Arteta began his second match in charge with the same system he used vs. Bournemouth and Lampard continued with the 3-4-2-1 that proved successful vs. Spurs.

Arsenal dominated the ball vs. Chelsea’s passive 3-4-2-1 in the first 34 minutes for two reasons. Firstly, Chelsea struggled to build attacks. Chelsea could not progress up the pitch because their back-three caused tactical inefficiencies. The shape of the back-three was inverted, meaning the right and left centre-backs were responsible for progressing the ball. As a result, Zouma’s role in build-up became redundant because he often blocked the passing option to Kepa.

Arsenal’s shape in build-up. 6 vs. 3 at times Arsenal’s shape in attack. 2-3 shape to prevent counter

Additionally, Arsenal were very organized in their 4-4-2 defensive shape and used a lot of energy in the first 30 minutes. This allowed Arsenal to outnumber Chelsea’s midfield, forcing Chelsea out wide in their build-up. Arsenal rarely pressed Chelsea’s centre-backs, instead, Arsenal waited for them to pass the ball forwards. Since only Lacazette was taken out of the game by a pass from one of the three centre-backs, Arsenal could always get two bodies around the ball when Chelsea progressed the ball.

Secondly, Arteta’s new build-up structure and Chelsea’s passive defence helped Arsenal retain possession. Lampard remarked,

“Mikel Arteta saw us play at Tottenham and found a way to pin our five back. We had three men marking one at the back and they had numbers in midfield”

Chelsea’s back-three was more of a back five, with Aubameyang and Nelson pinning back Emerson and Azpilicueta.

Chelsea’s wing-backs were not really involved in their press, which gave Arsenal a numerical superiority in the build-up. At times it was 6 vs. 3, with Willian, Mount, and Abraham pressing Arsenal’s back four and Guendouzi and Torreira. No wonder Arsenal begun with such ease in possession.

In the first half, as shown by the two images below, Nelson took up a higher position vs. Chelsea than he did vs. Bournemouth.

Arsenal’s average position’s 1-24 minutes Arsenal’s 1st half average positioning

This helped Arsenal pin back Emerson and Tomari. Nelson’s higher position meant he was less available during the build-up. As a result, AMN was stepping into midfield less in the build-up, with Ozil dropping deeper to help fill the right half-space. Arsenal could not achieve the rotation between Nelson, AMN, and Ozil shown below because Emerson would have followed Nelson.

When Arsenal entered Chelsea’s final third AMN moved into midfield to form a 2-3 shape. Torreira, Guendouzi, and AMN were the first line of defence when Arsenal lost the ball. This 2-3 shape reduced the threat of a counter and is proving to be a significant improvement on Emery’s system, which was extremely susceptible to counter-attacks. Against Chelsea, Arsenal conceded one counter-attacking shot (Abraham’s goal) because Guendouzi lost a header and failed to stop the counter-attack at its root.

Lampard’s switch to the 4-3-3

Jorginho’s introduction in the 34th-minute flipped the match, enabling Chelsea to dictate play. This is reflected in the match’s possession during different time intervals.

0-15 mins 53% Arsenal

16-30 mins 62% Arsenal

31-45 mins 66% Chelsea

46-60 mins 65% Chelsea

61-75 mins 68% Chelsea

76-90 mins 62% Chelsea

Chelsea’s new shape (4-3-3) allowed them to press Arsenal higher, massively disrupting Arsenal’s build-up. Jorginho provided cover so that Kovacic and Kante could push forward to match Arsenal’s double-pivot.

Chelsea’s high press turned a 6 vs. 3 to a 6 vs. 5 in Arsenal’s build-up. Arsenal mostly played on the counter and struggled to get out of their half.

Chelsea’s build-up play improved as Jorginho inverted the triangle of the back-three. Willian and Mount saw more of the ball as Arsenal had to commit an extra man to mark Jorginho.

When making the switch to the 4-3-3, Lampard had to sacrifice a defender. Instead of taking off one of his three centre-backs, Lampard moved Tomari to right-back. Since Willian had pinned back Saka, Lampard wanted to double up on Aubameyang. Lampard opted for Tomari, whose experience at centre-back made him an effective option to track Aubameyang’s movement inside.

Trailing Arsenal 1-0 after 59 minutes, Lampard made an attacking substitution, bringing on Lamptey at right-back. This helped Willian create overloads down the right, which turned Aubameyang into a full-time second full-back. In reflection, Chelsea did not need to commit two players to Aubameyang because Arsenal could not get out of their half. Tomari did not provide the quality Lamptey did and whilst Chelsea dominated possession they struggled to create chances.

It’s worth noting that before Jorginho’s goal Chelsea did not create any high-quality open-play chances. Chelsea’s open-play xG was around 0.5 until Jorginho’s goal (@oh_that_crab). Therefore, Arsenal’s 4-4-2 defence shape achieved its goal (reducing xG), but it was not convincing and Arteta should have responded to Jorginho’s introduction with a tactical change.

Changes Arteta could have made

Arsenal’s first-half performance was energy-intensive so Arsenal dropped deeper in their defensive shape, as shown by the images below.

Arsenal’s 2nd half average positioning Arsenal’s 1st half average positioning

Arteta touched on Arsenal’s defensive low block saying,

“We’re 1-0 up, pretty comfortable even if Arsenal were defending much deeper than I like. I cannot think about any clear chances for Chelsea before that.”

Arsenal’s counterattacks came through Aubameyang, Lacazette, Nelson, and Ozil. Despite being forced into an early sub (Mustafi for Chambers), Arteta could have influenced the game with his remaining two substitutions. Bringing Willock on for Ozil gave Arsenal more energy, but it did not change much tactically (Jorginho was closed down more). I have never understood why Emery, Ljungberg, and Arteta play Willock predominantly as a #10 when his best qualities are that of a #8. Perhaps Arteta simply had a lack of options on the bench.

Ozil had a solid match, but he was physically fading and it was a smart decision to take him off in the 76th minute. Even in his best form at Real Madrid, Mourinho would sub Ozil off around the 70th minute, and I like that Arteta is doing the same. Ozil becomes less valuable in the final parts of a match because matches become more about physicality.

Pepe is the most suitable player in the squad for counter-attacking football, and I was surprised he wasn’t introduced earlier in the match. Arseblog and Gunnerblog mentioned on the Arseblog podcast that Ozil and Pepe have barely played together because they are both viewed as defensive liabilities. Whilst Pepe may not have matched the work-rate Willock provided, his potential threat on the break could have been Arsenal’s best form of defence. Pepe could have thrived against the physically weak Jorginho and forced Chelsea to drop off.

We were actually good defending deep, so maybe this is mostly outcome bias but a change of shape to accommodate more stable ball control, or even Nico as a dedicated counter-attacking threat, could really have helped us kill Chelsea’s momentum before anything happened. — PM (@ThatGooner) December 29, 2019

Arsenal 4-4-2 defensive shape was working and like Arteta, I would not have changed it with a substitution. However, I wonder if Pepe could have played off of Lacazette in this system. Pepe’s work-rate would not have been a big issue because Ozil’s role requires less energy than Nelson’s second full-back role.

As @ThatGooner says, Arteta could have made a substitution to restructure Arsenal’s shape in possession. For instance, if Arteta brought on both Willock and Pepe, could he have changed Arsenal’s shape in possession to a 4-3-3? Arsenal have many injuries and there were only three players who could make a really make a difference (Willock, Pepe, Smith-Rowe). Arteta also has been forced into a centre-back substitution in both of his first two games, limiting Arsenal’s tactical adjustments.

Developments from Bournemouth

Arteta continued to undo the tactical habits learned under Emery by reducing Arsenal’s susceptibility to counterattacks and improving Arsenal’s build-up. Due to Xhaka’s absence and the threat of Willian, Arsenal’s full-backs played more conventionally (Saka deeper and AMN wider) than they did at Bournemouth.

Arsenal’s shape vs. Chelsea (H) Arsenal’s shape vs. Bournemouth (a)

AMN appears to be an essential player for Arteta due to his tactical flexibility and defensive strengths. The inverted full-back role allows AMN to use his dribbling and passing ability in possession as well as his pace and tackling ability out of possession (stopping counterattacks). Unquestionably, AMN is the largest benefactor of Arteta’s reign so far.

Until his injury, Chambers played aggressively high up the pitch and was impressive in his duels with Abraham. Arsenal missed Chambers’ tenacity, but Mustafi replaced his distribution. I am not a fan of Mustafi, but he was neat on the ball. Nonetheless, Mustafi was at fault for Abraham’s goal. Mustafi looks to quit in every defence situation and I expect Arteta will personally push him out the door in January. I would not be surprised if Mavropanos starts vs. Man Utd.

Back to Chambers… Chambers was an improvement on Sokratis as his aggression allowed Arsenal to push higher up the pitch. Furthermore, his distribution helped develop play down the right-side.

Arteta has not implemented an organized high-press, but Arsenal are running more.

In both of his matches, Arteta has used a 4-4-2 defensive shape, which requires particularly high work-rates from the wingers and two central midfielders. An organized high-press takes at least six months to implement, so I believe Arsenal will use this 4-4-2 shape for the next few months as the players become accustomed to Arteta’s philosophy.

Mesut Ozil had another solid game operating in the right half-space. I touched on his promising linkup with AMN and Nelson vs. Bournemouth, and vs. Chelsea, their linkup came to fruition. The three were Arsenal’s best performers and as shown below, most of Arsenal’s attacks came down the right.

Left-side of Attack

I mentioned in my piece on the Bournemouth match that the left-side of Arsenal’s attack wasn’t running smoothly and only clicked into gear in the second half. Against Chelsea, Arsenal’s left-side had the demanding task of trying to bypass the world-class Kante, who won a game-leading seven tackles.

In possession vs. Bournemouth, Xhaka moved wide left, which allowed Saka to push up. Sometimes Xhaka would move deeper to form the left side of a back-three (think Henderson at Liverpool). Xhaka’s deeper positioning gave him more time on the ball to pick a pass. Also, Xhaka’s left-foot gave Xhaka a better angle in this quasi left-back position. Arteta had to start Guendouzi in place of Xhaka, who missed out due to illness.

As a result of Nelson’s higher position – which denied AMN to move into midfield – Guendouzi needed to stay more central. Guendouzi moved laterally but never dropped deep to form a back-three. Guendouzi provides some advantages over Xhaka. Guendouzi is more dynamic and comfortable on the ball under pressure than Xhaka. However, Xhaka is a better line-breaking passer. Due to his right foot, on the ball, Guendouzi tends to move inside from the left, which can cut off passing options to the left of him. This limited the combination play down the left. Overall, Xhaka seems to be the better option for the left side of the double pivot as he can add another dimension to Arsenal’s build-up.

Despite Xhaka’s absence, David Luiz helped launch several attacks down Arsenal’s left-side. From Bournemouth, Arteta changed the movement of Aubameyang and Lacazette when Luiz or Guendouzi had the ball. Lacazette dropped deep into the half-space to receive the ball, with Aubemeyang making a run in behind. Before Aubameyang came to the ball and Lacazette stayed as the #9.

This new movement plays to Lacazette and Aubameyang’s respective strengths and also helps release Saka.

Looking forward. Man Utd (H), Leeds (H), Palace (a)

In the immediate future, there may be some injury/fatigue concerns. Aubameyang put in a massive shift vs. Chelsea that now makes him at risk of fatigue. Lacazette and Aubameyang swapped positions for 7 minutes from minute 52-59 to give Aubameyang a breather. Martinelli seems well suited for Aubameyang’s hard-working quasi-left-winger role, which could allow Arteta to move Aubameyang centrally.

Nelson has started the last three matches and has improved in each one. Arteta has talked a lot about trust, something he appears to have in Nelson. I expect Ozil and AMN to start, so whoever plays at right-wing will have to provide width by hugging the touchline. I would be intrigued to see if Arteta plays Pepe in Nelson’s role or if he decides to change the balance of the team.

There is no doubt that Arteta’s tactical developments have made Arsenal more competitive. Arsenal’s collapse in the Premier League could give Arteta a chance to completely imprint his philosophy on the squad. I am excited by the small glimpses of Arteta’s philosophy so far and as players like Ceballos, Kolasinac, Holding and Martinelli return, I am curious to see how the rest of Arteta’s plans play out.

I’ll leave you with a lesson Bukaya Saka has already learned from Arteta’s time as boss. I know this is a basic instruction for a professional footballer, but it shows Arteta’s desire to make Arsenal the protagonist again.

“Maybe one thing that I’ve picked up straight away is that when nobody’s pressing you, you don’t need to pass the ball. What you can do is just get the ball, drive the ball forward a bit and wait for someone to come to you, commit a player, then pass it.”