Arsene Wenger’s side grabbed the win over Sam Allardyce and the Charles Reep school of football in a game which sprung no real tactical surprises but was nonetheless still interesting given the vastly differing footballing philosophies of these two teams.

Line-ups

For the Hammers, George McCartney replaced Joey O’Brien in defence, while Andy Carroll returned to the starting line-up in place of Carlton Cole, who was relegated to the bench.

Carroll’s return coincided with the inclusion of Per Mertesacker ahead of Laurent Koscielny. This was not only for his added height to counter West Ham’s aerial advantage but also in light of Koscielny’s costly mistakes when defending set-pieces, an area in which West Ham are particularly strong, against Chelsea last week.

In attack, Oliver Giroud returned upfront with the in form Gervinho moving to right wing and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain dropped to the bench. Elsewhere, Aaron Ramsey returned for Francis Coquelin.

West Ham’s passive approach

When defending against a passing side such as Arsenal there are two broad approaches. You can either press high and aggressively in an attempt to disrupt the opposition’s passing rhythm or you can surrender the midfield battle in favour of defending deep with men behind the ball to try to cut off passes into dangerous areas and into the feet of the forwards as much as possible. On this occasion West Ham opted for the latter which meant that they allowed Arsenal to have the ball in midfield largely uncontested.

Considering the extent to which Arsenal dominated possession (68.7%-31.3%) it is somewhat surprising that they also made more tackles (21-15) than West Ham. West Ham, however, made more interceptions (16-9) but only one of those was made outside of their own half which underlines their disciplined approach. While West Ham did have some success, especially in the first half when Arsenal struggled to get at the Hammers defence and fell a goal behind, it wasn’t enough to stifle their opponents creativity as Arsenal still managed 21 shots, with 8 on target, compared to West Ham’s 9 which made them look good value for their 3 goals.

In comparison to West Ham’s reactive approach, Stoke, a team with a similar philosophy to West Ham, took a more proactive approach in dealing with Arsenal during their match earlier this season. Instead of sitting back, Stoke preferred to engage Arsenal more directly to get at their midfield in order to disrupt their passing rhythm by making more tackles and interceptions further up the pitch. This tactic was successful and caused Arsenal to have a season low 81% pass completion rate (compared to 87% versus West Ham) as well as fewer shots, 17, with only 2 on target, in a 0-0 draw.

This comparison would suggest that a proactive approach is the more effective strategy against Arsenal.

As an added result of West Ham’s passive approach their 4-4-1-1 formation was often turned into a 4-5-1, especially in the first half, as Kevin Nolan had to tuck in goalside of the ball to help deal with Arsenal’s numerical advantage in centre midfield. The obvious downside to this was that Carroll was often left very isolated (a fact compounded by West Ham’s wingers staying back in a flat midfield to cover Arsenal’s full-backs) upfront but he was dominant in the air (winning 17/25 aerial duels) and did relatively well when asked to hold up the ball from long clearances and bring others into play.

First half goals

Mohamed Diame’s goal bore a striking resemblance to the one Leighton Baines scored against Newcastle United a few weeks ago at Goodison Park. On this occasion it was Mertesacker who, in anticipation of a cross to the target man striker at the back post which never came, was positioned too far to the left creating a big gap between himself and right-back, Carl Jenkinson. Diame moved into this space and Mertesacker was left with too much ground to cover to stop him from finished well.

On this occasion, however, the runner was tracked, but poorly so. Ramsey, having gotten back to cover, then got himself into a poor position and, instead of showing Diame the touchline or backwards, allowed himself to be beaten too easily which could have been avoided had he been properly goalside. What followed was a fine finish from Diame but it was, to an extent, an avoidable goal from Arsenal’s point of view.

Arsenal responded well and, helped in part by West Ham’s stand-off approach, dominated possession which allowed them to build pressure which lead to their almost inevitable equaliser. Arsenal were much more incisive when attacking down the left hand side through Podolski whose movement and positioning was superb and showed that he knows when to stay out wide and when to cut inside. Podolski was the game’s most creative player setting up 6 chances in total (more than any other player) and prior to his assist for Giroud’s first Premier League goal he had already been involved in several moves which opened up West Ham’s left flank which made the manner of Arsenal’s equaliser somewhat predictable.

Gervinho’s positioning on the opposite flank was often too central and Wenger could been seen instructing him to move closer to the touchline on several occasions. This eagerness to drift inwards too often could have been a hangover from him having played in a central role in recent matches. Whatever that cause it meant that Arsenal’s right side wasn’t as well balanced as their left and this was only amended when Theo Walcott was introduced for Gervinho to give Arsenal some genuine width on the right.

Second half changes

West Ham’s came out at after half-time with a more attacking approach. This change of tack seems to suggest that Allardyce’s plan was to frustrate Arsenal and make sure that they were in the game for as long as possible before moving towards a more positive approach in the second half. Allardyce did this by managing to get supporting players closer to the previously isolated Carroll which worked to begin with as West Ham dominated for large periods early in the half.

The two wingers, Matt Jarvis and Ricardo Vaz Te (and then Matt Taylor), pushed higher up the pitch to make the midfield less flat and Nolan moved up beyond Carroll, who moved deeper when long balls were played out of defence. This meant that Carroll now had options other than just holding up long balls and waiting for help to arrive. He could now flick the ball on to Nolan ahead of him, to the wingers on either side, or bring it down for himself meaning he had potential options in all directions.

Wenger responded to this by adding width, pace and more directness to his attack by bringing on Walcott for Gervinho. The change did the trick as Walcott scored the crucial second goal and then set up the third.

At 2-1, and with time running out, Allardyce had to go for broke so he sacrificed Diame for a second target man forward, Carlton Cole. However, this only served to leave more space in centre midfield which Santi Cazorla exploited almost instantaneously with a wonderful goal from outside the penalty area.

Wenger, who once more got his substitution spot on, responded to the West Ham change by bringing on another centre-back, Koscielny, and switched to a 3-5-2. He kept his wide players up, and resisted falling into a 5-3-2, which maintained Arsenal’s numerical advantage in midfield and the 3 v 2 advantage at the back meant that Cole and Carroll found it hard to close down the Arsenal defence and so they could maintain possession easily and close out the remainder of the game without too much trouble.

Conclusion

Both sides played in their already well established fashions and so there were no real tactical surprises here. West Ham played reasonably well in parts but Wenger made smart changes in the second half which ultimately turned the tie in Arsenal’s favour. Podolski and Cazorla continue to impress up front and Giroud got his first Premier League goal as Arsenal’s front line continues to improve.