Good morning, Arsenal Women aficionados!
Today’s Arsenal Women Journal will be slightly different from the usual ones. I’ll be 100% honest with you, I didn’t want to write at all after the humbling 1-3 defeat at Stamford Bridge that ended any remote dream of breaking Chelsea dominance on the WSL.
If anyone has a chance to succeed in that, it might be Manchester City, rather than us.
The lack of spirit, intensity, tactical acumen and fighting spirit left me baffled and voided of any word. Some games are lost on fine margins, like a refereeing debatable decision or a bad choice at either end of the pitch, but others like the one against Emma Hayes’ team are lost as soon as the referee blows the kick-off whistle.
To borrow Mikel Arteta’s words, the team didn’t earn the right to play at Stamford Bridge and were second-best all day, from the very first minute.
Chelsea had a clear plan and a true willingness to put it into practice, not to mention an eagerness to get revenge after the battering they got at the Emirates Stadium, while we had nothing. We had the ultimate chance to catch the league leaders and stay well into the title race and we wasted it, playing what probably was the worst football under Jonas Eidevall and making all sorts of mistakes in and out of possession.
Sure, one could argue that Chelsea scored their second and third goals through some lucky bounces – after all Nüsken literally scored with her arse – but it would take some incredibly bad faith to claim that we deserved anything else from this game.
Now, with six games to go, we find ourselves with a six-points gap from Chelsea and Manchester City and another early summer campaign looming over. That’s exactly the scenario we should have avoided, because this season taught us how difficult it is to keep the momentum and preserve mental and physical energies when you start your season in early September, a month earlier than Chelsea and less than three weeks after the end of World Cup.
I don’t know if everything stemmed from the moment we were knocked out of the qualifying rounds for the UWCL, but this team never found their groove, alternating great performances with some fairly dull, uninspiring spells.
On the psychological side, it is always extremely difficult to recover from such a disappointment and find the energies to bounce back, because you go from the big nights in the Champions League to literally nothing and all the excitement fades away.
This loss feels like the end of a long season that I would candidly qualify as disappointing, regardless of how the Conti Cup final goes, and it naturally raises several questions, on many levels. From the head coach to the staff and the players, very few come out of this campaign with their stock raising and none gets to avoid the scrutiny that goes with such a deflating season.
Winning the Conti Cup – against Chelsea, of all opponents – would sweeten up the perception of our season but, unlike last year, it wouldn’t save it, at least not to my eyes.
Last year, winning the league cup against league champions and Champions League runners-up, with a squad reduced to the bare bones, felt like a vindication for all the efforts, dedication, and bravery that our players displayed despite all the injuries and misfortune. Winning it this year would be nice, but that’s it. That win, last year, should have been a starting point – while now it feels like getting back to square one.
So, who’s to blame? Who’s to save? What is next?
Don’t take this as a finger-pointing exercise but rather as a “where are we at” kind of summary, trying to make sense of a few things that don’t make much sense and still linger on the positives from this turbulent campaign.
Starting from the very top, recruitment has generated lots of questions in the past eighteen months: since joining in June 2021, Jonas Eidevall and the club brought in 19 new players and let go almost as many, including some cult figures (Jordan Nobbs above anyone else), which surely contributed to the apparent lack of cohesion and chemistry between the players.
While recruitment is by nature a hit and miss thing, at times I struggled to understand what the strategy was, and some deals left me confused. For example, Lina Hurtig was signed from Juventus in August 2022 for a reported fee of £ 100k, which is a significant one for the women’s football, four months after signing a new contract with the Italian club: if she was a target, why not lure her to London earlier and sign her on a free?
The Alessia Russo debacle last winter was also an indication of the lack of coordination and strategy within the club: if we truly wanted her to join during the winter window, why leave it so late? Manchester United would have never let her go without a replacement, and such a high caliber player cannot be replaced so close to the deadline day.
The infructuous pursuit of Mary Earps, last summer, also seemed a desperate move more than a planned strategy and, like Alessia Russo’s, it was very public and talked about in the media, which resulted in the reputation of the club being hit hard when both players stayed put – at a rival club, on top of that.
Seen from the outside, the strategy in place at the club to make the squad as competitive as possible isn’t exactly clear, which seems to reflect on the pitch – at times.
Over time, Jonas Eidevall built “his” team from the one inherited from Joe Montemurro, making it more aggressive in pressing and counter-pressing and generally more attacking-minded and adventurous, but the speed at which he revolutionised the squad might have backfired more often than not.
Injuries to key players surely didn’t help, and losing leaders like Rafaelle and Jordan Nobbs either, but my feeling is that Jonas Eidevall failed to establish a core within the squad that could carry the team during the most difficult times.
If I had to name the players who would be automatic picks when fit, I would only include Leah Williamson, Lia Wälti, Kim Little and Beth Mead – because no other player is 100% sure to start the next game, even high-calibre players like Vivianne Miedema, Alessia Russo, Caitlin Foord or Steph Catley. This speaks volume of the quality of this squad, however it also brings issues with players’ chemistry and understanding – something that Jonas Eidevall probably did on purpose but seemed to backfire quite spectacularly.
One thing is to imagine how powerful an attacking line could be with Vivianne Miedema, Alessia Russo, Stina Blackstenius, Cloé Lacasse, Lina Hurtig, Beth Mead and Caitlin Foord, another is to translate it onto the pitch with good results. Same at the back, where we still don’t have an established back-four and at times we struggled with communication and coordination. Assuming Emily Fox is considered as the first pick at right back and captain Leah Williamson is irreplaceable, it leaves two spots up for grabs and five players in contention: Lotte Wubben-Moy, Amanda Ilestedt, Laia Codina, Steph Catley and Katie McCabe. Again, one might rejoice with the quality of the options available to Jonas Eidevall, but everyone knows how important chemistry is, at the back, and not finding a balanced, reliable backline brings troubles.
As the saying goes, those are nice problems to have, but Jonas Eidevall is yet to solve them, which is among the reasons why he has divided opinions since taking over from Joe Montemurro, in June 2021. The Swede is liked for his modern approach and his openness in front of the media and the supporters, but doubts are raised about what he wants to implement, on the tactical side, and about some of his choices with the personnel and the in-game substitutions.
As of today, there is no consensus whether his appointment was the right choice for our club and things are unlikely to change unless he finds a winning formula. His first campaign was great and saw us missing out on the title by the smallest of margins, but since then the team has regressed, rather than improved.
As part of his revolution, Jonas Eidevall took away some of the foundations that made the Arsenal an inevitable force against any opponent outside of the top four, and it was only partially compensated by the tremendous improvements made on the big games. Joe Montemurro’s sides were often brushed away by the likes of Chelsea and Manchester City, but would win 99% of the remaining fixtures, making them an automatic title contender; on the other side, Jonas Eidevall’s teams proved they can record big wins against big opponents, but have stumbled more frequently against mid and lower table opponents, which represents a capital sin in a league as short as the WSL.
Of course, the league became much more competitive in the past three years, but it remains hard to explain how this Arsenal team could lose to West Ham, Tottenham or Liverpool while Chelsea only lost to us and Manchester City and Manchester City lost to Brighton and Arsenal (Chelsea and Manchester City only drew one game, against each other).
In summary, we lost nine points against smaller teams, while Chelsea lost none, and Manchester City lost three.
Is Jonas Eidevall the right man at the right place? Yes, he surely is one of the best coaches around and one of the finest tactical minds in women’s football, but it is not entirely showing on the pitch.
Successful people in very different environments have all concluded that the buy-in is probably the most important factor in achieving big results. No matter how good your idea is, if you cannot transmit it effectively to the people who are tasked to apply it, the results are always going to be worse than anticipated – while a less-inspired idea implemented efficiently might bear better results.
Can Jonas Eidevall and his staff get the buy-in they need? That’s probably the question whose answer will determine whether the former Rosengard coach is fit for purpose.
Pinning everything on Jonas Eidevall would be extremely unfair, though, because at the end of the day it is always down to the players who step on the pitch. All the long-term injuries have had a major impact in our performances and results, especially in attack, and this cannot be discounted when evaluating our performances.
That said, this team had enough firepower and talent to overcome the absences of Vivianne Miedema and Beth Mead, yet we found it extremely difficult to convert the chances we created all season long.
How many times were we left to rue the goals we should have scored? How many points have we left behind because of that?
We currently have the 4th best attack of the WSL (32 goals) but the 2nd xG total (35.2), which represents the worst ratio in the whole league. For comparison, Chelsea and Manchester United scored seven more goals than expected and Manchester City more than eight, while the only other teams with a negative ratio are Everton and West Ham, who coincidentally have the worst and second-worst attacks in the league.
Pair this with the negative numbers on the GA and xGA (-2.3), and it is easy to understand why we are this far from Chelsea and Manchester City: Emma Hayes has the second-best defence and the second-best ratio between GA and xGA (+2.7), while Manchester City are recording fantastic numbers overall, with the best defence and the best ratio between GA and xGA (+5.4)
Mikel Arteta once said the winning teams are those who are the best in both boxes, and this Arsenal team is far from there.
Data seem to suggest that players made bad choices at both ends of the pitch, missing chances that they should have buried and allowing goals that should be prevented. Is it because of the tactical setup? Is it because of their individual qualities? Is it because of the many changes made by Jonas Eidevall?
Some of our players should raise their hand and take responsibility for their output: our goalkeepers are comfortably at the bottom of the WSL ranks for overall PSxG+/- and far from their competition for save percentage (65% for Manu Zinsberger, while rivals are at +80%); elsewhere, Stina Blackstenius recorded a -1.7 in the difference between the goals scored and the xG which is the worst in the team, and none of our players features in the Goals/90 and Goals+Assist/90 rankings, which are filled by players from Chelsea and Manchester City.
These numbers seem to suggest that we desperately need an upgrade to Manuela Zinsberger between the sticks – and it hurts to say so because she is a wonderful player – and that we need Vivianne Miedema back to her best as quickly as possible. The Dutch superstar, who underwent minor knee surgery, is the only world class striker we have in the team, the one likely to outscore her xG by a large margin, in the mould of Bunny Shaw or Lauren James, and turns draws or defeats in wins out of her magic touch.
We’d also need Alessia Russo to step up and become the goal scorer she can be, based on her qualities and determination: the former Manchester United star had a decent season, but she probably didn’t play as much as – or as well as – we (and she) anticipated.
It remains to be seen if Jonas Eidevall is planning on playing them both, with either one coming deeper to link-up play and orchestrate our attacks, because he has been somehow reticent to do so when he had both available for selection. It might have something to do with Vivianne Miedema’s fitness, but only time will tell.
Luckily enough, there were some very bright sparks, too: Lotte Wubben-Moy took a huge step forward and is now considered as a first choice at the back. She is comfortably my Player Of The Year, and should be partnering with Leah Williamson whenever they are both fit. Hopefully, this duo will become an integral part of the spine of the team and build their understanding and chemistry by playing week-in, week-out. Her aerial presence, her ability to hit long passes and dribble forward with the ball are closer to Rafaelle than we could have hoped for, which is a big testament to Lotte’s development.
In midfield, Victoria Pelova has been a revelation in a slightly deeper role, with her outstanding ability to receive on the half-turn becoming key to turning up the tempo of our football. The Dutchwoman took time to settle in, also because she was deployed wide in a 4-3-2-1 formation, but then hit another level when deployed as a box-to-box midfielder, racking up five assists in the league, which sets her at the very top of the WSL rankings on-level with Niamh Charles and Johanna Rytting Kaneryd of Chelsea.
Similarly, Kiara Cooney-Cross, who arrived in January, showed glimpses of her talent when given the opportunity and showed that she can challenge Lia Wälti for the pivot role at the base of midfield – something we have missed dearly over the past three years.
To conclude, I feel that the team and the club are at a crossroads, at the moment: Jonas Eidevall must find a settled starting XI, with clear roles and responsibilities, and clear the air around some key positions in the team. Assuming that Emily Fox, Leah Williamson, Lia Wälti, Kim Little, Victoria Pelova and Beth Mead will start any game when fit, there are five shirts to be distributed and many good candidates – although their profiles are different from each other.
To start with, Jonas Eidevall should decide whether Manuela Zinsberger is his starting goalkeeper or not: she was offered a new deal earlier this year, but a few months earlier the club was actively (and publicly) trying to sign Mary Earps from Manchester United. The Austria international signed a two-year contract, with the option to extend for a further year, yet the feeling is that the coach is not entirely satisfied with her performances and profile. The feeling is that the club will upgrade on her, if the opportunity arises.
Then, Jonas Eidevall must resolve the first of his “abundancy problems” and choose between Steph Catley or Katie McCabe for the left-back slot: the Australian made more appearances, but the Irish has the grit, leadership and fighting spirit that this team desperately needs. While Steph Catley only occasionally deputised at centre-back but mostly played in her natural position, Katie McCabe has been deployed as right-back, right-wing and left-wing this season and I doubt she appreciates being moved around so frequently.
Finally, Jonas Eidevall must figure out what his best attacking lineup is: the talent is there, it’s all about finding the right formula and build the connection and coordination to make it work to its maximum.
As mentioned earlier on, Beth Mead is an automatic pick on the right wing, while Caitlin Foord started most of the games on the opposite flank, but the central role remains without a clear owner, as of today.
Stina Blackstenius, Vivianne Miedema and Alessia Russo all played there, with mixed results, partly because they didn’t enjoy a long streak with the same teammates around them.
Choosing who starts at centre-forward will have a domino effect on other positions, especially in midfield: if Jonas Eidevall decides to play Vivianne Miedema slightly behind Alessia Russo (or vice-versa), then one of Victoria Pelova or Kim Little will have to make room, unless he changes the system in place.
This is probably the biggest and most important decision Jonas Eidevall will face in the coming weeks, because it will define the shape of his squad and possibly results in some players leaving.
Flexibility is a very good thing but is has its down sides, especially when the team is not tactically mature and didn’t absorb the key principles – as seems to be the case with this group of players.
If Jonas Eidevall insists on his tactically hybrid football, he might get to the point where he can rotate his players freely and potentially work with Vivianne Miedema, Alessia Russo, Beth Mead, Caitlin Foord and one of Victoria Pelova and Kim Little simultaneously on the pitch but getting there too late might cost him his job, eventually.
I am not sure he will be given another full season to experiment with his players and his ideas, my feeling is that he and the players will be required to show signs of improvement right from the beginning of next season, however we finish this one.
Instead, if he favours his players’ strength over his most extreme principles, he might lose some players along the way (Vivianne Miedema? Stina Blackstenius? Katie McCabe?) but strike gold in terms of balance and understanding – building a team with a lesser degree of unpredictability but a greater deal of chemistry.
Once this season is finally over, it will be time to make what could be a final attempt to reach the top of the English and European football leagues, before building from scratch again.
Before that, this team will try to wrap things up nicely by retaining the Conti Cup and try until the very last minute to overtake Manchester City in second place.
We’ll talk again after we have played Aston Villa at Villa Park, on Sunday.
Speak to you soon!
Italian living in Switzerland, Gooner since mid-nineties, when the Gunners defeated my hometown team, in Copenhagen. I started my own blog and podcast (www.clockenditalia.com) after after some experiences with Italian websites and football magazines. Covering Arsenal Women with the occasional rant about the boys.
Eidevall isn’t up to the job
It’s plain to see.Seems more interested in being in front of the cameras with an opinion on everything.Team looks tactically bereft of ideas continually trying to walk the ball into the net.His days should be numbered.
Well that was a lot to say! But it is undermined by your first saying the pursuit of Earps lacked strategy and then saying how poor Zinberger is whilst still saying she is a great player. Confused ?
To me the whole issue is simple
We continue with a poor keeper
We mix and match endlessly trying to look clever
We turned prolific Russo into an average striker whilst enduring Blackstenius , who can’t grasp the offside rule, is slow, can’t control a ball and has never been lethal.
We overhauled the squad and lacked consistency
We keep reverting to slow possession football despite our best performances being fast pressing
We have a manager who speaks in cliches and soundbites
It was absolutely ludicrous that he was given a new contract.
We are reaping what we have sown.
Poor management = poor performances
Superb summation of our season Andrea.
For me, our squad is too big.
Yes we needed reinforcements as previously the squad numbers were the opposite.
But now it is top heavy.
This leaves players disenchanted with their game minutes, and is a detriment to team harmony.
Our Coach has not named the same starting lineup twice this season.
How the team is supposed to gel with constant changes in starting personnel is a clue to our inconsistent performances throughout the season.
But the one thing we clearly lack, [ as you have already alluded to ] is the ruthlessness in dealing with the lesser lights in the league.
Are the players too comfortable in the cocoon of the Ems and surrounding training facilities. ??
Is the Coach too soft. ??
Was it comforting arms around shoulders in the dressing sheds after Chelsea shambles, or was there a full blown blast from him, to let the players know in uncertain terms that what they produced on the pitch was completely unacceptable for our Club and our supporters to have to endure.
I know what I think.
Until we get a tough no nonsense, no favorites, ruthless manager that won’t accept anything other than 120% effort and desire in training as well as games, I fear we will continue to be playing catch up to Chelsea and City, never mind trying to get to group stages of CL.
Keep up the good work, always enjoy your Posts on Ladies side of the game.