Obviously in our current predicament and if we want to qualify for CL we must win a fair few of our last 8 games, many of us believe 7 wins would do it, that would see us on 74 points which should be enough for fourth, and possibly even third given the run ins of Spurs and Chelsea.

But for me the next four games hold the most important key to our success.

Here are the dates and respective fixtures for the three contenders for the remaining CL spots:

The change in the schedule has come from the FA Cup progression by Chelsea which has led to the postponement of their match against Spuds on 14th April.

So assuming everyone wins on 6th and 7th, we have the chance to narrow the gap to Spurs to 1 point when we play Norwich at home on the 13th and go 1 point above Chelsea, we will then have played same number of games as Spurs and one more than Chelsea.

Then assuming we and Chelsea win on 16th and 17th we will be 2 points ahead of Spurs, and remain 1 ahead of Chelsea.

If we can beat Fulham on 20th April, Chelsea and Spuds will go in to their tricky fixtures on 21st 4 and 5 points behind respectively, okay Spurs will both have two games in hand by then, but the pressure will have been transferred onto them as the chasers going into two difficult fixtures.

After 20th April

So thats 4 must win games for us, and we will hear the squeaks from N17 to SW6 on 21st April. If neither win on the Sunday the game in hand is irrelevant and we will maintain 3rd even if they win their games in hand.

Written by Gooner in Exile

One thing that no internet-literate Arsenal supporter can ever complain about is having a lack of information about the club.

The 24-hour news cycle, the internet and, specifically, the plethora of Arsenal blog sites have swamped us with a tsunami of information.

Not all of it is accurate information of course. And a significant minority can fairly be described as deliberately wrong or even malicious.

But leaving aside all the bogus transfer stories and poison-pen articles, there is one sub-set of Arsenal information that at least appears to be rooted in hard, solid, undisputable facts.

I refer to statistics.

After every Arsenal game it is now possible to know such wonderful and enlightening facts as how many times Kieran Gibbs slipped over because his studs weren’t long enough; how many miles Andrei Arshavin has run during the match (usually about 75 yards); how many minutes Thomas Vermaelen has spent in the opposition half (almost all of them) and how many drops of perspiration have fallen from the beleaguered brow of our Giant German only to land as snowflakes on the hallowed turf.

When I first started watching football back in the late 1960s and early 1970s we also had statistics. There were three of them: goals for; goals against; bookings.

Well, actually there was a fourth: number of away fans arrested while attempting to “take” the home supporters’ end.

These days mobile phone apps like the FourFourTwo Stats Zone allow us to pick over the bones of a game in ways that were unimaginable even a few years ago.

But statistics can be funny things. They present themselves all dandified in the clothing of objective truth – the numbers don’t lie, right?

Well, not everyone agrees.

Earlier this week one of AA’s regulars, Big Al, managed to tear himself away from the booze, birds, beer and beaches of Koh Samui for long enough to write an impassioned attack on the sloppy use of statistics.

In particular he had it in for the “stand alone stat”. An example of this – in an Arsenal context – would be someone posting a comment like “in games when Oxlade-Chamberlain has played wide right and Nacho Monreal has played left back, our results are: Played 3, Won 3. For 10, Against 0.”

If such a comment is posted, you can guarantee that somebody will pop up to say  “that’s amazing – we should always start with Oxo and Nacho – then we’ll win everything.”

Big Al, quite rightly, points out that these hit-and-run stats are potentially meaningless because they do not take into account all the other factors that may have contributed to the apparent connection between the player selection and the results.

In response to a ‘stand alone stat’ I posted about goals conceded by one of our centre back pairings, Al said: “…how were the goals conceded?
 From inside or outside the penalty area? From inside the six-yard box? From 30-35 yards out? From corner kicks? From free-kicks? From penalty kicks? Headers? Shots? Deflections? Errors by centre backs? Errors by full backs? Errors by the goalie? Who’s to blame, if in fact any blame at all is to be attributed?
That’s the stats required… not pointless ‘stand alone’ stats which show the centre-back pairing, but adding little or nothing else.”

I get it Al. And yet…

I cannot help but feel that sometimes even a “stand alone stat” can hint at a deeper truth.

So when Rasp wrote a Post about how, in our two recent away victories (over Swansea and Bayern Munich), we had (unusually) less ball possession than our opponents yet managed to win both games and keep clean sheets, it stimulated a really interesting discussion about our style of play.

Big Al is right: in and of themselves, Rasp’s possession stats didn’t prove anything. Playing devil’s avocado you could just as easily say that we won those games because we dropped Vermaelen and Szcsesny and the possession was irrelevant

But the fact that so many people responded to the Post by voicing frustrations about the way our attempt at tika-taka play sometimes produces sterile and toothless displays shows that Rasp’s ‘stand alone stats’ struck a chord. And maybe gave a glimpse of a truth about the way we play.

My conclusion: I can’t fault Al’s distrust of and skepticism about some of the Arsenal stats that are bandied about – but I also want to keep seeing them and discussing them.

No individual is forced to give them any weight, but others may see something in them that sparks an insight into the way we play and the way we can improve.

And the criticism that such stats don’t take all other factors into account could just as easily be applied to non-stat based comments. For example, if someone says “Ramsey was rubbish on Saturday and should be loaned out,” many might take issue with the lack of subtlety of the comment. It does not take into account his recovery from injury, the role he has been asked to play in the team, whether his team mates were equally rubbish in the game in question, whether he was coming off the back of a gruelling 90 minutes in midweek, whether he was carrying a knock, whether he got the right support from team mates etc etc.

I’ll conclude with a stand alone stat for Al. I carried out a quick survey and 83% of Arsenal supporters would like to keep getting stand alone stats to ponder 🙂 .

RockyLives

We’ve won our last two games, four goals scored, none conceded.

We’ve looked at these games to discover what the magic ingredient was that made the difference. Some think the defensive solidity was down to having Fabianski in goal rather than an out of form Szczesny, others believe that although Wilshere is a real talent, his presence somehow unbalances the midfield.

There is one factor that has not been considered but is something that has been troubling me for some time …… in both those games, the opposition had the greater share of possession. Bayern had 55% and Swansea 53% possession in those games. Our average for the season is 58.5%.

It’s an old saying that possession doesn’t score goals but with Arsenal I believe that prolonged possession also makes us more likely to concede. The pattern we’ve seen is slow build up involving over use of the centre backs and trying to get the ball forward via the wide players who often aren’t ‘wingers’ in the traditional sense and therefore we see the sideways and backwards passing that poses no threat to the opposition. The effect of this is to compress play on the outskirts of the opposition’s well guarded box and our back line gets drawn forward making us vulnerable to being hit on the break.

The result is that the longer we are in possession without creating chances, the more likely we are to concede – we’ve seen it many times. If you’ve got a Messi or Iniesta in your team you will have the guile to create chances even in the most densely packed defence – but we don’t.

The converse of this is that the team who have been starved of the ball are more likely to use pace and be direct when they get the opportunity to counter attack – just as we did against Bayern for the first goal.

Gone are the days when we delivered lightening attacks, when we were more likely to score after an opponent’s corner than our own. We have quick players but fail to capitalise on their abilities.

So what is the solution? Deliberately give the ball away to draw the opposition out of their tight defensive formation? Play more risky early balls through rather than the ponderous (tippy tappy) slow build up? Use proper wingers who can beat the fullbacks and deliver a good cross?

I don’t have all the answers, I suspect the remedy lies in the coaching – but maybe this hastily written post will inspire some ideas/responses even if you think I’m talking rubbish … over to you ….

Written by Rasp