Two issues I’d like to raise; the first is the pining after the pre-2005 Arsenal style and the second, misgivings about the three-man midfield.

I think we’re in danger of conflating the two.

Wenger first introduced a 4-2-3-1in a major game back during the 2005 Cup Final and the following season he used it in the Champions League (Ljunberg playing between Pires and Reyes). But Arsenal would continue to play 4-4-2 throughout league campaigns right up until 2009 when, as Sam Drew has stated above, Wenger introduced a Barcelona-style 4-3-3.

Crucially, during the intervening period (2005-09) what changed was not Arsenal’s formation; merely that Cesc now began to partner Gilberto in central midfield. Losing a dynamo in Vieira, but gaining a playmaker in Fabregas, the Gunners became more deliberative.

You could go back to 4-4-2 but even then where do you play Cesc? He himself has suggested that he prefers starting deeper in his old role. Pair him with Song or any physically imposing midifelder, fine and well. But you’d still be left with the kind of set-up that so many Arsenal fans bemoaned as “transition years”.

Rather than formation, I think the factor that most inhibits the Gunners from recreating the Invincibles formula is strategic: Arsenal used to forego pressing opponents and instead dropped off into their own half where they could absorb pressure before murdering teams on the counter.

Since 2009, the 4-3-3 (and sometimes 4-2-3-1) has come along with an attendant high-line and approach of let’s set up shop inside opponents half. As a result Arsenal’s play can be dizzying for opponents though sometimes prone to becoming rather static. And, critically, they lack the intensity of Barcelona in recovering the ball.
I can’t believe this hasn’t been flagged as the main flaw in Wenger’s post-2009 project; that a team can only get away with Barcelona’s high-line approach if they have been rehearsing it day-in day-out over the course of years.
It is extremely difficult to co-ordinate the pressing game in such a scenario and just one imprecision can lead to the team looking like mugs.

Sound familiar Messers Koscielny and Squillaci?

Szcsesny, came into the side because injury forced Wenger’s hand. But if Fabianski was a better option then he would have been straight back in after he came back. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree there.

On Song, I want him to offer more. Scoring a few goals doesn’t constitute him being an attacking force.

I want him to initiate attacks and then support them, not just pick the ball up in the middle of the park and take the simple ball out to a full back. I think he has the potential to be a better player than that and he should demand the ball more and dictate the game more.

I think we’ll agree to disagree there too, for me Arsenal have pretty much been playing a three man central midfield for the last four or five years.

On Eduardo, you’re quite right – I was listing the striking options.

However, in my defence, this article is the 2nd draft and I forgot to change it to the final draft which you can find here.

http://bit.ly/fGbqba

Secondly, Alex Song does offer something going forward. Goals versus Chelsea and West Ham spring to mind, the latter being a last minute winner. He also scored an important goal against Man City, and goals against Shakhtar Donetsk and Bolton.

Thirdly, I’m quite sure we only changed formation at the beginning of last season. Before then, we still played 4-4-2. Then, we changed, and received numerous plaudits, after a brilliant start to the season, including a 6-1 thrashing of Everton.

And finally, your mention of Eduardo. I may have misinterpreted your intentions, but it seemed like you were listing our striking options when you mentioned Eduardo. Well actually, he left last season. Get your facts right before you write.

I am all too aware about Arsenal’s history and have written about it in the past. Check it out, you might be interested http://bit.ly/lcRSfv

On the article, I think you’ve misunderstood it.

As someone who has followed Spurs for a long long time I can say, with hand on my heart, that each and every manager since Bill Nicholson has come under pressure to play a certain way but has never found a way to mix style and substance, just like this current Wenger team when compared with his first teams.

1) Arsenal beating United doesn’t really prove anything other than that the current Gunners team can play when the pressure is off.

2) The article was written well before the game, and was published on this site on gameday. http://bit.ly/fGbqba

3) The team is visibly growing in stature? No it’s not. The league positions answer that question.

Arsenal’s big advantage is a bigger stadium, and as far as I know – that comes with the most expensive seats in the country.

I definitely agree with you comparing City and Chelsea for Spurs and Arsenal.

I think the old truism of “if my auntie had balls she’d be my uncle is apt.”

The team who wins deserves to win, excuses count for nothing.

On Wilshire, this is actually the second draft of the article, and he’s mentioned in the final draft, and Eduardo is removed…

You can find it here… http://bit.ly/fGbqba

On the article, glad you liked some of the points.

Hurling and potatoes! Brilliant…

Hurling and potatoes! Brilliant.