Counter attacks are Arsenal’s weapon without a centre forward

By Tony Attwood

Liverpool, Manchester City, Tottenham Hotspur and Chelsea have all scored more goals than Arsenal this season.   Which seems like a pretty good reason to join the bandwagon proclaiming that Arsenal need a new centre forward.   After all how can Arsenal compete at the top when they are only fifth in the goal-scoring league?

Well, the first point back to that note is that three of those four clubs have only scored one or two more goals than Arsenal.   The only club way ahead of Arsenal is Liverpool with 15 more goals.

But the second point to make is that all of those teams that have scored more than Arsenal have also conceded far more.   So many more in fact that if the table is constructed on goal difference, Arsenal are still in second place.   And not just by the odd goal or two but by a goal difference of 12 above Manchester City and Chelsea and with a goal difference that is double that of Tottenham Hotspur (not that they matter but it is always nice to make a comparison).

Which really raises the question, why do journalists and their followers put so much emphasis on goal scoring when it is only a part of the game?   Indeed why do they go on and on about buying another centre forward all the time?

One obvious reason is that Arsenal have failed to score in the last two games and journalists are notorious short-termists.  Another is that Arsenal draw too many games, and that if seven of those nine draws had been victories instead of draws, Arsenal would be top of the league.

But if in those seven games Arsenal had had a centre forward who could knock in a goal in each case, someone would have to be taken out of the team, and that could have meant an extra goal against the club.  And this is where we see the problem because the sort of out and out centre forward that is demanded by many of the commentators to replace one of the deeper lying players at the moment, could change the defence and result in more goals against – which in turn defeats the whole purpose of the new centre forward giving Arsenal the extra 13 points required.

The fact is that Liverpool have scored 66 goals in 28 games and conceded 26, giving a goal difference of 40.  But a year ago, in the 2023/24 season, after 28 games, Arsenal had scored 70 (ie four more than Liverpool this season) and conceded two fewer, and thus had a goal difference at this point in the season that was six better.

So the Arsenal of a year ago was better at goal-scoring and better at defending than Liverpool this season.  And yet the idea is still to disrupt the entire team by changing the pattern and approach of Arsenal to match Liverpool this season, which seems odd.

Doubly odd in effect as Jorginho and Thomas Partey both have contracts that expire at the end of June and presumably need replacing.

Now, one of the constant approaches to this in the media is that Arsenal could buy or keep any player they want – it is only a lack of ambition that stops this from happening.

This is an approach that is particularly degrading to players, for it treats them as nothing but packages of meat to be bought and sold.   Players have their own ambitions and their own views, as well as having agents who manipulate them in order to get a slice of a forthcoming transfer fee.

Thus, every club faces situations in which players they want to keep are attracted away through being offered big signing-on fees, exciting add-ons, guarantees of how many games they will play and so on.  As often as not, players turn down Arsenal and other clubs because of bigger offers from elsewhere.

Now of course that could lead to the argument that Arsenal could then make a better offer, but we all know that some players actually turn out to be not as good as they were expected to be, so if all the money is blown on one such player that leaves the club still searching for a solution, but with far less money left with which to find it.

A lot of the problem here comes because the journalists like to suggest they have inside knowledge of what happened in a failed transfer, and thus can place all the blame on Arsenal, whereas the player might not have wanted to come to England nor to Arsenal for all sorts of personal reasons or because of media coverage of Arsenal in their own country based on all the whinging and whining about Arsenal in the English media.

But the story goes on and on.  Arsenal could have any player they wanted if only they would act more quickly and offer the right money.

And all the time we should remember that buying a centre forward is not the only solution to scoring more goals without conceding more at the same time.

For as the New York Times recently pointed out, Arsenal have “conceded the fewest open-play goals for the second season running.”  Start playing around with the structure of the team, and that great benefit goes.

Another recently reported factor is that Arsenal have “won the ball in the opposition third more than other teams that play a more “vertical” approach.  Bringing in a new centre forward whose approach is one of knocking in 20 goals a season might look like it could add 10 or more goals to Arsenal every season and thus potentially give the club the title, but it could also reduce the number of goals from elsewhere.

And this really is the heart of the problem.  Bring in a player who is just a goal scorer might sound good, but it could reduce the efficiency of the rest of the team.