Alex Song must redefine his position

Alex Song, the back four’s babysitter, is having a good season. But so he should. From 1 to 11, he has - by far - the easiest position.

In the Sky Sports 21st Century, every player must cover two positions. Full-backs must be wingers; wingers must be full-backs; centre-midfielders must be forwards; and forwards must be defenders.

Except, of course, the holding midfielder. He’s the lucky one; the spoilt son with his own position, his own rules, and his own cosy comfort zone.

He’s not an attacker. We know that. He doesn’t make forward runs, or make forward passes. The other midfielders do that job.

And, really, he’s not a defender. He’s an extra, a bonus, not the last line.

The holding midfielder doesn’t worry about holding the line, playing the offside trap. He doesn’t worry about marking the centre-forward, getting elbows in his gullet. And he doesn’t worry about nippy strikers, one-on-one, steaming past.

The holding midfielder, in short, has few responsibilities. He’s a full-back that doesn’t have to attack; or a winger that doesn’t have to defend. He’s pampered.

Song, in fairness, is making the easy position look easy. He wins headers, and - something not seen last season - he wins tackles. He also makes interceptions, though often, the ball finds him, not the other way round.

But, now he’s cracked the position, Song must redefine it. Like the Primary School chess champion, he must test himself at a higher level. He must leave the comfort zone.

Song, for starters, should score five goals a season. He can, stepping from the centre circle, be the extra man in Arsenal’s attacks; the man the opposition don’t mention in their team talks.

This season, he’s had - at least - ten chances to shoot from 25 yards, which he’s declined. Why? His shooting is far, far better than Theo Walcott’s or Emmanuel Eboue’s, who shoot more often, and from worse angles.

As Javier Mascherano showed for Liverpool against Everton, shooting from distance creates undeserved goals. Arsenal, surely, score fewer deflections than any Premier League team.

But that isn’t the only way Song can score goals. As he showed at Wigan last season - when he scored - and Sunderland this season, when he didn’t, Song has skill. He can drop his shoulder and beat a man; he can burst past people defenders with pace, or one-twos.

He’s shown he’s a holding midfielder. Now Song must show he’s a midfielder. He should stop holding, start pressing, and run 25 per cent more in each game.

Song can become a deep-lying Steven Gerrard. If he does, Arsenal could revert to 4-4-2, with Andrei Arshavin and Robin van Persie up front. And that, you imagine, would be worth watching.

Who is Arsenal's player of the season?

Who, after four months and 25 games, has been Arsenal’s player of the season?

After Sunday’s wonder-goal, some might say Andrei Arshavin. From that position, on his right-foot, Arshavin will score four times out of five. It wasn’t hit and hope. It was hit and admire.

That’s why the 2-1 win wasn’t lucky: Arsenal’s world-class player is in form, and played well. Liverpool’s two world-class players didn’t.

But, despite that goal, Arshavin hasn’t been brilliant this season. Too often, he’s been stuck on the left-wing; sulking like an unhappy 17-year-old at home on Saturday night.

The fact that, still, he’s scored eight goals in 16 starts proves what a special player he is. Eduardo, Tomas Rosicky, Samir Nasri, and Theo Walcott have fewer goals in total, despite 25 starts between them.

Robin van Persie would be a contender, had he played in the past month. Or, for that matter, the first month. He didn’t score until Emmanuel Adebayor stamped on his head, and he only scored in September and October.

Some might say Thomas Vermaelen has been Arsenal’s player of the year. The Man With The Bandaged Hand has the best leap, and the best left foot, in the Premiership.

If Arsenal had more than two centre-halves, he could play in Alex Song’s role when Song leaves for Africa. He’s quick, he wins headers, he tackles, and - most of all - he’s single-minded.

He won’t lose his temper, or his concentration, easily. He’s a 32-year-old 24-year-old, who will be Arsenal’s next captain.

But Vermaelen has made mistakes. His five goals - more than anyone but Arshavin, van Persie, and Cesc Fabregas - have made him immune from criticism.

He missed the corner Wolves scored from; he watched, helpless, as Darren Bent struck at Sunderland; and he shouldn’t have scored the own goal against Chelsea. He’s had an eight out of ten season. The man next to him, however, has been - at least - nine out of ten.

William Gallas has become, at last, the defender he was alongside John Terry at Chelsea. He’s 32, but, as Arsene Wenger revealed today, he’s getting a new contract. Will Wenger’s one-year rule for the over-30s apply? Doubtful.

The difference between Gallas this season, and Gallas last, is his partner. Centre-halves work in pairs, and Vermaelen - like Terry - can be trusted. Kolo Toure couldn’t.

Gallas can leave the left-side of the pitch alone, whether the ball comes long, or comes short. The Belgian has, in effect, halved Gallas’s workload. In turn, he’s become twice the player.

Last season - especially as captain - Gallas felt responsible for the left side, as he played then, and the right side. Like Arsene Wenger, he didn’t trust Toure. Gallas was on a one-man mission, and it didn’t work. It never could.

Free from Toure - who’s only been successful alongside Sol Campbell - Gallas has been the complete defender. He’s quick as ever - notice how he caught Tuncay against Stoke - but he’s braver. He’s barely six foot, but Gallas is no worse in the air than - say - Martin Keown in his prime.

And, most of all, he hasn’t made mistakes. He isn’t baby-sitting Toure, and he isn’t baby-sitting the team.

Arsenal’s defensive record - 19 goals in 15 games - is still poor. But that’s because only one midfielder tackles, and the keeper’s hopeless. Without Vermaelen and Gallas, it would be far worse.

Now he's not captain, Gallas is playing like a captain. At this rate, he'll be in the PFA Team of the Year for the third time (after 2003 and 2006). And, if the season ended now, he'd be Arsenal's player of the season.

Sorry - no articles until December 16

I'm away until December 16 and won't be able to write until then.

Here's hoping there's a decent sports bar in Dubai on Sunday.

Thanks

Owen

Eduardo's injury was lucky for Wenger

Arsene Wenger’s success at Arsenal has been caused by his inspired, and inspiring, decisions. But occasionally – just occasionally – he gets lucky.

Resorting to Jens Lehmann, after trying to sign other keepers in 2003, was lucky. For two years, Lehmann was Arsenal’s best defender.

Still having Ashley Cole, after planning on selling him to Crystal Palace for £200,000, was lucky. He became a better left-back, in defence and attack, than Silvinho. Cole, Robert Pires, and Thierry Henry were the Premiership’s best partnership from 2002 to 2004.

Now, Wenger’s got lucky again. Why? Because another of his players got injured.

Eduardo – apparently - strained a muscle on Friday. If he hadn’t, Arsenal wouldn’t have beaten Stoke 2-0.

Wenger would have played Eduardo, because the Croatian deserves loyalty, and he needs games. But, though that’s true, he’s been – comfortably – Arsenal’s worst player this season.

In 15 appearances this season, he’s scored three goals: from one yard against Everton, two yards against Standard Liege, and 12 yards – that penalty – against Celtic. He looks slower than last season. His touch is wooden, and his finishing is weak.

Arsenal’s attacks, which race down the pitch like a speedboat boat down the Thames, have ran aground when they’ve reached Eduardo. He’s the dancer one step behind the boyband.

Andrei Arshavin won’t have helped Eduardo’s confidence. Last week, the Russian told anyone who’d listen that, since Robin van Persie was injured, Arsenal had no striker. We can’t hold it up, he said. We’re too small.

So Wenger gave Arshavin the shirt. If you think you’re special, sonny, you do better.

And guess what? He did. Arshavin’s performance was Technicolor to Eduardo’s monochrome; sound to Eduardo’s silence.

He made runs, worried defenders, and offered midfielders space to find. His first goal – the run, the touch, the finish – was a van Persie impersonation, but right-footed.

And, for the difference between Arshavin and Average Arsenal, watch the penalty. Arshavin demanded the ball from Emmaneul Eboue. Then demanded it, then demanded it.

He’d seen enough mis-hit crosses, enough third-gear runs, enough weak-kneed dives, to know the outcome if Eboue kept it. Eventually Arshavin got the ball, beat a man, and won the penalty.

Easy, he thought. Just don’t take so long next time.

Playing Arshavin up front won’t win Arsenal the league. The keeper’s not good enough, the midfielders are one-paced, and no-one can goes a month without being injured.

But, with the Russian up front, Arsenal won’t go three games without a goal. And they should – should – beat Liverpool.

Three reasons why Arsenal haven't scored

In the past three games, Arsenal’s attack has been dumb. Unable to speak.

The team, the body, has worked. The possession stats against Sunderland (57 percent), Chelsea (51 percent), and Manchester City (61 percent), prove that.

But the attack – the mouth – has been frozen. There’s been no noise. Arsenal haven’t scored, in a domestic game, since Andrei Arshavin hit a half-volley against Wolves four weeks ago.

Arsenal’s attacking players, such as Arshavin, Samir Nasri, and Tomas Rosicky, want the ball. They’re footballers – exquisite footballers – and they’re unhappy without it.

And that’s the problem.

Some players don’t want the ball. Michael Owen, in his prime, didn’t want the ball. Neither did Marc Overmars. They lived behind the back four, not in front.

Owen and Overmars didn’t want the ball thirty yards from goal, like Rosicky does. They didn’t want to take a touch, roll it off, then move five yards, like Nasri does.

They wanted to dart behind. They wanted to come deep then spin, pouncing like a cat on a mouse.

Owen and Overmars could live without the ball. Arsenal’s attackers, reared on five-a-side pitches in Hertfordshire, can’t.

It means that, when Arsenal are 40 yards from goal, building a move, everything happens in front of opposition defenders. The polite attackers take turns to have touches; side-to-side, back and forth. After you. No - after you.

No-one ignores the ball, and runs. No-one disturbs their back-four. Instead, they let them watch, admire, breathe, and block.

It’s why so many Arsenal attacks end with a hopeless, half-baked cross from a full-back. Arsenal’s attackers play themselves into dead-ends, each pass slower than the last, like a drawn game of Connect 4.

When everyone wants the next touch, no-one wants space. Possession without movement equals paralysis.

The answer is part mental – confident players do things quicker – and part personnel. Robin van Persie is quicker, sharper, and busier than Eduardo. Theo Walcott – the closest thing Arsenal have to Owen, or Overmars – makes more runs than Rosicky.

So Arsenal fans, alas, must wait. Without movement – and van Persie, Walcott, and an interested Arshavin - goals may be scarce against Stoke.

There are, of course, two more reasons Arsenal haven’t scored since Wolves. But they don’t need 400 words to explain.

They don’t shoot from distance. And they don’t score from corners.

Arshavin wants 4-4-2, not 4-5-1

If you ran a kitchen, and employed the 21st best chef in Europe, would you have him cut carrots?

No. So why is Andrei Arshavin – who, in the Ballon D’or vote, came 21st – stuck, sulking, on the left wing?

Because Arsene Wenger doesn’t trust Arsenal’s defence. Instead, he gives them a burly babysitter from Cameroon.

Would Wenger do that for Dixon-Adams-Keown-Winterburn? Would he do that for Lauren-Toure-Campbell-Cole? He wouldn’t, and he didn’t.

But, because Arsenal’s back four panics him, Wenger changed the formation. He sacrificed a centre-forward for a babysitter. He admitted he’d lost what he inherited in 1996.

Which means, of course, there’s no room for Arshavin. He’s not an on-the-shoulder striker, so doesn’t play up front. And he doesn’t play as the attacking midfielder, because Cesc Fabregas is captain, and Arsenal's best academy advert.

So Arshavin is shoved, like an unwanted guest at Christmas dinner, to the periphery. For him, left-wing is the torn, tatty kitchen chair, stuck on the corner. Fabregas, meanwhile, heads the table.

Arshavin could win games from the left-wing. At 5’4’, and with two good feet, he can dart inside or outside full-backs; under them and round them. He can score Goals of the Month from 30 yards – as he did at Old Trafford – or from five yards, as he did against Blackburn, last season.

But he doesn’t win games from the left-wing. Too often, he plays like he’s unhappy; wondering, like a schoolgirl in a tower block, what life’s like elsewhere.

So should Wenger drop 4-5-1, and play 4-4-2? It would mean Arshavin and Fabregas in the middle. Arshavin would get the ball more often; he’d score more often; he’d win games more often. He’d make sure he never played left-wing again.

Eduardo, or Carlos Vela, would have the help they need. Samir Nasri, Tomas Rosicky - or Jack Wilshere - could play left-wing.

Wenger, however, won’t play 4-4-2. Firstly, it would remove the back-four’s babysitter. Even with him, they’ve conceded 18 goals in 13 games – more than Birmingham, Fulham, and Stoke, for example.

Secondly – and more importantly – it would be an admission. By playing 4-4-2, Wenger would tell the world he was wrong. His omniscient halo would slip.

So Arsenal will, perhaps rightly, persevere with 4-5-1. But – at least until van Persie returns – isn’t it worth playing Europe’s 21st best player in his best position?

After all, someone else came 21st in that poll, joint with Arshavin. And Chelsea wouldn’t play Frank Lampard on the left-wing, would they?