Same old story as Arsenal efficiency beats Spurs' idealism

Alex Keble looks at how Arsenal inflicted derby defeat on Tottenham Hotspur after the 1-0 win that took them second in the table.

In the aftermath of a 3-2 defeat to Arsenal in late April, Spurs head coach Ange Postecoglou was defiant about the set-piece goals his team conceded.

“Eventually I will create a team that has success and it won't be because of working on set-pieces,” he said.

After today’s 1-0 defeat, courtesy of Gabriel’s header from a Bukayo Saka corner, Spurs supporters will hope Postecoglou softens on that point.

TOT

0-1

ARS

Highlights Available

close

TV Info - Broadcasters

The first north London derby of the season was almost a carbon copy of the one that preceded it - and not just because of another set-piece goal for Arsenal.

The Gunners deployed exactly the same game plan. So did Spurs. Unsurprisingly, it produced the same end result.

Postecoglou needs a rethink on set-pieces

Since the start of last season Arsenal’s 24 set-piece goals are more than any other Premier League team, while among teams to compete in both the 2023/24 and 2024/25 seasons only Nottingham Forest have conceded more set-pieces goals than Spurs’ 18.

The Gabriel goal – a free header from six yards out - was predictable enough. Three of Arsenal’s last four goals against Spurs have been from corners, which is as many as in their previous 88 north London derbies.

“To quote Billy Joel, you may be right, I may be crazy, but it's maybe a lunatic you're looking for,” Postecoglou said back in April. “I'm just not interested in it. I never have been.”

Will that change now? Arguably it already has: The Times reports that Nick Montgomery, who joined as an assistant in June, is now in charge of set-piece routines.

But Montgomery’s influence hasn’t taken effect just yet. Even prior to Sunday’s match, Spurs ranked third in the Premier League for set-piece Expected Goals (xG) conceded this season, with 1.7.

That was before another decisive goal was conceded from a corner today.

“Look, I know… for some reason people keep thinking I don't care about set-pieces, and it's a narrative that'll go on,” Postecoglou said after today’s game. “We work on them as much as anyone. It's my burden to carry.”

Arsenal’s stubborn 4-4-2 repeats April trick

Postecoglou has been accused of tactical inflexibility in the past (a critique that extends to his views on set-pieces) and arguably that was again a factor here.

Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta knew exactly how Spurs would play and knew, from the experience of April’s encounter, exactly how to counter-act it.

Arsenal decided to sit ultra-deep, block the middle, and play on the counter-attack in a 4-4-2 formation, with Leandro Trossard and Kai Havertz playing as double “false nines”.

This should not have come as a surprise to anyone who watched that 3-2. It was exactly the same approach this time, with Arsenal holding 36.3 per cent possession, even less than the 37.8 per cent held in April.

In this typical example, note how remarkably deep Arsenal sat and how keen they were to crowd the central area.

Spurs are a very narrow team thanks to their use of Pedro Porro and Destiny Udogie as inverted full-backs and their reliance on James Maddison’s creativity. Arsenal’s reactive and humble approach was a direct response to this.

They managed to slow the game down, taking an age over every dead-ball situation and doing their best to avoid the kind of chaotic end-to-end match that favours Spurs.

Things occasionally became stretched, particularly in the first half, but Arsenal generally succeeded, creating a stodgy match in which their pragmatism beat Spurs’ idealism.

Solanke and Maddison tail off as Arsenal’s counters improve

It was the prevailing pattern of the match - but that does not mean an Arsenal win was inevitable.

Spurs had their chances, while for long periods the absence of Martin Odegaard and Declan Rice led to some poorly constructed counter-attacks from Arsenal.

Dominic Solanke in particular was rusty on his home debut, missing a couple of decent opportunities and looking hesitant in the final third, while Maddison never quite got going.

His pass map, below, reveals how hard he found it to cut forward passes through the Arsenal brick wall, with the red lines signifying unsuccessful passes.

But Arsenal made it very difficult, and it is fairer to praise Arsenal for the hosts’ low 0.77 xG than criticise Spurs.

And unfortunately for Spurs, a waning performance in the second half coincided with an uptick from Arsenal after Arteta instructed his players to go more direct.

Perhaps Arteta was wary of Thomas Partey getting caught on the ball too many times, and of his team generally struggling to build through the thirds, but whatever the reason the shift seemed to be a tactical choice.

Compared with the first half, Arsenal’s forwards were more aggressive in their arcing runs on the shoulder of the last defender, with players notably looked for a more direct route in the pass.

It led, indirectly, to the winner. The corner from which Gabriel scored was won from a neat move between Havertz, Gabriel Martinelli, and Saka: a fast break that began with a clearance that Havertz and two team-mates anticipated with bursting forward runs.

But a tactical angle on the match’s key moment is to overlook the more obvious truth: set-pieces, again, being Spurs’ undoing.

That is the real reason they sit in the bottom half of the table with four points from four matches, and why Arsenal, after an anxious fortnight, can look forward to next Sunday’s meeting with Manchester City knowing victory would put them in charge of the title race.