Anwar Wilson

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

@IJaSport If you think Arsenal should have purchased players that allow them to attack better, I'm pretty confident Arsenal agrees with you.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

If Arsenal swapped their front three with PSG front three would the game be played differently? Would the teams take a different approach? Would the result change? Why?

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

One thing I’ve found interesting in the responses to my Arsenal/PSG analysis is how staunch some of the reactions have been.

Which I get. Football is tribal. We all have biases. I do too, but my attempt was to look at the final through observable actions.

What did each team actually try to do?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

@IJaSport Can I ask what evidence you have to the contrary?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

@IJaSport If you are implying they should have purchased better players, agreed. How does that help them in this game?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

@IJaSport The same reason everyone does. They are the best options available to them given their unique set of considerations.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

I prefer the way PSG play. It's unlikely that this will be a recurring problem, because Arsenals footballing idea is to improve in every area as much as possible. This includes upgrading their attack, which necessarily changes their approach.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

@IJaSport Great! Now we are talking. Thank you for pointing this out, and forgive me for my error.

PSG recorded one shot on TARGET in 90 min regulation.

https://t.co/s88mwB2v7s

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

Pragmatism is to do the best you are able to given the circumstances. Arsenal played the holders whose attackers replaced Messi, Neymar, and Mbappe. PSG did not shoot inside the area until minute 117. Near identical chance to the one Arsenal actually scored!

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

And this is where the “pragmatism” argument gets difficult for me.

Because if pragmatism only means “finding a way to win,” then the entire idea becomes dependent on the result.

If you win, it was pragmatic. If you lose, it wasn’t. That feels too convenient.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

Yes, we can see this is what happened. Where is the analysis? I am trying to understand why you think this is? Why would Arsenal choose to play this way? Fear? What do you base that on?

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

As always Spielverlagerung articles are really interesting, and I actually agree that the future is probably about combining ideas.

My point was less “PSG’s ideology wins forever” and more “in this final, under pressure, PSG kept trying to play while Arsenal relied almost entirely on protecting.”

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

I understand your point. What I asking is, if Arsenal believed the could out "play" PSG, why wouldn't they? OOP is still playing, it's a component of the game you can't dismiss because of an ideal. This is the process for youth teams; always attack. It's niave for a CL final.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

As always Spielverlagerung articles are really interesting, and I actually agree that the future is probably about combining ideas.

My point was less “PSG’s ideology wins forever” and more “in this final, under pressure, PSG kept trying to play while Arsenal relied almost entirely on protecting.”

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

Because the plan mirrored what they have done across the season which "seems" to me to be effectivity in every game state. I do think it was the plan for the final. It's consistent.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

But intentional does not automatically mean ambitious. Organized does not automatically mean courageous. Logical does not automatically mean enough.

My question is not: did Arsenal have a plan?

They clearly did.

My question is: was that really the plan they wanted to show in a Champions League final?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

The chance you refer to is the statistical anomaly that Arsenal conceded their first penalty (legitimate pen) in a 60+ game season. It only took their 3rd choice RB and second choice CB to do it, that is a 21 year-old Spanish international BTW. Not a behavior. One mistake.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

I saw an article from Soccer Analytics that estimated chance accounts for around 21% of the variance in points awarded in the Premier League.

That means skill, work, and quality matter more.

Of course, but it also means luck is not nothing.

So as a coach, I can’t only judge the game by the result. To me, that is where philosophy actually shows up.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

I understand the defense of your thread you worked hard on. I just disagree. I've explained my points of disagreement without moralizing or bringing into the argument how I "think" the teams "feel".

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

That does not mean my thread is perfect.

Of course I have preferences. Of course I have a bias toward teams that want to play, attack, carry, combine, and solve pressure with the ball.

But the thread was not written from the final result. It was written from the actions I saw.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

They are the premier league champions. Your analysis is the level of consistency they produced to win that competition they abandoned in a final because they were afraid?

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

In the first 90 minutes, Arsenal had four shots. Across 120 minutes, around 0.5 xG.

This is the Premier League champion. This is a team built over years.

So yes, I understand the logic, but I still find myself asking: Is that the best version of the project?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

Be capable to: defend in low block against elite opp; press high against teams unable to build play; reduce the danger of - transitions; control set pieces in both boxes; commit 6 players to attack against low blocks; etc. They've done each, whenever necessary, all season.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

To me, “be good enough at everything to find ways to win” is not really a game idea.

It is a results aspiration.

Every team wants to find ways to win.

The question is: how?

Through what behaviours?
Through what intentions?
Through what repeated actions?
Through what kind of football?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

This is a great point! Arsenal did attack as much as possible and were able to score 1 goal. "One nil to the Arsenal" is longstanding, deep, part of their tradition. They also defending as much as necessary. Which was a considerable amount against the holders who played less min.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

My own belief is simple:

You should attack as much as possible and defend as much as necessary.

That does not mean defending is bad. Defending is part of the game. Suffering is part of the game. Protecting space is part of the game.

But the intention matters.

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

https://t.co/goVAqtOBzM

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

ARSENAL DEFENDED A LEAD, PSG DEFENDED AN IDEA

I don’t think Arsenal lost the Champions League final simply because PSG were better on the night

I think they lost because, after six minutes, they stopped behaving like the team they’ve spent years trying to become [THREAD🧵👇]

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

Great rhetorical. Point to an instance a PSG runner was found behind Arsenals last line?

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

That defensive solution made sense. It protected the wide area, but every defensive solution creates a new attacking question.

When Rice dropped, PSG started threatening the space behind him with midfield runners.

If Rice becomes the extra center back, who controls the runner behind him?

[Anwar Wilson @Wilson_Anwar]

The average height of Arsenal has risen year on year to contest arial duels, as well as the profile they purchase; zubimendi, merino, rice, havertz.

PSG is without equal retaining second balls, and it showed.

[David Garcia @IJaSport]

Arsenal’s issue was not just that they defended deep. The issue was that when they won the ball, they couldn’t keep it.

They could win moments. They could not win possession. And without possession, the block never gets to breathe.