Following Sunday’s 4-2 defeat at Manchester City, Tom Garry from the Guardian asked Renee Slegers whether it was the substitutions thta proved the difference in the game, with City gradually turning a tight game in their favour after introducing the likes of Beney, Casparij and Fowler. ‘They get immediate effect when they make their changes. They changed their full-backs. Casparij gets the ball on the edge of the box, shoots and scores the goal. The clearest example of the effect that they get. We have a quality squad.
“We have starters. We’ve gotten more consistent with the starting team. We have players that can come on and change the game for us. It’s been a super strength and it needs to be our super strength. But that’s also one of our reflections, that we haven’t had the same effect as last season and this season before. It’s always been our strength. We’ve been scoring goals in the last 15 minutes of games and the last couple of games it hasn’t been the case.”
After the 1-0 defeat at Stamford Bridge last weekend, I asked Renee whether she felt the substitutions confused the team, ‘I don’t think so. I think we have a lot of clarity in the way we want to play and principles, so all players can execute that. They know it. But of course, there’s different qualities in different players, so you have to make small adjustments in what you want to achieve. And I think we’ve had a couple of games in a row now where we are in a situation where we need to force a goal and then going into different scenarios, which we go through with certain players to the players on the pitch.’
However, I think it is undeniable that Arsenal’s games are following a broad pattern. The team start games well enough, there appears to be clarity and buy-in for the gameplan. Sometimes I think confidence in the final third has drained when the goal hasn’t arrived. But most of the time, I think the team plays broadly reasonably well and as soon as the time comes to make substitutions, the performance slowly disintegrates.
Arsenal conceded to City twice following their first round of subs, which were made with the scores at 2-2 (I am putting aside the enforced change that saw Foord come on for Mariona before half time due to injury). They were 2-0 up in Paris when they made their first second half changes and conceded twice in the final 18 minutes. When Georgia Stanway put Arsenal 2-0 up in Paris, their XG was around 1.3. 40 minutes later and it had only been raised to 1.7.
Against Koge, Arsenal’s XG totally flatlined between the 65th and 85th minutes (graph courtesy of Scott Willis of Cannon Stats). The only substitution that has demonstratively changed a game was Smilla Holmberg’s introduction against Manchester United. Not only did she score a stoppage time equaliser, but she also put nine crosses into the United box in her 32 minutes on the pitch.
I think a big part of the problem is that Arsenal lack the attacking profiles for low blocks and because they have not been sharp or confident enough to either take or hold a lead for a significant period of time, players like Foord and Blackstenius, who are better against higher defensive lines, are coming into situations that suit their qualities less.
Having Mariona as a winger means Arsenal are, essentially, playing with four midfielders and only Lisa Baum as a sort of ‘runner’, which is just not testing defences enough and asking enough questions. Geraldine Reuteler just does not seem to be trusted at all, which is bizarre and damning. This is a player that Arsenal waited an entire year for and now she is here and Arsenal are struggling to break teams down, she can’t sniff the pitch.
Selina Cerci is clearly only trusted as a very late Hail Mary sub. Her four sub appearances so far add up to a total of 59 minutes. Cerci did win a late penalty with inventive play against Koge (Mariona converted the penalty and was a substitute that evening). Holmberg scored a late equaliser from the bench against Manchester United.
But it’s not really about the individuals themselves, it just seems that Arsenal start games reasonably well (not bombastically, but they look coherent at least), struggle to make that show on the scoreboard- with the exception of the Paris game- but as soon as the time comes to switch up the personnel or the game plan, they totally dissolve and don’t really seem sure of what they should be doing.
A criticism of Slegers in the past has been that her subs have felt heavily pre-empted. I understood that criticism but didn’t fervently subscribe to it. Slegers had previously explained that an element of choreography to substitutions helps to take the emotion away and gives players some clarity. If anything, I feel like this season that script has been strayed from too far. Substitutions feel reactive and sometimes over corrective at times when Arsenal are broadly playing well enough.
Slegers explained earlier in the season that the club had made a conscious decision to expand the squad this season, especially when it comes to attacking options. ‘It also makes my job harder and it’s small margins and that’s something we need to manage really, really well with the squad because it’s new to us, it’s new to the players as well.’
Instead of a strength, this has felt like a weakness so far this season. It feels less like Slegers has more tools in the toolbelt and, instead, is looking for needles in a bigger haystack, which has led to confusion when the ‘game changers’ are introduced. Because at the moment, the in-game changes are causing more harm than good.