Two games into the new campaign, _Lines and Lanes_ returns to examine Arsenal’s tactical footprint. The Week 1 trip to Old Trafford produced a narrow 1–0 victory defined by defensive control and a decisive left-side move against Manchester United. A week later, the 5–0 win against Leeds United showcased a more expansive attacking display, though the core structures remained familiar.
With two rounds of data in hand, the picture is becoming sharper. Certain traits have carried directly from the first game. Others appeared more clearly against Leeds, hinting at how the side is evolving. And there are both concerns and reinforcements: weaknesses that still show up in the numbers, and strengths that are fast becoming repeatable.
### Trends That Continued
#### Right-Side Dependence
Week 1 against Manchester United revealed a strong bias toward the right, with progression and final-third entries flowing through the Ødegaard–Saka–White channel. White provided the width, Ødegaard the creative link, and Saka the carrier. The same pattern appeared against Leeds. Though Ben White was unavailable in Week 2, Arsenal still tilted heavily toward the right flank, with Timber stepping into the progression role. This continuity suggests Arsenal’s build remains oriented toward right-half-space value creation.
#### Defensive Resilience
Across both matches Arsenal suppressed quality chances. Manchester United managed little threat centrally, forcing play wide into Saliba and Gabriel’s coverage. Against Leeds, the defense restricted them to three shots worth just 0.1 xG. In consecutive matches Arsenal conceded very few final-third entries or deep touches, underscoring a platform that looks sustainable.
#### Compact Structure in Possession and Out of Possession
Arsenal’s rest defense has remained consistent. The base structure features three players behind the ball, with the full-backs asymmetric: one pushing high, the other more balanced. Against United, White advanced and Calafiori stayed conservative; against Leeds, Timber bombed forward with Calafiori still reserved. Out of possession, pressing came in waves against United, while against Leeds the line of engagement sat higher but still compact. Both weeks show a disciplined approach to shape management.
#### Central Buildup Through the Centre-Backs
Saliba’s passing volumes were highest across both fixtures. Arsenal consistently used him as the platform for controlled exits, with Gabriel operating as the cover defender. Raya’s short distribution under pressure provided stability, even when his long completion numbers were low. This pattern appears a fixed feature: controlled distribution out of defense, central platform from Saliba, cover and duel presence from Gabriel.
### New and Emerging Trends
#### Timber as an Attacking Force
Against United, Timber was conservative in build-up support. Against Leeds, he became a decisive figure. His forward movements generated two goals, both originating from set-piece runs, and he logged six progressive passes to lead the team. Timber’s Week 2 performance shows him not only as a stabilizer but also as a threat in advanced zones. His two-way impact is a new trend worth monitoring.
#### Rice’s Expanded Role
Rice was positioned higher at Old Trafford, contributing mainly in ball winning and long-range attempts with little xG value. Against Leeds, he became a chance creator, producing three key passes and registering the team’s highest Goal Probability Added (~0.74). He also delivered several deep completions from the middle third, changing the rhythm of Arsenal’s attacks. Week 2 introduced Rice not just as a stabilizer but as an offensive hub.
#### Youth Integration and Compact Support
The Leeds match featured Nwaneri and Lewis-Skelly in the second half. Their impact was evident in the passing networks: tighter central clustering around Rice and Ødegaard allowed faster re-entries into the final third. This emerging pattern of compact support could be an early sign of deeper squad rotation and developmental opportunities.
#### Higher Line of Engagement
While pressing came in bursts against United, the Leeds data shows Arsenal defending higher upfield with a PPDA around 8.1. The press was more consistent, forcing turnovers closer to the halfway line. This shift may represent a tactical adjustment toward a more assertive defensive block when territory can be controlled.
### Concerning Trends
#### Central Chance Creation
Both matches reveal a bottleneck in central creation. Against United, zone-14 touches produced limited xA. Against Leeds, Arsenal recorded ~16 touches in this area, again with minimal chance creation. The side continues to rely on half-space entries and wide service, which leaves them vulnerable if opponents successfully crowd those zones.
#### Predictability of Right-Side Funnel
The heavy right-side orientation has now appeared in consecutive games. While effective, it carries a risk of predictability. Against stronger midfields, funneling through the same axis can be mirrored and congested. This reliance needs variation if Arsenal want to maintain attacking unpredictability across the season.
#### Ground Duels Under Pressure
At Old Trafford, Arsenal’s ground-duel win rate was ~41%, with visible struggles on the wings. Against Leeds, it improved to ~56%, but the opposition provided less pressure. Against stronger opponents, duel inefficiency could re-emerge as a weakness, especially in wide areas where Saka and Timber are tasked with progression under contact.
#### Finishing Margins
The Leeds result flattered the underlying numbers. Arsenal scored five times from ~2.9 xG (including a penalty). The conversion was significantly above expectation, a positive short-term outcome but not a repeatable margin. The data suggests finishing may regress to average levels, making the creation bottleneck more concerning if central supply does not improve.
### Reinforced Positives
#### Set-Piece Effectiveness
Both matches featured repeatable set-piece schemes. Against United, Calafiori’s decisive goal came from a left-side move. Against Leeds, Timber scored twice from rehearsed routines. The variety of deliveries and run profiles—near-post, far-post, late arrivals—points to a reliable set-piece arsenal that is producing goals directly.
#### Gyökeres’ Penalty-Box Presence
Week 1 data showed striker isolation with limited touches. Week 2 showed the reverse: Gyökeres earned and converted a penalty, added further shots, and demonstrated reliable timing into the box. He is beginning to show repeatable positioning patterns, which, paired with improved service, can solve the isolation problem evident at Old Trafford.
#### Defensive Ceiling
Across two matches Arsenal have conceded a combined 0.1 xG to Leeds and ~1.2 xG to Manchester United, both controlled through compact structure. The consistency of suppression, particularly of central shots, is becoming a clear team strength. This defensive ceiling is the strongest reinforcement to date.
#### Individual Growth in Responsibility
Timber and Rice have each expanded their roles significantly in Week 2, without sacrificing the underlying security of their Week 1 profiles. Timber moved from stable full-back to two-goal scorer and progression leader. Rice added creativity to his ball-winning skill set. These developments suggest Arsenal are not relying solely on Ødegaard and Saka but are distributing creative burden across more players.
### Conclusion
Two games are enough to reveal patterns without providing the full season’s truth. Arsenal’s data shows continuity in right-side progression, defensive compactness, and set-piece efficiency. New traits are emerging: Timber’s attacking thrust, Rice’s creative expansion, youth support, and higher pressing. Concerns remain around central creation and the predictability of funneling play through the right. Finishing margins against Leeds may regress, so the sustainability of attacking output depends on addressing these issues.
At the same time, positives are solidifying. Defensive control across two matches is undeniable. Set-piece output looks repeatable. Gyökeres has begun to show the penalty-box timing Arsenal lacked at Old Trafford. Timber and Rice are growing into more rounded roles.
The direction of travel is one of control. Arsenal are not yet a side overflowing with chance variety, but they are showing consistent defensive strength and a clear attacking structure. If the new developments can stabilize and the concerning trends can be addressed, the data points toward a team evolving into a balanced contender.