Arsenal Has No Squad Depth They Say

For the biggest clubs, the League Cup is something of a footballing laboratory; a chance to test the depth of their respective squads and experiment with their most promising youngsters in an environment very much apart from the rigours of Premier League football. Quite predictably, following Arsenal's 3-0 defeat to Sheffield Wednesday on Tuesday night, the issue of 'squad depth' ascended to the top of the agenda. The players on the outer reaches of the squad who were given a chance were deemed players we can no longer 'rely upon', while others fretted that we may have left ourselves 'short', with reference to the manager's lack of spending in the summer an inevitable parenthesis.  

Fans had good reason to be disappointed with Tuesday's performance; regardless of the make-up of the team and early injuries to Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, it was an incredibly limp effort. Did the manager and players approach the game not caring whether they won or lost? Of course not. However, all football watchers know that it only takes the slightest doubt about the importance of a game within the subconscious of the team to hand the opposition an immediate advantage. 

Essentially, two elements contributed to Arsenal's downfall. Firstly, an experienced 'back six' consisting of Petr Cech, Mathieu Debuchy, Calum Chambers, Per Mertesacker, Kieran Gibbs and Mathieu Flamini were not as diligent in their defensive work as they should have been. Debuchy let his runner go to cross for the the first Wednesday goal, while the proceeding two goals from set pieces were collective failings.

Secondly, following the early injuries, Arsenal were left with an inexperienced midfield of Glen Kamara, Alex Iwobi, Joel Campbell and Ismael Bennacer. All have scope for improvement, but lacked the necessary knowledge of how to build and sustain attacks. This led to too many aimless long passes towards an isolated Olivier Giroud. It was less a case of 'too many kids', more a case of too many concentrated in one area of the pitch. Neither unit helped each other; the young midfield would have benefited from a more solid and frugal platform, while every back four relies on the protection it is offered from those elsewhere in the team. 

During the post-mortem that followed the game, all such problems were offered as evidence for why Arsenal haven't got a big enough squad. I am not too sure who started the rumour about Arsenal carrying a squad that is light on numbers, because it simply isn't true. Below are two first XI's that Arsenal could field, based on the premise of a fully fit squad:

First XI

Cech; Bellerin, Mertesacker, Koscienly, Monreal; Coquelin, Cazorla; Ramsey, Ozil, Sanchez; Walcott. 

Second XI 

Ospina; Debuchy, Chambers, Gabriel, Gibbs; Arteta, Wilshere; Oxlade-Chamberlain, Rosicky, Welbeck; Giroud. 

That doesn't include Mathieu Flamini and Joel Campbell, nor the likes of Serge Gnabry and Chuba Akpom who have tasted first team football but are currently on loan. If 'two players players for every position' is the universal indicator of a 'deep' squad, then Arsenal are in a luxurious position. Without too many injuries, something like that 'Second XI' would be Arsenal's League Cup team. Every one of those players has been involved in Premier League victories for Arsenal in the past. Not too shabby.

Of course, supporters will chew the fat over the respective quality of each individual. Here's one popular refrain: 'Are you telling me there's no defensive midfielder better than Flamini that we could have bought?'. Well, I'm sure there was. However, is upgrading your third choice defensive midfield player going to push you from 3rd to 1st in the Premier League? No. Might it have helped Arsenal beat Sheffield Wednesday last night? Perhaps, but that's not the basis of any club's transfer policy.

Chelsea are often held up as a standard bearer for squad depth. However, if one examines their 'Second XI' based on the squad that won the title last season, we are confronted with a different impression:

Cheslea's Second XI (2014/15)

Cech; Christensen, Zouma, Ake, Luis; Mikel, Ramires; Cuadrado, Salah, Remy; Drogba. 

That team isn't noticeably stronger than the 'Second XI' Arsenal could hypothetically field this season. Such things are subjective, but there's a good case to be made in favour of Arsenal's being the stronger. Remember, this is a Chelsea squad that won the Premier League title, an achievement many claim to be out of Arsenal's reach because of a lack of 'depth'. It doesn't quite add up. 

What all title winning teams rely on is keeping a core of 7 or 8 key players fit and in the first XI for the majority of the season. Chelsea did that last year. Arsenal did it for most of 2003/4. I sometimes wonder how the likes of Sylvain Wiltord and Edu would be viewed by supporters in today's environment. I suspect 'sub-standard' might a popular expression on Twitter. 

Successful squad building involves getting a balance between a close knit, cohesive group of first team players and a layer of squad players who can slot into the team when needed. Like many things in football, this involves taking a gamble in certain positions. What many pundits seem unable to grasp is that you cannot insure yourself against every injury crisis or worst case scenario. 'What if x gets injured, what if y gets injured?' If you plan your squad around such scenarios you'd end up with a squad of 40 odd senior professionals, many of who will be unhappy at a lack of playing time. Look and learn from how Debuchy and Gibbs have stagnated somewhat due to a lack of games. Buying more and more players would simply exacerbate the problem. The club would be left with a layer of unfit, rusty and disillusioned back up. 

It is comparable to hosting a house party and proceeding to buy every type of beer in the supermarket, on the off chance that one guest arrives who only drinks a specific brand. Such a policy is imprudent, both logistically and financially.  If the worst case scenario does occur, that one picky so and so who only drinks Cusquena turns up, then you deal with that situation as best as you can. You don't plan for it. 

If you have been following closely, you will have noted that the depth of Arsenal's squad depends on a lack of injuries (like every squad in the history of the game). Many will point out that the club were aware of the long term nature of Jack Wilshere's and Danny Welbeck's injuries. Other will argue that the club should have anticipated injuries given Arsenal's recent history. In fairness, since the turn of the year, Arsenal's record regarding muscular injuries has been much improved until recent weeks. Whether the recent problems are due to a flaw in preparation and training methods, or just plain coincidence, remains to be seen. One thing is for certain though; if the club cannot identify an underlying cause then us fans certainly can't, no matter how many guesses we take. 

Arsenal could well come up short this season. We might not be good enough, lucky enough, smart enough or consistent enough. We might suffer from a combination of all of those things. Any prospective failings will not, however, be due to a shortage of players. Arsenal have a fully fattened squad, and you ought to question those who tell you otherwise. 

http://twitter.com/ZeqiriDanTell us what you think! If you agree, or have a different view, please leave a comment in the comments section or why not write a response or your own article on YouWrite?

Think you know Arsenal? Test your Arsenal knowledge on our trivia page and see if you can beat the top score.

Don't forget to like us on Facebook, add us to your G+ circle and follow us on Twitter.