Alex Keble analyses Arsenal’s 1-1 draw at Liverpool.
TV Info - Broadcasters
Arsenal’s second-half strategy change backfires
Aside from Mohamed Salah’s battle with Oleksandr Zinchenko (more on that below), Arsenal had the better of the first half thanks to Mikel Arteta’s surprising decision to play a direct game.
David Raya and the Arsenal defence repeatedly played long passes when in possession at the back, therefore neutralising Liverpool’s hopes of winning the ball high up the pitch and bursting forward in a classic "gegenpress".
Arsenal complemented this approach with an aggressive man-to-man press of their own and an urgent desire to get the ball forward as often as possible, breaking a season record of forward passes, with 43 per cent of them in the direction of Liverpool's goal.
It worked, ruffling Liverpool’s feathers until the intensity of Arsenal’s pressure began to wane towards the end of the first half.
That’s why it was a little odd that Arsenal dramatically changed their approach in the second half, instead trying to control the play and build gradually out from the back.
Liverpool were now able to pinch the ball from Arsenal players struggling under the pressure, hence their 24 successful second-half tackles compared with just 10 in the first half.
Having initially avoided the Liverpool trap, Arsenal started playing into it, and Liverpool could easily have scored from one of their high turnovers.
Klopp makes error in taking Salah off Zinchenko
The key tactical mismatch at Anfield was between Salah and Zinchenko, with the Arsenal left-back regularly appearing unsettled by the Egyptian.
Salah had Zinchenko on toast for large portions of the match, inspiring a nervousness that ultimately led to Liverpool’s equaliser. Zinchenko was beaten too easily by Salah checking inside before he shot, and yet the initial error was just as crucial.
In order to give himself more time and space, Zinchenko began retreating before the long ball had been launched towards Salah, thereby playing the Liverpool forward onside and handing him the advantage.
The pattern continued into the second period, making Klopp’s decision to move Salah into a central position following a 68th-minute triple substitution difficult to understand.
Darwin Nunez’s introduction made a lot of sense as Liverpool looked to capitalise on the pressure they were building from those high turnovers and fast transitions, but with Harvey Elliott preferring to cut into the No 10 position from the right wing, Klopp effectively let Zinchenko off the hook.
In truth, the substitutions didn’t really work. Liverpool held just 42 per cent possession after the 68th minute and had a total of four shots on goal. Like Arteta, Klopp’s in-game changes only exacerbated the game’s sticky, awkward feel.
Gunners happier with hard-earned point
Arsenal didn't have a single shot on target after Gabriel's fourth-minute goal, primarily because they didn’t commit enough players forward; Kai Havertz and Gabriel Martinelli were regularly found hovering on the edge of the box when a cross came in.
That isn’t necessarily a failing on their part. Arteta’s side were far happier with a point than Liverpool, and indeed the conservatism that marked long portions of this match was another sign of Arsenal’s growing maturity and emerging defensive resilience.
| Position Pos | Club | Played Pl | GD | Points Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Arsenal
ARS
|
37 | +61 | 86 |
| 2 |
Man City
MCI
|
36 | +58 | 85 |
| 3 |
Liverpool
LIV
|
36 | +43 | 78 |
| 4 |
Aston Villa
AVL
|
36 | +20 | 67 |
| 5 |
Spurs
TOT
|
36 | +12 | 63 |
Saliba and Gabriel were superb in fending off Nunez, Cody Gakpo, and Salah, while Declan Rice was his usual brilliant self patrolling the base of midfield. Liverpool’s football never clicked, but that is at least partly because Arsenal’s powerful defenders never let their opponents settle.
Of course, the analysis would be quite different had Trent Alexander-Arnold not missed the chance from Liverpool’s bizarre 5-on-2 counter-attack from an Arsenal corner, but his shot hitting the crossbar was a far better representation of the game than a winning goal would have been.
