Feature

Why moving Havertz back into midfield backfired on Arteta

By Alex Keble 14 Apr 2024
Aston Villa Arsenal havetz

Alex Keble explains how Unai Emery exploited the German's weaknesses in No 8 role in the second half

Related Articles
Rice wants a reaction when we face Bayern Munich External Link
Watkins: I want to beat Haaland to Golden Boot
Pundits: Title is Man City’s if they can overcome Spurs hoodoo

Alex Keble analyses how Aston Villa dealt a major blow to Arsenal's title aspirations with a 2-0 victory at Emirates Stadium.

If Arsenal do not win the Premier League this season then Villa, the only team to beat them twice, will be the ones to blame; Unai Emery, of all people, will have done the most damage.

Villa richly deserved the three points for an immaculate performance, from digging deep in the first half to flipping the match on its head and dominating the second.

It is a tactical victory for Emery, but it was just as much a tactical defeat for Mikel Arteta, whose team selection and formation proved to be too attacking.

The man at the centre of it all, for better and worse, was Kai Havertz: the key to Arsenal’s good first half and the symbol of Arsenal’s collapse in the second.

The title race

Position Pos Club Played Pl GD Points Pts
1 Arsenal ARS 35 +57 80
2 Man City MCI 34 +50 79
3 Liverpool LIV 35 +41 75
View More
Havertz’s clever positioning key to early joy

Arsenal were on top in the first half, pinning Villa into a low block that made it difficult for the visitors to counter-attack and ensuring the hosts were in control.

The chances were few and far between, and indeed Villa went as close as Arsenal to taking the lead, but there is no doubt Villa were on the ropes – thanks predominantly to the surprise use of Havertz as a No 8.

Villa, in their flat 4-4-2 shape, just didn’t have the numbers to cope with Havertz’s runs in the left-hand half-space, and with Leandro Trossard pulling Ezri Konsa out wide, the German consistently found a gap to drive into.

In this example, Havertz is put clean through on goal.

Havertz chance v Villa

It happened over and over again, with John McGinn unsure of how to block off the space, and by half-time Arteta must have thought the goal, via Havertz (circled in black), was coming.

Havertz space v Villa
Downside of playing Havertz as a No 8 emerges in second half

After the interval, Villa clamped down on that area, with McGinn (circled in black) dropping deeper to become part of the back five, blocking Havertz’s space.

McGinn tracks Havertz_

But that isn’t why Villa won. They did so because once they started passing the ball out from the back and gaining a foothold, the problem with playing Havertz in midfield began to show.

Havertz and Declan Rice formed a two-man midfield when Villa had the ball, which is frankly too light to defend the spaces, especially with Morgan Rogers so effective at dropping to receive the ball between the lines.

Rodgers v Arsenal

Havertz completed one tackle and zero interceptions, the same as Jorginho managed in just 20 minutes and considerably fewer than Youri Tielemans (four tackles, one interception) and McGinn (three tackles, three interceptions).

Kai Havertz twenty3

Worse still, once an emboldened Villa were sitting higher up the pitch, Arsenal lacked someone to dictate the tempo from deeper areas or play progressive passes into the forwards.

In other words, they missed Jorginho.

By contrast, Villa’s Tielemans and McGinn were outstanding, evading pressure and stitching things together with the dexterity and intelligence that Arsenal lacked.

Youri Tielemans twenty3
John McGinn twenty3

It was all about that midfield, tipped in Villa’s favour when the territorial battle became even; Villa had 43.7 per cent possession in the first half, but between the 46th and 87th minute, when they scored their second goal, they held 61 per cent.

Once that happened, Arsenal’s main strength in the first half – an unusually attacking line-up, led by Havertz – became their weakness.

Emery’s subs win the day as Arteta reacts too late

Tense, deadlocked at 0-0, and with one team’s dominance having been swapped for the other, substitutions were always going to play a big part.

But you would have thought Arteta would be the one to shake things up.

Instead, he waited too long to bring on Jorginho, preventing Arsenal from regaining momentum, and, when he initially made substitutions in the 67th minute, he removed the wrong full-back.

Oleksandr Zinchenko had looked shaky all half. So much so, in fact, that Emery brought on Leon Bailey in the 61st minute to put him under pressure.

It worked instantly - and eventually led to the opener.

Bailey (who now has seven goal contributions from the bench, more than anyone else in the Premier League) scored the opener from the second phase of a corner, but the move that led to it began with a clever one-two down Villa’s right that had Zinchenko under pressure.

Zinchenko v Villa

With hindsight, Arteta got his changes wrong as well as his initial selection. It was always a risk fielding so many attackers - and removing the in-form Jorginho – when up against such high-quality opposition.

Emery, on the other hand, did everything perfectly. It was a tactical masterclass that swept away any creeping doubts about Villa’s recent form – and raised serious doubts about Arsenal’s title hopes.

Latest Videos

More Videos