Why key injuries really did have a big effect on Arsenal’s season | OneFootball

Injuries contextualised by Jonbo

I wrote an article here recently about key injuries having a significant impact on Arsenal missing out on the top 4. I prefixed that article with my acknowledgment that decisionss made in January also played their part. It was not injuries alone that cost us, but in my opinion, they were central to our struggles.

What surprised me in the comments was that some said that key injuries were an unacceptable excuse, across the board! In fact, many claimed they had ZERO impact on results, performances, and tactics.

Not only is that train of thought completely illogical (in all walks of life), that would also apply to transfers as well then. If Tavares coming in for Tierney for an extended period of time has absolutely no impact on the team, then the same would apply to any transfer, would it not? Why sign Haaland when we have Nketiah? If there is no link between a player’s ability and the capacity for the team to achieve better results, then why sign supposedly better players?

With this article I want to contextualise injuries, and debunk this theory amongst some that key injuries are irrelevant. Arsenal have had so many seasons derailed from injuries, that I wonder how any Arsenal fan could even think they wouldn’t matter?

And it’s not just the odd key injuries that can affect a team, it’s the quantity as well. Look at Leeds and Everton this season. Two teams that shouldn’t have been in a relegation battle, yet both almost went down, and why? Both clubs had a huge amount of injuries. That was the common denominator.

To add context to any injured player, we have to break down the effect off a key player’s (key player = starting XI/world class) absence on a team, into multiple sub-categories:

1 – Length of injury

2 – Timing of injury

3 – Ability of injured player and the ability of their replacement

4 – Effect on tactics

5 – Amount of injuries

1 – Length of injury

Now if a player is out for a couple of games, then there isn’t a lot to worry about, especially if those two games happen to be against weak opposition. However, any medium/long-term injury does cause problems. A manager now has to find a proper solution.

2 – Timing of injury

Timing is a key factor for a manager to find this solution. The worst time for injuries to occur is after the January transfer window because you can only work with what you have available at that point for the last half of the season. Any injury right before kick-off, or during a game, is also very difficult for a manager because they have to come up with a solution on the spot. The team also has no preparation for any possible change in tactics if needed.

3 – Ability of injured player and the ability of their replacement

This is arguably the most important element. For the vast majority of teams, not having a quality replacement can be detrimental, especially when dealing with multiple key injuries at the same time. Other teams can absorb many key injuries, because of the quality of their overall squad. E.g., KDB is the best midfielder in the world, but City have so many quality options in midfield, that his absence would not have much of an effect. Liverpool is another team that would need a lot of key injuries before it really started to affect them, which is what actually happened to them last season, for those with short memories. With most other clubs, there can be a big drop off in quality when a key player is missing.

Not only is Partey our only world class player, but he would walk into ANY midfield, he’s that good. The drop off in quality with his replacements like Elneny/Lokonga, is huge! Even worse when comparing Tierney and Tavares. Naturally, that then has a negative effect on the team’s ability to achieve their desired results. If we had someone like Lokonga missing for half a season, it wouldn’t have mattered as he was rarely used, and was poor most of the time when playing anyway. No negative effect on the team at all with his absence.

4 – Effect on tactics

As stated earlier, injuries pre-game/during a game are the toughest as an effective plan is needed on the spot. Any injury, but usually multiple injuries, can affect how a team plays. E.g., If your team only plays Burnley style football of lumping it forward and hoping for the best, and you suddenly lose all your big target men, and a small forward is your only available option, then a change in tactics is now needed. Obviously, it’s down to the manager to find a solution, but it can still take a while for everyone to adapt to a new system.

For Arsenal, our full backs play a vital role in our system, as does the DM role, occupied by Partey. Losing all at the same time, made life so much harder for the team. It’s also no surprise that our CB’s form dropped off. They had lost that calming, quality influence in front of them with no Partey, and were also a lot more exposed down the sides with the loss of Tierney and Tomiyasu, who are both great defenders.

5 – Amount of injuries

Even weaker teams can sometimes cope with the odd key injury here and there, but when you have multiple injuries at the same time, it often becomes too much. As we saw with Leeds and Everton this season, and even a great team like Liverpool last season.

As I stated in my previous article on injuries, there are many other factors that affect poor results. Tactics, transfer decisions, and sending offs being some of the main other ones, but I do find it interesting that those who criticise Arteta on the basis of tactics, and transfer decisions, do not accept how injuries and sending offs can also play a huge role in the outcome of results.

Whilst all of these above factors are subjective, the most subjective of them all has to be the January transfer window. Which ironically is being used the most against Arteta. At least with losing quality players, specifically those who have, and still are a success at the club, we can say with a high degree of certainty that those injuries affected outcomes. Because we are basing our opinions on the fact we’ve already seen the importance of said player in our team. Based on our knowledge, experience and history of the January transfer window, we know it’s very tough to sign quality players mid-season. Especially if you’re looking for an upgrade. Even if we had signed someone, we have no idea if they would have been a success or not.

So, if one is comparing a quality injured player, who’s already proven their importance to the team, against mid-season signing who’s never played for your club before, or maybe not even in England – it’s far more speculative to suggest that the lack of January signings outweighed the injuries, in relation to the outcomes of our fixtures.

As I’ve said many times, Arteta has made mistakes, but injuries badly cost us more than anything. And a question I have posed many times, which almost never gets answered is:

Would Spurs have still finished above us if Kane, Son, or both had missed a couple months after the January window had closed?

Who would have got the goals and assists in the league at the rate that Kane and Son did? Who would cause havoc in general like those two do, even when not scoring or assisting?

Bergwijn? 3 goals and 1 assist. Moura? 2 goals 6 assists. Kulusevski is the only other forward with good stats at Spurs, but he is a winger/wide-forward. I cannot think of anyone at Spurs to replace Kane as the target man.

In regard to putting any blame on Arteta in relation to the injuries, I would say he made a mistake with Tavares. We all knew the issues with Tierney coming into the season, and a decent, experienced LB (especially with experience of playing in England), would have been a far better option than an inexperienced signing from a weaker league.

Jonbo

CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS! Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, please contact us through this link…

Learn more about Arsenal’s proud history – Decade by Decade CLICK HERE to visit our new Arsenal History section