iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

We desperately need important bodies to finally be available consistently and simultaneously to survive this run-in, and yet I have no belief things will align. That being a constant theme, as we saw last season, makes it extra difficult to build new setups around the key players at our disposal.

130

Beyond all that, how many minutes have Kai and Øde played together this season? You know, the two leaders of the press and core components of our attacking play during our last title run.

130

Have we patched the issue of White’s absence from 2 seasons ago to help Saka’s side? No. Have we fixed the left to ensure both wings are a threat? Barely (we’ve leant, when possible, on squeezing out what’s left of an ageing Trossard + not used Eze there).

120

PM @that-gooner.bsky.social · 04/04/2026

Not for one second trying to reframe the current scenario (everything collapsing in on itself) as unavoidable by any stretch, but I am still kind of baffled at the position we’ve found ourselves in this season despite a weaker approach and continuous key injuries.

170

Don't *love* the pressure that b2b defeats and cup outings mounts (regardless of context for this one), but it does still lighten the load, we barely used up 1st-teamers, Ødegaard looked much sharper, and Dowman was sensational again. So, I'm definitely reserving any actual fear for next weekend.

161

Mikel has been doing that though, and his G/A90 is still better than Noni's. Rotating Noni into the XI is fine but some of the discourse has been about promoting Noni to first choice for a sustained period, which isn't logical, especially not with Leo & Øde absent rn

100

giving him Timber and Timber alone as a static inside presence, you're not platforming him at all. I wouldn't blame Leo for much, I'm a big fan of how he's played this season and think he's pivotal to the XI atm. Nelli isn't for the reasons in the thread & Gyök gets attacked because he's been poor 🤷‍♂️

200

Of course there is such a thing as platforming. We regularly play deep blocks in the league and have Saka hugging the touchline – if you give him numerical support and players that will give him options to combine with and rotate with and to cancel out 1v2s, he will inevitably cause danger, but by

100

Reposted by PM

On the Madueke-Saka for the XI bits of discourse I've seen floating about this week (which has likely been minimal and is also fair to some extent): I think people are overlooking the difference in control one provides us/can provide us vs the other when starting games.

111

I'm just confused as to why he hasn't done it yet. I doubt it's some staunch refusal on Eze's end, he's just been too willing to go with Nelli as a main deputy when that has cost us stylistically when he's started

100

Agreed, I'm definitely open to it as a solution whilst Øde is sidelined. It's looked like creating some more controlled chaos that has opened up some positive space for us in possession, and theoretically allows us to use Eze on the left like you say.

Given we're breaking down deep blocks a lot of the time, and that I back Kai as a box threat much more than Gyök, I see the bigger issue as being us not creating optimal environments for combinations out wide, akin to 2 seasons ago with the same batch of players pretty much.

100

due to the packed schedule, as dips in form don't change the key differences in what they lack stylistically comparatively. Saka gets cut the most slack because he's a difference-maker who, despite inconsistencies this season, has still be an top-level threat despite weak platforming.

100

I mean, on my end, I don't have that feeling of Saka being a particularly special case when it comes to a willingness to drop starters (I'd always go with Leo/Eze over Nelli, Kai over Gyök, Øde over Eze in mf, etc). Like with all of them, I'm happy for them to get starts but more so out of necessity

100

I think this probably results in the same issues that I'm talking about initially in terms of having that control of the flank and the final third. Saka can be effective on the left, but idt you'd expect him to be able to control play nearly as well as he does on the right, due to footing mostly.

100

than about those players lacking the offensive traits to help the attack tick. Like you say, Hincapié can be fine with Leo but not Nelli, so we really miss a rogue presence like Cala. Timber can work with Saka if we overload that side, but we haven't been, so we sorely miss White.

I think the persistence with Hincapié, despite his in-possession improvements of late, has felt similar to use of Timber, in that it prioritises the defensive half of the pitch over the attacking half. I think Mikel much prefers the fact he doesn't worry about getting picked apart defensively there

200

Idm Noni on the left but he does (understandably) look a lot more sheepish with the ball on that side. Eze, for me, seems like the best alternative and could be the best primary option, even.

If everyone's fully fit, I'd still much prefer Leo and Saka in the XI because it enables us to control both flanks effectively, which is key for greater control and creativity vs deep blocks. Øde and Kai usually combine and overload well out wide with Leo and Saka, so it strengthens the case for it.

200

Again, I'm not bashing on Noni, and I back him much more as a starter than Nelli but I think the flashiness blinds some people from the important subtleties Saka brings. The left is a bigger issue rn with Nelli-Hincapié as the pairing, as well as other aspects of our approach when Kai's missing.

111

If you actually supply him with some bodies that can offer up half-decent rotation close by, it makes a massive difference. In fact, the supportive lopsidedness of the shape when Noni came on was what he'd been starved of – suddenly the whole midfield 3 was helping to overload that side.

Saka was undoubtedly poor vs Leverkusen, and if that level remains (which it hasn't yet, even if he hasn't hit the same heights so far this season), then there's reason to do it but he was woefully under-supported in that match too. He only had Timber making passive underlaps for the time he was on.

I think you can get away with having just one of Saka & Leo (or Eze, if Mikel ever dared to use him in that role) to then isolate the opposite-sided dribbler more (works better with Leo & Noni than Saka & Nelli, like vs Athletic) but not having either, esp without Øde, can be limiting.

210

are able to pick locks from standstill, they look to combine and are also 1v1 threats in their own right. And, when 1v1s don't go their way and they have to recycle it, they still have it clear in mind how they can look to become an option quickly again to reset high up to keep probing for new gaps.

100

to effectively press out on you & force you to reset. Even when Noni's had a positive impact starting lately, that feeling of a comparative lack of control at the top of end of the pitch has felt apparent to me. You don't see that often with Leo or Saka because they let things develop around them,

100

It can be damaging when trying to sustain pressure in the final third when you have someone who's either turning over the ball after beating his man, or who when resorting to recycling is doing so in a way without always prioritising how play can be sustained in that area, which is what allows teams

100

reasonable because his unpredictable chaos can still strike fear in defenders and create bits of danger out of nothing. However, the inconsistent, if not very erratic, execution at the end of moves can lead to break-ups in play, and his more one-paced nature is what's similar to Nelli in this case

100

For me, it mirrors some of the drop-off we see when Nelli starts instead of Leo: we lose a focal point who can help sustain pressure high up while having the bigger picture in mind every time. Noni's definitely a more significant touchline threat than Nelli, which makes the argument much more

100

111

like it's some challenge we have to partake in, rather than seeing the limits to it and how that's effecting Saka's ability to impact games.

020

They both put a ceiling on attacks compared to their counterparts for sure. Hincapié's been disappointing in that regard, even if he's still learning the ropes, while Timber's functional but it's equally frustrating to be complimenting him on simply being ok in an attacking inside position sometimes

100

but have neglected to use him in his favoured position(s)) has created a massive rod for our own backs. We've done well to be in the position we are because, at the end of the day, we're still unhealthily reliant on notoriously unhealthy FBs.

100

The more I think about the left side situation, the more it bothers me. For all the improvement Leo-Cala has brought, the over-reliance on an injury-prone FB (who has no like-for-like backup) to unlock a player we were meant to have upgraded on in the summer (which we sort of did

Reposted by PM

Here's another. Zubi wall pass into Mosquera avoided, and so is any attempt to access Øde who's free in the centre. Again going straight to Gyök who's suffocated with minimal support = another turnover.

Reposted by PM

Skimming back through some of the post-1-0 plays when we had the chance to set up with the ball, and we were effectively offering them the same easy turnovers as in the 1st half.

While the long ball approach can often be the safe one – avoiding intricate play closer to goal – it was instead the higher risk option given how ill-prepared we were to support it. And so we didn't give ourselves the platform to repeat those sustained spells when it mattered.

000

The most dangerous we looked was quite easily when we crowded the left with Øde for 4-man combinations, so that we could not just avoid being forced back, but also gradually pick holes in their defensive organisation.

The chaotic long ball plays looked more promising with Kai and a strike pairing but much less so here, especially in a game where we were ill prepared to win out those crucial duels.

200

The only long ball success was for the Nelli chance but that came from a throw-in where Brentford were forced into much more of a man-for-man situation up and down the pitch as we squeezed collectively towards the near side.

100

Double pivot completely open here but opts for the long ball that Brentford are very prepared to collapse on since they're not marking the drop-off players so tightly as to avoid leaving too much space in front of Gyök.

100

Raya was at fault for this too. Pumping the ball long when the same wall passes to bring the ball out from in the 1st half were still there but now vs a much more aggressive press.

120

He was at fault for giving away a needless foul at the end of one spell (giving them an inch), and for the rest of the game was too scared to take charge on the ball like Saliba would, in terms of pausing on the ball, keeping angles open & trusting that we would have a spare man.

100

We did have a couple of spells in their third after their equaliser, but we were slower and showed much less conviction in the little duels. Mosquera was partly costly when it came to a lack of sustainability to ground possession.

We needed to pick a lane wrt approach. Long balls for quick progression into potential stabilisation up the pitch is fine but you have to set up to support it. Brentford were excellent at taking a mile when you gave them an inch (set piece threats from anywhere on the pitch).

100

But by bypassing them to go straight to Gyök, even his genuinely good efforts today to take on direct balls into feet, he was then way too isolated to do anything to hold it up, as the supporting options were waiting way deeper more in support of us playing out.

100