Four Positives and Four Negatives from Arsenal's draw with City 

Here's Scarlet Katz Roberts with must-read in-depth analysis on Arsenal after Gabi Martinelli's late goal earned draw with City  

We’re five games into the new season and already it feels like Arsenal analysis will fall into two camps, writes Scarlet Katz Roberts 

If we don’t win: Too cautious, Mikel Arteta’s holding the team back, Mikel Merino is a defensive midfielder, not allowed to mention injuries to key players, and so on...

When we win: Arsenal have superior squad depth to Liverpool, they will go all the way in the title race, best defense in the world...

Can all things be a bit true? Probably. But the rush towards a binary assessment of the game is so frustrating, and so characteristic of the way this Arsenal side is judged.

Here are my snap judgements from the game. No stats, no overthinking, just four positives and four negatives.

Four Positives: -

Two words: Gabriel Martinelli.

What a difference a week makes! He isn’t just scoring goals, he is the difference maker. Two vital finishes - the go ahead goal in Bilbao and an unbelievable intervention against City.

The midweek goal was quite typical of him, a goal we have come to expect, galloping into acres of green grass, a slightly bobbled touch and a bit of a messy finish.

But make no mistake about Sunday it was exceptionally good: running at pace, great first touch and an inch perfect lob over the gigantic (and annoying) Gianluigi Donnarumma.

Time will tell if this is a meaningful late resurgence in his Arsenal career.  

- We found a way

Liverpool have been praised this season for their never say die attitude and they would’ve been absolutely feasting on our downfall.

They’re still the real winners of course, with both their rivals dropping points, but the stoppage time equaliser would’ve stung ever so slightly. Because we aren’t going anywhere.

Overcautious in the first half? Maybe. Struggled to create chances against a Pep Guardiola team that parked the bus? Definitely. But we refused to lose.

The difference between a five point gap and a six point gap is not numerically large but a loss would’ve felt like we were down and out already.

We still have to go to St James’ Park. Win there and take four points from these two fixtures, then we’re having a different conversation.

- We’ve almost run the gauntlet of our difficult start.

I said after Anfield that one of the major positives was that we don’t have to go there again.

The same applies to the fixture against City. One down, a trip to the Etihad to go. Wherever they are in their ‘City are back’/ ‘City will never be the same’ journey, they are an expensively assembled and high quality test for anyone in the league.

Pep is a top coach. Erling Haaland is a killer. Jeremy Doku looks a man finally realising what to do after he beats a player. They have the personnel to play savage counter attacking football, and they did, with the Doku outball to Haaland pipeline almost securing them a second goal.

Opta ranked our start the third toughest for a reason, and while early momentum would’ve been a godsend for us this season, if we can come out of the other side in decent shape, I think we are very well positioned for the long haul.

- City parked the bus

It was awful to watch, painful to play against as they sought to interrupt any momentum, Donarumma taking an age over every goal kick.

Perhaps they wouldn’t have been so defensive if they hadn’t got the early goal, but they, them, Pep’s Manchester City, didn’t want a football game with us. I think that says a lot about where we are.

A lot that people might not want to hear right now. And it’s hard to defend our creativity when we struggled to find a late equaliser, but we did.

Pep’s humble tactics are a collectors item that he will receive plenty of praise in the media for. City won’t do that against many teams. We are a threat, and I think part of prevailing with any silverware this season is truly believing in how good we are, and how good we can be.

Four Negatives:

- The first half

Passive was the operative word. Plenty of possession but no penetration and done on the counter. Generally, I feel that Arteta has earned the right to select whoever he wants in big games, with an exceptional record against the top six clubs, so I’m going to put Mikel Merino and Leo Trossard to one side for a minute (who actually both played quite well).

It doesn’t matter who is on the pitch if you move the ball slowly, camp out in a horseshoe at the edge of the opposition box, pass sideways and backwards and don’t make forward runs. City were defensive from the start. I know it’s hard. But I think passivity is a mentality.

We went behind in the 9th minute and spent the first half meandering, seemingly happy at that stage for the game to remain at 1-0. City are dangerous on the counter, so I can understand why we didn’t throw caution to the wind immediately. But I still think you can play with intent and intensity, no matter what your game plan is. In the first half we had neither.

-  We got done on the counter

It felt like a lot of Arteta’s usual keep it tight plan was made to look absurd by the ease with which Haaland picked us off.

It can happen against City, they have unbelievable transition threats. But normally defending is something we’re quite good at. It all went down at the other end of the pitch to where I was sitting, so I couldn’t see clearly, but it felt like Pep Reijnders had the ball forever.

Haaland could’ve doubled his and City’s tally in the second too, but for a bit of good goalkeeping from David Raya (did anyone see his touch to take the ball out of the sky by the way?!).

If you’re going to keep things tight, you can’t get countered on like that. It feels like the worst of both worlds.

- We struggle to turn games around

I don’t have the stat to hand, but I think the last time we won a game from a losing position in the league, was Bournemouth at home.

Yes, City parked the bus. Yes, our captain is still out, Bukayo Saka is only just back, Kai Havertz is a long way off. But we had all game to figure out a way of hurting City, and in the end were bailed out by a true moment of magic.

People have praised our approach in the second half, with the double change of Eberechie Eze and Saka injecting life and movement into our play, but I think it was a lot of huff and puff. Until the goal, there wasn’t a moment where I felt we really deserved to score, despite City dropping deeper and deeper.

- City’s low touch striker did the business. Ours did not

Surely Viktor Gyokores would’ve loved to be fed in those two slipped passes that Haaland received, one resulting in a goal, one in a near miss.

I don’t think this style of game suits Big Vic. It’s worth noting that both Haaland chances came from counter attacks and we know how much Gyokores likes to attack space.

I do think Havertz would’ve played if he’d been fit. But we’ve only got one number nine for the foreseeable future. We need to find a way of integrating him and playing to his strengths.

He will take chances if he gets them, I guarantee it.