Group dynamics

I signed for Arsenal when I was 18, just before the 2003/04 season kicked off. The Arsenal Invincibles season. 

I was a teenager who had come from a Cannes team that was struggling to stay in France’s third division. Suddenly, I found myself with these great Arsenal players. Idols. 

At that time in France, everybody was following Arsenal because of Thierry Henry, Patrick Vieira and Arsène Wenger. Without me really understanding it then, it was the beginning of something very special.

It wasn’t until much later in my career that I became aware how working with such a group, such a manager, would help my transition to being a coach 20 years later. In life, you have to enjoy the moment. Sometimes, by enjoying the moment, you don’t pause to realise that what you are doing with this group of players is extraordinary. 

People often ask me what the difference was between that Arsenal team and later, when we moved to the Emirates, and when I became a starter. It is very difficult to explain to people who never played football. It is not that they will never know, more that I need to explain it in a way that is simple to understand. 

You see, when I arrived at Arsenal, I was lucky to train with professionals who were each, at that time, probably in the top five in their position in Europe. As a young player, I could not ask for more.

"Clubs want to throw young players in because, if they play at 16, they are going to be more valuable"

My first Premier League game was away against Birmingham in November 2003. I played left midfield, and Ashley Cole was behind me. The next day I went to the boss and asked him what he felt about me. 

He said: “Listen, I’m not playing an 18-year-old boy for him to perform. I don’t need you to win the game for me. What I want to know from you is: yesterday, have you given everything that you had in your legs?” I said: “Yes.” 

He asked me: “Have you been honest with your teammates?” Again, I replied: “Yes.” Then he said: “That is all I want. When I put someone in at your age, I just want that person to give his best. The result? The players around you are going to take care of that.” 

At the end of my playing career, at Servette in Switzerland, they wanted to throw a few young players in. I told them: “You don’t throw in 12 young players, even if they are good. One young player needs at least six mature professionals around him to make sure they will develop, with time. It is not fair on a young lad to have to carry the team.” 

Clubs want to throw young players in because, if they play at 16, they are going to be more valuable. If you have three or four players from the academy in the first team, then you start to think that the club is great at bringing young players through. That can be true, but at the same time I really do not believe it is fair. 

First of all, it is not fair on senior players who are there to compete at the top level and win titles. When you bring young players in, the team will lose a little bit in performance.

"I can give so many examples of the ways wenger cared for young players"

Look at Thierry Henry. When he left for Barcelona in 2007, he had been playing with some amazing, talented young players at Arsenal. But now I can see why he wanted to leave. The group we had was not ready to give him what he wanted, which at the time was the Champions League. So he went to Barcelona, and won the Champions League. 

It’s also not fair on the young players, because you don’t want them to feel that they have to perform to be called a success. You need them to give a lot, but let them develop in time. When I think about those words Wenger gave me after my first game, back then I wasn’t ready to understand it. Now, as a coach, I do. 

I can give so many examples of the ways Wenger cared for young players. In February 2004, I started a huge game at Chelsea, our closest challengers in the Premier League.

During the week before the game, he spoke with me. “Remember when I came to meet you and your parents in Cannes?” he asked. “You said to me: ‘Okay, you want me to join Arsenal, but I know Ashley Cole and Giovanni van Bronckhorst are there. I know they are better than me, so I will never have any game time if I am third choice.’” 

His response to that had been: “If you come, Ashley will remain the number one, but we will send Van Bronckhorst on loan. You have to trust my word on that. Come, spend some time with us, and see if Van Bronckhorst leaves or not. Then, if Ashley gets injured, needs a rest or is suspended, if you perform well in training, you will play.” 

So before the Chelsea game, he said: “You remember what I said a few months ago? Here we are now, you are going to play. Signing for Arsenal was not going to guarantee you game time, even if we sent Van Bronckhorst on loan. You needed to prove that you were capable of being consistent, showing the desire to train.

"I want to give a chance to young players, or a second chance to a player who needs it"

“We wanted to see you working hard. That is what you have done, so I am telling you that you are going to play in a big stadium in a very important game. We don’t want you to perform like Ashley Cole, because that would not be fair on you now. What I want from you is to enjoy it. I want you to get the full experience. Whatever happens will happen, and the people around you will be there to support you.” 

And that is what happened. We came into the game, nobody asked me to do anything more than I was supposed to do, and the game was great because we won. 

A coach is very much alone when making decisions like that. It would have been much easier for Wenger to have Cole and Van Bronckhorst that season. Okay, you have the egos if you have two big players for each position. But to go from a big player — probably the best player England’s ever had in this position — to a young lad from third division Cannes? To do that as a manager, you need courage.

This is the kind of courage I want to show as a coach. I want to compete, to manage big players, but I want to give a chance to young players. Or a second chance to a player who needs it. Results matter, but above all there are people you touch and lives you can change. You have to care about those things, and Wenger was very mindful of that. That was one of his main attributes. 

With players — and I experienced this — there can be periods where, for whatever reason, you don’t perform. You can have trouble at home, you can have a dip in form, lose a bit of confidence. Wenger was not the kind of manager to all of a sudden put you on the bench. He gave you time to come back to your normal self. Depending on the player, that time could be one game, three weeks or two months. But Wenger was not scared of letting the player come back to himself. 

It is about finding the balance between what you have to do as manager of a top club, and what you have to do for the people who work with you every day. These are the people who give you pretty much everything. If your players don’t want to perform for you, they’re not going to perform. Now that I see all of this, it is so impressive what Wenger did over the years.

"What mattered to them, with their level of maturity, was winning games, winning trophies"

I lost count of how many young players he brought to Arsenal and transformed into Premier League stars; world-beaters, even. We’re talking about the likes of Thierry Henry, Patrick Vieira, Robert Pires, Dennis Bergkamp, Nwankwo Kanu, Robin van Persie, Cesc Fàbregas. The English players he gave to the English national team. I can go on.

When you don’t win silverware, people are going to say you’re not successful. But when you look back, he qualified his team for the Champions League in 19 consecutive seasons. The building of the Emirates Stadium limited his budget, and he did it with players who perhaps were not ready to play in the Premier League. I hope people recognise this. 

The team he had when I arrived had the best players in Europe, and those guys just wanted to win. They were the best. When you have the best players and they are working towards the same goal, that is when you win titles, reach the Champions League final and so on. 

You can’t really compare it with the young team that followed them. When you are Patrick Vieira and you have already won the World Cup, the Euros and the Premier League so many times, you don’t have to prove anything to anyone. When you’re a young player — even with all the talent — you want to make a name for yourself. 

Perhaps the Arsenal team in which I was a starter could lose a game 4-3, and if one player scored three goals he would go home feeling proud about the performance. The Invincibles had already been through that phase of “I need to make a name for myself” and weren’t looking for that any more. What mattered to them, with their level of maturity, was winning games, winning trophies. They wanted to be regarded as the best. 

When I became a starter at Arsenal, my role changed a lot. When you become one of the senior players, you need to perform week in, week out. I had understood what it was to be the understudy, and have the group looking after me. Everybody was pulling to help me out. 

"I was always keen on analysing my game. I would watch games back, minute by minute"

Then, when I became first-choice left-back, we had a younger squad. Everybody had that idea to show what they were capable of. Instead of having 10 players working for you because they know they have to, you are working with 10 players who want to make themselves successful within a team. That can be counter-productive in terms of the group’s results. 

Without naming names, I found myself in a position where I had many discussions with Arsène about one player in particular, who wasn’t really helping defensively. I was always keen on analysing my game. I would watch games back, minute by minute. It would take two and a half hours, because I would see one incident and want to watch it again. 

By doing this, I would see the behaviour of a teammate. Then I would understand this teammate was making that move because the guy in front of him was not well positioned, and so on. By doing this you start to realise: “Okay, this player is doing this because he knows this move is going to make him better in terms of the situation, but by doing this he’s often leaving me two against one.” 

From that moment, I knew I couldn’t really count on this guy. I had to learn to defend in a different way, because I was alone now. “This guy is clearly a threat going forward,” I thought. “But he’s actually a little bit costly for the team when we don’t have the ball.” 

It makes me think of Manchester City’s 2023 treble team, when Pep Guardiola decided to leave the full-backs out. When you are a very offensive full-back, you always have that moment within the game where you know you have to defend — that’s your main job. But you also know that, even if you defend really well, you also have to give support going forward. One assist will validate your game, but if you don’t deliver that assist people will think: “He is good, but he’s not that good.” But to have two full-backs going forward, you always risk two or three situations where your team can face a defensive transition that a top team will exploit. 

So Pep decided to go with centre-backs who remain defenders and would not attempt to go forward. Then, if they lost the ball, they had five players whose main job was to defend. Already, just with that, they were a more solid team. 

"When you play against Pep’s City, the only way to beat them is to exploit those transitions"

He also got rid of the flashy wingers. The mavericks who create something out of nothing in one situation, but will perhaps not be seen for the next 10 minutes. They can also be exposed because they don’t want to make the effort going backwards. 

He brought in players who were equally magnificent, but more composed on the ball. They would have fewer flashy moments in the final third, but didn’t lose cheap balls and expose you at the back. That City team was perhaps less sexy than the ones we’ve seen before, but one that better controlled the transitions. When you play against Pep’s City, the only way to beat them is to exploit those transitions. When they lose the ball, you have to counter and access their box in a few seconds. Pep decided to try to stop that, and did it so well that they won the treble. 

Football has evolved. We have so many details and statistics. Before, people would see a player score and judge them on that, saying: “He’s not there to defend.” Obviously attackers are there to score, but if your team is conceding more chances because of one player, then perhaps it’s the moment to think: “Do I really need him?”

I had realised at Arsenal that managing a group was tricky, and that is the moment when my view on the game changed. I could feel that I wasn’t able to perform the way I wanted to perform because I was often left two against one, so I had to deal with that. 

In one way, I became a better defender, because I learned how to better use my reading of the game and speed. My game was already based on interception and anticipation. I made sure that on one pass — let’s say, from the opposition number six to the winger — I would put myself in a position where if the pass was too slow or sloppy, I could nick it and create a transition for my team. 

The problem was that when we arrived against a top team, sometimes it was difficult. These days we can see that you need 11 players to be able to win a game. At that time, I think there was less focus on these details, but I could see it. I am happy football has developed the way it has, because it is a team sport. Everybody needs to do their bit.

Author: Craig Bloomfield

Popular

Newsletter

The Coaches' Voice Weekly Superb insights and stories from the top names of football delivered to your inbox weekly.