Statistically speaking, this game closely resembles the three victories over Liverpool, Chelsea and Man Utd. The one major detail that differs significantly is the scoreline of course.

Villa presented little threat to Almunia’s goal in the second half, but it was certainly more a case of Arsenal eventually making their chances pay after the break and there will be little argument about who can be credited with that fact.

It’s not often that a single player comes off the bench to make such an impact on a game, but Cesc Fabregas certainly brought Arsenal the breakthrough they were struggling to find. Martin O’Neill correctly responded to the introduction of the Spanish midfielder by removing Emile Heskey, but in my opinion he should have been looking to bolster the midfield himself, Reo-Coker possibly the best option, rather than bring John Carew on.

I’m not suggesting that the events are linked, but Fabregas scored the opener just two minutes after MON’s substitution. It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that someone like NRC or Sidwell might have had an influence on preventing Fabregas getting to the position of winning the free kick. Equally, it could still have panned out the same way or, had they somehow prevented that particular event from ever happening, they could have gone on to hack someone down in the box to give away a penalty. That’s life, that’s football and hindsight is always 20/20.

However, having gone behind, MON may well have felt grateful that he had Carew on the pitch which may well give him the best chance of getting back on terms. Perhaps so.

The second substitution made less sense to me and it’s easier to accept an argument that it lead to the second goal in a fairly direct fashion. MON himself may be willing to accept that argument as he said in a post match interview that he was less concerned about conceding the final two goals chasing, as they were, the game.

I don’t have a copy of this game yet and haven’t seen it as much as I should before commenting, but it certainly appears that Milner was guilty of losing possession in an advanced position on the right. Traore may have hit an exquisite pass to find Theo Walcott on the run and his pass to Fabregas charging through the middle may have been perfectly weighted, but you might want to pay close attention to who was trying to track Fabregas on his run and failed.

There’s little point in singling anyone out for blame, but when Arsenal’s breakaway move, as fantastic as it was, effectively started with Milner and ended with Delph, it’s reasonably logical to question whether the second substitution was the right change to make. We’ll never know, it’s entirely possible that Milner, Sidwell or Reo-Coker could equally have been left in Fabregas’ wake, but I would bet the coaching staff will be looking the videos pretty closely nonetheless.

The second goal killed the game, but without it, could Villa have equalised? Certainly. Would they have? Unknown, but probably not. Sometimes it’s just a case of accepting that the better side won.

3	Arsenal	Dec 27th 2009	Aston Villa	0
	62	Possession %	38
	21	Shots	9
	9	On Target	2
	10	Corners	4
	1	Offsides	5
65′ 81′ Fabregas, 90′ Diaby		Scorers
Song		Booked	A Young, Cuellar, Delph
		Sent Off
	389	Good Passes	205
	88	Bad Passes	59
	12	Interceptions	29
	35	Tackles Won	54
	38	Tackles Lost	28
	2	Blocks	7
	25	Free Kicks	16
Starting XI: 1. Friedel 2. Young 25. Warnock 24. Cuellar 5. Dunne 19. Petrov 8. Milner 7. Young 6. Downing 18. Heskey 11. Agbonlahor Subs: 22. Guzan 10. Carew 4. Sidwell 20. Reo-Coker 29. Collins 23. Beye 16. Delph
Average Position Map