Introduction:

I originally started researching this piece with the intention of writing purely about Élisa De Almeida, the footballer.

Arsenal needed to go out and buy another centre-back, they did that. Yet the reaction was hardly one of excitement. Instead we all collectively seemed to go:

De Almeida is a right-footed player; Arsenal arguably needed somebody on the left. Sure, she offers versatility, able to play both centre-back and right-back, but is that actually what Arsenal need? Then you’ve got that not exactly insignificant reported fee. I think we’ve already got the basis for a pretty hearty discussion here.

The more I research the person Arsenal have signed, the less comfortable I am writing about this signing purely through a tactical lens.

As most will already be aware, there has been plenty of discussion online around De Almeida’s previous social media activity and her alleged political views. I refuse to write and publish this piece whilst pretending the wider conversation isn’t happening.

I’ve never really been one to separate football from the things that matter to me when they collide. I studied Politics for three years at University. I’m actively political. I’ve written about my experiences as an LGBTQ+ supporter at Arsenal, and I’ve stood pitchside at the Emirates talking about how much it meant to me to find my community in women’s football. Arsenal have a huge LGBTQ+ following and a community that, for a lot of people, myself included, means considerably more than what happens for 90 minutes on a Sunday afternoon.

I did initially want to know whether De Almeida is the centre-back Arsenal needed.

Now I think it’s as much about examining what Arsenal consider when deciding who should represent this team, and whether recruitment can ever be judged solely on what somebody offers on the pitch.

Let’s talk centre-backs

Leah Williamson and Lotte Wubben-Moy have both been around Arsenal’s backline for years, with both most comfortable on the right side of a centre-back pairing. Both came through Arsenal’s academy, so neither really tells us much about the type of centre-back Arsenal have actively looked to recruit. Williamson has been in the senior side since 2014, while Wubben-Moy returned to Arsenal in 2020.

Then came Rafaelle Souza, signed in January 2022 (yes I’ve found another excuse to talk about Rafa).

She was, and will always be, the clearest example in recent years of Arsenal actually finding the kind of complementary CB they desired. She was experienced, naturally left-footed and formed a dream partnership with Leah Williamson. The problem came in the longevity. Rafaelle made just 35 appearances for the Arsenal before leaving when her contract expired in summer 2023. Injuries did play a role too; Arsenal were already having to use a Steph Catley and Lotte Wubben-Moy pairing in October 2022 because both Rafaelle and Williamson were unavailable.

Arsenal were forced to go out and respond pretty aggressively. They signed Amanda Ilestedt and Laia Codina and on paper, they had two international centre-backs arriving in the same window. Codina was specifically praised by Jonas Eidevall at the time for her passing, leadership and desire to defend, while Ilestedt arrived straight off an outstanding 2023 World Cup in which she almost took home the golden boot (not bad for a centre-back, right?)

Neither ended up being the long-term answer Arsenal needed.

Ilestedt actually started pretty well, had strong performances against Manchester City and Chelsea, and contributed to improving Arsenal’s set pieces, something few have been able to do from that position (Rafa, obviously I don’t mean you). Yet before we knew it she took a step back from football during her pregnancy in 2024. Her eventual return was understandably gradual; she never really became more than a squad player for Arsenal. She departed Arsenal at the end of 2025/26 following expiration of her contract.

In Laia Codina, Arsenal bought a 23-year-old World Cup-winning Barcelona defender who was good on the ball and theoretically had years ahead of her, where she could develop and hopefully reach her prime. Yet she never properly established herself as an unquestioned starter. In 2025 alone she made only ten appearances, five starts and 433 minutes (according to Arsenal’s own year-end statistics).

Then came Katie Reid, which altered things again. Rather than buying another established CB, Arsenal suddenly had a wonder kid forcing herself into the conversation. She became so trusted in the 2025/26 season that she was on course to become only the third Arsenal teenager ever to start the opening five games of a WSL season, also earning her first senior England call-up in the process.

We all know how the story went after that, though. Reid suffered an ACL injury and Arsenal are still awaiting her return, with the inevitable uncertainty over exactly how quickly, and in what shape, she will come back from an injury of that nature.

In the midst of all of this, Arsenal were forced to find their answer in someone they probably hadn’t expected - Steph Catley.

Catley arrived as a left-back, but her left foot, experience and quality in possession made her increasingly useful at LCB. Even in the biggest of occasions, Arsenal were perfectly comfortable playing her there, and her and Williamson formed a key partnership. She also formed a positive relationship with Lotte Wubben-Moy.

One of their most trusted solutions was not in fact a world-class signing, but a reliable left-back converted into a highly effective centre-back.

With injuries, rotation and the sheer amount of games Arsenal play, though, you can’t rely on just two centre-backs, nor can Catley be the only left-footed option available.

So fans and journalists alike have spoken consistently that Arsenal need to find that left-footed centre-back to provide the squad depth required. Ideally someone who could also improve Arsenal’s set pieces, from both an attacking and defensive point of view.

Now they’ve finally gone back into the market and spent significant money on another senior centre-back...and she’s right-footed?

Haven’t Arsenal just simply added another centre-back without addressing the specific profile they were missing?

Understanding the signing:

At 28 years old, Élisa De Almeida has spent her entire senior career in French football. PSG signed her in July 2021, initially on a three-year deal. Subsequently when she became the heart of that PSG defence, she signed another three-year contract in July 2024, which was due to run until 30 June 2027. Arsenal therefore paid a hefty transfer fee of a rumoured £550k. It makes sense given PSG did not have to let her leave. During her time at PSG she made 114 league appearances, starting 101 times and encompassing 8,975 minutes, scoring three goals and providing seven assists. In the 2025/26 season she made 17 appearances in the league, and also started six times in the Champions League.

What position does she actually play?

You probably think that’s a strange question to ask given I have exclaimed constantly throughout this piece that Arsenal finally have their centre-back signing.

It's true that at club level she was predominantly a centre-back, but when playing for her national team France, she is very often a right-back. That’s not to say she hasn’t also played centre-back for them though; at the 2023 World Cup she started at CB in two games and RB in another. Later, at the 2025 Euro’s France essentially used her as their right-back.

De Almeida Goal Line Clearance

De Almeida is not a huge, dominant centre-half (reports say she is around 5 ft 6 but there is some discretion on this).

She is a front-footed defender; her strengths lie in her anticipation and recovery defending. She won’t wait for an attacker to receive the ball and turn, she likes to follow them out, get touch-tight and look to disrupt possession. That is a positive in the sense that it allows the defensive line behind the press to stay aggressive. It also presents a huge risk as if she doesn’t win the duel, space will appear behind her, and Arsenal will be vulnerable in transition. Having the right balance alongside her in the back line will be vital.

Arsenal aren’t exactly a side that spend most games sitting back and defending, so making a huge amount of clearances every single week simply isn’t part of the job. But if the opposition do turnover possession and Arsenal become vulnerable in transition, she would need to be able to deal with this. Defend the channels, deal with 1v1 situations, cover wide spaces. Technically her full-back experience should make her more than capable of doing this, although concerns over her lack of pace in recent performances are causing a stir online. I’m not going to form a tactical opinion on a player based on what people are saying on social media, but it’s still something Arsenal will need to be aware of.

The bigger problem with Arsenal’s recruitment

Given all of the above, we can still understand how Élisa De Almeida could offer Arsenal depth and cover across the backline, even if she doesn’t fit the profile of the centre-back they ideally needed to sign.

I can’t help but think this is just another example of the wider issues with Arsenal’s recruitment, and I’m not the only one.

The majority of the discussion around De Almeida has fallen into three camps: whether she’s actually the right signing tactically, what it says about Arsenal’s wider recruitment, and, inevitably, the politics surrounding De Almeida herself.

You don’t need me to tell you that Clare Wheatley isn’t exactly a popular figure among Arsenal fans. The frustration around her has been building for a long time now, mainly because we keep having the same conversations every transfer window.

How many windows have we had previously to this one where Arsenal desperately desired another midfielder and just didn’t sign one? Arsenal knew they wanted Keira Walsh in the summer of 2024, but waited until the very end of the transfer window to throw a huge bid at Barcelona. At that point Barcelona had very little reason to accept it. After they inevitably said no, Arsenal were left without the midfielder they had spent the summer looking for and seemingly without much of a plan B either. All of that, only for her to end up at Chelsea a few months later anyway.

We saw a similar situation with Naomi Girma. Arsenal were prepared to spend the big bucks to bring her in, only to miss out to Chelsea (again). The missing out on two world-class players isn’t actually the problem I’m identifying, instead I’m wondering why Arsenal are putting so much into individual targets only to look a little completely lost when those deals fall through.

I thought this summer had been different. Actually, I thought it had been really good. Players were signed early in the window and some unbelievably exciting signings at that. Arsenal seemed to finally be getting things done without an overwhelming sense of panic.

Now we’ve ended up here.

What a ‘one step forward, three steps back’ kind of situation, this is.

The De Almeida signing doesn’t override the rest of the transfer window, far from it, but it does bring back some of those recurring questions.

For all the good business Arsenal did earlier in the summer, I’m not sure the end of it has done much to change the concerns people already had about the recruitment.

Where does this leave us?

Arsenal, understandably, have disappointed a lot of people with this signing. From a tactical perspective, she fails to address the agonising need for a tall, aerially-dominant, left-footed centre-back. She’s just another example of the hierarchy failing to deliver Arsenal the right player at the right time. It’s a desperate signing. Just because you can’t find the player you’re looking for right now, doesn’t mean you need to spend that significant of a fee on a player that doesn’t fit the profile you’re searching for.

From a personal perspective, I too feel hurt and concerned about the impact this signing will have on the club culture and connection with the fanbase.

There are still plenty of questions to be asked, and even more that need answering.

Plenty more to come from me content wise this week. I’ve got another two pieces in the works: a Brighton preview ahead of Sunday and something a little bit different that I’m excited to share.

As always, everything I write on here is completely free; if you hit subscribe below you’ll get the next one to land straight in your inbox and keep up with everything I’m putting out.

(Just 26 games, a few goals, minimal emotional damage and Arsenal at the top of the table come May).

May 11th 2019 was 2,670 days ago. It was on a Saturday - the 131th day of 2019 to be exact. If you want even more of a reference point, and to make yourself feel old, that was 7 years, 3 months and 21 days ago (at the time of writing).

Arsenal lifted the WSL trophy after their final league game, a 1-0 win over Manchester City at Meadow Park (they actually clinched the WSL title when they beat Brighton 4-0 at the Amex, but for dramatic writing purposes, we’re going back to the moment they actually lifted the trophy).

It was the Arsenal of Miedema, Van de Donk, Little, Williamson and Nobbs - and, since I’m trying to keep this a happy memory, I think we’ll stop the list there.

That side was incredibly fun. They won 18 of their 20 league games, scored 42 goals in their first nine matches alone and finally ended Arsenal’s seven-year wait for a league title. They also beat reigning champions Chelsea 5–0 away that season (always worth the mention, right?).

Of course, a lot has changed since then. Competition in the WSL has inevitably increased, and Arsenal have had to adapt with the ever-changing times, become less sentimental, make tougher decisions and invest to keep pace with the growth of the game. Most of the players holding that trophy are just a distant memory for us, with some newer fans having never even seen the triumphs of that season. Even Meadow Park, where they lifted the trophy, is no longer the main stage for this team.

Despite all those changes, the goal at the end of it all still remains the same: we all long to see Arsenal lift that WSL trophy once more.

After seven frustrating years of waiting, there’s no reason to believe they can’t do it once again.

Pre-season in a nutshell

I was originally going to start this piece on a somber note and tell you that the pre-season game against Paris FC was the first I’d missed since December 2025. From January 10th 2026 (that boring 0-0 draw against United at the Emirates) all the way to that final away day last season at Anfield on the 16th May 2026, I built a streak of 23 games without missing one. That’s 23 games, home and away, Lyon to Bromley and everywhere in between. I’d driven down the A1 so many times, I was convinced I could do it with my eyes closed (I didn’t of course, for legal purposes).

My new job and busier schedule left me with no choice but to watch the recent pre-season games via YouTube. I watched all of the second game live; the first I only caught the second half and reviewed long after the match concluded.

Putting my personal sentiments aside, the real purpose of this article was to follow on from my recent pieces. It’s all fun and games exploring the new signings and how they might fit in this team and make their impact. It’s all good picking out players and anticipating what their individual campaigns might look like.

But how does that all fit together? What are the expectations? What are we going to see from this Renée Slegers side? One with its eyes on glory?

We can’t afford any more disappointment (from a selfish point of view I really prefer it when we win trophies, not miss out on them).

Building the Ultimate Squad

Let’s get the transfer window business out the way first. I went into all of this in much more detail in my last piece, and nobody likes a repetitive writer. You can go back and give that a read if you missed it, then make your way back here when you’re done.

Transfers Piece

Arsenal signed 7 players - Georgia Stanway, Géraldine Reuteler, Selina Cerci, Lisa Baum, Ona Batlle, Isabella Damm and Misa Rodríguez.

They also said goodbye to a fair few. Several left upon expiration of their contracts - Beth Mead, K*tie McC*be, Victoria Pelova, Laia Codina, Manuela Zinsberger, Naomi Williams and Barbora Votíková. Rosa Kafaji left for London City Lionesses, Laila Harbert joined San Diego Wave, Jenna Nighswonger returned to the NWSL with Bay FC and more recently Arsenal announced Vivienne Lia would join Eintracht Frankfurt.

In terms of loan deals, Jessie Gale has joined Newcastle United for the season, and Sophie Harwood has joined Sheffield United.

As it stands, the squad consists of 4 goalkeepers, 8 defenders, 6 midfielders and 8 forwards (using Arsenal’s website as a reference point).

Daphne Van Domselaar, Anneke Borbe, Misa Rodriguez and Isabella Damm make up your goalkeeper union.

Leah Williamson, Steph Catley, Lotte Wubben-Moy and Katie Reid are, on paper, your CB’s, with Taylor Hinds able to play there but technically a full back. Ona Batlle joins Emily Fox and Smilla Holmberg in that position.

Kim Little, Mariona Caldentey, Frida Maanum and Kyra Cooney-Cross add Geraldine Reuteler and Georgia Stanway to the midfield mix.

Caitlin Foord, Olivia Smith, Lisa Baum and Chloe Kelly are your wide forwards, with Alessia Russo, Stina Blackstenius, Selina Cerci and Michelle Agyemang your strikers.

Both Katie Reid and Michelle Agyemang are returning from ACL injuries, of course.

The one area I think is still a concern is CB, but it looks unlikely Arsenal will make an addition there now.

(I’ve actually come back to edit this after seeing the news come through. It looks like we will be signing a centre-back after all. I’ll share my thoughts on this signing at a later date).

Arsenal agree terms to sign De Almeida

Katie Reid will also return at some point in the season, with Taylor Hinds there to cover should Arsenal require it, and we even saw Smilla Holmberg filling in there during pre-season.

As I mentioned in previous pieces, this is a squad full of adaptability and versatility. Arsenal now have multiple players that can play in several positions, not just one starting XI destined to stay unchanged no matter the opponent.

This season is a different challenge for Renee Slegers and one I believe she will relish in.

Thoughts from pre-season:

Tim Stillman wrote an excellent piece on observations from pre-season which I think is worth checking out before you read on.

Read Tim's Piece

Naturally, when people are writing about the same team, there’s going to be some overlap in the points being made. When Renée Slegers is openly talking about the areas this team are working on, multiple people are inevitably going to reference the same things.

Most of which you will already know, but it’s still worth breaking down ahead of the season to give a full rundown of what these key focus points are.

Opposing teams, look away.

Arsenal want to draw less games, they want to take more shots on, they want a better midfield in transition, they want to improve set pieces. They need more impact from the bench and different options dependent on opponent so they signed players capable of just that. They signed a goalscorer in Selina Cerci, a creator in Lisa Baum and they want to get Olivia Smith back scoring again (going well so far).

They want less workload on Mariona Caldentey and Kim Little, with Mariona back in her preferred number 10 position or out wide to give Arsenal more creativity, so they signed Georgia Stanway and look to reintegrate Kyra Cooney-Cross.

They lost key leaders and central components of their starting XI so they replaced with quality of the same highest standard.

A new set piece coach, a focus on interchangeability in game across multiple positions and a back-up goalkeeper that could already be number one material.

Does that summarise it in succinct style for you?

Basically, Arsenal know where they went wrong previously, or where they simply didn’t have enough. They know where they can go up another level, and they’ve taken steps to address exactly that.

On paper, it all sounds great. In execution, we await.

My Predictions:

First of all, you should never ever ask me to predict anything. I’m just going to hope no one comes back to this piece when I’m dramatically wrong in 8 months time.

Do I think we are capable of winning the WSL? Yes.

Do I think we have the squad to compete on all fronts? Yes.

Does football always work out that way? No.

No matter how much you study the tactics and psychology of the game, no matter how many prediction models you build, nothing comes close to the real thing.

I think that’s why we love the sport so much.

The truth is, it’s all there for Arsenal. They just have to grab the season by the scruff of the neck.

Avoid the mistakes of the past, go into it with optimism, and get behind this team.

I guess we’ll find out in Crawley on Sunday.

I will not go into the personal details of her absence, for there is no need, and most that were around last season will be aware. I will say that to go through such a profound loss and then mark your return with a goal of that calibre was quite a moment for Cooney-Cross.

I’ve viewed Kyra Cooney-Cross as a fan favourite since her arrival; so many times seeing her name on the back of people’s shirts and on people’s matchday scarves. Every time she is in the starting XI there is a collective sense of elation. Every time she is not, there is a wave of disappointment. That gives you very much a sense of the kind of talent she possesses.

Most of the discourse around building a world class squad this season, especially in midfield, has naturally drifted to Kim Little, Mariona Caldentey and new addition Georgia Stanway. I’m no outlier to this narrative; I’ve said it myself with no hesitation that given the dynamics and talent these individuals possess, it should work out (on paper). Yet I’ve also been realistic that both Kim Little and Mariona Caldentey CANNOT play the vast number of games they did last season, and reinforcements need to be both available and reliable.

What makes it even more enticing is if any of those alternatives are NOT in fact just reinforcements, but capable of nicking a starting spot and providing some real competition.

You get where I’m going with this?

Pre-season means experimentation, which is always a positive in my eyes. The other side of that is we see so many combinations of players on the pitch together at any given time, we may struggle to determine which blend is the strongest. We also never see certain players play together, as it would be impossible to rotate and try all your players and combinations across just a handful of matches.

At the same time, when the season starts, there’s no time for experimentation. You can ask Renee Slegers all about that in the game against Brighton last season, where she tried to rest Mariona Caldentey. Mariona was then dragged on at half-time trying to salvage a game that had already got away. The party commenced on the blue side of Manchester that night, and the late title hopes were ended abruptly in Crawley.

Yet Kyra Cooney-Cross is no experimentation for Renee Slegers. Although the rhythm she started to build last season had to come to an end for reasons beyond anyone’s control, a statement of intent was made last night.

The ability to find individual player data on pre-season games is somewhat impossible, so we’re going off pure observation and the little stats we do have.

Cooney-Cross played 45 minutes of last night’s game and scored 1 goal from roughly 25 yards out in the 57th minute (12 minutes after coming on). Arsenal won the second half 3-0 with Kyra Cooney-Cross at the heart of the team. Her appearance was no cameo, she was part of the ‘second-half’ midfield and looked more than promising. Renee Slegers stated afterwards that Cooney-Cross had been training at a “really high level” and was gradually building her minutes.

From a tactical observation point of view, Cooney-Cross was her usual self, looking to find space in between the lines and pick out those cutting edge passes designed to catch the opposition out. Especially against an organised Charlton side determined to play in a low block and defend, something Arsenal are all too familiar with.

Arsenal have several players capable of that kind of passing range, including Leah Williamson, who demonstrated that profusely in the first half. It’s important to have those kind of players at your disposal when you’re looking to create unanticipated moments in attack. Arsenal want to be less predictable, and utilising Cooney-Cross’ ability to play passes through the lines, as well as longer balls for the wingers and full-backs to run onto, will be essential in achieving that.

I published a note earlier today with a few initial thoughts I’d had on pre-season. A standout for me was how much I want to see a midfield trio of Kyra Cooney-Cross, Georgia Stanway and Mariona Caldentey (may I add I am not ignoring Kim Little and her talent by stating this, as you can equally substitute her in for Georgia Stanway).

Each of those players possess qualities that should on paper, equate to a balanced midfield. Georgia Stanway comes in as your defensive minded midfielder, someone designed to prevent dangerous transitions, but also good at holding the ball up and helping with build-up play. Kyra Cooney-Cross can link up well with Stanway, play through the midfield, or look for those balls through the lines or long range switches of play. Mariona Caldentey brings the attacking dynamic, and will look to thrive once again in her preferred number 10 role, with her late runs into the box and her long range shooting ability. This midfield should have it all. Arsenal will need to be careful that they are not exposed on the counter attack, so interchangeability and an understanding between the three will be key. That will come with time.

And when Arsenal need something completely different or fresh legs to change a game, we’ve got even more midfielders in and around the squad (Frida Maanum, Geraldine Reuteler etc).

That’s why last nights Cooney-Cross performance excites me from a tactics point of view. I hope we see her entrusted with a starting role more, and we see just how much she can improve this Arsenal side.

On a more personal note, I’m just so happy to see her back and on the scoresheet.

With all the discussion of new signings and their impact, we must not forget the obvious talent our existing squad possesses.

Whether it’s tactics, player performances, managerial appointments, grassroots football, media or investment (just to name a few!), keeping up with all of it is easier said than done.

Add in the fact I write alongside a full-time job, try to get to as many matches as I can and, somewhere in between, still live my everyday life, I’m not ashamed to admit I sometimes fall behind.

Nothing captures my attention quite like a transfer window, though.

I’d always envisioned that Arsenal would go big this summer, giving full backing to a manager who has the potential to take this team and club to the very top. Although I would have liked to have seen Renee Slegers backed sooner (which I think would have led to greater success last season), I try to remind myself we have technically only seen one full season under her tenure. Not that I’m forgetting the half-season before that, of course, when she led us to a Champions League final win in Lisbon against Barcelona (I did say I’d find a way to mention it in every piece I write).

Arsenal have strengthened considerably with the players they’ve brought in so far - Georgia Stanway, Selina Cerci, Geraldine Reuteler, Ona Batlle, Lisa Baum, Isabella Damm & Misa Rodriguez. At this point, it’s probably safer for me to say “in no particular order”; there’s been so many signings I genuinely couldn’t tell you what order they happened in.

I’ve taken some time off socials for the past month or two, so I’ve seen less rumours and transfer talk than I perhaps would have in previous windows. In a way, it’s been refreshing to actually find out from Arsenal for once, rather than through weeks of rumours beforehand.

Midfield, the Stanway

I’m not sure anyone’s reaction to Georgia Stanway signing for Arsenal was “Well, I didn’t see that coming.”

The rumours had been doing the rounds for months and, once Bayern Munich confirmed she would be leaving in January of this year, it felt more like a matter of when, rather than if.

Predictable doesn’t make it any less exciting, though.

Despite being only 27, Arsenal have signed in Stanway one of the most experienced midfielders in Europe. She has already racked up 224 domestic appearances, 187 starts and almost 17,000 league minutes. Add that to 71 England caps and well over 4,500 international minutes. She still likely has her best years ahead of her.

You don’t rack up those kinds of numbers without doing something right.

Stanway broke into Manchester City’s first team as a teenager, establishing herself as one of the WSL’s top midfielders before later joining Bayern Munich. Four seasons in Germany, another 108 appearances, 27 goals and 49 assists, coincided with four years of competing for titles and regularly going deep in Europe.

We know the CV speaks for itself. That’s only half the story, though.

Stanway is a relentless player. She’s one that presses aggressively, can put in a tackle when required and is responsible for winning a lot of those second balls. She will be key to winning possession back high up the pitch, look to carry the ball with intent, thread a pass through the lines or make a late run into the area herself. Unlike most Arsenal players these days, she also seems quite happy to shoot from distance. Add in her set-piece ability and the fact she can comfortably play as both a six and an eight. It really is easy to see why Slegers wanted her, right?

I don’t think Arsenal are looking to build “one perfect midfield”, as Stanway, combined with the other signings I’ll touch on after, point to something different. The idea seems to be having several midfielders who each bring something different to the team. If Arsenal want to compete for everything, Slegers needs more than two or three she can trust when it matters.

We’ve spoken so much over the last couple of seasons about Arsenal needing more creativity from midfield, being better in transition and finding ways to manage minutes across a packed schedule. Having this many options should help with all three.

(On a side note, part of me still wishes we’d seen a fully fit Lia Wälti in this Arsenal side under Slegers. I genuinely think her profile would have suited this team down to a T. She was one of those players you appreciated most when she wasn’t there).

There’s obviously the goals, assists and versatility that Stanway brings, but I’m thinking beyond that. We know she will get stuck in and try and drag Arsenal through a difficult game. She also, like most of us, really, really doesn’t like losing. I’m quite happy to have someone like that in my team.

Every successful team needs those players who hate losing more than they enjoy winning.

In another transfer window, Stanway might have been the signing. This summer, she’s just one of seven.

No Mercy, Cerci

I’m never someone who thinks you should sign a player based on sentiment alone…which is why I’m not worried about this signing at all.

The fact Selina Cerci is a Gooner is merely the tiniest of bonuses to the kind of player Arsenal are signing (although, it is a pretty nice bonus).

Cerci arrives in North London with consecutive 16-goal league seasons behind her. The first of those was enough to make her the Frauen-Bundesliga’s joint top scorer in 2024/25. She matched that tally again last season, while adding nine assists from 23 starts. Across the two campaigns, that works out at 32 goals in just 43 league appearances for Hoffenheim.

So, goals. Lots of them.

Despite being young and playing in a league I can safely say is less competitive than the WSL, Arsenal aren’t gambling on what Cerci could (or in turn, could not) become. Two very good seasons with Hoffenheim still makes her ready and capable of making an impact straight away.

Cerci is a direct player. She’s physical, quick and rarely needs an invitation to go forward. Or, to use Slegers’ slightly more tactical description, she has “forward intent”.

She wants to attack space, run beyond defenders and get herself into the box. I think Slegers will look to play her through the middle more often than not, but she can comfortably start wider and come inside from there. She also registered nine assists last season, so there’s more to her game than the 16 goals suggest.

It’s not going to be as simple as Cerci coming in as Alessia Russo’s back-up. Not unless we’ve all collectively decided to forget Stina Blackstenius exists.

Russo likes to drop away from the defensive line, get on the ball and involve herself in the build-up play. Blackstenius gives Arsenal the willingness to run in behind and stretch a defence, while Cerci brings some of that same directness but with the added possibility of starting from a wider position.

The forward options all of a sudden start adding up (good luck predicting that front three every week).

The wide part of Cerci’s game does interest me, especially because it seems to have dominated a lot of the conversation since she signed. I don’t think Arsenal brought her in to suddenly turn her into an out-and-out winger. They already possess other options out wide in Kelly, Smith, Foord and Baum. For me, the fact Cerci can play wide is just that - another option.

This brings me back to that point I made earlier. Arsenal aren’t collecting different versions of the same player; they’re giving Slegers choices, options.

There will obviously be questions about whether the numbers translate from Germany to England. One 16-goal season and maybe you can put it down to a particularly good year. Do it again, this time with nine assists too, and there’s clearly more to it than that.

I don’t have to convince anyone that Cerci knows where the goal is.

Whether she can keep those numbers up in England remains to be seen.

The Right Reute

I think we’ve established by now that Renée Slegers quite likes a versatile player.

Géraldine Reuteler certainly isn’t about to break that trend.

Arsenal announced her as a midfielder, Eintracht Frankfurt had her down as a forward and Switzerland have generally considered her a midfielder too. Naturally, I’m going to make my life a hell of a lot easier and tell you she can do “a bit of everything”.

(That is kind of the point, though).

Reuteler spent eight years in Frankfurt, joining in 2018 and leaving this summer with 184 appearances, 54 goals and 44 assists to her name. Nearly 100 goal contributions across her time there isn’t bad going for someone whose position we’re actively struggling to define.

Last season alone she scored six and assisted nine, and I don’t think I need to remind anyone how often creativity (or a lack of) from midfield has come up in conversations about this Arsenal side.

Reuteler has been around the Switzerland setup for almost a decade too, making her Switzerland debut back in 2017 and since playing more than 90 times for her country. Major tournaments and big occasions are nothing new for her.

For those of you that watched Switzerland at their home Euros last summer, there’s a good chance you already know exactly what she can do. Reuteler was named Player of the Match in all three of Switzerland’s group games in that tournament.

The most interesting question for me, and probably plenty of others, is where exactly Slegers plans on using her.

I’m not sure even Slegers has decided that yet.

Reuteler is comfortable receiving the ball under pressure and taking it forward herself. She can create, obviously, but that isn’t the limit of what she does. Give her the chance to get forward and she’ll get into goalscoring positions herself.

You could play her as an eight. You could push her higher. You could start her out wide. There will be games where it’s difficult to even put a position on her, and I imagine that’s part of the appeal for Arsenal.

Going back to what I said about Stanway earlier; Arsenal aren’t trying to find one midfield three and play it until everyone’s legs fall off. Reuteler gives Slegers another completely different profile to choose from, and an unpredictable option from the bench. So often last season, and even in the seasons before Renée Slegers’ tenure, Arsenal brought on the same faces and you almost knew what to expect. This is a whole different ball game now.

Reuteler’s career has been anything but straightforward, suffering an ACL injury in 2021 and spending close to a year out before returning in March 2022. If anything, some of her best football has come in the years since.

There shouldn’t be much waiting around with Reuteler either - I think we’ll see plenty of her straight away.

She might not arrive with quite the same fanfare as Georgia Stanway, or the goalscoring numbers of Selina Cerci, but there’s a lot to like about this one.

The more I think about it, the more Reuteler feels like the best example of what Slegers wants this Arsenal side to be.

Half the Batlle

How do you make losing one of the best full-backs in the world hurt slightly less?

Sign another one. Duh.

All jokes aside, Ona Batlle’s quality hardly needs much of an introduction from me. The majority of you reading will already be aware of the kind of player Arsenal are signing here.

Across her three seasons in Barcelona’s first team, Batlle made 114 official appearances, scored 14 goals and played 8,571 minutes. In that time, she won 11 major trophies, and not just as a squad player either. She was a key name on the team sheet and one of Barcelona’s most regular starters.

Batlle can comfortably play at full-back on either side, once again fitting the theme of Slegers’ transfer window. She is attack-minded but still possesses defensive ability, referred to as ‘unpredictable’. All traits that sound very similar to another Arsenal full-back who has gone on to become one of the best in her position. Need I name names? (🦊)

Arsenal now have ridiculous competition in that full-back position, in the best possible way. Every player you could pick out has a different profile and brings something different to this Arsenal side. For me, Ona Batlle is a nailed-on starter in the big games, but that doesn’t mean she won’t face some serious competition along the way (Enter: Smilla Holmberg).

Experience in big games, WSL tested, versatile and, did I mention, she came on a free?

This is serious business from Arsenal and, in my eyes, the standout signing of the window. I’m sure everyone will have their own opinion on that though, and rightly so.

There’s little projection required with Ona Batlle. The question is simply: what does she want to win next?

Baum! There It Is

With so much of this piece so far focusing on Arsenal signing experienced, aggressive, almost proven players, Lisa Baum provides the opposite. That is by no means an insult to the talented player we paid £500k+ for. As I’ve eluded too previously, no successful transfer window comes from signing several players of the same profile.

At only 19 years old, I see Lisa Baum as something of a test of whether Arsenal have improved their ability to nurture young players. I have several thoughts on this topic in general, probably too many to squeeze into this piece, as this crosses over with the progression of academy players (or the lack of, perhaps). I guarantee many of you reading this may have similar concerns, so I’ll save my rant for another time.

If we compare them purely on the basis that they were both young talents upon joining Arsenal, I do draw comparison to Rosa Kafaji, who departed Arsenal this summer to join London City Lionesses. Her departure came as no surprise to a fanbase who largely expected it (whether I expected her to join a team brimming with new signings and existing players, making her route to game time look even more impossible, is another talking point altogether).

Rosa Kafaji excited the fanbase when she joined, but even those most excited by her arrival had some reservations over exactly where she would fit into this Arsenal side, who had seemingly avoided using a traditional number ten for some time. Tim Stillman wrote a great piece recently on what the number ten position could look like for Arsenal Women next season, as well as how the role has evolved under different managers. It’s worth checking out, as he makes the point far better than I can.

Tim's Piece

Rosa Kafaji didn’t really slot into any position; Lisa Baum on the other hand does. Arsenal have long needed fresh legs out wide and, Olivia Smith aside, haven’t really addressed that in recent transfer windows. Smith proved that an exciting young player with pace, dribbling ability and an eye for goal could significantly improve Arsenal’s creativity. She didn’t, however, sign for Arsenal when the rumours first emerged, when she was still much younger and yet to properly establish herself in a major league. She chose Liverpool first, gained valuable WSL experience and only then made the next big move in her career. While Kafaji exits after failing to fit the Slegers puzzle and Smith represents a different pathway altogether, what does Lisa Baum offer Arsenal?

Baum is, on paper, a direct, attack-first winger. She’s quick, strong and comfortable carrying the ball forward, wanting to take her full-back on when receiving the ball out wide. She is equally capable of cutting inside and looking for goal, unpredictability a key component of her game. The numbers suggest there’s more to her game too. She ranked joint-seventh in the Bundesliga for chances created, despite playing in a Leipzig side that finished 10th.

While Arsenal have targeted certain players with the intention of making them regular starters, Baum feels part of the bigger plan hinted at earlier: building a complete squad. I don’t think anyone expects her to walk straight into the starting XI, but equally, no one is saying she can’t. I’ll make the point again that Renee Slegers needs options, players that can come on when the game requires a change or an injection of pace. When Arsenal inevitably come up against a low block, there’s Lisa Baum waiting in the wings, ready to run at defenders, cause problems out wide and try to make something happen.

In going back to the comparison I made with Rosa Kafaji and other young players who have struggled to cement their spot among the Arsenal greats, there is that creeping fear that Baum may also be “eager to prove herself”. A £500k+ move into such an established squad does create the fear that she may feel the need to force things (that said, I’ve read notes on her Bundesliga performances suggesting her decision-making is already quite advanced for her age).

Finding the balance between embracing that unpredictable, direct nature and knowing when not to force things will be key.

She doesn’t have to prove she’s worth £500k every time she touches the ball.

Arsenal just have to give her the time to prove why they paid it.

Well, Damm

I remember a season or two ago when there were rumours that a mystery Danish goalkeeper was training with Arsenal’s senior squad. I remember wondering who it was at the time, then life happened and I completely forgot about it. As you do.

Many of us will have watched Georgia Stanway and Ona Batlle play at some point, probably more than once. Some of the more hardcore fans among us might even be able to say they’ve watched Geraldine Reuteler, Selina Cerci and Lisa Baum play too. Many of us, myself included, can honestly admit we haven’t watched a single minute of Isabella Damm play. This signing required a bit more research than the others did. For those in the same boat as me, let’s have a look at who Damm actually is and why Arsenal have brought her in now.

Damm joined Danish women’s football club Brøndby back in 2021, where she was around the first team despite being only 15. She didn’t collect a large amount of senior minutes whilst there, but Arsenal’s monitoring of Damm clearly showed them there was plenty of talent there.

“One of the best young goalkeepers in Europe in her age group.” - Clare Wheatley, Arsenal's Director of Women's Football.

As much as this transfer window has been about preparing for the now, there’s an overwhelming need to plan ahead. The signing shows Arsenal are planning for two, three, maybe even four years down the line. For a club that prides itself on developing young players, I can’t help but criticise how little we’ve actually seen of it in recent times. I think they could do more, quite frankly. The signing of Isabella Damm is a step in the right direction.

I think the big question for me is what they plan on doing with her next. In my eyes, she’d go on loan, because having a fourth goalkeeper around seems unnecessary. Then again, if one or more of those goalkeepers are not fully fit, maybe to the point they won’t even feature in the matchday squad, you want to make sure you have a backup to call upon. She can learn so much from the three top goalkeepers we have, but even in cup games she is going to struggle for the minutes.

If Arsenal believe she is one of Europe’s best young goalkeepers in her age group, development minutes are going to be key.

Don’t Misa Thing

Another goalkeeper, you say?

Of all the transfer rumours and announcements, this one was perhaps the most shocking.

I really didn’t see Arsenal signing a goalkeeper of this calibre, instead assuming they would go for a player of similar calibre to Barbora Votíková. A ‘just in case’ kind of player, there if others get injured or aren’t up to full fitness. Now the signing has been announced and the player joins our ever-growing goalkeeper union, I understand it more.

Daphne Van Domselaar spent most of last season dealing with an injury that made it difficult for her to build any real consistency. Even when she did play she still had lingering issues that disrupted her form and impacted her performances. Anneke Borbe, initially doubted by many, came in and proved herself as a strong, viable option for the number one position. She then too got injured and although she was in that starting XI on numerous occasions, she was never fully fit either. Manuela Zinsberger was out with an ACL injury, so Renee Slegers saw the need for another senior goalkeeper, to play if required.

Ahead of the upcoming season it's clear that Daphne Van Domselaar is still recovering, not featuring in team training, instead we assume in individual training. Arsenal have signed 18 year old Isabella Damm, as I just discussed, but if both Van Domselaar and Borbe are not deemed match fit, it would be cruel to put all that pressure on the young keepers, Amy Liddiard included.

Arsenal don’t just need someone who is a ‘needs must’ kind of player, they need a strong, reliable goalkeeper capable of coming in and proving they too can fight for that number one position. How does a 27 year old, experienced goalkeeper on a free transfer from Real Madrid sound?

Arsenal haven’t signed just anyone, someone convenient because they were available. They’ve signed someone who was a huge part of Real Madrid’s women’s team from (basically) the beginning. Spending six seasons at Real Madrid, she eventually became their captain, credited with 215 starts, the most of any player for the club at that point.

Despite her age, she has tons of senior experience, featuring in the Champions League and major international tournaments, so she knows what it’s like to be part of squads that possess winning mentality. I haven’t had much of an opportunity to watch her play, so I did a bit of research on the kind of player she is. Some words to describe her came up consistently - assertive, proactive, leader.

There were some references to her height being just 1.73m, compared to Daphne Van Domselaar at 1.76m and Anneke Borbe at 1.80m. Isabella Damm and Amy Liddiard even sit at a similar height to Borbe. At 5 ft 8 Misa isn’t exactly tall, and therefore her positional awareness and decision-making have to be even more perfectly timed than other keepers. That’s something she will have to think a lot about in a league as tough as the WSL.

In signing someone like Misa Rodriguez, it’s clear Arsenal don’t just want a make shift goalkeeper there if required, as Misa may be called upon sooner rather than later. Even if Daphne Van Domselaar or Anneke Borbe struggle with injury, Arsenal can rely on an experienced player, hopefully preventing any kind of drop-off or disruption. This kind of planning has been central to almost everything Arsenal have done this transfer window.

Joining her Spanish teammates in Mariona Caldentey and Ona Batlle, Misa Rodriguez can add experience, leadership and mentality to Renee Slegers’ squad. I don’t think this will be a player that sits on the bench all season; she simply wouldn’t sign for Arsenal if she didn’t think there was a role for her here.

Can she come in and impress enough that we end up having a three-way competition for the number one shirt? That wouldn’t be so bad, would it?

What Remains

I’m not ignoring the elephant in the room and the comment in Arsenal’s replies whenever they post, well, anything.

“Sign a CB.” “We need a left-footed CB.” “Are we going to sign a CB?”

I’m not even going to try and play devil’s advocate here because quite frankly, I agree with you all.

I agreed even more when I realised that Steph Catley wasn’t in full training, Katie Reid is still in recovery and Laia Codina now plays for another club.

There’s no doubt Arsenal are short in that position. Both Leah Williamson and Lotte Wubben-Moy missed periods of last season through injury. With reinforcements arriving in the full-back areas, you could argue that Taylor Hinds gives Arsenal another option at centre-back if needed. But if they’ve been so keen to add depth elsewhere, why are we still having to make do at centre-back?

Giving Arsenal the benefit of the doubt for a second, I’m going to put myself in their shoes and assume it’s one of a few things.

Maybe they believe they already have enough cover to allow Steph Catley and Katie Reid to return to full fitness, with other players capable of stepping into centre-back if needed. Maybe they plan to keep another young player around the first team alongside Reid, providing emergency cover that they’ll ideally never have to use. Maybe they simply haven’t found the centre-back they want in the market and believe signing nobody is better than signing the wrong player.

Or, of course, they’re planning a major surprise towards the end of the window that’s going to shut us all up.

Shall we start taking bets?

My guess is that, as with most things, we’ll eventually find out it wasn’t just one of these factors after all.

But yes, I’d still love to see Arsenal add a centre-back this summer. Not someone who has to come in and immediately start every week, just someone we can have in the squad that can be there if needed.

I strongly believe Katie Reid is the future of Arsenal’s defence, so why go out and sign another world-class young centre-back who could potentially block that pathway (despite how much I like Bella Andersson). At the same time, we don’t know how Reid will come back from injury. We don’t know how quickly she’ll be back to her best or if she ever will. Arsenal will need to manage her minutes, only adding to the argument for signing reinforcements.

If Arsenal do sign a centre-back before the window closes, we’ll revisit this discussion then. If they don’t, we’ll revisit it a few months into the season and see whether they were right to trust those they already have.

Final Thoughts:

As the season approaches I’ll be returning to my regular posting schedule of once a week, so if there’s any topics you’d like me to discuss, drop them in the comments below.

I’ll have a piece out after the two upcoming pre-season games, discussing everything we’ve learnt ahead of a huge season for Renée Slegers’ Arsenal.

I’m not going to sit here in August and declare Arsenal league champions. A brilliant transfer window guarantees absolutely nothing. We all know that.

I will say this, though: they’ve given themselves one hell of a chance.

Shortly before this picture was taken, we’d been together when the transfer rumours first started circulating. With no disrespect intended towards Jenna, I raised an eyebrow, stared at the name on my screen and asked: “Who’s that?”. I did my usual research, nothing too formal, just a few YouTube highlight reels. I let the experts who regularly watch the NWSL do the talking and I can’t lie, I was quite excited.

Nighswonger looked like a player with heaps of talent, while Arsenal were in need of reinforcements at full-back. A year earlier, Arsenal had signed Emily Fox, who set the standard for what a full-back arriving from the NWSL could offer in the WSL. As it turned out, though, Fox was less the standard and more the ceiling. It’s worth remembering that when the Nighswonger rumours began and the deal was eventually confirmed, Arsenal signings were few and far between, a stark contrast to the influx we’ve seen more recently. The only other signing in that January transfer window was Chloe Kelly, joining on loan from Manchester City.

Arsenal appeared to sign Jenna Nighswonger to provide depth at full-back. Katie McCabe and Steph Catley were their main options on the left, although Catley was increasingly being used at centre-back. There’s no doubt Arsenal knew they were signing an attack-minded full-back, one who had only been converted to the position by a former manager at her previous club. She was good at progressing the ball and contributing in the final third, and despite being young, had won an NWSL Championship and been named NWSL Rookie of the Year. A highly rated US international who could bring creativity for a fee of just $100,000 seemed like a no-brainer.

For all the discussion about what she could offer, there was one overriding concern from the start. An attack-minded player operating at full-back in the WSL still needed strong defensive qualities, and that had never really been a major part of Nighswonger’s game. Perhaps Arsenal believed they could develop that side of her game, but expecting improvement without ever really giving her the opportunity to show it felt somewhat cruel. She made just six competitive appearances for Arsenal: five in the WSL and one in the FA Cup. Five came during the second half of the 2024/25 season, followed by just one more in 2025/26 before she joined Aston Villa on loan. Her only Arsenal start came on her debut against London City Lionesses in the FA Cup. It’s hardly a bold statement to say her role was exceptionally limited.

As is so often the case in football, neither players nor clubs tend to offer a detailed explanation when they part ways. The reasons are usually left unspoken, although there are, of course, exceptions. It doesn’t take a genius to work out why Jenna Nighswonger needed a move this summer; her route to regular football at Arsenal was almost non-existent. When Aston Villa chose not to activate their option to buy, I expected her to make the move back to the NWSL. A return to a league she knows, where she should have the opportunity to play consistently and hopefully earn a USWNT recall, feels like a no-brainer.

The transfer to Arsenal never worked out as either side would have hoped, leaving Jenna Nighswonger with little choice but to look elsewhere for regular minutes.

Nighswonger’s time at Arsenal is just one example of a much wider question: what stops a transfer that makes sense on paper from working on the pitch?

There’s no one answer, but the same reasons tend to crop up again and again.

Caught in the Wrong System

I couldn’t start with any of these sections and say ‘the first and most obvious’, because the truth is that any of them can be the cause of, or a contributing factor in, a signing not working out.

When I think about Jenna Nighswonger’s situation, I lean towards ‘caught in the wrong system’ as one of the key factors in, firstly, why she didn’t play and, secondly, why she had to move somewhere better suited to her game.

When a player signs, the manager will likely have some say in the decision. In my eyes, they should have the majority say. I don’t think that is always the case when there is a hierarchy above them with its own ideas about where to spend the money. Although the manager then has to come out and say how much they’re looking forward to working with the player, you can’t help but wonder how often that is more for PR than anything else.

I sit on the fence when it comes to whether Renée Slegers really wanted Jenna Nighswonger. Part of me thinks she must have known that the defensive side of her game was not her strongest and that she would naturally struggle at full-back. She didn’t really fit when she was used in midfield, either.

Did Slegers envision using her in a way that would avoid exposing her defensive limitations? Did she believe that side of her game could improve over time? Or was Nighswonger simply an available option in a position Arsenal needed to reinforce?

I lean towards the latter, but I’m also not Renée Slegers, so take that as nothing more than my opinion.

There’s also the fact that managers come and go. A player can sign for a manager who wants to play a certain way, only for them to leave and be replaced by someone with a completely different style. Suddenly, that player finds themselves in an awkward position.

A player can have all the talent in the world, but talent alone cannot create a place for them in a system that does not suit them.

Overloaded Position

When a player does have the potential to suit the system but finds themselves behind better options, you get the ‘overloaded position’ dilemma. It’s the ‘my steak is too buttery’ problem of the football world: a manager has too many good options in one position, someone inevitably falls down the pecking order and their game time becomes extremely limited.

You’d probably question why clubs, recruitment teams and managers allow this to happen, but it often comes as a consequence of trying to build strong squad depth. Tip the pendulum too far one way and you end up bringing in so many players alongside the ones already there that there simply aren’t enough minutes to go around.

A player can be left on the bench because they aren’t what a particular game requires, or because they’ve been brought in largely to fill out the squad. It has even reached the point where players cannot make the matchday squad because there aren’t enough seats on the bench (metaphorically, I think, but also…literally?)

If we’re ranking the reasons why a signing doesn’t work out, I don’t think this comes anywhere near the worst. Trying to build squad depth, managing players returning from injury or bringing someone in to fill a gap, do their job and move on is hardly a crime in football.

Good squad building will always leave someone on the outside looking in.

Managerial Tension

Have you ever found yourself frustrated at a manager, maybe even one from another club, for constantly overlooking the obvious choice on the bench? A player who looks like the answer to all their problems but is somehow still ignored? No? Just me, then.

I’d like to think every manager gets along with all their players, maintains a level of professionalism, has no favourites and picks their team purely based on what each game requires. But I’m also a realist.

Sometimes, for one reason or another, a player falls out of favour with the manager and tensions build. I’ll leave an article below without further comment. You’ll soon know exactly what I mean.

The Guardian Piece

There’s two sides to every story, nonetheless, but when tensions get beyond repair it leaves a player no choice but to seek a move elsewhere. That move might lead to the best football of their career, and they may feel so hard done by their previous manager that they occasionally feel the need to make a few digs.

Whatever you think of endings like these, they happen, and they can be a major reason why things simply don’t work out for a player at a particular club.

Sometimes, the relationship between a player and manager reaches a point of no return, and moving on becomes the only option.

Injuries

A player in their prime, playing the best football of their career at the club of their dreams. One ACL injury, and everything changes overnight.

Injuries, especially serious or recurring ones, are among the most heartbreaking reasons a transfer doesn’t work out. The toughest part is that there’s often no one to blame. The player gets injured through no fault of their own, but while they’re absent, the manager has to find a replacement. Someone from the existing squad steps up, or a new signing arrives and hits the ground running.

The injured player never quite reclaims their place. They might not look like the same player they were before, leaving them stuck chasing a version of themselves that no longer exists and lose confidence in the process. It’s cruel and, unfortunately, happens far too often, especially in women’s football.

There isn’t always a comeback story waiting at the end of the recovery.

The Weight of Expectation

I’ve actually touched on this in my upcoming piece on Arsenal’s new signings, including 19-year-old Lisa Baum, who arrives with a hefty £500,000 price tag. I drew comparisons with a young Olivia Smith, who arrived for £1 million, and the weight of expectation placed on young players when they sign for such significant fees.

It would be easy for me to sit here and say they should just ‘ignore it’ and ‘focus on the football’, but I’d be naive to think the fee doesn’t cross their mind, or the minds of those at the club. There’s an immediate need to impress and avoid being labelled a ‘waste of money’, which can lead to a player becoming overeager and overcompensating. Without even realising it, they start trying to do too much to prove they were worth the price, when all anyone really wants is for them to play their best football and continue developing.

What’s that old saying…pressure is a privilege?

I wonder how much a player who arrived for a significant fee, gave everything and still had to leave because it didn’t work out would agree with that.

Home Sickness

Did I include this section just so I could mention Rafaelle? Of course not. I included it because I genuinely think this is a forgotten factor.

I hesitate to say this is a reason why a signing ‘doesn’t work out’, because a player leaving earlier than the fanbase, or perhaps even the club, expected does not necessarily make the move unsuccessful. I’ll use Rafaelle as the obvious example, partly because of how much I admired her during her short spell at Arsenal, equally for the fact she left way too soon.

Short but significant is the best way to describe her time at Arsenal. She made 35 appearances, scored four goals, and after joining in January 2022 established herself as one of the team’s strongest centre-backs. Even now, Arsenal seem to search for elements of her profile in every centre-back they consider: her physicality, composure and experience were difficult to replace. The partnership she formed with Leah Williamson was also key during her time at the club. I’m surely not the only fan who formed that emotional connection with her and still looks back on those 18 months at Arsenal from time to time, wondering what might have been.

There was no suggestion Rafaelle left Arsenal because of issues at the club. When she left it felt emotional but positive, so it appears to have just been primarily a personal and lifestyle decision. Speaking after joining Orlando Pride, Rafaelle even explained how she wanted to be closer to both her family and the Brazilian community.

She’s a prime example of how a move can end without anything necessarily going wrong. Sometimes, there are things that matter more than football.

A Goodbye Letter from Rafaelle

Do we always need to read into every decision a club makes, or can we accept that, whether because of one factor or several, things simply don’t work out?

Not every failed transfer needs a villain.

In other news, I’m about halfway through my transfer window piece, which I’m going to publish before the pre-season games begin. I’ve gone into detail on each signing, how they fit into the broader blueprint for Renée Slegers’ Arsenal and what she and the club are trying to build.

I look forward to sharing it with you very soon.

I must clarify, however, that my exit never was, and still isn’t, permanent.

I’ve been using every bit of free time I have to work on a piece sharing my thoughts on the signings, the upcoming season and I suppose, my expectations heading into it all.

I’m aiming to get that out over the next couple of weeks, but I’m not putting any pressure on myself by setting a date.

Last summer, the end of the season was pure elation, followed by a whirlwind few weeks in Switzerland. By the time I’d got home and unpacked my suitcase, it felt like the season was starting up all over again.

This summer, though, every time I look at the calendar I end up thinking, surely it can’t still be this long until the season starts again?

Like many others I miss it. The football, the community, the socialising, the travelling. I even miss the ranting and rambling that comes with it all (something I’m sure there’ll be plenty of again this season).

Before I release the piece I’ve been working on over the next couple of weeks, I felt it was only right to check in with a short note.

So many of you have supported this Substack throughout its journey, with plenty of you joining along the way, and I’m incredibly grateful for every single one of you.

I’m happy to say it’s not going anywhere. Next season might look a little different, but if you’re worried my opinions might disappear too, don’t be. Arsenal will no doubt give me plenty to say.

If there’s anything in particular you’d like to see discussed in the upcoming piece, or throughout the season more generally, do let me know.

This has always been built around a shared love for the club and the team, so your thoughts matter just as much as mine.

Here's to another season. See you very soon.

I promised myself a poetic, from-the-heart piece would come, but I knew writing instantly would be driven by harsh emotion rather than honest reflection. I’ve taken time to genuinely process it all and, although I’m still deeply hurt as an Arsenal fan, I feel I have just enough perspective to write honestly about it. About Katie McCabe, Chelsea and a transfer that has been far harder to understand than most.

It won’t take long for you to find traces of Katie McCabe throughout my writing. Just recently in my end-of-season pieces, I shunned Arsenal for an apparent contract U-turn that seemed to push a player still thriving towards the exit door. A “club legend” at the time. A player still starting the biggest games, still willing to play wherever she was needed, still wearing her heart on her sleeve when Arsenal needed it most.

"Red is in my blood," an emphatic Katie McCabe tells us from the balcony outside the Emirates just over a year ago. Arsenal are European champions. Life is good.

It wasn’t just that either. It was a badge tap we’d waited years for. Then another. Then another. It was joining in with the away end singing “Arsenal”, even stood at Stamford Bridge of all places. It was every contract extension that made it feel like we’d never even have to have this conversation.

Was it all a lie?

It can’t have been.

While supporters criticised the club for the absence of a proper goodbye, then emptied party stores of every piece of Irish merchandise they could find, Katie McCabe captained Arsenal for one final time at Anfield.

She spent time with supporters afterwards. Smiling. Taking photos. Talking. The connection felt just as genuine as it always had.

I saw tears in people’s eyes. Real tears. Supporters trying to make peace with losing a player they never thought they’d lose.

The strange thing is that whilst all of that was happening, whilst we were saying goodbye, Katie McCabe was already on her way to Chelsea. We just didn’t know it yet.

Parade day followed not too long after. North London covered in red. A bus full of our players rolling through the streets. Banners hanging from pub windows.

The biggest of them all an Irish-designed “We’ve Got McCabe” flag.

I remember seeing the photo of it and feeling genuinely gutted. All I could think was how had Arsenal managed to let this happen? How had we reached a point where one of our “club legends” was saying goodbye at all?

And whilst all of this was happening, Katie McCabe was at Stamford Bridge writing a completely different ending.

We celebrated history, she signed Chelsea contracts. We hung Irish flags from pub windows and sang her name through North London, she prepared to become a Chelsea player.

The announcement made my stomach drop. It wasn’t understanding. It wasn’t perspective. It wasn’t context. It was just hurt. And immediate anger.

The badge taps. The chants. The speeches. The memories. All of a sudden they were being played over Chelsea promotional videos. “We’ve got McCabe” ringing out in the background whilst she stood there in blue.

It felt impossible to process.

One minute she was an Arsenal legend, a player whose decade at the club had earned her a place in its modern history. The next she was being presented as Chelsea through and through. Chelsea now her club. Her dream.

Red turned blue and, for a lot of supporters, everything changed with it.

Some immediately found understanding. The level-headed people. The ones talking about relationships, homes, lives outside of football. London. Stability. Circumstance.

Others blamed Arsenal. No contract. Then a contract. A complete change of direction and not even the role she reportedly wanted. Just a backup position in a position that wasn’t really hers. Arsenal had spent months leaving the door open and then seemed surprised when she walked right out of it.

Then there were people like me.

I didn’t take to posting on social media. I wasn’t arguing in comment sections. I was just making it everybody around me’s problem in real life.

How could she?

Chelsea?

Surely there was another option. Surely it didn’t have to be Chelsea.

For those who found themselves somewhere in the middle of all of that, I get it. That’s where I’ve eventually landed too.

One minute I was angry. The next I was trying to understand it. Then I was angry again. Then I was blaming Arsenal. Then I was blaming nobody.

That’s football, I suppose.

The women’s game may still be growing, but the feeling certainly isn’t new. Rivalry has always been part of football.

That’s why this hurts. Not because Katie McCabe left Arsenal, but because Katie McCabe left Arsenal for Chelsea.

No one could have seen this coming.

The hurt doesn’t end today. It’ll be there when she plays for Chelsea. It’ll be there when she comes back to the Emirates. It’ll be there the first time we hear her name announced in blue.

None of that feels particularly enjoyable to think about right now.

What I will say, loudly, is that disappointment and abuse are not the same thing. They never will be. I have absolutely no time for the abuse players receive online or in person, and I find myself spending less and less time on social media because of it.

But being upset? Confused? Angry? Hurt?

I think that’s okay.

I don’t think every football emotion needs to be rational immediately. Sometimes something happens and you’re left trying to work out exactly what you’re feeling, and who you’re feeling it towards.

Football would be a pretty pointless thing to care about if losing players never hurt.

Arsenal will move forward, as football clubs always do. New signings will arrive. New stories will begin. The conversation will eventually move on to tactics, transfers and another season waiting just around the corner.

For now, we process it. We argue about it. We try to understand it. We probably fail to understand it. Then we do it all again tomorrow.

Some chapters just take longer to close.

Some collapse suddenly. Some finish with celebration. Others seem to slowly tell you what they are long before the final whistle actually arrives.

Arsenal’s season feels more like the latter.

The football is over now. The table is settled. But emotionally, most of the bigger conclusions had already been waiting there for a while.

This time last year, everything around Arsenal felt different. I published a piece asking 100 Arsenal supporters what they thought of Renée Slegers’ first season in charge, written at the height of the “Reneessance”, before the Champions League final, when belief had returned so quickly it almost felt like the entire club had been lifted out of something.

The responses were full of optimism. Supporters spoke about clarity, calmness, reconnection, tactical identity, players looking free again. Slegers had taken over a side that had looked emotionally and tactically drained under Jonas Eidevall and made people believe again. Not just in results, but in the team itself.

But even in that piece, beneath all the hope, the warning signs were already there. Supporters referenced rotation, squad depth, fatigue and players falling out of favour. A gap existed between Arsenal and the sides who could keep winning while changing half a team. At the time, those concerns felt like understandable footnotes to a season that had been emotionally transformed.

A year later, they feel much closer to the point.

From the Reneessance to Reality

In September, ahead of this season, I wrote a three-part series trying to understand Arsenal tactically under Renee Slegers across the midfield, defence and forwards.

At the time, the reading felt quite clear. This was a team being built on stability first, then flexibility.

The midfield was the control centre. Kim Little, Mariona Caldentey and Frida Maanum formed the trusted core, with Kyra Cooney-Cross and Victoria Pelova the players who could potentially disrupt the hierarchy if things fell their way.

The defence had an obvious first-choice structure too. Daphne van Domselaar, Emily Fox, Leah Williamson, Steph Catley and Katie McCabe looked like the trusted five. When they played, Arsenal looked calm, balanced and capable of competing with the best. When one or two of those pieces were missing, the wobble beneath became harder to ignore.

The forward line was the area I felt was most exciting. Alessia Russo was the reference point, Caitlin Foord was the connector and Stina Blackstenius was a chaos option from the bench. Chloe Kelly gave directness, Olivia Smith could be the spark and Beth Mead gave you the experience and depth.

It looked layered, it looked varied and it finally looked like Arsenal had more ways to win.

And they did, to a point.

But that is probably the story of this season. Arsenal did evolve. The question is whether they evolved enough.

A Season of Progress, Without Enough Reward

Competitively, this season leaves Arsenal in a slightly awkward place to assess.

In the WSL, Arsenal finished second again, ending the campaign on 51 points, four behind winners Manchester City. On paper, it looks like progress of sorts: just one league defeat all season, a smaller gap to the champions than last year, and a team that often looked more structurally stable than the one Renée Slegers first inherited.

Football seasons are never just numbers on a table though, and Arsenal’s league campaign will probably be remembered less for the one defeat and more for the six draws that quietly drained the title race of its momentum.

Draws against Tottenham and Aston Villa felt like missed opportunities in games Arsenal should have found a way through. Both Manchester United matches ended level when Arsenal had periods of control but not enough ruthlessness. Then there was Chelsea at the Emirates, a game many Arsenal supporters still feel was taken from them in what felt like daylight robbery.

That is twelve points dropped without even touching the one defeat. The cruelty of a title race.

Arsenal did not lose often enough to collapse out of contention. They simply drew too many games where champions usually find another goal, another moment, another ugly way to win.

That Brighton draw ultimately ruled them out mathematically, but the warning signs had been there long before that. Arsenal often controlled matches territorially, dominated possession, and looked tactically organised, but there were too many afternoons where control drifted into passivity instead of pressure.

That is the biggest difference between a very good side and a title-winning one.

Manchester City set a pace Arsenal could not quite sustain, but Arsenal also left too much on the table themselves.

Arsenal became harder to beat under Slegers. The next challenge is becoming harder to stop.

In Europe, Arsenal reached the Champions League semi-final but fell 4-3 on aggregate to Lyon. Last season, they went all the way and beat Barcelona 1-0 in the final (yes, I needed to remind you). This time, the feeling was different. Arsenal competed, but they did not quite look like a team capable of winning the whole thing again. Lyon understood the tie better and despite Arsenal having their moments, they merely lacked enough control, enough edge and enough of the tiny details that decide games at that level.

The domestic cups told a more familiar story.

An FA Cup quarter-final exit to Brighton and a League Cup semi-final exit to Manchester United. Last season it was Liverpool in the FA Cup quarters and Manchester City in the League Cup semis. Different opponents, similar frustration.

Arsenal can talk about progress, and they should, but the cup pattern cannot keep repeating itself. At some point, good football has to become trophy-winning football.

The Champions Cup win does still matter. It is still silverware at the end of the day, still a marker and still something that reinforces standards within a squad moving through transition. Arsenal will know, however, it cannot be the full answer.

This season was not a collapse. It was not failure in a dramatic sense. But it was a season that left Arsenal close enough to see where they want to go, and far enough away to know more is still needed.

What the Stats Tell Us

The numbers tell a story of a squad that became deeper, but also more clearly divided.

Alessia Russo remains Arsenal’s attacking reference point. Her goals stayed elite, moving from 19 last season to 22 this season, but the shift in assists from three to eight says a lot about how her role developed. Arsenal did not just play towards Russo, they increasingly played through her too, especially during periods where she dropped into the number 10 role and allowed others to run beyond her.

Mariona Caldentey’s numbers tell the opposite story, but not necessarily in a negative way. I know some will disagree, as her goals and assists dropped heavily from 16 goals and seven assists last season to six goals and four assists this season. But her appearances and starts stayed almost identical. That is the tactical shift in one player. Last season, Mariona was allowed to be decisive higher up the pitch, this season she became structural. She’s the player Arsenal used to control rhythm, progression and tempo from deeper areas. Yes there was less headline output, but still more reliance than ever.

Stina Blackstenius had one of the clearest upward shifts. Her starts rose from eight to 13, while her goals jumped from seven to 12. She was no longer just the late-game chaos option. Arsenal found more deliberate ways to use her threat, particularly with Russo dropping deeper at times and creating space for those runs in behind. Her hold-up play improved too, alongside her passing, link-up play and the way she stayed involved even when not scoring. She was a player adding layers without losing what made her dangerous in the first place.

Beth Mead’s numbers surprised me slightly. Five goals and nine assists in 28 matches and 17 starts is still a strong return for a player whose role was clearly shifting. She was more involved than I expected when looking back through the data, and her assist output especially shows how useful she remained in that interchangeable front line. Arsenal will miss her presence in and around the box, even if the attack is already moving towards something else.

Caitlin Foord’s numbers tell a more difficult story. She remained heavily involved, with 31 appearances, but her output dropped from nine goals and three assists last season to two goals and two assists this year. Foord still brings carrying power, strength, pressing and ball security, but in a squad trying to become relentless, Arsenal probably need more final-third output from that wide role.

Frida Maanum remained productive, with eight goals and four assists, but her starts dropped from 27 last season to 15 this season. That probably says a lot about how Arsenal’s attack and midfield blurred this year. Maanum did not disappear, but she became more situational. At times, especially towards the end of the season, she linked effortlessly with Russo, but she still has not completely owned the number 10 role.

Chloe Kelly’s numbers are quietly strong. She started nine matches in both seasons included here, but her total goal contributions increased from seven to 11. On paper, that is a really good return. But I am not sure I felt her presence in the same way this season. Last year, Kelly seemed to arrive in the moments Arsenal needed something to happen, giving the team that bit of directness, bravery and edge in big games. This season, even with good numbers, her impact felt slightly less obvious within the rhythm of the team. Still useful, still productive, but not quite carrying the same big-moment feeling as before.

Defensively, Emily Fox remained one of Arsenal’s most reliable players (and, if I failed to mention it, one of my favourites). 32 appearances again, but fewer starts than last season, which actually feels healthy. Last year, Arsenal relied on her almost too much. This season, there was more fullback rotation, and that matters when you are asking players to compete across every front.

Katie McCabe’s numbers also show how trusted she remained. 33 appearances, 28 starts, one goal and five assists. Her assist numbers dropped from eight last season, but that probably reflects a wider tactical shift and more creators around her rather than any simple decline. The numbers do not fully capture what she brought anyway. They rarely do with McCabe (TBC).

Steph Catley became fully established as a centre-back. 24 appearances, 22 starts, and Arsenal missed her badly at times when she was unavailable, particularly against Lyon. Her adaptation from fullback to centre-back under Slegers has been one of the more important tactical shifts of this era.

Leah Williamson’s reduced availability changed the defensive picture completely. From 27 starts last season to five this season, Arsenal lost passing range, leadership and structure for long stretches. Lotte Wubben-Moy stepped up hugely, moving from seven starts last season to 24 this year, and in some ways she probably works more naturally with Catley than with Williamson.

Laia Codina’s numbers show a player who was involved more often but never truly trusted. 19 appearances, 10 starts, and still the sense that she never fully cemented herself. Her recovery pace, physical reliability and decision-making under pressure never quite settled.

Taylor Hinds solved a problem Arsenal have had for years. 26 appearances, 10 starts, reliable when called upon, and a far stronger squad-depth option than many fullbacks Arsenal have brought in previously. She did not need to be spectacular every week to be important.

Then there is Smilla Holmberg. What a signing. 15 appearances, six starts, two goals and five assists from a young defender/fullback profile is ridiculous really. She adapted quickly, looked physically ready, and gave Arsenal immediate impact and versatility. Sometimes a player arrives and just looks like they understand the assignment before anyone has even fully explained it.

In midfield, Victoria Pelova’s numbers tell the story of difficult reintegration. 24 appearances, 11 starts, no goals and three assists. She played more than last season, but rarely in a way that made her feel central again. The ACL injury clearly changed the timeline. A few years ago, she felt like one of the first names on the team sheet yet this season she often felt like someone there to rest others, fill gaps, or give minutes where possible.

Kyra Cooney-Cross is harder to assess, and should be discussed with care. Her personal circumstances understandably kept her away from the game and away from the usual football conversation. There were promising glimpses when she did play, and there should be no rush on what comes next.

Overall, the data shows a team that became more rotational, but also more hierarchical. More players accumulated appearances, but the gap between appearances and starts widened.

Slegers seemed to know more clearly who her core players were, who could be used tactically, and who was drifting towards the edge of the squad.

What Changed Tactically?

Slegers’ first full season felt less like a revival and more like a manager beginning to shape Arsenal in her own image over a sustained period of time, which is a very different challenge entirely from inheriting a struggling side and riding an emotional wave back towards belief.

Last season often felt like football being played on emotion as much as structure. Arsenal were rediscovering confidence, rediscovering freedom, rediscovering a connection between players and supporters that had looked fractured under Jonas Eidevall, and there were moments where that emotional release carried them through games in ways that almost felt bigger than tactical detail. There were comeback performances, momentum swings, huge nights in Europe, and stretches where Arsenal looked like a team feeding off belief and adrenaline. It was powerful, but it was also not always something you could replicate over a full campaign.

This season looked much more like Slegers stepping beyond emotional repair work and into the more complicated process of tactical construction.

The clearest difference was in how Arsenal increasingly tried to control the shape and speed of games rather than simply win moments within them. Last season, Arsenal often looked most dangerous when matches became transitional, stretched or emotionally chaotic, because players like Russo, Blackstenius and Foord could attack space quickly and Arsenal had a real ability to build momentum in surges. This season, there was a far more deliberate emphasis on controlling territory, slowing tempo when necessary, circulating possession with greater patience, and forcing games into structures Arsenal felt comfortable managing. At times, it looked like a side trying to dictate the emotional temperature of a match rather than simply react to it.

That tactical shift probably starts with Mariona Caldentey, because her season almost becomes a tactical metaphor for Arsenal’s evolution under Slegers.

On paper, her attacking output dropped significantly from last season, but anyone watching Arsenal closely knows that does not tell the real story. Last year, Mariona was often a final-third difference-maker, arriving higher up the pitch, influencing games through goals, assists and attacking combinations. This year, Slegers increasingly pulled her deeper and essentially turned her into one of Arsenal’s primary control mechanisms. She became less of a statistical headline and more of a structural necessity. Arsenal played through her rhythm, her ball progression, her ability to settle games when they became fragmented, and her intelligence in linking phases together. Kim Little still carried huge responsibility too, but the midfield increasingly became less about individual attacking contribution and more about creating a platform for the rest of the team to function from.

That shift had consequences elsewhere.

By moving Mariona deeper, Arsenal lost some direct attacking output from midfield, but they also became more dependent on the front line to provide goals in a more concentrated way. Russo’s season reflects that perfectly. Her goals remained elite, but her assists jumped too, because she increasingly became more than just Arsenal’s number nine. There were long stretches where she functioned almost like the attacking hinge of the entire side, dropping deeper, linking phases, initiating pressure, creating combinations and allowing others to attack space beyond her. Blackstenius’ improved output sits alongside that change rather than separately from it. Arsenal became much more intentional in how they used her, not simply as a late-game runner into chaos, but as a player whose movement could be deliberately built into attacking patterns, particularly when Russo occupied defenders differently or dropped into spaces that destabilised shape.

That front line overall became much harder to define in rigid positional terms, and that feels very Slegers.

Rather than Arsenal having a fixed attacking hierarchy of roles, the season increasingly saw attackers functioning more as profiles within a fluid structure. Mead often contributed through creativity and combinations rather than simply goalscoring. Kelly brought directness and productivity without always emotionally feeling as central as some of her big-moment interventions last season. Olivia Smith offered pace and unpredictability in certain games. Foord’s statistical decline probably reflects this too; she remained important physically and structurally, but was less often the player finishing moves herself. Arsenal’s attack increasingly became less about isolated individuals producing moments and more about rotations, relationships and collective attacking mechanisms.

That same move towards collective structure could be seen in the pressing too.

Last season, Arsenal sometimes pressed like a side playing off adrenaline. There was aggression, there was crowd-fuelled momentum, there was emotional intensity, but it could feel reactive at times. This season, the press looked much more coordinated and much more selective. Arsenal increasingly pressed through triggers rather than emotion. Poor touches became cues. Wide areas became traps. Russo’s central positioning often forced opponents towards zones Arsenal had already prepared to collapse on. The objective did not always seem to be immediate ball recovery, but territorial manipulation; forcing rushed decisions, forcing opponents long, forcing play into spaces Arsenal could control.

The fullback evolution was another really important part of that.

For years, Arsenal have often had fullback depth on paper that supporters never fully trusted in practice. This season felt different. Fox and McCabe still remained hugely important, but Hinds and Holmberg were not simply emergency options; they became genuine tactical rotation pieces that Slegers trusted without Arsenal immediately losing structural confidence in those areas. That changes more than minutes. It changes how aggressively you can use your first-choice fullbacks, how much physical load you ask them to carry, and how adaptable your defensive structure becomes across different competitions.

Holmberg’s output in particular is interesting because it hints at something beyond just squad depth. Arsenal have often relied on McCabe for left-sided aggression, chaos and attacking contribution. Holmberg’s ability to contribute creatively so early suggests Arsenal may be moving towards spreading those attacking responsibilities more evenly across the defensive line rather than concentrating them in one emotionally dominant profile.

And perhaps that leads to the biggest tactical theme of all: Slegers increasingly looked like a manager prioritising multifunctional players above all else.

Russo did not just play as a striker. Mariona did not just play as an advanced creator. Fullbacks did not just overlap automatically. Attackers rotated sides. Defenders stepped differently in build-up depending on pressure. Blackstenius’ role evolved. Even some of the players who struggled this season reflect that same tactical reality; specialist profiles increasingly looked harder to fit into a system that seems to value adaptability and in-game flexibility above almost everything.

That does not necessarily make football feel more emotionally explosive from week to week, and perhaps that is why parts of this season felt different to supporters emotionally too.

But tactically, it tells you something quite significant.

Arsenal no longer look like a team searching for what they are.

They increasingly look like a team refining exactly what their manager wants them to become.

Share

The Departures and What Arsenal Lose

The confirmed departures make this summer feel like the real beginning of the next Slegers’ cycle.

Manuela Zinsberger leaves as a significant dressing-room figure more than an on-pitch loss at this stage. The ACL injury meant her role was already minimal this season, and Arsenal’s goalkeeper future seems to have shifted towards Daphne Van Domselaar and Anneke Borbe. The impact on performances next season should be minimal unless injuries hit the position again. Emotionally, though, Arsenal lose the experience and a player attached to previous versions of this team.

Naomi Williams leaving feels right in terms of timing. She needs regular football, and Arsenal were not able to offer that. In first-team terms, the impact is little to none, but it does again raise the wider point about pathways and how difficult it is for young players to move from squad presence to genuine minutes.

Laia Codina’s departure feels logical. She never fully cemented herself at Arsenal, and even with defensive injuries elsewhere, she did not really become a trusted starter. Arsenal may not feel her specific absence heavily, but they will still need centre-back depth. More importantly, they need the right kind of depth. Recovery pace, physicality and comfort defending large spaces must all be considered. They need someone who can step into Slegers’ system without Arsenal immediately losing control.

Victoria Pelova is the one that feels sad in a different way. The decision is not impossible to understand; the timing of her injury and Arsenal’s evolution seemed to move against her. Pelova’s best Arsenal version offered rhythm, progression and technical calmness through midfield. But under Slegers, Arsenal have increasingly valued versatility, adaptability and players who can cover multiple tactical needs. Pelova became more specialist in a squad moving towards multi-functional profiles. Her absence may not be felt massively in a practical sense next season because she was already peripheral, but Arsenal still need to address what she once offered: central progression, line-breaking passing, and control beyond Mariona Caldentey and Kim Little.

Beth Mead is probably the most emotionally significant departure, but this is not just sentiment talking; her numbers still show real output. Five goals and nine assists from 18 starts is a strong return, and perhaps more productive than many people would have expected when looking back on the season. What Mead continued to offer Arsenal was not just end product, but intelligence: movement into dangerous central spaces, sharp combination play around the box, quality delivery, and an understanding of how to influence big moments when games tighten. Arsenal will miss that. This is not about replacing Beth Mead like-for-like, but they do need to ensure the frontline continues to carry that blend of creativity, goals and decisive attacking quality, while adding another layer of physical directness that can help Arsenal become even more dangerous in the biggest moments.

Katie McCabe is probably the biggest footballing loss Arsenal will feel this summer and, quite frankly, one that breaks my heart a little too.

The statistics alone do not fully explain it, but 33 appearances and 28 starts show how important she still was. Arsenal lose aggression, they lose leadership, they lose set-piece quality, versatility, intensity, emotional edge. I could keep going. These are all things that matter most when games start becoming uncomfortable.

McCabe could solve problems without Arsenal having to change shape. She could play different roles, shift the mood of a game, raise the temperature, drag standards up. Arsenal may feel her absence most in the moments where games start drifting and someone needs to grab hold of it emotionally.

Replacing her is not just about signing a left-back. Arsenal need a high-intensity left-sided defender or fullback, yes, but they also need personality. Leadership. Someone with the edge to make Arsenal feel less polite when the game demands something uglier.

Collectively, these departures tell us where Arsenal are going. Renee Slegers seems to favour younger, more physical and more adaptable players. Those less emotionally tied to the previous cycle.

That can be exciting but it can also be dangerous if too much experience leaves at once.

This summer has to make sure they do not lose the soul of the squad while trying to improve the structure of it.

What Recruitment Has to Solve

It is difficult to discuss specific players properly until deals are confirmed, but you can see why certain profiles are being linked.

Ona Batlle makes sense because Arsenal need elite fullback quality, especially with Katie McCabe leaving. Georgia Stanway makes sense because Arsenal need midfield power, leadership and long-term succession planning beyond Kim Little. Géraldine Reuteler makes sense because Arsenal need technical quality, versatility and another player who can operate within a fluid attacking or midfield structure. And if Arsenal do land Selina Cerci too, that would point towards another clear priority: adding a forward with goals, physical presence and a slightly different attacking profile, somebody capable of stretching defences while giving Arsenal another genuine threat in and around the box. Whether those signings happen or not, the needs are clear.

Arsenal need an elite left-sided defender or fullback capable of replacing McCabe’s minutes and intensity.

They need another high-level midfielder who can help control games now, not just in theory, and eventually carry some of the burden that still sits heavily on Little and Mariona Caldentey.

They need centre-back depth with athletic recovery ability, especially if Renee Slegers continues asking fullbacks to push high and centre-backs to defend space aggressively.

They need another wide attacker who gives them goals, creativity and directness, because depth is only useful if it actually pushes the level higher.

And they need leadership.

That might be the most underrated one. Arsenal are losing a lot of experience this summer. A lot of familiarity. Recruitment cannot just be about profiles on a pitch, it has to be about personality too.

Because next season, the expectations change.

What Comes Next?

This season felt like a transition between rebuilding belief and building an elite winning machine.

Last season under Slegers felt like Arsenal coming back to life. This season felt like Arsenal trying to work out whether that life could become something sustainable.

The foundations look real. The tactical identity is strong. Players have developed. Roles have shifted. Arsenal look far less fragile than they did before Slegers arrived.

But the hard part starts now.

Next season, Arsenal cannot just be promising. They cannot just be competitive. They cannot just talk about fine margins and progress and lessons learned.

They need to challenge properly for the WSL title into the final weeks. They need to reach at least one domestic cup final. They need to remain competitive deep into Europe. Most importantly, they need to show that this evolution can produce trophies, not just better football.

The domestic cup exits have to stop becoming a pattern. The flat league performances have to become rarer. The big European ties have to be managed with more authority. The squad depth has to feel real not just in minutes played, but in trust earned.

The biggest question going into next season is simple:

Because that is the difference now. Slegers has already restored belief. She has already given Arsenal clearer structure. She has already shown enough to suggest the direction is real.

Now Arsenal have to become ruthless with it.

A Few Final Words

I would genuinely love to know what you think of the season.

How do you feel Arsenal performed overall? How much will the departures be felt next year? And what do you think this new-look Arsenal becomes under Slegers?

For me, this season has been a strange one to follow and write about. I have managed to attend 37 Arsenal matches, which is somehow five more than last season, and I say that with gratitude, tiredness, and a bank account that probably deserves a quiet word with me at some point.

But mostly, I am grateful.

Once upon a time, this was just me, my thoughts, and a lot of feelings about Arsenal Women that needed somewhere to go. The fact people now read, respond, challenge, support, and come along with it still means more than I probably say enough.

Thank you for reading my work this season, for supporting my authentic self, and for being part of this little corner of Arsenal discussion with me.

Over the summer, I will be diving into the new recruits as they arrive, looking at who they are, what they bring, and how they might fit into this Slegers side. So if you are already here, stay along for the ride. If you are new, join it now.

Next year, we do it all again.

More football. More discussion. More trying to understand Arsenal while they become something new in front of us.

I would not really want it any other way.

The piece was called ‘Built on Margins’, which feels almost too fitting now, just not for the reasons Arsenal would have wanted.

The pendulum swings, it lands, and this time it does not fall in Arsenal’s favour. Lisbon songs fade into the background, Barcelona and Lyon board the flight to Oslo, and Arsenal stay home. No trophy lift, no title parade, no final chapter waiting to be written. Back in England, the ribbons are flying, but they are flying blue, and Arsenal are left feeling much the same.

While the tide may yet have turned for Arsenal men, with Budapest ahead and the possibility of pipping a nervy Manchester City to the league, the women’s season has moved in the opposite direction entirely.

I’ve always considered myself an optimist, but probably more accurately, an optimist with enough realism to know better. I follow this club across countries and through too many expensive train delays and late-night journeys home to pretend it all rests on whether they win or lose. I get home at 3am and do it all again because it has never really been just about results. Of course I care when they lose. I never want them to lose. But I would still be there regardless, because supporting a football club has always asked for something far less logical than that.

This is not a eulogy for a season, and it is not a poem either. It is more a reflection, maybe the beginning of an end-of-season one, shaped by a campaign that still has three games left but already feels like it has shown us most of what it is. Whether Arsenal win those games or not will not completely change how this season is viewed. The bigger themes are already there. But as Arsenal fall to Lyon, and then watch a draw against Brighton end even the smallest remaining hope of a title race, those themes feel harder to ignore.

When Lyon Found the Answers

Arsenal left the Emirates with a lead against Lyon, but probably not enough control of the tie to ever truly feel comfortable. There were moments in the first leg where the game felt open to being taken properly away from Lyon, moments where a more ruthless Arsenal might have turned a narrow advantage into something heavier, something Lyon would have had to chase rather than patiently dismantle at home.

Over the two legs, Lyon just looked like the more complete team. Not overwhelmingly so, and not in a way that made Arsenal look out of place at this level, but enough. Enough in transition, enough in composure, enough in their understanding of how knockout football changes when momentum swings. Arsenal competed, but Lyon understood the tie better.

Football history loves repetition. Arsenal had beaten Lyon before. Arsenal had reached this stage before. But elite football rarely repeats itself so neatly. When you play the same opponents often enough, they learn you. They recognise your press, your rotations, and the challenge is no longer reproducing the same performance, but evolving it. Arsenal did not quite do that.

Emily Fox was one of the only Arsenal players who looked comfortable in the chaos of the tie, defensively aggressive without losing composure, still willing to step forward and compete when the game was beginning to drift away from Arsenal. Smilla Holmberg changed the feel of it too when she came on. Arsenal suddenly had somebody willing to actually take the game to Lyon, to carry the ball forward and make things happen rather than letting the tie drift away from them. Which is why moving her deeper after Chloe Kelly’s introduction felt odd. Arsenal lost a lot of their unpredictability after that, and honestly, it felt like the tie went with it.

Opportunities Not Taken

If Lyon exposed Arsenal’s ceiling, Brighton exposed the floor beneath it.

The title was probably gone long before the final whistle on the south coast, dropped in fragments across the season rather than entirely in one afternoon. But the Brighton draw removed even the illusion of pressure being applied to Manchester City. Arsenal rotated heavily despite there being little tangible left to preserve, and once again the same question surfaced: why does this side so often feel dramatically weaker outside of its strongest eleven?

Victoria Pelova spoke openly to the media not too long ago about the insecurity and frustration that has followed her return from injury and her struggles to get back into the team.

Read Pelova Article

ACL recoveries are rarely straightforward, especially for players whose game depends so heavily on rhythm, sharpness and confidence in tight spaces. There is sympathy in that, of course there is. Returning from an injury like that is as much mental as it is physical. But football seasons do not pause while players try to rediscover themselves. Arsenal have spent large stretches of this campaign waiting for certain players to find their level again while the season continued moving around them. Pelova has had opportunities under Renée Slegers, multiple opportunities, but she still looks like somebody searching for confidence within games rather than properly shaping them.

And she is not the only one. Laia Codina feels like another player Arsenal have spent much of the season waiting on, waiting for consistency, waiting for authority, waiting for performances that properly settle the uncertainty around her role in this team. Too often, those moments just have not really arrived.

That is one of the harder realities of this season. Slegers has trusted this squad, probably more than most managers would have. She has continued giving players chances to play themselves back into form, back into rhythm, back into importance.

That has become one of the defining frustrations of this campaign.

Slegers has kept leaving the door open for players to step into this team and make themselves undeniable, but too often, nobody really has.

Arsenal Still Do Not Have Enough

So what is the story of this Arsenal season under Renée Slegers? How do these last two games fit into the wider picture of it all? And maybe more importantly now, what are the issues Arsenal can no longer keep explaining away?

It probably starts with set pieces. And that might sound like a strange place to begin, but if it does, I’d genuinely recommend reading Tim Stillman’s recent piece, because more of Arsenal’s season has been shaped by set pieces than people probably realise.

Tim wrote about Arsenal’s lack of height potentially stopping them from properly reaching the top, and referenced Tom Garry’s piece for The Guardian, which highlighted how Arsenal have repeatedly conceded set-piece goals that changed the direction of their season. Lyon, Manchester City, Brighton, Aston Villa, Corinthians. Different games, same issue. Arsenal have found clever ways to work around it offensively, but defensively, it still feels unresolved. And with set-piece coach Chris Bradley set to leave the club this summer, maybe now is finally the time Arsenal stop trying to manage around the problem and properly address it.

Read Tim's Piece

This summer feels bigger than simply replacing a set-piece coach or tweaking small tactical details. Once you start pulling at one issue within this Arsenal side, a lot of the others begin revealing themselves too.

Ultimately, it all leads back to squad construction and the bigger questions Arsenal are going to have to answer over the next few months. Which players still fit where this team is trying to go? Which players can this next version of Arsenal actually be built around? And which players increasingly feel tied to a cycle that may already be reaching its end?

Naturally that discussion brings you towards the uncertainty surrounding player futures too. There are too many contracts, too many rumours, too many questions hanging over this squad right now for it not to sit somewhere in the background of everything. Whether consciously or not, it is hard not to wonder if some of that uncertainty has started creeping into performances as well.

If Arsenal really are heading towards another rebuild, then difficult conversations have to come with it. But Katie McCabe being placed into the category of players Arsenal could move on from is one I still struggle to understand. And I say that understanding where some of the conversation comes from too, because there is probably a level of respect within it. McCabe is not the type of player who would quietly accept sitting on the bench every week. But why should that already be decided? Football changes quickly, squads evolve, injuries happen, systems adapt. Arsenal should be building with players like Katie McCabe still in mind, not already imagining a future without them.

At the same time, there have been too many moments this season where Arsenal’s in-game management has only added to that feeling of drift. Against Brighton, players performing well came off while others enduring difficult afternoons stayed on. Taylor Hinds was removed despite offering progression, while Laia Codina remained on the pitch despite struggling again. Similar frustrations surfaced against Lyon too. At times, Arsenal have looked like a team disrupting their own momentum through substitutions rather than strengthening it.

That feels like the real difference now. There are players who still look connected to where Arsenal are trying to go, and there are players who increasingly look like they are simply existing within the season as it passes them by. Arsenal have to work out which is which very quickly this summer.

Change Feels Inevitable Now

Every successful side eventually reaches the point where loyalty, familiarity and past contributions can no longer outweigh what the team currently needs. Arsenal have key players worth building around. They have one of the brightest coaches in Europe in Renée Slegers. They have elite individuals capable of competing at the very highest level. But they also have a squad that increasingly feels caught between cycles.

There are still three games left. Arsenal may yet secure second place. The season will continue because football always does. But emotionally, the shape of this campaign already feels decided.

No trophies. Too many moments where Arsenal fell short of control, short of adaptation, short of the ruthlessness required at the very top.

The important thing now is whether the club recognises that repeatedly falling short is not automatically proof that success is just around the corner. Sometimes it is proof that change is required first.

The Biggest Test Yet

As I was finishing packing for my flight to Lyon, it hit me that I hadn’t actually sat down to write about Arsenal in a while.

In truth, the international break filled most of that gap, and the stretch between Arsenal losing to Brighton on 5 April and facing Lyon on 26 April felt longer than it probably was. A lot has happened in that space, but the central theme hasn’t really changed.

For Renee Slegers’ side, the performances have kept coming, but so have the challenges that sit alongside them. Every good run eventually asks a bigger question, and Arsenal’s biggest one arrives tomorrow.

An away second leg against Lyon, in familiar circumstances, with a place in the Champions League final on the line. It is the kind of fixture that defines seasons, and one Arsenal know all too well.

This time, they travel with the advantage.

The 2-1 win at the Emirates gives them something to protect, something to build from, but it changes very little about the reality of what waits in France. Going away to Lyon is never about managing a lead comfortably. It is about surviving pressure, handling moments, and producing enough quality of your own to make the advantage matter.

Arsenal are ninety minutes away from a second consecutive Champions League final, but they are also ninety minutes away from watching that opportunity disappear.

The first leg gave them belief, and deservedly so, but belief alone does not get you through a night like this.

Lyon away demands something closer to perfection, or at the very least, the ability to endure when perfection is no longer possible.

Turning the Tie

The first leg at the Emirates felt like one Arsenal had to work their way into rather than take control of from the start. Lyon were sharper early, quicker in transition, and punished the first real lapse when Jule Brand cut inside and finished past Daphne van Domselaar to give them the lead.

What stood out compared to last season was how different Lyon looked in the way they tried to hurt Arsenal. Previously, so much of that threat came through their wide players, using pace out wide and isolating full-backs, but this time it felt far more focused on breaking through midfield. Rather than always looking for the wings first, Lyon were quicker to play through central areas, moving the ball forward early and trying to exploit the space before Arsenal could reset.

In the first half especially, Arsenal looked uncomfortable there. The game felt messy, physical, and stuck in spaces that suited Lyon far more than Arsenal. But after the break, that changed.

Kim Little and Mariona Caldentey started to get hold of things, Arsenal’s press became more aggressive, and the game shifted further into Lyon’s half. The equaliser came from that pressure, Mariona’s ball into the box causing enough confusion between Christiane Endler and Ingrid Engen for it to end up in the net, and from there Arsenal looked like the side more likely to win it.

Eventually they did, with Olivia Smith quickest to react to another loose moment at the back to slide home the winner. On paper, both goals came from Lyon mistakes, but Arsenal created those moments by staying in the game and making Lyon uncomfortable in a way they had not managed for most of the first half.

Ruthless and Routine

The Leicester game was one of those nights where the result felt inevitable long before the final whistle. Arsenal did not start at full speed, but once Frida Maanum headed in the opener on her 100th WSL appearance, the game opened up quickly and Leicester never really recovered.

Smilla Holmberg, playing higher up on the right, was excellent and took full advantage of the space Leicester kept leaving, scoring twice and constantly stretching the game. Stina Blackstenius did what she so often does in those moments, making the right runs, attacking the right spaces, and turning pressure into goals with two of her own before half-time. By the break, it already felt done.

The second half became less about whether Arsenal would win and more about how far they could push it, with Mariona Caldentey adding another from distance and Leah Williamson heading in from a corner to complete it.

On paper, 7-0 against a struggling Leicester side can be easy to dismiss, but the value was in how ruthless Arsenal were. Rotation did not disrupt the structure, the intensity never really dropped, and with Lyon waiting again just days later, it felt like exactly the kind of performance they needed; controlled, clinical, and with enough confidence carried forward into something much bigger.

What Tomorrow Demands

Taken together, these two games say quite a lot about where Arsenal are right now heading into Lyon away. The Leicester win was what it looks like when everything is in place from the start: control in possession, structure holding even with rotation, and a game that never really gets the chance to become messy. The first leg against Lyon was the reminder of the opposite side of it, where that control slips, midfield transitions open up, and suddenly you are reacting more than you are dictating.

Tomorrow feels like it will sit somewhere in between those two versions of Arsenal.

They will not get the freedom they had against Leicester, and they cannot afford the loose spells they had in the first half in the Emirates tie. The key is the middle of the pitch, staying compact when Lyon try to play through, and being far cleaner when possession turns over.

With a one-goal lead, there will be moments where they have to absorb pressure, but the challenge is making sure those moments do not become long spells. If Arsenal can settle into the game, manage the tempo when they need to, and still carry a threat in transition, they are more than capable of seeing it through.

If Arsenal can do that, they give themselves every chance of turning a difficult night into something they’ll remember for all the right reasons.

For the most part, these pieces have written themselves, built on a run of performances where the positives have led the conversation and the negatives have only needed to be examined through a slightly sharper lens rather than becoming the focus entirely. The issues have been there, they always are across a season, but they’ve been outweighed by results, by control, and by a sense that Arsenal were finding ways to navigate different types of games.

That balance is easy to maintain when you’re winning.

It becomes a lot harder when you’re not.

And on Easter Sunday at Meadow Park, that run came to a stop, in a performance that never quite settled and a result that, while not entirely unpredictable, still felt like it arrived at the wrong time.

The One That Turns

I had this game down as a potential banana skin, but not in a way that made it feel inevitable.

If anything, there have been other moments this season that carried more obvious warning signs. A North London Derby placed in the middle of a Champions League quarter-final, where attention is naturally split, or an away trip to London City Lionesses straight after the international break, where rhythm can easily be disrupted. Both had the feel of games that could have derailed momentum, and neither did.

Which is why this one stands out.

Because it didn’t carry the same level of concern going in, and yet it unfolded in exactly the way those games sometimes threaten to. The one time it isn’t clearly framed as a potential slip, it becomes just that, and in doing so, shifts the tone of the week far more than expected.

Brighton’s Approach

Before anything else, Brighton deserve credit, not just for the result but for the way they approached the game and executed their plan from the opening minutes.

They pressed with intent, disrupted Arsenal’s build-up early, and never really allowed the game to fall into a rhythm that suited the home side. Their structure out of possession forced mistakes, while their decision-making in key moments ensured that those moments turned into something tangible, rather than drifting away as half chances.

Brighton didn’t just bring energy, they looked like a side that knew exactly how they wanted the game to go, and more often than not, it did.

Rotation and Rhythm

From an Arsenal perspective, the performance never really found its footing, and that started early.

Rotation is always going to be part of the conversation, particularly at this stage of the season, where managing minutes and keeping players fresh across competitions becomes essential. But there’s a balance to it, and this felt like it tipped slightly too far.

Making multiple changes at once, especially just before an international break, inevitably alters the rhythm of the side, and while the quality on paper remains high, the understanding within the team can take time to settle.

Without players like Alessia Russo and Olivia Smith setting the tone from the start, the game looked different, not just in terms of individual quality, but in the connections between phases of play. The ball didn’t move with the same purpose, the pressing wasn’t as coordinated, and the overall structure felt less secure.

Laia Codina, Smilla Holmberg and Taylor Hinds came into the back line, Frida Maanum operated in the number ten role, and Stina Blackstenius led the line alongside Beth Mead and Chloe Kelly, a front line that, on another day, is more than capable of producing moments.

But this wasn’t that day.

Arsenal struggled to establish control early, losing possession in areas that invited pressure and forcing themselves into defensive situations far more quickly than they would have wanted. From there, the game became reactive rather than proactive, with Brighton dictating both tempo and territory.

By the time Arsenal were chasing at 2-0 down, the game already felt stretched beyond their reach, not because opportunities were entirely absent, but because there was little to suggest they would be taken.

It was the kind of game where, even with more time, the outcome doesn’t necessarily change.

Where It Leaves Them

This is where the conversation naturally widens.

Another cup exit under Renee Slegers will draw attention, and while each situation carries its own context, the pattern is difficult to ignore. There has been clear and undeniable progress in the way Arsenal’s first team functions, in the structure, the adaptability, and the ability to control games when the preferred XI is available.

But that level hasn’t consistently extended across the squad.

There are positives, particularly in defence, where the development of Anneke Borbe into genuine competition for Daphne Van Domselaar, alongside the additions of Taylor Hinds and Smilla Holmberg, has created both depth and flexibility. Those are signs of a squad moving in the right direction.

Elsewhere, it feels less settled.

Changes in midfield can alter the balance more noticeably, and the forward line, without its usual focal points, can lose some of the cohesion that has defined Arsenal at their best this season. When those changes happen in isolation, they can be managed, but when they come all at once, the overall level drops rather than holding steady.

That has to be the next step for Arsenal.

Not just building a strong starting side, but ensuring the structure holds regardless of who is on the pitch.

Refocus

The timing of this result matters, but so does what follows.

There’s still a league position to secure, one that keeps Arsenal in the Champions League conversation for next season, and there’s a semi-final against Lyon that demands a level far closer to Arsenal’s best than what was shown here.

That’s where the focus shifts now.

Not ignoring what happened at Meadow Park, because there are clear lessons within it, but not allowing it to define the final stretch of the season either. At this stage, the response becomes more important than the setback itself.

What Comes Next

Arsenal should have been better here, that much is clear.

But the season doesn’t pause for reflection, and it doesn’t allow for prolonged frustration, particularly not with what still sits ahead. The margins from this point only get tighter, the level only rises, and the demands become less forgiving with each game that passes.

Arsenal have already done the hard part in many ways, putting themselves in a position where something significant is still within reach.

This result on its own doesn’t define much, but what comes after it probably will. Now it’s on them to respond.

Two games, two contexts, two very different demands placed on this Arsenal side. A North London Derby that delivered exactly what it always threatens to, and a Champions League night that carried the weight of a season within it.

But there’s no avoiding where the attention lands.

Because while Arsenal’s 5-2 victory over Tottenham Hotspur was emphatic, entertaining, and at times ruthless, what followed at Stamford Bridge ultimately defines the week.

Still, both matter.

Both add another layer to what this Arsenal side is becoming under Renee Slegers.

Controlled Chaos in the Derby

The North London Derby rarely follows structure, but Arsenal found a way to impose one anyway.

From the outset, the team selection hinted at both rotation and trust within the squad. Daphne Van Domselaar was preferred in goal over Anneke Borbe, a decision that no longer feels like a hierarchy but rather a reflection of two goalkeepers pushing each other to a level where either can start without concern. Steph Catley returned to centre-back alongside Lotte Wubben-Moy, with Leah Williamson unavailable, while Smilla Holmberg and Katie McCabe occupied the full-back roles.

In midfield, Kim Little and Mariona Caldentey provided the now familiar base, with Frida Maanum operating ahead of them. The front line of Chloe Kelly, Olivia Smith and Alessia Russo carried both fluidity and directness.

Arsenal didn’t just dominate, they created through multiple avenues. The opening phases saw Tottenham Hotspur repeatedly pressed into uncomfortable build-up situations, with Arsenal capitalising on moments where the visitors attempted to play out from the back. That pressure translated into chances, and eventually goals.

Set pieces were one route. Sustained pressure was another. But perhaps most consistently, it was the space in behind that Arsenal identified and attacked. Balls played early, runs timed well, and a willingness to exploit Tottenham Hotspur’s defensive line created a constant threat.

Alessia Russo, at the centre of it all, delivered a performance that reflected both individual quality and structural benefit. A hat-trick built on movement, anticipation and clinical finishing, each goal arriving through slightly different circumstances but all rooted in Arsenal’s ability to destabilise the opposition.

Caitlin Foord, introduced from the bench following her return from the Asian Cup, added a fourth with a finish that felt inevitable given her history in this fixture. There are players who rise to certain games, and Caitlin Foord continues to be one of them against Tottenham Hotspur.

Stina Blackstenius then completed the scoring, her run in behind and composed finish encapsulating the spaces Arsenal had been exploiting all afternoon.

There were, nonetheless, imperfections.

Conceding from a set piece, where Arsenal failed to clear effectively, and a well-taken finish from Bethany England reminded that even in control, there are moments that require sharper management. There were also opportunities left on the pitch, situations in and around the box where an earlier shot may have extended the margin further.

But within the context of a derby, the control Arsenal established across most phases was significant.

And yet, even then, it felt like part of something larger.

A Night Defined by Resilience

There was always going to be noise around this game.

A 3-1 lead from the first leg gave Arsenal control, but not comfort. Chelsea framed it as a comeback opportunity, Stamford Bridge set the stage, and the opening minutes unfolded exactly as expected.

The pressure from Chelsea was sustained, aggressive, and immediate.

They pushed early, attempting to disrupt Arsenal before they could settle, and within that spell, the game demanded something different. Not control in possession, but resilience without it.

Daphne Van Domselaar delivered exactly that.

In a performance that will define her season, and perhaps more, Daphne Van Domselaar repeatedly denied Chelsea at key moments. Not just in volume, but in timing. Saves that prevented momentum from fully swinging, interventions that allowed Arsenal to stay within the tie even as Chelsea dictated large periods.

There had been quiet questions around her selection ahead of Anneke Borbe. Those conversations don’t exist after this.

Defensively, Arsenal were forced into adaptation. Emily Fox returned to the back line, while Taylor Hinds replaced Steph Catley early due to injury and produced a performance of real composure against a difficult opponent. Stina Blackstenius was introduced from the start ahead of Frida Maanum, a decision that aligned with both recent form and the demands of the game.

Because this was never going to mirror the first leg.

Arsenal spoke pre-match about playing the “Arsenal way”, but with the understanding that this does not mean one fixed approach. This was about adapting to context, recognising when control looks different, and staying within the game across ninety minutes.

They did exactly that.

There were moments that could have shifted everything. A late Sjoeke Nusken goal that reignited belief for Chelsea. A disallowed Arsenal goal, where Smilla Holmberg’s delivery found Stina Blackstenius, only for VAR to intervene. Beth Mead striking the post from the bench, inches away from ending the contest.

And then, the closing stages, where game management took over completely.

The ball was worked into the corner, fouls were drawn, and time was slowed wherever possible, every decision made with full awareness of the aggregate scoreline rather than the moment in isolation.

Arsenal lost the game on the night, but won the tie.

And that distinction matters.

From the Stands

To the away support, as I joined you pre-match and then in row 9 of the lower Shed End, that was something else.

From 4pm in the pub through to full-time, there was a constant sense of tension, but also belief. Even when Chelsea pushed and the game felt like it could shift, the noise didn’t drop. And at the final whistle, in a Stamford Bridge that had quickly emptied, it felt like everyone who remained understood just how significant that night was.

The Fine Margins and the Bigger Picture

It would be impossible to reflect on the match without acknowledging the officiating.

The late incident involving Katie McCabe, a pull on Alyssa Thompson’s hair, should have resulted in a red card following VAR review. Katie McCabe acknowledged as much post-match, apologising despite describing the act as accidental. Instead, it was Sonia Bompastor who saw red on the touchline, her frustration reflecting what many inside the stadium felt.

It’s disappointing, not because it defines the result, but because it shifts the discourse away from what was, in reality, a high-level, closely contested European tie.

Because both things can be true.

Arsenal did enough, Chelsea didn’t take their chances, and across two legs, that was enough to decide progression.

What Comes Next

Arsenal now face Lyon in the Champions League semi-finals, a fixture that carries both history and familiarity.

Last season’s encounter remains one of the defining moments of Arsenal’s European campaign. A 2-1 defeat at home overturned by a 4-1 victory at the Groupama Stadium, a performance that ultimately propelled them towards lifting the trophy against Barcelona. Earlier this season, Arsenal lost 2-1 to Lyon in October, but showed enough within that match to suggest the margins are not as wide as results may indicate.

Before that, attention briefly shifts back domestically, with an FA Cup quarter-final against Brighton offering another route to silverware, and another opportunity to build momentum before the international break.

Still Building

At this point in the season, everything tends to get framed as decisive, where each game is treated like it defines what comes next.

But this week didn’t really feel like that.

If anything, it felt like a continuation.

Arsenal are still figuring things out within games and across competitions, moving between control and resistance depending on what’s needed, rather than trying to force one version of themselves onto every situation.

That shift is probably more important than any single result, because it shapes how they approach what’s ahead.

There’s an FA Cup still there, a Champions League semi-final against one of Europe’s strongest sides, and a league position that, realistically, needs to hold.

Renee Slegers has them in a position that feels closer to complete than anything else, with enough in place to keep pushing forward, and that’s what stands out right now.

Since I last sat down to write, Arsenal have dismantled West Ham 5-0 at the Emirates and taken a 3-1 lead over Chelsea in the Champions League quarter-final. Two results that reflect control, but more importantly, show a side that are beginning to understand exactly how to impose themselves on different types of opposition.

That’s the real shift.

Because these weren’t identical performances. West Ham allowed Arsenal to dominate territory and dictate tempo from the start, whereas Chelsea demanded something far more reactive, more resilient, and at times, more pragmatic.

Arsenal managed both.

A Game That Followed the Script

Going into West Ham, the expectation was not just to win, but to control the game early and avoid it becoming stretched.

That control came almost immediately.

Inside four minutes, Chloe Kelly set the tone, cutting inside and delivering what initially looked like a dangerous cross but ultimately found its way into the net, later confirmed as her goal. It was one of those moments that reflected both intent and confidence, and from there, the game was played almost entirely on Arsenal’s terms.

The wide rotations between Kelly and Olivia Smith were a constant problem. Both players swapped flanks regularly, dragging West Ham’s defensive line across and creating space centrally. That movement allowed Arsenal to progress through the lines rather than forcing play into predictable areas.

The second goal highlighted a different layer to Arsenal’s attacking structure. Smilla Holmberg, advancing well from full-back, showed the awareness to scan the box before delivering a pinpoint cross for Alessia Russo, who attacked it with a diving header just after half-time. It was a well-rehearsed pattern, executed with precision.

Even the chances that didn’t result in goals reinforced the dominance. Smith’s volley crashing against the crossbar after capitalising on West Ham trying to play out, and another effort from Stina Blackstenius that clipped the bar, both came from sustained pressure rather than isolated moments.

By the time Kelly added her second from the edge of the box, finding the bottom corner after yet another phase of Arsenal possession, the game had fully settled into one direction. Her third, sliding past the goalkeeper after Arsenal once again forced an error high up the pitch, summed up the afternoon.

Beth Mead’s late finish, a composed strike into the bottom corner, felt less like a decisive moment and more like a continuation of everything that had come before.

Arsenal didn’t just win, they dictated every phase of the game.

Control, Depth and Game Management

Beyond the goals, the way Arsenal managed the game speaks to a broader development.

Despite naming just seven substitutes, including two goalkeepers, every outfield option was used, and each one contributed without disrupting the rhythm. That consistency in performance, regardless of personnel, suggests a structure that is now well embedded rather than dependent on individuals.

Even moments like Sophie Harwood’s debut, coming on and being trusted to play up front despite being a defender, reflect both the state of the game and the confidence within the squad.

There’s a growing sense now that Arsenal are not just rotating players, they are rotating within a system that remains consistent.

A Different Type of Test

Chelsea, as expected, was a completely different challenge.

The opening stages highlighted areas Arsenal still need to manage, particularly defensively in wide spaces. Both Alyssa Thompson and Lauren James hit the post early on, exposing how quickly Chelsea can transition and isolate defenders.

But what followed was perhaps more important than anything seen against West Ham.

Arsenal adjusted.

The opening goal came from a set piece, but again, it reflected control. Mariona Caldentey won the free kick, Katie McCabe delivered with quality, and Stina Blackstenius guided her header beyond Hannah Hampton. It was structured and efficient.

The second goal showed another evolution. Beth Mead found Chloe Kelly in space, and Kelly backed herself from distance, striking an effort that bounced awkwardly past Hampton. It’s the type of decision that reflects confidence, but also a willingness to vary attacking options rather than relying on high-percentage chances alone.

Chelsea’s response, through Lauren James producing a moment of individual quality to curl an effort over Anneke Borbe, was always likely.

What mattered was Arsenal’s reaction.

Rather than retreating, they continued to play, and the third goal reflected that intent. Stina Blackstenius effortlessly found Alessia Russo in just enough space to finish confidently, continuing her outstanding Champions League campaign. It was a goal built on movement, awareness, and timing.

And perhaps most importantly, it restored control.

Fluidity in Attack, Flexibility in Structure

Across both games, the development of Arsenal’s attacking structure stands out.

There is far less positional rigidity. Players are rotating naturally, dropping into different spaces, and linking play in ways that make defensive marking far more difficult. The relationship between Alessia Russo and Stina Blackstenius, in particular, is evolving into something far more complementary than competitive.

Against Chelsea, Blackstenius operated deeper at times, facilitating play and allowing Russo to arrive into goalscoring areas, a role reversal that worked effectively.

In wide areas, the rotation between Chloe Kelly and Olivia Smith continues to stretch defences, while the midfield partnership of Kim Little and Mariona Caldentey provides the balance needed to sustain attacks and regain control when required. Little’s defensive work, especially her recovery runs, was key in limiting Chelsea’s transitions.

Defensively, there is also a growing adaptability. Katie McCabe stepping into a centre-back role in the second half and performing as comfortably as she did is a clear example of that flexibility.

This is no longer a side reliant on one structure or one solution.

Context Matters More Than Ever

Chelsea dropping points to London City Lionesses shifts the league picture slightly. Arsenal remain fourth, but with games in hand and now just two points behind, the table looks very different.

At the same time, players are returning. Steph Catley is back from the Asian Cup, Caitlin Foord adds another dimension to the attack, and squad depth is beginning to look like a strength rather than a concern.

Momentum, at this stage of the season, becomes more than just a narrative, it becomes a factor in performance.

And right now, Arsenal have it.

The Immediate Test

Before Stamford Bridge, attention turns to the North London Derby.

Tottenham have shown enough this season to suggest this will not be straightforward. They’ve been effective in transition at times, and against a side that commits numbers forward as Arsenal do, that will be an area to watch.

Game management becomes crucial.

If Arsenal can replicate the territorial control shown against West Ham, while maintaining the defensive discipline they grew into against Chelsea, they should be able to dictate large parts of the game.

But derbies rarely follow expectation, and that, in itself, is the challenge.

Where Margins Become Defining

This is now the stage of the season where margins are small.

The job against Chelsea is not done. A two-goal advantage is significant, but it shifts the dynamic of the second leg rather than deciding it. Chelsea will have to push, which creates opportunity, but also risk.

In the league, every point matters.

And with fixtures continuing to come at pace, Arsenal don’t have the luxury of slowing down.

But if this past week has shown anything, it’s that Arsenal are no longer just reacting to the demands of this period.

They are beginning to control it.

The Return

Arsenal returned to WSL action this weekend following the international break, making the short trip to face London City Lionesses. A 2-0 win, three points on the board, and in many ways, a job done.

But as is often the case with games like this, the scoreline only tells part of the story.

There’s always that slight uncertainty after a break like this; rhythm disrupted, players returning at different stages of sharpness and for Arsenal, that showed, particularly in the first half. The tempo wasn’t quite there, passes lacked conviction, and control in midfield felt just out of reach at times. It’s not unusual, and perhaps more a reflection of timing than anything deeper, but it did make for a slower start than we’ve come to expect.

The second half, though, was much more like it.

Finding Their Rhythm

Once Arsenal settled, the quality began to show. The front line, in particular, stood out through Alessia Russo, Olivia Smith and Stina Blackstenius all putting in strong performances, each offering something slightly different but complementing each other well.

What continues to be encouraging is the development of link-up partnerships. Russo and Blackstenius showed real promise together, while Chloe Kelly and Olivia Smith looked equally dangerous, especially when driving at defenders and creating space in wide areas.

It’s that fluidity that Arsenal have been building towards; the ability to rotate, adapt, and find different solutions depending on the opponent.

And both goals reflected that.

Low driven crosses with runners attacking the box are becoming a clear pattern of Renee Slegers’ Arsenal. The team look far more comfortable creating in these moments than relying on aerial duels, and it makes sense when you consider the profiles they have available. It’s something we’ve seen before too, thinking back to that Real Madrid game at the Emirates last season, where similar movements turned the game around.

This time, it was Olivia Smith and Stina Blackstenius making those runs, continuing a trend that feels increasingly intentional rather than incidental.

Selection and Squad Depth

One of the more interesting talking points came before kick-off, with Anneke Borbe starting ahead of Daphne van Domselaar.

Rather than a concern, it feels like a positive problem for Arsenal - two goalkeepers, both more than capable of being number one, both confident in their roles. With the schedule only getting busier, that depth becomes even more valuable.

The same can be said for the options off the bench.

Victoria Pelova, Laia Codina and Stina Blackstenius all made an impact when introduced, helping to raise the level in the second half. It’s something Arsenal perhaps lacked earlier in the season, that ability to change the game through substitutions, but it’s becoming a real strength at exactly the right time.

Areas to Improve

That said, the game wasn’t without its issues.

Frida Maanum, in particular, struggled to impose herself on the game, giving the ball away on a few occasions. More broadly, the number ten role still feels slightly unresolved. Mariona Caldentey offers real quality there, but equally, Arsenal need her deeper alongside Kim Little, where that partnership has been consistently strong.

It leaves a bit of a gap - not a glaring one, but enough to notice.

Set pieces, too, remain an area of frustration. Time and again, deliveries from both Katie McCabe and Chloe Kelly failed to beat the first player, and ultimately, very little came from those situations. In games where margins are tight, those moments matter.

The Opposition Threat

Credit should also go to London City Lionesses, who had their moments.

They showed clear intent, particularly in trying to exploit the space left by Arsenal’s high fullbacks, something that worked on multiple occasions. Katie McCabe, especially, pushed high throughout, and LCL looked to take advantage of that space in transition.

The final ball, though, often let them down.

Freya Godfrey, facing her former club, looked lively and probably should have found the net, but like much of LCL’s play, the move broke down in the final third.

On another day, those chances might tell a different story.

Matchday Reflections

On a personal note, a first visit to the stadium and another one ticked off my list.

You can see what London City Lionesses are building. There’s clear progress, real intent behind it, and it does feel like a project moving in the right direction. I have a lot of time for it.

The only real drawback was the lack of facilities. With the women’s toilets out of order, it made for a difficult matchday experience, relying on a disabled toilet and a couple of unisex options. It’s something that feels easily avoidable, especially when you compare it to grounds like Leigh Sports Village, where adjustments have been made in the past to better accommodate supporters.

That aside, the away following from Arsenal was excellent. A strong turnout and plenty of noise throughout.

Context Matters

Perhaps the most important thing here is that Arsenal got the job done.

We’ve seen other teams struggle after the international break (Manchester City dropping points in a 0-0 draw with Aston Villa), so to come away with a win, even without hitting top form for the full 90 minutes, is significant.

Arsenal remain fourth, still with two games in hand, and very much in control of their own position.

And they’re doing it without their Asian Cup players in Caitlin Foord, Steph Catley and Kyra Cooney Cross.

What Comes Next

Attention now turns to West Ham at the Emirates next weekend.

On paper, Arsenal go in as favourites. West Ham have a midweek fixture to navigate and are missing key players themselves, but this is the stage of the season where those factors don’t always guarantee anything.

Points matter for everyone, not just those at the top.

For Arsenal, it’s about maintaining momentum, continuing to build rhythm, and managing the squad carefully with fixtures coming thick and fast. Because just around the corner, Chelsea awaits.

With that in mind, these games become about more than just results, they’re about preparation too.

For now, though, it’s a solid return, three points secured, and another step forward.

Looking Ahead

I do have the tendency when I write these pieces to look backwards, rightly so, reflecting on what we’ve seen from Arsenal - what’s worked and what hasn’t. Yet as we approach the final few months of the season, it made more sense during this international break to look ahead and consider what we can expect from Arsenal going into this final stretch.

The Current Situation

It’s less than ten days until Arsenal return to action away at London City Lionesses in the WSL. My first time at this stadium, so another one to tick off my list, alongside an international break trip to the City Ground in Nottingham to watch the Lionesses this weekend. Arsenal sit on 29 points, fourth in the table with two games in hand, 13 points behind leaders Manchester City. Arsenal’s remaining opponents in the WSL include West Ham, Spurs, Aston Villa, Leicester, Everton, Brighton and Liverpool, with none of those teams above Arsenal still to play.

Arsenal also have the small matter of a two-legged Champions League quarter-final against Chelsea. The first leg is at home on the 24th March, and the second leg is away on the 1st April. An FA Cup quarter-final against Brighton is also confirmed just four days later on the 5th April.

The Small Matter of Absentees

As we go back into the season, we are without our three Australian players - Caitlin Foord, Steph Catley and Kyra Cooney Cross, who are away representing their nation in the Asian Cup. Caitlin Foord has made 14 appearances this season in the WSL, scoring just one goal, and has two assists across 8 appearances in the Champions League. If we compare that to other forwards in a similar position, Beth Mead has 1 goal and 5 assists in the WSL, and Chloe Kelly, even despite injury, has 2 goals and 1 assist. Olivia Smith has 4 goals and 1 assist. Beth Mead is out injured and is absent from the Lionesses squad, with Chloe Kelly included but just back from injury. Arsenal are not overcompensated in this area, but their adaptability is evident. Arsenal will find a way, depending on the opponent, to work with the personnel they do have, as seen in Olivia Smith playing as a number nine with Stina Blackstenius out to catch out the opponent. It worked so well that it delivered Arsenal three crucial points against front-runners Manchester City.

Steph Catley has been integral to this Arsenal side for a while now; what seemed like a make-shift fill-in at centre-back is now her strongest and preferred position. She’s started 14 of 14 WSL fixtures and has two assists. Sarina Wiegman’s decision to start Lotte Wubben-Moy and Leah Williamson together during the international break is hugely beneficial to Arsenal (despite the risk of injury, more for partnership strength), as we expect to see them start with Catley away. Wubben-Moy has really come into her own as the season has progressed, and with Williamson now returning to fitness, the timing works in Arsenal’s favour.

Kyra Cooney Cross has started just three matches and made six appearances overall, without registering a goal or an assist. Mariona Caldentey, meanwhile, has started 14 games, contributing two goals and three assists. Kim Little has featured in 12 matches, starting 11 of them, and has one assist to her name. Frida Maanum has played in 11 games, starting five, scoring three goals and adding one assist.

The midfield partnership of Kim Little and Mariona Caldentey has been consistently solid, typically operating behind a number 10 in Frida Maanum or Alessia Russo. Unfortunately, due to personal circumstances, Kyra Cooney Cross hasn’t yet had the chance to build a sustained run of games, but there’s plenty of optimism about what she could bring when that opportunity comes.

So, what does the rest of the season hold?

Arsenal have made big strides since the start of the season - tightening up defensively, building stronger midfield partnerships, moving away from relying solely on a Plan A, and rotating the squad more. Renee Slegers is starting to put together the side she’s been working towards: one that can adapt depending on the opponent. With that progress, the targets for the rest of the season are still very much there.

Every game from here on will carry real weight. There’s that old football cliché that “every game is a cup final” at this stage of the season, something I’ve seen joked about a lot on social media recently with the men’s team, as we fans start counting down the number of wins needed to wrap up the Premier League title. But for Arsenal, there is some truth to it now. With games in hand to make count in the league and knockout ties looming in both the Champions League and FA Cup, the margin for error is small. Managing the squad, keeping key players fit, and navigating this packed stretch of fixtures will be just as important as the performances themselves.

Dream Big or Go Home

So for Arsenal, the message is simple, right? Win the FA Cup, win the Champions League and finish 2nd in the WSL to secure a Champions League spot.

Of course, it’s an idealistic scenario, but that will be in the mind of every player and staff member. For now, it’s simply a case of taking things one game at a time.

Football Doesn’t Wait, and Neither Do Arsenal

Football doesn’t really pause anymore. Games arrive, disappear, and are replaced almost immediately by the next demand on your attention. Trying to balance work, life, and following this team properly (including travel days, midweek trips, and the emotional whiplash of it all) isn’t always straightforward. There’s rarely time to sit with a performance before you’re already looking ahead.

What Arsenal are doing right now is learning how to exist within that pace. Not rushing decisions, not overcorrecting after every result, but quietly building something that holds up even when the calendar doesn’t slow down. The 4-0 away win in Leuven felt like a product of that approach. Not frantic or forced, just a team that knew exactly what it wanted from the game and went about getting it.

A System That Flexes, Not Fractures

While Stina Blackstenius’ absence might have unsettled the system Renee Slegers had planned to use against Leuven (and Manchester City previously), it instead highlighted how effectively the squad can adapt to different personnel.

Seeing Olivia Smith operate as the number nine actually felt intentional rather than experimental. Her pace immediately stretched Leuven’s back line, her movement created space for others, and her finishing gave Arsenal an early platform to control the game. On her development in that role, Slegers said in her pre-Brighton press conference:

That’s where the real shift lies. Arsenal aren’t clinging to fixed ideas anymore. They’re showing a willingness to adapt roles based on opponent, availability, and game state and crucially, doing so without losing structure. This kind of positive versatility doesn’t dilute identity; it sharpens it. Players know what the framework is, even when their specific responsibilities change within it.

Defensive Consistency, Regardless of Personnel

There was something quietly reassuring about how routine Arsenal made this clean sheet feel.

Personnel changes didn’t bring hesitation. The defensive line stayed compact, distances were managed well, and recovery work was consistent across the pitch. Arsenal look increasingly comfortable defending as a unit rather than relying on individual interventions.

Whoever steps in seems to understand the expectations, and that collective understanding is becoming one of the team’s strongest assets.

Focusing Inward, Not Looking Sideways

One of the most encouraging aspects of this performance was Arsenal’s discipline in keeping the focus internal.

There was no sense of chasing statements or getting caught up in wider narratives. The game was approached as a task, not a referendum on form or ambition. That kind of mindset hasn’t always come easily, but it feels increasingly embedded now.

Players Finding Rhythm at the Right Time

There were plenty of individual storylines woven into the performance, all pointing toward a squad finding its rhythm.

Caitlin Foord continues to grow into her role, offering balance between defensive work and attacking threat. Her form feels increasingly reliable, even when she isn’t directly on the scoresheet.

The frustration around Beth Mead’s injury lingers, particularly because she was just starting to look sharper, more decisive, more like herself. Still, this team has learned how to absorb those setbacks without unraveling, redistributing responsibility rather than waiting for one solution to return.

There was also a moment worth pausing on for Kim Little, who marked her 400th appearance for Arsenal. It passed without ceremony on the pitch, which in many ways felt fitting. She continues to be one of the key cogs in this system; setting the tempo, covering ground relentlessly, and knitting phases together with quiet authority. Even now, she remains one of the hardest-working and most technically reliable players in the squad, and her influence is often felt most in how smoothly everything functions around her.

It was also genuinely uplifting to see Kyra Cooney-Cross back and embraced so warmly. The reaction from the fans said everything about how valued she is.

In midfield, Victoria Pelova and Frida Maanum impressed in a context that suited their strengths. There have been valid questions about balance and impact in certain setups, but this was a reminder that form and effectiveness are often situational rather than absolute.

And then there’s Mariona Caldentey. Free transfer, elite level, tactically intelligent, and endlessly composed. We joked about it in the pub beforehand, but it’s becoming harder to frame as exaggeration: she may well be one of Arsenal’s best signings of all time. Her ability to raise the level around her is tangible.

Fans, Travel, and What This Club Gives Back

Over 900 Arsenal supporters making the trip to Leuven was another reminder of what supporting this club really means. European away days aren’t cheap, easy, or convenient, yet the turnout was loud, joyful, and unwavering.

Moments like that give context to everything else. The football matters, the results matter, but so does the connection. Following Arsenal often asks a lot of us supporters, time, energy, emotion, and performances like this feel like something being given back.

So, What Are Arsenal Building?

At 4-0 up heading back to Meadow Park, this tie isn’t really about jeopardy. It’s about confirmation.

What’s emerging now is a system that clearly suits Renée Slegers. Rotation that sustains performance rather than undermines it. Versatility that enhances clarity instead of blurring roles. Better quality chances being created more consistently. A defence that looks reliable regardless of personnel or setting.

If Arsenal maintain this momentum and back it with a strong transfer window in a few months’ time, then as a fan it’s genuinely hard to complain. Not because everything is finished or flawless, it isn’t, but because the foundations finally feel deliberate. And let’s be honest, a few extra bits of silverware would make the whole thing feel even better.

In a sport that rarely gives you time to pause, having a clear direction might be the most important progress of all.

As Arsenal booked their place in Sunday’s final against Brazilian side Corinthians at the Emirates, there were clear takeaways from a performance that felt calm, cohesive, and refreshingly efficient.

Midfield balance - and rotation that actually worked

This felt like one of the more balanced midfield performances Arsenal have produced under Renée Slegers.

Victoria Pelova, back in her preferred role within the double pivot, looked far more comfortable. There was a clarity to her game; receiving on the half-turn, moving the ball quickly, and contributing without forcing anything. Alongside her, the midfield as a whole functioned smoothly, with Frida Maanum getting on the scoresheet and Mariona Caldentey driving Arsenal forward with purpose.

What made this especially encouraging was the rotation. Arsenal have struggled at times when moving away from the familiar Kyra Cooney-Cross, Kim Little, Mariona Caldentey combination. Too often, alternative partnerships have brought a noticeable drop-off. Here, though, the balance held. Players understood their roles, trusted the system, and executed it regardless of personnel or opposition level. That adaptability feels like a genuine strength.

Set pieces finally showing signs of life

I’ve been critical of Arsenal’s set-piece threat this season, so it’s only fair to acknowledge when there’s progress.

The aerial presence of Lotte Wubben-Moy and Laia Codina made a clear difference. Arsenal looked far more purposeful in dead-ball situations, with clearer targets and better structure in the box. There was intent rather than hope, and that matters.

It’s still an area that needs consistency, but this was a step in the right direction, and one that could prove valuable in tighter games, particularly in knockout football.

Rotation, depth, and taking chances

Perhaps the most reassuring aspect of the performance was how well Arsenal managed rotation without losing rhythm. The system held regardless of who came on, and the connections between players remained sharp.

The fullback pairing of Taylor Hinds and Smilla Holmberg worked particularly well. Holmberg was lively throughout, confident in possession, eager to overlap, and unlucky not to get on the scoresheet herself. Hinds complemented her nicely, and the balance between the two allowed Arsenal to stretch the game effectively.

Alessia Russo’s substitute appearance was another reminder of her quality. Two goals, taken with composure, and a timely response after recent criticism of Arsenal’s finishing. After weeks of low scorelines and missed opportunities, this felt like a clear statement: when the chances come, Arsenal can still be ruthless.

What it means now

This competition has brought about a different challenge. New opponents, new styles, and unfamiliar contexts, and Arsenal have navigated it well so far. Sunday’s final against Corinthians offers a chance to do something genuinely special: become the first Champions Cup winners on home soil.

There’s no need to overcomplicate what comes next. The platform is there. The system is bedding in. The squad is showing it can rotate and still perform.

One more game stands between them and a trophy, and now it’s about finishing the job.

“When it really, really, really has to happen, they do it every single time.”

Those were the words of Renée Slegers after Arsenal’s 2–0 win over Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. Simple, almost understated, but the more I sat with them, the more they felt like a neat summary of Arsenal’s season so far, and the tension that runs through it.

Because when it really matters, when the stage is big and the pressure is undeniable, Arsenal still know how to show up.

I held off writing immediately after the midweek League Cup defeat to Manchester United for a reason. Not because it wasn’t disappointing (it was), but because it felt like a game that reflected so much of what I’d already written. Despite the FA Cup win over Aston Villa, that United match brought the deeper concerns back into focus: short-term solutions meeting longer-term questions, predictable substitutions, a lack of attacking variation, and once again, a failure to turn control into something tangible.

Against United, Arsenal started well. They controlled possession, dictated the tempo, and looked comfortable early on. But football has a habit of punishing familiar flaws. One defensive error, chances not taken, and suddenly the game tilted. United did what strong teams do when they get ahead: they leaned into their defensive reliability and managed the game just enough. Arsenal couldn’t find a way back, and with it went a chance to walk out at Ashton Gate and compete for a trophy.

That context matters, because it framed everything that followed.

A Different Kind of Test

Chelsea away offered something different. Not easier, never that, but clearer. The performance against them at the Emirates earlier in the season had given me a flicker of belief, and while Chelsea are still Chelsea, they haven’t always looked convincing in recent weeks. Arsenal still needed to take their chances, though. That was the non-negotiable.

This time, they did.

Arsenal didn’t just win at Stamford Bridge; they deserved it. They could have scored more, and for long spells Chelsea looked second-best to a side that played with intent, aggression, and clarity. It felt like Arsenal wanted it more, not in a sentimental sense, but in the decisions they made and the moments they refused to hesitate.

It was Arsenal’s first league win away to Chelsea since September 2018, a season that ultimately ended with a league title. History isn’t repeating itself here; Manchester City look set to run away with the league, but context still matters. Results like this don’t happen often, and this one applies real pressure to a Chelsea side now only one point ahead of Arsenal in the WSL, with City still to come. Sometimes, football really is that simple: win against your rivals and enjoy the front-row view.

Familiar Levels, Reached Again

What stood out most was not just the result, but the reminder of what this team can still be. The levels that carried Arsenal to Champions League success last season didn’t feel like a distant memory for once. They were visible again, tangible, and coherent.

Beth Mead, in particular, made a statement. A goal, an assist, player of the match quietly or loudly, depending on how you view it, she reminded everyone that she is far from done. Matches against Chelsea have always brought the best out of her, and this was no exception.

Emily Fox’s return was just as important. Calm, consistent, sharp - she looked like someone who had never really been away.

Up front, the combination of Stina Blackstenius and Alessia Russo worked better than I had expected. Blackstenius’ work rate stood out in this game: dropping deeper, winning the ball back, offering physicality and intent. At times, it was Russo pushing higher with Blackstenius doing the less glamorous work, and that flexibility helped disrupt Chelsea’s rhythm.

And then there’s Mariona Caldentey. A big-game player, once again. Back on the scoresheet, influential when it mattered, and a reminder of how valuable she is when Arsenal need composure and edge in equal measure.

The Limits Haven’t Disappeared

For all the positives, the constraints remain. The squad still looks stretched. Only seven substitutes named. Limited options to change the attack if the game had demanded it. These things didn’t matter in this game, but they will again soon.

That’s what makes Slegers’ comment resonate so strongly. Arsenal can reach these heights - we know that now, beyond doubt. The question is whether they can do it consistently, away from the spotlight of derbies and defining cup moments. League titles aren’t won in one-off statements; they’re built almost every week, often in games that don’t feel anything like this.

What Comes Next

The focus now shifts to the Champions Cup. Another opportunity, another test, and another chance to build momentum. The prize money alone (£1.7m) is significant, before even considering the prestige of becoming world champions.

And yet, as the January window remains quiet, the underlying concern doesn’t go away. Leaving everything to the summer places an enormous burden on Renée Slegers and the recruitment team to get it right immediately, and then expect everything to click at once. That’s a risky way to build.

Arsenal don’t just need a destination. They need a journey that makes sense - one that supports performances like this, rather than relying on them to paper over the cracks.

The Chelsea win shows Arsenal at their best, but one victory alone won’t define the season. The real work begins in stringing together performances like this, week after week, until consistency becomes the standard rather than the exception.

That’s not a criticism of the result. Cup football rarely allows for perfection. But as Arsenal move through a demanding run of fixtures, it’s becoming harder to separate short-term solutions from longer-term concerns.

Rotation, or the Lack of It

One of the first things that stood out was how little rotation there actually was. Going into the game, I expected to see Taylor Hinds involved, particularly given how carefully Emily Fox’s minutes have been managed in recent months. Instead, Hinds didn’t feature at all, not even from the bench, while Fox started and was then forced off early through injury.

Smilla Holmberg stepping in softened the blow, and more on her later, but it does raise questions. Arsenal now have multiple options at fullback, yet the rotation still feels selective rather than systematic. If the intention is to protect players from overuse, it needs to be applied consistently. Otherwise, it starts to feel reactive rather than planned.

Defensive Stability, Confirmed Again

If there’s one area where Arsenal genuinely look settled now, it’s defensively. Lotte Wubben-Moy’s return to the starting lineup, stepping in for the injured Leah Williamson, felt seamless. That shouldn’t surprise anyone, but it was reassuring all the same. If Wubben-Moy is required in the bigger games coming up, I have little doubt she’ll rise to it.

The back line as a whole continues to look far more organised than earlier in the season. This no longer feels like a brief uptick in form; it’s sustained improvement. Anneke Borbe looked confident again, commanding her area well, and the clean sheet felt deserved rather than fortunate.

There was also a noticeable improvement at set pieces. Better delivery from Katie McCabe, clearer targets in the box, and repeated connections with Wubben-Moy. Given how much of a concern set pieces have been, that felt significant. I’d be surprised if a goal from her doesn’t arrive soon.

Versatility vs Make-Shift

Steph Catley’s continued lack of rest remains slightly concerning. Even when Laia Codina came on, she shifted into midfield, rather than replacing Catley. Renée Slegers has spoken a lot about valuing players who can operate in multiple positions, and there is value in that, but there’s a fine line between versatility and necessity.

Slegers also mentioned recently having “another player” who could operate as a striker or number nine, but is yet to. That comment stuck with me. Is this about genuine tactical flexibility, or is it about filling gaps because the squad doesn’t quite offer enough natural options? At times, it feels like the latter.

Alessia Russo’s feature in the number ten role is a good example. It works in moments, but it doesn’t get the best out of her. That’s less about Russo herself and more about what Arsenal lack around her. Again, it comes back to depth, or the absence of it.

Holmberg, and a Glimpse of the Future

Smilla Holmberg was the one genuinely unpredictable element off the bench, even if her introduction came earlier than planned. She looked tired towards the end, understandable given the circumstances, but there was still plenty to like. Her creativity, willingness to overlap, and confidence in possession stood out, and the reception she received from the Meadow Park crowd reflected that. Her delivery into the box was particularly impressive too; early, accurate crosses that asked real questions and gave Arsenal a different kind of attacking threat.

Holmberg represents the direction Arsenal should be moving in: young, brave, creative, and capable of offering something different depending on the game state. She isn’t a like-for-like replacement for anyone, and that’s the point. Arsenal need more players who expand their options rather than narrowing them.

Midfield Control, Again Through Kim Little

Kim Little’s role further forward was another reminder of just how complete a midfielder she is. Her movement, passing, and ability to arrive late in dangerous areas added a different dimension, and she once again controlled the tempo of the game with quiet authority.

It still amazes me how underrated she remains across the league. Few players offer that level of control, intelligence, and consistency. She does everything, and often without fuss.

Predictability Creeping Back In

Despite the win, Arsenal’s attacking issues haven’t disappeared. They were simply less punishing in this context. The bench told its own story: four defenders and two goalkeepers, with limited attacking variation available. Outside of Holmberg, there wasn’t much to alter the shape or rhythm of the game.

Victoria Pelova’s late introduction felt more like rotation than intent, and it’s increasingly difficult to see what her defined role is under Slegers. That uncertainty mirrors a broader issue: Arsenal don’t currently have many ways to change a game when Plan A stalls.

The Bigger Picture

Atmosphere-wise, Meadow Park offered a welcome contrast to the Emirates last week. It felt louder and more connected. That matters, especially at this stage of the season.

Arsenal remain in the cup competitions, and that’s where the focus has to be for now. But strong defensive performances and controlled wins will only take you so far. To genuinely challenge for silverware, you need options. You need variety. You need the ability to introduce something new when the game demands it.

This isn’t solely on the players, or on Renée Slegers. Squad building matters. Investment matters. Especially on the day it emerged that Arsenal generated the highest revenue of any women’s football club in 2025, according to Deloitte, it’s hard not to feel that the squad should reflect that ambition more clearly.

Arsenal Generate Most Revenue 2025

There’s progress here, no doubt. But progress needs backing. If Arsenal want to turn control into conviction, the next steps can’t all be taken on the pitch.

This wasn’t about panic, or overreaction, or pretending progress hasn’t been made. In many ways, Arsenal were good. But good, at this point in the season, isn’t quite enough.

A Game Arsenal Owned, But Didn’t Decide

On paper, the numbers from the United match are emphatic. Arsenal posted an expected goals figure of 2.7 to United’s 0.4, attempted 25 shots to United’s four, and completed 689 passes compared to United’s 386. Mariona Caldentey and Leah Williamson topped the touches chart with 117 and 106 respectively, underlining just how much of the game Arsenal controlled.

Manchester United defended well, there’s no getting away from that, but they were reduced to ten players and barely tested Arsenal in return. For a side chasing points and sitting behind Arsenal in the table, it was surprising how little threat they posed. That owes something to Arsenal’s defensive performance, which deserves genuine credit. Concerns earlier in the season around cohesion and organisation feel increasingly outdated. The fullback cover is improving, the option to bring in Lotte Wubben-Moy strengthens rotation, and Anneke Borbe’s save was pivotal in maintaining control. With Daphne van Domselaar due back soon, that area feels stable - not perfect, not optimised, but clearly improved.

And yet, with all that control, Arsenal couldn’t find a way through.

When Control Costs You Elsewhere

It’s been a while since the attack has been the central concern of my pieces, but this game brought it back into focus. Under Renée Slegers at the start of her tenure, during her interim days, Arsenal were free-flowing and ruthless, regularly scoring four or five goals a match. That fluidity has been harder to find recently, and the United match exposed why.

Mariona’s deeper role has been necessary at times, particularly due to Kyra Cooney-Cross’ absence, but it comes at a cost. She remains influential, but her impact shifts away from the areas where she is most dangerous. That absence has also highlighted how difficult it is to replicate her balance. Frida Maanum has worked hard, but the connection isn’t quite the same, and Arsenal’s chance creation has suffered as a result.

This was the first game in a while where the lack of a true number ten felt obvious. Alessia Russo needs service, or at least someone consistently close enough to link with. Without that, Arsenal’s possession can start to feel circular rather than progressive. It raises uncomfortable but necessary questions. Do Arsenal need another forward who can change games? Another winger who scores goals? Or a midfielder who can bridge that gap without compromising control?

Predictability and the Depth Problem

The substitutions told a familiar story. Caitlin Foord and Stina Blackstenius coming on felt inevitable, so predictable that Marc Skinner probably had them written down before kickoff. With limited attacking options, there was no real way to change the game’s direction. Victoria Pelova struggled to influence proceedings, losing the ball at key moments, and without Chloe Kelly, Arsenal lacked a genuine wildcard.

This circles back to a recurring issue: squad depth. Not just numbers, but variety. The ability to alter a game tactically rather than simply rotate personnel.

A Bright Spot on the Right

One of the few genuinely energising moments came from Smilla Holmberg’s debut. From where I was sat, her intent was obvious. She overlapped confidently, wasn’t fazed by the occasion, and delivered several dangerous crosses. Even in the dying minutes, she was tracking back, defending with urgency, and linking well with Stina Blackstenius. There’s a lot to like there, and plenty of room for growth as her confidence builds.

Watching Others Move

Elsewhere, movement in the market only sharpens the contrast. Manchester City’s signing of Sam Coffey stood out immediately. A player I’ve admired for a while from watching Portland Thorns in the NWSL, Coffey would have offered something different. While Renée Slegers has spoken openly about preferring a double pivot over a traditional number six, Coffey’s intelligence and versatility could have fitted into that framework. There’s no need to dig into the stats - she’s a top-level midfielder but she’s a City player now, and Arsenal will have to look elsewhere.

I waited to write, half-expecting Arsenal to act. We’re only halfway through January, and while I won’t hold my breath, I remain, perhaps foolishly, optimistic.

Why Georgia Stanway Feels Inevitable

Then there’s Georgia Stanway. Reports of her Bayern Munich departure arriving on the day of the United match felt more than coincidental. This is a deal Arsenal should be doing everything possible to complete ahead of the summer.

Looking at this season alone, Stanway’s numbers stand out immediately. She has featured in 13 league matches, more than any of Arsenal’s central midfielders, and availability matters. Her attacking output is even more striking: four goals and seven assists, with 30 shots taken and eight on target. None of Arsenal’s midfield options come close to matching that combination of volume and efficiency.

In possession, her influence is just as clear. Stanway has completed 969 passes from 1,102 attempts, maintaining an 87.9% completion rate while attempting more passes than anyone else in the comparison. That balance of volume and accuracy speaks to a player comfortable controlling games, not just participating in them. Kim Little’s completion rate is marginally higher, but on far lower volume, while others drop off sharply once asked to shoulder greater responsibility.

Defensively, Stanway again leads the group. She has won 21 of 27 tackles and recorded 13 blocks this season, offering a level of defensive contribution Arsenal currently spread across multiple players. The same patterns appear when looking at last season and her previous WSL spell at Manchester City: consistent goal threat from midfield, high defensive output, and the ability to operate across multiple phases of play.

Context matters. Leagues differ, roles shift, and stats never tell the whole story. But taken together, they outline a profile Arsenal lack: a midfielder who scores, defends, passes under pressure, and brings experience at the highest level. It’s not about chasing a name, it’s about efficiency.

Where This Leaves Arsenal

Arsenal are likely out of the title race now, which places even greater emphasis on the cup competitions. But if you can’t score goals, you can’t win tournaments. The upcoming fixtures are unforgiving: Aston Villa, then Manchester United again, followed by Chelsea. There is no margin for stagnation.

It’s hard not to notice that other clubs appear more ambitious in the market. Even Manchester United, despite an underwhelming performance, look far from finished in their recruitment. Arsenal still need a centre-back, ideally one strong in the air, an attacking midfielder, and reinforcements up front. Rafaelle’s departure continues to be felt (yes, I’m bringing it up again).

The foundations are improving. The defence looks stronger, the squad is steadier, and players like Holmberg hint at a more sustainable future. But control alone won’t carry Arsenal through the defining moments of the season. At some point, conviction has to follow.

Whether that comes through January signings, or simply clearer decisions about what this team wants to be, remains to be seen.