Zola and West Ham's Midfield Catch 22 - How To Beat Arsenal Today!

What does Zola do with his midfield? Most seem to agree that Parker, Collison and Behrami, when fit, are all "givens", automatic starters. What does Zola then do with Dyer (if he is ever fit), Jimenez, Diamanti, Noble and Stanislas? Zola, of course, has tried to accommodate two of the five in his 4-3-3 system but everybody, apart from the manager, has seen that the system doesn't work. Jimenez sits too deep to be played as one of the front three, Diamanti doesn't get into the box and is a liability when in his own half, Stanislas is an impact substitute and lacks the experience to meet the dual demands of a role in that 4-3-3 system, Dyer can't manage more than 60 minutes a month and Noble seems very patchy in his performances.

Everybody seemed to agree that the old four in midfield - Behrami, Parker, Noble and Collison - made us solid when we didn't have the ball but very predictable when we had it. There was no creative spark, no shock value. Collison would get into the box but he was the only one of the four who you could bank on to do it regularly because, Noble, for some reason, became shy of getting forward. That was why Jimenez was signed.

Now Jiminy Cricket has been a disappointment for me. I was expecting a Yossi type player, looking for every opportunity to get into advanced positions to score goals. I expected a player of guile, a player who would bag us eight goals a season from midfield. However, the very first time I saw him play in a West Ham shirt - that friendly against Burpswhenpoor - I wrote that he was playing too deep, leaving Cole isolated, and nothing has changed since. I know he hasn't scored yet this season but the worrying question is how many shots has he had? I bet it's not more than three or four. Have any been from inside the box? I'm struggling to remember one. So, put simply, Jimenez is not doing what it said on the Nani tin, he is not the player that Duxbury led us all to believe. Zola is clearly scratching his head trying to work out how to accommodate him. He should be the fourth member of that midfield against Arsenal today, the creative spark amongst the three workhorses, but I'm not convinced he has what it takes.

What about Diamanti? Well he is not a second striker is he? How many times has he made it into the box so far? Once, to take that penalty against Liverpool? And then he fell over at the shock of it all! Yes he can let fly from odd positions on the pitch and yes he can take a free kick but here's a thing - when we have scored from corners, Noble, and not Diamanti, has taken them. The Diamanti corners too often do not beat the first defender. The new Di Canio? The new Zola? Don't make me laugh! His performances so far have reminded me of Boyzone's risible TV debut on that Irish chat show - all the fancy footwork but no substance whatsoever. Can he be risked in a four man midfield given his reluctance to defend? I doubt it. Can he operate as a second striker? Not from what I've seen. So do we play 4-3-3 just to accommodate him? If we do, we will be relegated.

So what about Noble? How good is this boy? He was a starlet as a kid but, apparently, his lack of pace required that he remodel himself, moving from a tricky dribbler to a combative midfielder. He was a key figure in our Great Escape but then he had Tevez in the side and I suspect I would look good with Tevez making runs and opening opportunities for brilliant looking passes. Most seem to agree that Noble has not kicked on and many feel that he and Parker do not compliment each other in midfield. He has certainly not been helped by being asked to play wide right - he definitely lacks the pace for that role - and I suspect he has found the 4-3-3 formation confusing and limiting - he is not one of the front three so sits too deep. In theory, he should work in a central midfield pairing with Parker. Naturally, Parker should sit at the base of a diamond and Noble should be suited to playing the more advanced role, but when they have been paired, both have sat too deep in my opinion and that is why we have looked solid but lacked creative spark. We have to find a system that opens up the opposition and gives us the opportunity to score more than one goal a game, and last season suggests that a Parker and Noble pairing will not result in free scoring performances.

So we come to Dyer. Now there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Dyer should be the player we need - high energy, keen to get into the box, pacey, intelligent (in terms of football!), competitive. But will he EVER be fit? Can Zola EVER rely on him? There's as much chance of that as there is of seeing Ashton leading the England attack in South Africa. I have ripped the piss out of Beano and Diarrhea for two years now, not because I want them to fail but because it has always been obvious to me that the hopes pinned on them have always been misplaced. Both are made of porcelain and both, I suspect, have low pain thresholds. Anderton, Madeley, Owen, Chris Old in cricket, there are sportsmen who are precious about niggles and twinges and players whose bodies cry out against any hint of pain. How bad is the pain in Ashton's ankle? Only Ashton knows. How painful are the groans of Dyer's muscle strains? Only Dyer knows. I suspect Bryan Robson would be playing through the pain! If fit, Dyer would be my "fourth man" but if my Auntie had balls, she would be my uncle!

Now what about Stanislas? I feel for this kid. We haven't yet see him start in his true position, wide on the RIGHT of midfield and I think that, given a run there, he could deliver both the crosses and the goals that we so desperately need. Without Dyer, I might try a midfield with Stanislas wide on the right, Collison on the left of midfield and Behrami and Parker in the middle. With two combative defensive central midfielders, we could look to get Stanislas and Collison into the box, with Faubert and Ilunga offering additional attacking threats down the flanks. The style of play would change dramatically. Instead of trying to pass our way through the middle, we would be looking to open up the flanks much more, dare I say in the "style" of Stoke City? No place for Noble, no place for Jimenez, no place for Diamanti, no place for Dyer, no accommodation of 4-3-3 - I think it would work but will Zola go for it? I doubt it!

So how would I try to beat Arsenal today? 4-4-2. Green: Faubert, Upson, Gabbidon, Ilunga: Stanislas Behrami, Parker, Colison: Cole and General Franco (or Hines). It might not work but if I saw that team I would feel more confident than I would with a 4-3-3 formation featuring Diamanti, Noble and Jimenez! The catch 22 is that Zola has nailed his colours to the 4-3-3 mast and I fear, in the words of Pulp Fiction, pride is now fucking with him. So, bring out the Diamanti gimp!