Do Arsenal always collapse in April under Arteta?

TL;DR

Arsenal's performance in April under Arteta is often criticized, but a review of the last four seasons reveals a more nuanced picture. The narrative of consistent collapse may not accurately reflect the team's actual run-ins.

Key points

Arsenal's April performance under Arteta is often criticized
Analysis spans the last four seasons
The narrative of collapse may be oversimplified
Performance metrics suggest a more nuanced reality

Mentioned in this story

Mikel Arteta

Arsenal

Do Arsenal always collapse in April under Arteta?

A look across the last four seasons suggests the popular version of Arsenal’s run-ins is far lazier than the reality.

Photo by Justin Setterfield/Getty Images

After Arsenal’s defeat to Bournemouth last weekend there has been a lot of ‘dialogue’. The fact that many of the sensible comments have come from pundits who are paid to be contrary tells you a lot about where we are as a fanbase.

I was taken aback by the strength of the anti-Arteta feeling in the wake of the defeat that left Arsenal top of the Premier League with six games remaining. Sure, it wasn’t ideal, and the team looked awful, but demanding Arteta’s removal seemed to me a rather ridiculous thing to be saying.

The argument seems to be this – “If Arsenal fail to win the title this season they will have finished second in the last four seasons and that proves that Mikel Arteta cannot get them across the line. Arsenal are always awful in April when it matters.”

That sounds reasonable enough on its face, but scratch at it just a little and it throws up more questions than answers about how people remember things.