The Athletic: Arsenal vs Chelsea could be the best match in months, with both teams finding hope after the game

In Premier League Matchday 3, Arsenal came from behind to beat Chelsea 2-1 at home. After the match, The Athletic analyzed the key talking points.

How good was this match?

Overall, the start of this Premier League season has been relatively calm. Although the transfer market was very active, many teams have looked uncertain after the opening matches and lacked direction. Arsenal have appeared steady, which has lowered expectations around the title race.

Whether a genuine title battle will eventually emerge remains to be seen. However, this match was enough to spark imagination, with both sides producing a fluid and varied contest that will be difficult to surpass easily in the coming months.

Arsenal deserved the victory, showing both creativity and aggression. But Chelsea's performance also showed that Arsenal, as defending champions, may not have a completely comfortable path. Especially in the first half, the visitors stretched Arsenal several times and had chances to extend their advantage after Rogers scored early.

Chelsea certainly caused Arsenal problems, making the comeback even more significant. This was not a routine victory, but an emotional and inspiring win achieved through determination. Both teams can find hope from the match, and neutral fans can as well.

Havertz's highlights: goal, dummy, and hold-up role

We live in a data-driven era where every player touch is coded, weighted, and measured. But Havertz's clever dummy that created Odegaard's goal reminded people that assists and chance numbers cannot capture every flash of creativity.

After Tzolis cut inside from the left, Havertz moved into the middle near the top of the penalty arc and called for the ball. Tzolis passed to him, but it was a classic feint. Havertz shaped as if he would receive the ball, then pulled away, allowing it to roll perfectly to Odegaard in the center of the box.

Odegaard calmly finished, and the assist was eventually credited to Tzolis. The Greek winger's creative statistics improved, but he knew the decisive contribution was Havertz's movement that never appeared in the data.

It completed an excellent overall performance from Havertz. He scored his fourth goal in seven appearances against his former club, while Chelsea struggled to contain his powerful and creative influence. A fully confident Havertz is extremely difficult to stop.

How did Morgan Rogers and Chelsea's front three perform?

Arsenal chose not to match Chelsea's £117 million offer for Rogers in July, creating an ironic moment in football: the most expensive English player scored with a volley after just 1 minute and 17 seconds at the Emirates Stadium, beating David Raya.

If Chelsea want to compete with the Premier League champions, their highly anticipated attacking trio must prove that Arsenal's defense, which has looked like a 'brick wall' early this season, can be broken.

The player who truly did that was not Palmer or Joao Pedro, but Rogers, which was not surprising. Among the three, he is the most willing to take risks and attempt things others would not, such as a first-time volley from outside the box, simply to create opportunities.

That adventurous style can sometimes see Rogers lose possession in dangerous areas and create more defensive work for teammates. However, he has added a more direct attacking dimension to Alonso's Chelsea side, one they lacked last season, and his combination with Palmer and Joao Pedro is already very smooth.

Around the half-hour mark, he received an excellent long pass from Martinez, combined with Joao Pedro, moved past Konsa, and fired a shot just wide of Raya's far post.

In the second half, Konsa brought down his former Villa teammate with a fierce sliding challenge and came out on top in that moment. But Rogers constantly forces opposing defenses to react. Even when his best attacking ideas do not always come off, that quality remains valuable, as Arsenal clearly felt on Sunday.

Is Arsenal's attack more fluid and more rotational?

After conceding within 77 seconds, Arsenal had no choice but to push forward, and they actually looked better after doing so.

Their passing immediately became sharper and more attacking, with Saka, Odegaard, and Ben White creating the same level of threat on the right side as they did against Coventry in the opening round.

Unlike last season, Arsenal are no longer dependent only on the right side. Tzolis' more direct runs provided a second threat through movements behind him, keeping Chelsea's entire defense alert.

However, Arsenal's constant positional rotations and short passing on the right ultimately proved decisive. Havertz moved wide right and combined with Rice's quicker passing to help Arsenal equalize.

The understanding between Tzolis and Odegaard was also excellent. Their combination for Arsenal's winning goal was almost a copy of the Arsenal captain's Community Shield goal against Manchester City last month.

For the Greek international, repeating these actions consistently, like that dangerous pass, will provide Arsenal with major benefits throughout the season.

The continuous movement of the red and white shirts also helped Havertz contribute to Arsenal's second goal.

How can Chelsea solve their midfield issues?

Lavia and Reece James meant Chelsea fans did not spend much of the match worrying about Caicedo, or even Lamine Camara, which deserves credit.

Chelsea spent a long period of the first half fighting to survive, especially after Morgan Rogers scored first. It may have been Lavia's best defensive half since joining the club. He pressed aggressively, forced Arsenal mistakes, recognized danger in defensive areas, and blocked passing lanes effectively.

Meanwhile, Reece James largely deserved Alonso's bold assessment of his midfield potential, bringing technical quality and composure to Chelsea's possession phases.

But Caicedo's absence and the lack of other high-quality alternatives became more obvious in the second half. Odegaard escaped James to help Arsenal take the lead.

Lavia usually begins to tire around the hour mark, which was telling. Alonso replaced him with another full-back, Gusto, rather than Valentin Barco.

Gusto added energy to Chelsea's late attacking push, but he lacked the ability to break open Arsenal's low defensive block in possession, although he did help with defensive transitions.

Even with Caicedo returning soon and James able to perform in midfield as Alonso believes, Chelsea's manager still needs more against opponents of this level.

A battle between set-piece coaches

Odegaard's low, curling deliveries caused major problems. Shortly after Rogers opened the scoring, Odegaard took a free kick outside the right side of the box. Chelsea defenders appeared to expect a cross to the far post, but he instead sent a low reverse cross toward the near post, where Calafiori narrowly missed making contact. Another low cross followed, Joao Pedro failed to clear it, and Calafiori's goal was eventually ruled out, while Pedro escaped because Konsa was offside during the move.

McPhee also produced his own response, attempting to limit Arsenal's set-piece threat. When defending corners, Chelsea kept four attackers forward, forcing Arsenal to leave more players back. This approach recalled the strategy used by Chelsea's former set-piece coach Bernardo Cueva during the second leg of last season's League Cup semifinal.