Manchester City defender John Stones has admitted that the team’s conservative approach during their 1-1 draw with Arsenal at the Emirates Stadium in September was not part of Pep Guardiola’s tactical plan and went against the side’s usual attacking philosophy.
City entered the clash against the Gunners in strong form, coming off back-to-back victories against Manchester United and Napoli. Guardiola fielded an unchanged starting lineup for the third time in a week, signalling growing confidence after a sluggish start to the 2025/26 Premier League season that saw defeats to Brighton and Tottenham.
The match began perfectly for City when Erling Haaland continued his incredible scoring run, firing home in the ninth minute after being set up by new signing Tijjani Reijnders. However, after taking the early lead, the reigning champions noticeably dropped deep and allowed Arsenal to dominate possession for much of the contest — an unusual sight for a Guardiola-led side.
While City remained disciplined and compact, their defensive stance sparked widespread debate among fans and pundits, who questioned whether Guardiola had opted for a tactical shift against a major rival. Haaland had a golden opportunity to double City’s lead in the second half following a brilliant counter-attack initiated by Jeremy Doku, but his effort went wide.
Guardiola made several defensive substitutions in the latter stages of the match, seemingly content to hold onto the narrow advantage. However, Arsenal’s pressure eventually told as they found an equaliser, forcing City to settle for a share of the points in a tightly contested encounter.
Reflecting on the game, Stones clarified that the decision to sit back was not premeditated. Speaking to talkSPORT, he said:
“It wasn’t planned to do that. When you’re in a game, you get different scenarios and a feeling of pressure or a sense within the game that you have to do that. The guys took initiative and did it – and that’s why it’s caused such a stir and become such a big talking point.”
He continued,
“It wasn’t planned and it’s definitely not in our DNA as a team to do that. We don’t want to. I believe it isn’t the right way to win a match. I’ve played against it enough to know how frustrating and difficult it is to soak up all that pressure for a long period. It was a mixture of things. Definitely not a tactical set-up.”
Stones’ comments suggest that the defensive display stemmed more from in-game circumstances rather than Guardiola’s strategic instructions, with the players adapting instinctively to mounting Arsenal pressure.
City have since recovered their momentum, following the draw with a series of strong performances. Stones was an unused substitute in the team’s 1-0 victory over Brentford at the GTech Community Stadium, which sent the Blues into the international break in promising form after overcoming their early-season struggles.
FAQ
- Q: Did Pep Guardiola instruct Manchester City to play defensively against Arsenal?
A: According to John Stones, no. The defensive approach was not planned and arose naturally from the in-game circumstances.
- Q: What was John Stones’ opinion on the defensive performance?
A: Stones disapproved of the approach, calling it “uncharacteristic” and not in the team’s DNA, stating that he doesn’t believe it’s the right way to win matches.
- Q: How did Manchester City perform after the Arsenal match?
A: City bounced back strongly, beating Brentford 1-0 before heading into the international break on good form.
- Q: Who scored for Manchester City against Arsenal?
A: Erling Haaland opened the scoring for City in the ninth minute following an assist from summer signing Tijjani Reijnders.
Conclusion
John Stones’ candid comments provide rare insight into the mindset of Manchester City’s players during a key Premier League clash. His remarks underline the team’s preference for proactive, possession-based football and suggest that the defensive performance at Arsenal was more a response to match dynamics than managerial design. With City back in winning form, Guardiola’s men appear to have learned from the experience and refocused on their trademark attacking identity.