Everton manager David Moyes has publicly defended Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta amid criticism of the way Arsenal use and prioritise set pieces in their attacking play.
Speaking about his opposite number, Moyes described Arteta as “unbelievable” and argued that relying on well-rehearsed set-piece routines is a completely legitimate and often decisive part of modern football. He suggested that criticism aimed at Arsenal for the volume of chances and goals they generate from dead-ball situations overlooks how central set plays have become at the highest level of the game.
Moyes, who has managed extensively in the Premier League and across Europe, noted that set-piece preparation is now deeply embedded in most clubs’ weekly work on the training ground. Coaching staffs devote significant time to analysing opponents’ weaknesses at corners and free kicks, while also drilling their own players on movement, timing and delivery. In that context, he argued, Arsenal’s emphasis under Arteta is simply a reflection of the broader tactical evolution of the sport rather than an outlier approach.
He also highlighted that set pieces can offer a crucial edge in tightly contested matches, particularly when open play chances are limited. According to Moyes, managers are judged on results, and using every available tool – including sophisticated, rehearsed routines from corners, wide free kicks and throw-ins – is a rational response to the demands of elite competition.
The Everton manager stressed that there is no single correct way to play, and that teams should not be criticised purely because a significant portion of their goals come from set-piece situations. Instead, he suggested that the effectiveness of these routines speaks positively about a coaching staff’s attention to detail, planning and ability to execute under pressure.
By defending Arteta’s approach, Moyes placed Arsenal’s style within a broader discussion about how top-level teams look for marginal gains. He framed set pieces as a natural and important component of the sport, rather than a secondary or inferior route to goal, and maintained that using them well is very much “part of the game.”
