Sky Sports columnist Laura Hunter breaks down the main talking points emerging from the second round of Women's Super League fixtures, giving readers a deeper look at the narratives shaping the women’s game today. Arsenal have now etched a club record by going unbeaten for 20 consecutive Women's Super League matches, a milestone that would normally be celebrated. Yet for manager Renee Slegers the achievement feels hollow after the Gunners slipped up at home, surrendering two points to a Manchester United side that has exposed surprising frailties in the early weeks of the campaign, conceding a league‑high seven goals. Historically, Slegers’ Arsenal have never been beaten at the Emirates, so it was almost inevitable that a late surge would rescue a point.
In the 95th minute, Smilla Holmberg latched onto a perfectly timed lofted cross from Leah Williamson and nudged the ball home to force a draw. The goal was technically sound, but its brilliance was lost on an Emirates crowd that seemed more pre‑occupied with the déjà vu of the previous weekend’s goalless stalemate at Crystal Palace.
That sense of repetition has left many fans wondering whether Arsenal are squandering their chance to mount a serious title challenge from the outset – and again. Five points from three games currently places Arsenal in sixth position in a league that has been expanded from twelve to fourteen clubs, stretching the season to 26 matches. The expansion may offer a sliver of consolation, suggesting there will be more opportunities to climb the table as the campaign progresses.
Some may even look back on this draw as a "good point" when the season is over. For now, however, the result must be framed as a setback – another stumbling block in a pattern that has persisted for seven seasons. Despite finishing runners‑up last term, Arsenal have struggled to keep pace with whichever side emerges as the league’s benchmark each year. So what does Arsenal stand for if not genuine title contenders?
Is the team merely a collection of attacking threats that lack the conviction to turn chances into goals? In the first three matches they have managed just two goals from 60 attempts, an expected‑goals (xG) shortfall of 3.84, highlighting a stark inefficiency in front of goal.
Slegers will undoubtedly have a response. No team should be written off after three games; the season is only just beginning.
Yet the issues exposed go beyond a small sample size. Opponents have discovered a tactical weapon: by sitting deep and compact, they can frustrate Arsenal’s fluid attacking patterns. Maintaining a disciplined block against the Gunners often yields a point – a result that benefits every side except Arsenal themselves. Four draws before Christmas proved enough to derail the title bid last season, and the club cannot afford a repeat.
The urgency to reverse this trend is palpable, but the solution is not simple. Arsenal’s attacking rhythm appears to be losing its spark. Mariona Caldentey’s pass to Alessia Russo was errant, Stina Blackstenius’ powerful header was saved by Phallon Tullis‑Joyce, and Chloe Kelly’s long‑range effort lacked the necessary precision. All were legitimate attempts, yet each was tinged with doubt.
The decisive moment came only in the final kick, underscoring a tendency to rely on late drama rather than sustained dominance. Both Slegers and her players need to be questioned after such a passive start.
Is the midfield balance correct? Georgia Stanway and Mariona Caldentey both seem to be deployed as the primary No. 8, potentially overlapping responsibilities and blurring who should dictate play from deep. Should Alessia Russo operate as a true No.
10, or is she being asked to drop deeper and protect the back line? Are the wide players hesitant to take on one‑on‑one battles? Over the weekend, Lisa Baum and Olivia Smith combined for just one cross and one dribble; the solitary delivery from Baum that found Blackstenius should have produced a goal but did not.
Rather than exploiting Manchester United’s transitional weaknesses under new coach Eva Olid, Arsenal spent much of the match standing off, too polite to engage fully. With a squad of this caliber, such restraint is puzzling. What is required now is a demand for higher standards: sharper creativity from the midfield architects, more incisive service from the flanks, and clinical finishing in the final third. Every component of Arsenal’s attacking machinery must shift up a gear if the team hopes to convert draws into victories.
In contrast, Tottenham’s Holdt appears to be thriving. Since February, only Bunny Shaw (with 12 goals) has outscored her, underscoring Holdt’s growing confidence in front of goal. Spurs’ attack exudes freshness and excitement; after a tight first half against Crystal Palace, they unleashed a devastating 7‑0 onslaught, netting six goals in a 25‑minute burst.
Holdt’s hat‑trick set the tone: a composed finish from a rehearsed throw‑in, a powerful strike from a loose ball inside the box, and a clinical finish following a quick turnover. Her blend of talent and determination has allowed her to adapt to the league’s demands faster than most, serving as both scorer and creator, capable of driving forward with the ball or distributing it effectively. On her first start for Spurs this season, Holdt gave manager Martin Ho a clear signal that his side could contend for the top spots, propelling them to second place.
The challenge now is to maintain that momentum. In summary, Arsenal’s early season narrative is one of unfulfilled potential: a record unbeaten run that masks a lack of cutting edge in attack, tactical naiveté against compact defenses, and a need for clearer role definition among key players. If the Gunners can sharpen their finishing, diversify their midfield responsibilities, and adopt a more aggressive stance against opponents, they could still revive their title aspirations. Until then, draws will remain the most realistic outcome for a side that, on paper, should be fighting for more than just survival in the upper half of the table.