The departure of Dion Cakolli was always going to leave a structural question as much as an emotional one. Chur did not merely lose their leading scorer; they lost a reference point around which much of their attacking play had been calibrated. The early evidence suggests that Inaki Arriola has attempted to solve that absence by replicating the role Cakolli occupied rather than adapting the profile of the player now asked to fill it.

Cakolli was a centre-forward in the most classical sense. Physically dominant, penalty-box oriented, and ruthlessly efficient in high-value zones, his contribution was overwhelmingly terminal. Over his time at the club, he scored more than four goals for every assist – a ratio that speaks less to selfishness than to design. Chur did not require him to link play, drift between lines, or destabilise blocks through movement. His function was to arrive, finish, and reset. That profile shaped the attacking structure around him. Chance creation was outsourced to the supporting cast, transitions were built without his involvement, and build-up phases simply moved past him. The team accepted this trade-off because the returns were consistent and decisive: over 100 goals, most from inside the box, many from first-time finishes.

With Cakolli gone, Arriola has resisted the temptation to reinvent the forward role. Instead, Iker Huerte has been asked to inherit it.

Last season, Huerte was introduced cautiously, primarily from the bench, often late and in simplified contexts. This season, with no like-for-like replacement signed, he has been installed as the primary striker and – crucially – used in almost exactly the same positional way. He is asked to play on the shoulder, occupy centre-backs, and remain high as the final reference in the attacking line.

From a production standpoint, the numbers suggest adequacy, if not comfort. Relative to other attacking midfielders and forwards in the Challenge League, Huerte sits around the 71st percentile for goals scored and an impressive 86th percentile for shots on target. He is converting opportunities at a reasonable rate and demonstrating composure when chances do arrive. But the similarities with Cakolli do not end there. Like his predecessor, Huerte is functionally absent from large parts of Chur’s attacking sequences. His involvement in link play is minimal, his touches per possession chain low, and his contribution to progression almost negligible. The ball rarely moves through him; it merely moves past him. This is not a failure of skill, but of usage.

The irony is that Huerte was not recruited as a pure box striker. Data from his previous club painted him as a more rounded forward: mid-range dribble volume (54th percentile), acceptable pass completion (43rd percentile), and a profile closer to an all-action striker than a penalty-box specialist. He was capable of dropping off, carrying the ball, and contributing outside the final action. Yet at Chur, those aspects of his game have been largely suppressed. Attempting just 19 passes a game puts him in the first percentile and, as expected, is there for completion of passes too, despite being quite accurate when he does have the ball.

Structurally, this appears intentional. Arriola’s current attacking setup – particularly with the use of narrow tens and a high-volume right flank – prioritises verticality and occupation of the last line. The striker’s job is to pin defenders, create depth, and leave the creative burden to others. In that sense, Huerte is being asked to play as Cakolli played, not as Huerte can play. The knock-on effects are becoming visible elsewhere. With the striker disengaged from build-up, central combinations rely heavily on the attacking midfield line. When that line is disrupted – either through targeted pressing or compact low blocks – Chur struggle to progress centrally. Matteo Gambardella’s underwhelming output so far this season is not isolated from this context. Without a striker dropping into his zone or creating overloads, Gambardella is often forced to receive with his back to goal and limited forward options.

This raises a tactical question rather than a personnel one. Should Arriola continue to treat the striker role as a fixed reference point, or is there scope to reintroduce fluidity at the top of the structure?

Allowing Huerte to drop deeper – even selectively – could alter the attacking dynamic significantly. It would invite centre-backs to step out, create space for runners from the tens, and reintroduce vertical connections through the middle. It would also better align the system with Huerte’s original recruitment profile, leveraging skills that are currently dormant. Such an adjustment would not require abandoning Arriola’s principles. On the contrary, it would represent their evolution: using role flexibility to maintain structural superiority rather than enforcing rigid positional inheritance.

Cakolli was irreplaceable because of what he did in the box. Huerte does not need to become him. But if Chur continue to ask him to play like him, they may never find out what they actually signed.The coming weeks may determine whether Arriola is seeking continuity through familiarity – or growth through adaptation

I posed the question of whether Inaki Arriola was trying to replace Dion Cakolli through role replication, the last eight matches suggest a clear answer: no. Or at least, not anymore.

There has been a discernible shift in how Iker Huerte has been used, both in possession and within the attacking structure more broadly. Rather than functioning as a fixed reference on the last line, Huerte has increasingly been asked to operate as a link-up forward, dropping into midfield zones to facilitate progression and, crucially, to vacate space for others to exploit. 

The striker is no longer simply occupying centre-backs; he is manipulating them. Tactically, the adjustment has been subtle but significant. By withdrawing into the space between the opposition’s midfield and defensive lines, Huerte has enabled one of Chur’s attacking midfielders – most often Jano Monserrate or Zidan Tairi – to make penetrative runs beyond him. The forward line has become staggered rather than flat, with depth now created through rotation instead of occupation. This marks a clear departure from the Cakolli-era structure.

The collective outcomes, however, have been mixed.

Across these eight matches, Chur’s overall form has stuttered slightly: three wins, four draws, and a single defeat. Goal output has dipped from 1.73 goals per game to 1.53, a marginal but notable decline given the sample size. This is not collapse, but it is friction – the kind that often accompanies systemic change. Individually, Huerte’s statistical profile has shifted in ways that reflect his new responsibilities. His scoring output has decreased from 0.29 goals per game to 0.25, with his percentile rank among forwards falling from the 70th to the 58th. Shot accuracy has also declined, dropping him to the 50th percentile for shots on target. These numbers underline a simple truth: when the striker steps away from the box, he steps away from the actions most likely to inflate goal metrics.

But this is only half the picture. Huerte’s creative involvement has increased meaningfully. His assists per 90 have risen from 0.17 to 0.25, pushing him into the 65th percentile. He is now far more involved in the connective tissue of Chur’s play, ranking in the 13th percentile for passes attempted and completed and the 18th percentile for progressive passes, including those into the box. These are not elite figures, but they represent a radical shift from his previous usage and confirm that his role is no longer merely terminal. Interestingly, his presence in high-value chance situations has actually improved. Huerte has moved from the 15th percentile to the 38th for clear-cut chances, suggesting that while he is shooting less, he is arriving in better-defined moments – often later in moves rather than at their conclusion. It is worth mentioning that these metrics will never truly look great for him – he’s an attacker, not a midfielder, whom he is being compared to. Likewise, Chur don’t see the ball as something that they must hold on to, and even their midfielders do not feature regularly above the fiftieth percentile for passes, instead, weigh heavily on higher outputs from chances and assists, instead. For Inaki, it was never about 0% to 100% with this switch, it was finding the right balance.

The redistribution of responsibility has had tangible effects elsewhere in the system. Jano Monserrate (form bottom right), in particular, has benefited from the change. Operating as the central attacking midfielder, he has become a genuine creative hub rather than a secondary runner. In the last eight games, Monserrate has scored five times – 56% of his total season tally – while also producing 19 key passes and three chances created in just six appearances. With Huerte drawing defenders upward and inward, Monserrate has found both time and space to dictate play between the lines.

Others have also found new routes to goal. Huerte himself has scored a third of his total league goals during this period, while Iriondo and Tairi have both added to their tallies through late arrivals and secondary runs. The attack has become more distributed, less reliant on a single focal point. Yet not all problems have been solved. Matteo Gambardella’s struggles persist, and perhaps more tellingly, they have not been alleviated by the striker’s deeper positioning. If anything, the increased central congestion – a by-product of Huerte’s movement – may be limiting Gambardella’s ability to find clean shooting lanes or receive in advantageous positions. His lack of goal contributions remains an unresolved issue within an otherwise evolving structure.

What emerges from this second phase is not a verdict, but a tension. Arriola’s decision to reprofile Huerte has added layers to Chur’s attacking play and unlocked performances from players like Monserrate. At the same time, it has slightly blunted the team’s overall efficiency in front of goal and introduced transitional instability as roles are recalibrated in real time.

Cakolli’s departure removed certainty but created possibility. Huerte’s transformation from finisher to facilitator suggests that Arriola is no longer searching for a replacement in the traditional sense, but for a different attacking identity altogether. 

Whether that identity ultimately proves more sustainable will depend on how quickly the rest of the system – and particularly players like Gambardella – can adapt to a striker who no longer lives in the shadow of the six-yard box.

For now, Chur are not worse. They are different. And in tactical terms, that distinction matters far more than the scoreline.