I've found it strange that the French manager prefers Giroud to Lacazette, whereas if the stories about Giroud being released to either West Ham or Everton are true, Wenger has the opposite opinion. I don't associate the French style of play with lobbing high crosses in the area and while Giroud does have other qualities like his control and laying off of passes, they're what I associate with a slightly more direct approach. I thus wonder if Lacazette may be better suited to Arsenal than Giroud. Although as I associate France's style more with Arsenal's, that does raise the question of why Giroud comes above Lacazette in the pecking order for their country?

Like you I have some doubts about Mahrez. He's extremely gifted, but strikes me as a bit milky. He can be excellent as we saw in 2015/16 but often disappears from games as in 2016/17. Some used to moan about Özil's tendency to decorate rather than dominate games. I suspect that issue could well be raised to an even greater extent if Mahrez joins. Is Mahrez being signed, if he is, to replace Özil or play with him? If it's the latter, might Wenger see him in a more central role to replace Cazorla? After all, Cazorla started in a wider position before being moved to the centre. If so perhaps it could be the making of Mahrez, or it might be a nail in his coffin at the club. We'll have to wait and see, I suppose.

Agree with this. I'm not sure Lacazette is even a better overall player than Giroud, but his qualities are more suited to the type of football we should be playing.

There are certainly question marks about him, and he's not world class. I like him better than the likes of Lukaku and Morata though, especially since they would cost substantially more.

With regards to the French national team, I think there is sometimes a bias against players from smaller clubs. I remember Phil Neville complaining about the fact that when he was a backup player at Man Utd he was consistently called up England squads, but when he went to Everton and became a starter he was rarely picked for England.*

Just one of several possible reasons. Giroud is a good player who has often played very well for France, which is probably the main reason.

*A very good argument can be made that Phil Neville should never have been called up for international duty in the first place but that's beside the point.

Hmm...so its likely Sanchez is off then? If so, I just hope its not City or any other EPL side. There are reasons other than money for players to leave. RvP wanted a title. I've got to think that part of Sanchez's reasons are the lack of fight in the side throughout the season and not wanting to kill himself on the pitch alongside players who didn't want it badly enough. The last dozen matches excepted.

Logic may dictate that given a choice, Mahrez over Lemar for reasons obvious and perhaps not so obvious but I actually like Lemar more. Mahrez can fit in immediately as he is already well experienced in the EPL and knows what it takes to win titles. Its a huge advantage over Lemar. Also, he is in his prime at 26.

I like Lemar though a wee bit more. A bit more dynamic for my taste. Plus at 21, who knows how good he can get?

Will I be upset if we end up with Mahrez? Obviously I'd 'loov it' (channeling my inner Keegan). I just happen to be more excited seeing Lemar. But its like saying I enjoy Henry over Berkgamp...and I love Bergkamp to bits.

Too much news going around. Too much speculation. I'll get excited, or not, when transfers in/out are confirmed. With Sead's incoming , I'm excited

Hi Aussie Gooners, I'm just about to finish my vacation week in beautiful Cairns. Lovely city, so much fun stuff to do.

This is most likely so when you think about it, the club would probably factor this in too, that if Sanchez is going we have basically just replaced him with an inferior player, so in order to improve the team we simply have to improve other areas, basically what I'm saying is it is nigh on impossible to replace him with a player as good so we have to replace him with 2 (or 3) players that are closer to his level than the existing one's at the club.

This begs the question who's place is under threat from our first choice line up from last season?, I am not especially keen on Mahrez for the reasons others have already said, plus isn't he a bit too similar to Özil?, unless of course he is Özil's replacement!. Assuming we stick to 3 at the back there are limited places for 'attacking' players, this is why I think Ox might go as Ramsey/Xhaka was first choice in CM and Ox doesn't want to play as a utility man.

Back to Mahrez - if we do sign him where does this leave Walcott? - he's got to go surely. Wenger has always preached about 'evolution' rather than 'revolution' but I can't help thinking this summer we need the latter, there are just too many issues that need resolving for a little bit of tinkering to be enough.

Out - Walcott £20M, Giroud £20M, Ox £25M
Debuchy £0, Jenkinson £0 , Elneny £5M , Ospina £5M

£75M

In - Lacazette £50M..

So we are already +£25M if we get rid of this lot, big ask but it needs doing, the time for tinkering is over!.

P.S I would keep Wilshere purely as he's homegrown and has a passion for the club, he would have to accept back up status though, Szczesny I would keep as well but this doesn't look likely which I find odd.

I'd love to find a place for Wilshere as well. He is talented and he's passionate. We need those types of intangibles. If or when Sanchez leaves, we will get a huge fee. We were a bit over-reliant on him. He will be a huge loss both skill wise and emotionally. However, it also presents an opportunity to make the squad more balanced. A more than decent lead striker for the first time since RvP left. If we can get a couple high level wingers on either side, Sanchez's loss may turn out to be a good thing long term IF we can replace the goals, and have those goals spread out across the attack.
Ideally, I'd love to keep Sanchez but if we can't we have to make the best of his leaving.

I think it's too soon to write off Elneny, who has some useful qualities and deserves at least another season. I think his value is a lot higher than £5 million as well. The rest I'd have no problem with - ship em out.

I also think, very sadly, that Wilshere should be surplus to requirements. Any decent fee offered we should take. I think it looks like he will never reach his potential. Being a through the ranks player and one who looked the real deal, I sincerely hope I'm wrong on that.

Agree that Özil and Mahrez shouldn't be in the same 11 together. Too powder puff. Not sure I really see the logic in signing Mahrez tbh.

That's what concerns me too. I've long argued that the best teams have balance. If Özil goes I can see the logic of signing Mahrez far more than I can if he stays. A midfield with both Özil and Mahrez seems a bit, to use socrate's word 'lightweight' or to use bromley's term 'powder puff', especially for the game in England. Two highly talented but very inconsistent players who when they turn up are brilliant, but regularly (some would argue more often that not) go missing. Is that what's needed for success in the Premier League? I have genuine doubts.

Hi Bernard,

I like Mahrez.

Wenger likes out-to-in wingers, or rather wingers who play on the wrong side to their natural kicking foot so that they can cut inside. Mahrez is great at this.

He's also a bit of a magician with the ball and a great dribbler who can take players out of the game, which appeals to me. He won the PL player of the year trophy two seasons ago so he's top quality when he's on his game.

I could see him and Özil at home against lesser opposition but I'm not sure you could risk both in a big game. It'd be like playing with 9 men defensively.

If that's what turns your key I'll see if this turkey can make the afternoon flight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzdfJvKvoC0

I've thought that ..... spend two weeks with Robert Pires or Denis Bergkamp .... but really the burning desire to improve should come from within .

Success comes too easily for some " Selected for England , fabulous wages " why spend three hours kicking a ball against a wall like Supermac did to perfect his skills ... better climb in your new Porsche and rev off home and play X Box or whatever .

I watched Jimmy Greenhoff playing for Stoke in 1973 twisting Arsenal's back four every which way and I don't think either Walcott or Oxo cube come close to his skill levels .

Glad you enjoyed it and hope you return to Oz to enjoy other areas. Not a bad location to spend winter.

Lots to see and do. We'll be back. Highlight was convincing my wife to do the skydive.

Glad you enjoyed the sun. If you'd skydived down here you'd probably have turned into a giant hailstone.

Can't believe preseason already in 10 days!!

Morning socrates. I'm surprised you like Mahrez when you never took to Özil. To me they're very similar types of player and largely bring both the same benefits and negatives to their teams. Very talented when going forward but adding next to nothing to the defensive side of the game. I'd say in that respect Mahrez might even be a bit worse than Özil. Both can look disinterested and disappear from games, and after seeing so much of them I'd also rate Mahrez as a little worse in that way too. It adds up to them both being inconsistent. Mahrez will of course be cheaper to buy than Özil, but I'd be surprised if that was a significant factor in making you like Mahrez while never appearing to take to Özil.

Give it time.

Hi Bernard,

Mahrez is an old fashioned dribber with a magical left foot who likes to take on his man with little drops of the shoulder, step-overs, changes of pace etc. He likes a shot at goal coming inside from the right wing onto his left foot.

Sometimes I think we get so bogged down with our passing game, especially when teams drop deep and defend with two banks of four, that we need someone who can go past his man and take him out the game, opening up space for others.

I think Mahrez actually suffered a bit at Leicester because they rarely dominated possession, home or away, infact they often had around 30% of the possession and played largely a counter-attacking game. It was good when Mahrez got the ball but that wasn't always that often in matches so his influence was limited. He's have much more of the ball in an Arsenal side.

Özil is a precision passer with fantastic vision and weight of pass but not really a dribbler.

So basically, I see them both as having magical left foots but being quite different in terms of their playing styles. Both are very lightweight defensively though.

Hi Soc

I largely agree with that. Özil is a playmaker. Mahrez is a winger with real ability to beat a player and happily, he has a good shot on him too. He is one of the few players in the league who can kill a defender one on one without using blinding pace.
Unlike the rest of the forum, or so it seems, I am not too worried about the defensive qualities of either, although Özil's half-arsed tackles are annoying. We never cared too much about Pires' defending. A solid central midfield and well organised defence should be more than sufficient to take care of the defensive side of the game and let the attacking players do the damage at the other end.

Exactly. Plus, the notion that Sanchez contributes anything defensively is a complete myth. If anything he's a defensive liability because of his habit of holding on to the ball for too long in our own half. Hazard, De Bruyne, Coutinho, Eriksen, they're all pretty much useless defensively. It's not what they're there for.

Could either of them take over Carzorla's role?

Now that could be magic?

Afternoon socrates. Mahrez is certainly much more of a dribbler than Özil. I certainly wouldn't call him a Peter Marinello style dribbler though, if you're talking of him being an "old fashioned" dribbler.

Chilean newspaper La Tercera are claiming Sanchez will 'honor his contract'. Assuming that would mean him leaving for free next year. Not sure how reliable La Tercera are, but I would be ok with that outcome if he's set on leaving.

Bayern have said that he is too expensive for them. If Arsenal are insisting that they won't sell to another PL club, there may be nowhere else for him to go. If true, it is quite a change from the RVP days.

From Arsenal's point of view I don't think that's a good option. If he goes into the last year, winding down his contract, I think we'd have an unsettled and distracted player on our hands. That could destabilise the whole squad. I would prefer ideally he signs a new deal, but if he's not willing to do that we should sell. Reluctantly.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40496970

Haven't seen this posted. It looks like we got our man.

I tend to agree with bromley. £50m is, even in today's world of football, a lot to give up for a single season of having a possibly unsettled player (even if he is great) on our books. Look, if he stays and we win the league, then Sanchez leaves on a Bosman, I'll be more than comfortable with that. In fact I'll be delighted as anyone who could afford it would presumably spend £50m on a player for one year who would guarantee them the title in that season.

But even with Sanchez, if we sign Lacazette and Mahrez as well as Kolasinac, will that be enough to make up the difference with the other big clubs no doubt strengthening too? If Sanchez does stay, we'll have to wait and see. But I think anything less than winning the league will make the decision to give up the £50m a mistake, especially as we could have bought other players with it on the basis of talent Wenger has identified, which I still believe is the part of the job that he's best at.

SSNews reporting completion of medical for Alex Lacazette.

Looks like we have our man..........................

Bad news. He's got piles and Arsenal are walking away from the deal. Arsene Wenger quoted: ' Well, er, Lacazette has a touch of the Farmer Giles, so we will not be signing him. I feel very sorry for him as he had set his jam tart on joining us, but it is not to be. We could not have him playing a little with the handbrake on.' Lacazette's agent, Emma Royd, was unavailable for comment,

I agree with Haz that Sanchez's defensive work is overrated. Disagree that we should keep him if he has decided that he wants to play elsewhere. Having a player like that would have a negative influence on team morale and £50m is still a big amount to chuck away, especially when he could just end up at City next season anyway - and for free.

Will be interesting to see if we revert to two cb's next season. With all the attacking talent we're seemingly after, I can't see us sticking with three cb's and leaving a big money signing on the bench.

I think we should stick with 3 cb's. I 've always said we should try it and am really pleased with how solid we look since we changed to it.

Problem now is are our two backs competent with the new set up. Monreal yes suits his play but Bellerin I think needs to work at it. Cazorla needs replacing then it's up to the forwards to play their parts, four of them assuming we have two midfielders. Two playing up front two floating. 5212 defending 3412 attacking.

I know what you mean. We've been shaky defensively for a long time so it was great to see some stability at the back when we tweaked the defence. It also released Xhaka and he played some lovely football in the last two months. However I just don't think Wenger will stick with it longterm. We just have too many attacking players and sounds like we still want more.

Don't think it would be that big a problem if Sanchez was to stay on for the final year of his contract. He seems like someone who mostly wants to play football all the time, don't think it's his style to not give it all he's got. Plus, he'll be 29 when the season ends. If he has a poor season it will probably have a big impact on what offers he'll recieve.

The rest of the players knows what it's about. It's professional football, everyone is out there to maximise their careers. As long as we keep strengthening I genuinely don't think it will bother them too much if Sanchez was to leave. Not selling him to City would be a statement that we're their rivals and won't be doing them favours. You can never control what players do when their contracts are up anyway.

It just seems to me that taking £50m now from City, or him going there for nothing in a year, seems a big price to pay for making a statement to City. I'm struggling to think of anything other than winning the league that would end up making it worthwhile.