Fixtures Thursday November 26th - Molde FK - Aker Stadion - Europa League - 5:55 Pm

Kick-Off

       Injuries                    Steve Gleiber



Get the Latest Post Go to the Bottom of Page It is currently Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:37 pm

All times are UTC


  


Reply to topic

Users browsing this forum: Bernard, Bing [Bot], warrior and 7 guests

 
Post #472401  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 7:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18053

bubblechris wrote:
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,

_________________
"Young and caught up in life, we seldom watched the skies.”


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472402  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 8:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7959

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.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472403  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 3407
Location: Waltham Abbey, Essex

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.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472404  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7959

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.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472405  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:21 pm
Posts: 14322
Location: Stockholm

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.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472406  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:19 pm 

Hazuki wrote:
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.


  
 
 
Post #472407  Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 8:52 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Salisbury

Bernard wrote:
Hazuki wrote:
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.


Only works (for the fans) if you assume we will spend the said £50M.. our track record would say not so I say keep him, more likely is we have just spent it on Lacazette.

_________________
Wake me up when wiggy snuffs it


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472408  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

This guy nails the typical GOP fundamental voter because he used to be one of them. 45 (refuse to use the 'P' word Trump) has the launch codes. Its sobering. Its scares the daylights out of me...and it should everyone else. The country has visibly changed. Way more acts of rage on a one to one human level. More fatal road rage like a man who chased down and killed an 18 year old recent female HS graduate. A girl!! I can't recall if it was Churchill who said something to the effect Americans will do the right thing eventually...after exhausting all the alternatives.
I'm not so sure anymore. The amount of people who have the mindset in the article are too large. Not the majority but not far from half.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/fundame ... er-change/

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472409  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

If and its looking like a big IF, we keep Sanchez, I doubt we'll see him as a striker any longer. The good thing about Lacazette is he can basically duplicate Giroud's skillset with technical ability and pace. Too many times we break on the counter with Giroud up front and he is too slow for the counter. What happens with Welbeck? He came to us for more playing time and may find himself 3rd in rotation. Will he want to stay under that scenario?

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472410  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:55 pm
Posts: 8756
Location: Singapore

I'll like to see Alexis staying on for another year. His work rate is always a plus point for me. As a fan who is more keen to see successes on the field, I am not bothered with Arsenal's financial losses if he leaves on a free the following year. Ironically, that had always been the bug bear for most of us, in that, Arsene and Arsenal had always let financial considerations precede winning trophies.

With the additions (hopefully good ones), we might win it next season. Or challenge very strongly till the end. This might change Alexis' mind about leaving after a good season. Well, it is all hopeful thoughts from my end.

_________________
A new Chapter awaits!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472411  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 6122
Location: Townsville Australia

old man of hoy wrote:
bubblechris wrote:
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,

Actually Hoy I think our first move would be to offer 20 mil less before we pulled out.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472412  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

Given the choice, would it be better to sell Sanchez and get top or near top dollar (or pound) now or have him for one more season along with our new buys so that we make sure we are top 4 and god forbid challenge the title?
If its the latter. Is he professional enough not to mope around for the season or does his will to win and compete override his not being sold?

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472413  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 4:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

The overrated ginger prince Paul Scholes? Chelsea fans think so. I didn't think he was as good as advertised. I saw very fine player but frankly, not as good as most said he was. It was either believe you lot or my lying eyes. Still, one has to respect even the great (greatest) Vieira saying Scholes was the best midfielder he played against. I saw a player who had an uncanny ability to arrive outside or inside box at the right time and good vision. I never bought the 'he's a bad tackler'adage one bit. He was a nasty player in the tackle and referees coddled him. How can a so called bad tackler How in god's green earth does a known 'bad tackler' admittedly by his own manager get only 4 red cards in his career? Along with 97 yellow cards and such a low number becoming red? His national team career exposed him. For a player who was always mentioned no worse than top 3 or 4 ever in the EPL do so awfully bad in Europe both club and country?

http://www.givemesport.com/1092549-chel ... -III-1sted

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472414  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 4:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

Don't think it will pan out this way...but one can dream.


Attachments:


_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"
 Profile  
 
 
Post #472415  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 6:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

AmericanGooner wrote:
The overrated ginger prince Paul Scholes? Chelsea fans think so. I didn't think he was as good as advertised. I saw very fine player but frankly, not as good as most said he was. It was either believe you lot or my lying eyes. Still, one has to respect even the great (greatest) Vieira saying Scholes was the best midfielder he played against. I saw a player who had an uncanny ability to arrive outside or inside box at the right time and good vision. I never bought the 'he's a bad tackler'adage one bit. He was a nasty player in the tackle and referees coddled him. How can a so called bad tackler How in god's green earth does a known 'bad tackler' admittedly by his own manager get only 4 red cards in his career? Along with 97 yellow cards and such a low number becoming red? His national team career exposed him. For a player who was always mentioned no worse than top 3 or 4 ever in the EPL do so awfully bad in Europe both club and country?

http://www.givemesport.com/1092549-chel ... -III-1sted


He was a fantastic player, AG.

I'd say Scholes was in the top four central midfielders I've seen in the PL era...........Keane, Vieira, Scholes and Gerrard would be my top four (in no particular order).


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472416  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:07 am 

Wilts-Gooner wrote:
Bernard wrote:
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.

Only works (for the fans) if you assume we will spend the said £50M.. our track record would say not so I say keep him, more likely is we have just spent it on Lacazette.

I take your point but doesn't our track record also say we won't win the league whether he stays or goes? So what's the point in not collecting the £50m now? Look, as I've said, if he stays and we win the title, then he goes on a Bosman, I'll consider it money well spent. But anything less than a fourteenth league win and I'll look on it as money thrown away. Money that could have been used to strengthen the team. You doubt it would be, and I can understand why. But if it wasn't, that's another factor about Wenger's management that I would feel deserves to be looked at very closely.

I'm not even sure a second, third or fourth place finish to get back into the Champions League would justify the decision. I do firmly believe Arsenal can qualify for the Champions League again with or without Sanchez, especially as I'm hoping Tottenham might struggle to maintain their standards of last season from playing at Wembley. What I'm much less sure about is winning the title if Sanchez sees out the last year of his contract. Perhaps I'm alone in seeing it this way, but for me the only outcome that would justify the risk is winning the title. In my view, anything less would make it a poor decision.


  
 
 
Post #472417  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7459

socrates wrote:
AmericanGooner wrote:
The overrated ginger prince Paul Scholes? Chelsea fans think so. I didn't think he was as good as advertised. I saw very fine player but frankly, not as good as most said he was. It was either believe you lot or my lying eyes. Still, one has to respect even the great (greatest) Vieira saying Scholes was the best midfielder he played against. I saw a player who had an uncanny ability to arrive outside or inside box at the right time and good vision. I never bought the 'he's a bad tackler'adage one bit. He was a nasty player in the tackle and referees coddled him. How can a so called bad tackler How in god's green earth does a known 'bad tackler' admittedly by his own manager get only 4 red cards in his career? Along with 97 yellow cards and such a low number becoming red? His national team career exposed him. For a player who was always mentioned no worse than top 3 or 4 ever in the EPL do so awfully bad in Europe both club and country?

http://www.givemesport.com/1092549-chel ... -III-1sted


He was a fantastic player, AG.

I'd say Scholes was in the top four central midfielders I've seen in the PL era...........Keane, Vieira, Scholes and Gerrard would be my top four (in no particular order).

I would keep it to the first three as I think Gerrard is a level below. The other three were superb players. Among the very best in Europe at the time. There is nobody close in the PL today.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472418  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

socrates wrote:
AmericanGooner wrote:
The overrated ginger prince Paul Scholes? Chelsea fans think so. I didn't think he was as good as advertised. I saw very fine player but frankly, not as good as most said he was. It was either believe you lot or my lying eyes. Still, one has to respect even the great (greatest) Vieira saying Scholes was the best midfielder he played against. I saw a player who had an uncanny ability to arrive outside or inside box at the right time and good vision. I never bought the 'he's a bad tackler'adage one bit. He was a nasty player in the tackle and referees coddled him. How can a so called bad tackler How in god's green earth does a known 'bad tackler' admittedly by his own manager get only 4 red cards in his career? Along with 97 yellow cards and such a low number becoming red? His national team career exposed him. For a player who was always mentioned no worse than top 3 or 4 ever in the EPL do so awfully bad in Europe both club and country?

http://www.givemesport.com/1092549-chel ... -III-1sted


He was a fantastic player, AG.

I'd say Scholes was in the top four central midfielders I've seen in the PL era...........Keane, Vieira, Scholes and Gerrard would be my top four (in no particular order).


I won't rule out an ''Arsenal tinted" view. The link mentions Lampard again, who I think was a great player but also overrated in terms of how high he is held in actual talent.

I didn't see much of Keane pre-Vieira if at all but for me Vieira ruled, lord and master over all when he was in the mood. Gerrard had a bit of that but not to the same level, more attacking than Vieira. Scholes...hmm...I can't..just can't...haha..but I do concede he was a great player.

We can all agree he is, its just how great is the question. How much of his greatness was due to being in that coddled Man Utd team? Everyone on that list of yours did it for their country. It could be argued the national team exposed his shortcomings. :7laughter:

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472419  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7459

Bernard wrote:
Wilts-Gooner wrote:
Only works (for the fans) if you assume we will spend the said £50M.. our track record would say not so I say keep him, more likely is we have just spent it on Lacazette.

I take your point but doesn't our track record also say we won't win the league whether he stays or goes? So what's the point in not collecting the £50m now? Look, as I've said, if he stays and we win the title, then he goes on a Bosman, I'll consider it money well spent. But anything less than a fourteenth league win and I'll look on it as money thrown away. Money that could have been used to strengthen the team. You doubt it would be, and I can understand why. But if it wasn't, that's another factor about Wenger's management that I would feel deserves to be looked at very closely.

I'm not even sure a second, third or fourth place finish to get back into the Champions League would justify the decision. I do firmly believe Arsenal can qualify for the Champions League again with or without Sanchez, especially as I'm hoping Tottenham might struggle to maintain their standards of last season from playing at Wembley. What I'm much less sure about is winning the title if Sanchez sees out the last year of his contract. Perhaps I'm alone in seeing it this way, but for me the only outcome that would justify the risk is winning the title. In my view, anything less would make it a poor decision.

I think the fan reaction is a factor here. The anti-Wenger and anti-Kroenke sentiment hasn't gone away. If we sell Alexis to City, fans will be up in arms again. The best option for me would be to sell him and get in a top class player with the proceeds. If the Aguero swap is a possibility, that would be great.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472420  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:55 pm
Posts: 8756
Location: Singapore

AmericanGooner wrote:
Given the choice, would it be better to sell Sanchez and get top or near top dollar (or pound) now or have him for one more season along with our new buys so that we make sure we are top 4 and god forbid challenge the title?
If its the latter. Is he professional enough not to mope around for the season or does his will to win and compete override his not being sold?


I read Alexis as the type of person who will give his all. And I think this will only change if Wenger gets anal with him. I see Wenger as someone who will get anal with players who dare to speak of/to him (speak against obviously).

_________________
A new Chapter awaits!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472421  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:55 pm
Posts: 8756
Location: Singapore

dec wrote:
Bernard wrote:
I take your point but doesn't our track record also say we won't win the league whether he stays or goes? So what's the point in not collecting the £50m now? Look, as I've said, if he stays and we win the title, then he goes on a Bosman, I'll consider it money well spent. But anything less than a fourteenth league win and I'll look on it as money thrown away. Money that could have been used to strengthen the team. You doubt it would be, and I can understand why. But if it wasn't, that's another factor about Wenger's management that I would feel deserves to be looked at very closely.

I'm not even sure a second, third or fourth place finish to get back into the Champions League would justify the decision. I do firmly believe Arsenal can qualify for the Champions League again with or without Sanchez, especially as I'm hoping Tottenham might struggle to maintain their standards of last season from playing at Wembley. What I'm much less sure about is winning the title if Sanchez sees out the last year of his contract. Perhaps I'm alone in seeing it this way, but for me the only outcome that would justify the risk is winning the title. In my view, anything less would make it a poor decision.

I think the fan reaction is a factor here. The anti-Wenger and anti-Kroenke sentiment hasn't gone away. If we sell Alexis to City, fans will be up in arms again. The best option for me would be to sell him and get in a top class player with the proceeds. If the Aguero swap is a possibility, that would be great.


For me, a swap for Aguero is a good second option. Keeping Alexis is first.

_________________
A new Chapter awaits!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472422  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

dec wrote:
socrates wrote:

He was a fantastic player, AG.

I'd say Scholes was in the top four central midfielders I've seen in the PL era...........Keane, Vieira, Scholes and Gerrard would be my top four (in no particular order).

I would keep it to the first three as I think Gerrard is a level below. The other three were superb players. Among the very best in Europe at the time. There is nobody close in the PL today.


Funnily enough, I'd probably say that as an all round player Gerrard was the best of the lot.

He had a bit of everything (technique, vision and a great range of passing, power, pace, desire and a bit of a nasty streak). He could do just about everything on a football pitch and could play in multiple positions. I think he should have gone to Madrid or Barca in his prime rather than stay at Liverpool.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472423  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

dec wrote:
Bernard wrote:
I take your point but doesn't our track record also say we won't win the league whether he stays or goes? So what's the point in not collecting the £50m now? Look, as I've said, if he stays and we win the title, then he goes on a Bosman, I'll consider it money well spent. But anything less than a fourteenth league win and I'll look on it as money thrown away. Money that could have been used to strengthen the team. You doubt it would be, and I can understand why. But if it wasn't, that's another factor about Wenger's management that I would feel deserves to be looked at very closely.

I'm not even sure a second, third or fourth place finish to get back into the Champions League would justify the decision. I do firmly believe Arsenal can qualify for the Champions League again with or without Sanchez, especially as I'm hoping Tottenham might struggle to maintain their standards of last season from playing at Wembley. What I'm much less sure about is winning the title if Sanchez sees out the last year of his contract. Perhaps I'm alone in seeing it this way, but for me the only outcome that would justify the risk is winning the title. In my view, anything less would make it a poor decision.

I think the fan reaction is a factor here. The anti-Wenger and anti-Kroenke sentiment hasn't gone away. If we sell Alexis to City, fans will be up in arms again. The best option for me would be to sell him and get in a top class player with the proceeds. If the Aguero swap is a possibility, that would be great.


I just hope Lacazette isn't the replacement for Alexis. If he is then we still need at least another 3 topclass players to even think about competing for the league.

Looking around at what's available to us (ruling out Mbappe) it's hard to see a like-for-like player who would provide the same number of goals and assists so we are almost needing to buy two players to replace one.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472424  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:04 am 

dec wrote:
Bernard wrote:
I take your point but doesn't our track record also say we won't win the league whether he stays or goes? So what's the point in not collecting the £50m now? Look, as I've said, if he stays and we win the title, then he goes on a Bosman, I'll consider it money well spent. But anything less than a fourteenth league win and I'll look on it as money thrown away. Money that could have been used to strengthen the team. You doubt it would be, and I can understand why. But if it wasn't, that's another factor about Wenger's management that I would feel deserves to be looked at very closely.

I'm not even sure a second, third or fourth place finish to get back into the Champions League would justify the decision. I do firmly believe Arsenal can qualify for the Champions League again with or without Sanchez, especially as I'm hoping Tottenham might struggle to maintain their standards of last season from playing at Wembley. What I'm much less sure about is winning the title if Sanchez sees out the last year of his contract. Perhaps I'm alone in seeing it this way, but for me the only outcome that would justify the risk is winning the title. In my view, anything less would make it a poor decision.

I think the fan reaction is a factor here. The anti-Wenger and anti-Kroenke sentiment hasn't gone away. If we sell Alexis to City, fans will be up in arms again. The best option for me would be to sell him and get in a top class player with the proceeds. If the Aguero swap is a possibility, that would be great.

I certainly accept the reaction of fans is a factor shaping the decision, if the decision to keep him is made. But the club was happy enough to ignore fan opinion over Wenger's contract renewal so they're picking and choosing when to take account of fan reaction, which I'm not saying is wrong. I'm just suggesting they've possibly got it the wrong way round in ignoring and abiding with fan opinion. But I'm with you on this. The best option would be to sell him now and recruit a top level player with the £50m. If we end up kissing goodbye to the £50m and not winning the title next season, I think supporters may be less understanding of any explanation for the shortfall with 'we could not compete financially with the Manchester clubs or Chelsea'.


  
 
 
Post #472425  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:05 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:38 pm
Posts: 5032
Location: ɹǝpu∩uʍop

So, Arsenal is playing in Sydney on Thursday 13 July at ANZ Stadium and then against the Western Sydney Wanderers on Saturday 15 July.

I've been offered tickets to see them for $ 49. I might get an even better offer though I'm not sure.

Anyway, I've already decided what I'm going to do. The decision I've made is quite clear in my mind but I can't tell anyone just yet.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472426  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7959

Definitely with Bernard and Dec on this. If Alexis doesn't sign on, selling now and replacing with a top class player is the best option. I'd accept Aguero or someone on that level. How would we replace his goals? We've lost players that have scored 30 in recent years (Adebayor/RVP) and improved our scoring record in the following season. For example we scored 12 more as a team when Giroud came in. Also if we're talking straight stats and how we'll replace goals then surely we have to consider how Theo's goals will be made up if he leaves (and Giroud). For a player that doesn't play all the time, Theo has a hell of a return from the right wing.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472427  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

Rooney back to Everton eh? He goes full circle. My guess he lasted as long as he has at Man Utd the last couple years when he was obviously past it, is because of legendary status and for him to get the goal scoring record.

His getting a rumored 250k a week is nuts though. I have to assume Man Utd is forgoing a fee and the fee is applied to his wages.

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472428  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16975

warrior wrote:
So, Arsenal is playing in Sydney on Thursday 13 July at ANZ Stadium and then against the Western Sydney Wanderers on Saturday 15 July.

I've been offered tickets to see them for $ 49. I might get an even better offer though I'm not sure.

Anyway, I've already decided what I'm going to do. The decision I've made is quite clear in my mind but I can't tell anyone just yet.

:1laughter:

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472429  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:53 pm
Posts: 16975

socrates wrote:
dec wrote:
I would keep it to the first three as I think Gerrard is a level below. The other three were superb players. Among the very best in Europe at the time. There is nobody close in the PL today.


Funnily enough, I'd probably say that as an all round player Gerrard was the best of the lot.

He had a bit of everything (technique, vision and a great range of passing, power, pace, desire and a bit of a nasty streak). He could do just about everything on a football pitch and could play in multiple positions. I think he should have gone to Madrid or Barca in his prime rather than stay at Liverpool.

All bias aside, it has to be Patrick Vieira.

_________________
It's a terrible love and I'm walking with spiders.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472430  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 12492

Sabir wrote:
Definitely with Bernard and Dec on this. If Alexis doesn't sign on, selling now and replacing with a top class player is the best option. I'd accept Aguero or someone on that level. How would we replace his goals? We've lost players that have scored 30 in recent years (Adebayor/RVP) and improved our scoring record in the following season. For example we scored 12 more as a team when Giroud came in. Also if we're talking straight stats and how we'll replace goals then surely we have to consider how Theo's goals will be made up if he leaves (and Giroud). For a player that doesn't play all the time, Theo has a hell of a return from the right wing.


The key thing for next season is to watch how Lacazette operates and his impact. He clearly is a better finisher than most of our current natural strikers and the fact we will have more pace and movement further up the pitch will benefit us. If we sold sanchez and signed Mahrez or a wide player who contributed 15 goals plus assist and Lacazette scored 30 we'd be covered.

I'd also just let sanchez run his contract down but not Özil. Lacazette, Mesut and sanchez in the final third is pretty serious firepower on paper and we could make a title charge if wenger can keep the defence tight (don't laugh)


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472431  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:03 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 12492

Everton must be off their rocker if they are going to pay fatboy his 250k a week. that chubby little *%^@ looks well past his best


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472432  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

gooner7 wrote:
For me, a swap for Aguero is a good second option. Keeping Alexis is first.


I forgot about this possible option. It would be the best option probably. My fear is that Aguero sees us as a step down and his heart is not in it. Plus his injury record.

I think he'd see the quality players around him, London as a world class city and first class facilities at The Arsenal and end up liking it...I hope.

Aguero, Lacazette, Özil, possibly the Monaco winger or Mahrez....ooh wee!

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472433  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 29836

So far we seem to be spending money well. My fear is Wenger and 50 million. Will it be spent? And secondly, will it be spent wisely if it is? He seems to like his reputation for making money for the club in net transfer spending.

_________________
"What is best in life?
Conan: "Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentations of their women"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472434  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 7459

TOP GUN wrote:
Everton must be off their rocker if they are going to pay fatboy his 250k a week. that chubby little *%^@ looks well past his best

Everton have already spent close to £100m this summer. The TV money is really kicking in.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472435  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

Niall wrote:
socrates wrote:

Funnily enough, I'd probably say that as an all round player Gerrard was the best of the lot.

He had a bit of everything (technique, vision and a great range of passing, power, pace, desire and a bit of a nasty streak). He could do just about everything on a football pitch and could play in multiple positions. I think he should have gone to Madrid or Barca in his prime rather than stay at Liverpool.

All bias aside, it has to be Patrick Vieira.


I'd probably go Gerrard, Scholes, Keane, Vieira mainly because Gerrard and Scholes had goals in the repertoire. Keane would be ahead of Vieira purely because of his incredible will to win and ability to drive his team on whatever the circumstances. Basically he was a nasty *%^@** who lead from the front and inspired/bullied his teamates into performing whilst intimidating his opponents.

Not much to choose between any of them to be honest.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472436  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 1:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:52 pm
Posts: 13128

Niall wrote:
socrates wrote:

Funnily enough, I'd probably say that as an all round player Gerrard was the best of the lot.

He had a bit of everything (technique, vision and a great range of passing, power, pace, desire and a bit of a nasty streak). He could do just about everything on a football pitch and could play in multiple positions. I think he should have gone to Madrid or Barca in his prime rather than stay at Liverpool.

All bias aside, it has to be Patrick Vieira.

Vieira all day long. End of discussion. Thanks.

PS. Scholes was the best English player of his generation by miles.

_________________
There's a man who's been out sailing in a decade full of dreams


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472437  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7959

PV4 in his peak was the best midfield player in the Premiership era. The way he bossed the middle of the mark, sometimes single handedly was unique and that included games against Utd when he absolutely schooled Keane. Vieira number one, Keane (who did have more longevity) second.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472438  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:46 pm
Posts: 2587

Vieira.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472439  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

Sabir wrote:
PV4 in his peak was the best midfield player in the Premiership era. The way he bossed the middle of the mark, sometimes single handedly was unique and that included games against Utd when he absolutely schooled Keane. Vieira number one, Keane (who did have more longevity) second.


Not sure about that Sab, how many times did he school Keane, infact how many times did we get the better of United full stop?.

I can't recall too many.

Was it the game when there was the famous fracas in the tunnel and we ended up losing 4-2 at home?


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472440  Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 2:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18771

Darren wrote:
Niall wrote:
All bias aside, it has to be Patrick Vieira.

Vieira all day long. End of discussion. Thanks.

PS. Scholes was the best English player of his generation by miles.


Gerrard edged it for me. Scholes was the best technically and could control a game with his passing and incredible game intelligence but Gerrard was the better all round player......better athlete, quicker, stronger, taller, more dynamic, more versatile. He won games for the scousers virtually on his own whereas Scholesy, as good as he was, had far better players around him.


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     [ 519113 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 11808, 11809, 11810, 11811, 11812, 11813, 11814 ... 12978  Next

All times are UTC

Gooners Online - Click to see what Everyones Doing

Colour Key:  Visited Profile    Members Profile      Admin

Get Latest Post

Users browsing this forum: Bernard, Bing [Bot], warrior and 7 guests


Search for:

Go to Top

Powered by php BB © 1993 - 2018