Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread Summer 2015

Quazzie · 27-08-2015 11:28pm

emmetlego wrote: »

Great piece by Tim Stillman
http://p1r.es/1hhHrnD
Explains transfer season very well for Arsenal fans!

June 2nd 2003.

That's the date he forgot.

That's the date Roman Abramovich agreed to buy Chelsea. That's the day that oil money changed the face of football forever. That's the day the Title race was no longer a two horse race, but now a three horse race.

Talk about cohesion all you want, but it's a known fact that oil is a great preventer of cohesion.

emmetlego · 28-08-2015 12:05am

Quazzie wrote: »

June 2nd 2003.

That's the date he forgot.

That's the date Roman Abramovich agreed to buy Chelsea. That's the day that oil money changed the face of football forever. That's the day the Title race was no longer a two horse race, but now a three horse race.

Talk about cohesion all you want, but it's a known fact that oil is a great preventer of cohesion.

Next, you have to imagine the world without Arsene, where Arsenal get lost in the past, by a manager who didn't think of the future, and just thought of the present... He would have bought titles by spending on wages keeping your Nasri and your Cole and your RVP... But we'd be bankrupt in our 40k seater stadium...

What this man has done for us, and now delivered 2 x FA cups... and brought in Ozil, Alexis and Petr...

Yeah. Sack this twit. He hasn't a clue.

If you don't see why AW is a living God, I'm afraid you are "Arsenal blind"!

Quazzie · 28-08-2015 12:13am

emmetlego wrote: »

Next, you have to imagine the world without Arsene, where Arsenal get lost in the past, by a manager who didn't think of the future, and just thought of the present... He would have bought titles by spending on wages keeping your Nasri and your Cole and your RVP... But we'd be bankrupt in our 40k seater stadium...

What this man has done for us, and now delivered 2 x FA cups... and brought in Ozil, Alexis and Petr...

Yeah. Sack this twit. He hasn't a clue.

If you don't see why AW is a living God, I'm afraid you are "Arsenal blind"!

He has done brilliant for us in the past, but that is no reflection on what the future holds. In my opinion we will never win another title with Arsene in charge. That doesn't take away anything from what he has done for us to get us to this point, but in my opinion we need a better manager to take us forward.

gosplan · 28-08-2015 12:26am

Quazzie wrote: »

He has done brilliant for us in the past, but that is no reflection on what the future holds. In my opinion we will never win another title with Arsene in charge. That doesn't take away anything from what he has done for us to get us to this point, but in my opinion we need a better manager to take us forward.

I disagree.

There's a huge chance Wenger will never win another title but looking at the landscape for a min...

Chelsea - trying hard to spend about 150 million this summer (if reports of approach for Pogba are true)

City - prob will spend 150 million this summer

Man U - pouring money into the club for the last few years

Despite our healthy situation now, we still can't keep up with that spending. This means that we need a manager that can buck the odds. Yes, if we get someone new in, there's a chance they'll be a Diego Simeoni ... but probably not.

I think given the quality of the squad Wenger has assembled on a much smaller budget than our rivals, the change in fortunes against the top teams, the cup wins ... He deserves to take his time and keep trying.

farna_boy · 28-08-2015 12:31am

AdamD wrote: »

They're probably the only other strikers who have played 100 games for Arsenal in the pl...

Only if you don't count Wiltord, Kanu or RvP..

kronsington · 28-08-2015 3:11am

So wenger says per is apprehensive about taking antibiotics for his chest infection. And that Germans in general are skeptical about antibiotics. Is this for real? Can someone explain what the fook is going on here?

gosplan · 28-08-2015 5:43am

kronsington wrote: »

So wenger says per is apprehensive about taking antibiotics for his chest infection. And that Germans in general are skeptical about antibiotics. Is this for real? Can someone explain what the fook is going on here?

Depends if it's viral or bacterial and all of that.

I agree with the Germans tbh. Most things that doctors in Ireland fix in 2-3 days with antibiotics would be fixed in 3-4 days by just letting nature run its course and your immune system do the work.

Although I don't know the specifics of Per's case.

28-08-2015 5:51am

emmetlego wrote: »

Great piece by Tim Stillman
http://p1r.es/1hhHrnD
Explains transfer season very well for Arsenal fans!

I gave up reading Tim's pieces a good while ago. Always found his articles painful to read, like he'd gone back through ten times and added any kind of literary wizardry he could think of.

This is indeed an enjoyable read, however. He speaks a lot of sense. I particularly like how he talks of bridging the gap to Chelsea, echoes what you read in this thread all the time.

CatInABox · 28-08-2015 5:56am

gosplan wrote: »

Depends if it's viral or bacterial and all of that.

I agree with the Germans tbh. Most things that doctors in Ireland fix in 2-3 days with antibiotics would be fixed in 3-4 days by just letting nature run its course and your immune system do the work.

Although I don't know the specifics of Per's case.

Yeah, I'm far more wary of medication these days. I had a tooth implant a few years back, which required a strong antibiotic. Turns out that it was too strong, and ruined my digestive system. It's only on the last year that I've gotten it back on track, and that's only by trail and error finding out which food I can and can't eat.

Still love modern medicine, but just aware now that if its not life threatening, then you might be better off toughing it out.

emergingstar · 28-08-2015 7:00am

Quazzie wrote: »

He has done brilliant for us in the past, but that is no reflection on what the future holds. In my opinion we will never win another title with Arsene in charge. That doesn't take away anything from what he has done for us to get us to this point, but in my opinion we need a better manager to take us forward.

I like this post I 100% disagree with it buts it's a ractional post

No insults petty name calling, appreciate what he done but want change

That's fair enough really

Soups123 · 28-08-2015 9:08am

gosplan wrote: »

I disagree.

Chelsea - trying hard to spend about 150 million this summer (if reports of approach for Pogba are true)

City - prob will spend 150 million this summer

Man U - pouring money into the club for the last few years

Despite our healthy situation now, we still can't keep up with that spending.

Your wrong with new TV deals and our own new sponsorship we can compete very closely to those amounts. We could comfortably spend 100m this summer.

We were lesser of while we were building the Emirates but don't kid yourself thinking we don't have money in bucket loads

symbolic · 28-08-2015 9:23am

Soups123 wrote: »

Your wrong with new TV deals and our own new sponsorship we can compete very closely to those amounts. We could comfortably spend 100m this summer.

We were lesser of while we were building the Emirates but don't kid yourself thinking we don't have money in bucket loads

Is it a bit different with Arsenal though, the money was hard earned. Needs to be spent wisely. I think in Chelsea's case there's always more where that came from, ya know. It doesn't matter if it doesn't work out.

duffman13 · 28-08-2015 9:31am

symbolic wrote: »

Is it a bit different with Arsenal though, the money was hard earned. Needs to be spent wisely. I think in Chelsea's case there's always more where that came from, ya know. It doesn't matter if it doesn't work out.

Chelsea seem to be self sufficient now. Arsenal are have done fantastically to build that stadium and position the club where it is now. They have plenty of money to spend but for some reason seem reluctant to spend.

The money at Arsenal is consistent and year on year you guys seem to clear 100 million profit (when you add purchases to profit) so why not spend. There is also over 100 million in a reserve. Arsenal have money to spend and if I was a fan I'd be wondering is it the board being tight or Wenger not wanting to spend.

greendom · 28-08-2015 9:41am

duffman13 wrote: »

Chelsea seem to be self sufficient now. Arsenal are have done fantastically to build that stadium and position the club where it is now. They have plenty of money to spend but for some reason seem reluctant to spend.

The money at Arsenal is consistent and year on year you guys seem to clear 100 million profit (when you add purchases to profit) so why not spend. There is also over 100 million in a reserve. Arsenal have money to spend and if I was a fan I'd be wondering is it the board being tight or Wenger not wanting to spend.

The article that's been discussed a fair bit in the posts above gives an excellent hypothesis...

http://arseblog.com/2015/08/stone-cold-dead-in-the-market/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

greendom · 28-08-2015 9:50am

I imagine, if we do buy anyone, it will be left till the very last day, in the hope that a big name will become available. If that doesn't happen, then we may go for someone lower down the list.

symbolic · 28-08-2015 9:51am

duffman13 wrote: »

Chelsea seem to be self sufficient now. Arsenal are have done fantastically to build that stadium and position the club where it is now. They have plenty of money to spend but for some reason seem reluctant to spend.

Yeah like Chelsea are self sufficient now after the massive cash injection. Where as Arsenal have been building to compete with the massive cash injection whilst having to be self sufficient along the way. I know I'd be a bit more wise spending if I had taken the Arsenal path!

I think Wenger has proved he will spend when the player comes along, but I still think Chelsea would always be at Arsenal to a player if it came down to money. They have the upper hand cause they can just inject more money. Well I think they can?

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 28-08-2015 10:06am

It's funny how Draxler's name disappeared completely considering our upposed interest a few years ago. Although in fairness he is another winger/attacking midfielder so arguably not really necessary, and he has had his injury problems.

emmetlego · 28-08-2015 10:17am

Some English media reporting Benzema again today... Zzzzzz

greendom · 28-08-2015 10:18am

He's no longer our player but this made me laugh...

2BB6AD6D00000578-0-Lukas_Podolski-a-2_1440699569322.jpg

tayto lover · 28-08-2015 11:33am

Quazzie wrote: »

He has done brilliant for us in the past, but that is no reflection on what the future holds. In my opinion we will never win another title with Arsene in charge. That doesn't take away anything from what he has done for us to get us to this point, but in my opinion we need a better manager to take us forward.

Good post.
The problem with Wenger, as I see it, is that he dithers.
Too slow to make changes when things are not going well.
Too naive in his tactics. Plenty of evidence for that over the years.
Training methods - i.e we have people who can't kick a good corner.

He now also has the money as many have said yet he dithers over spending. Get in early and get your man is not his way. Then he complains that the market is bad and the players are not there. The small hole becomes a chasm before he attempts to fix it.

greendom · 28-08-2015 11:41am

tayto lover wrote: »

Good post.
The problem with Wenger, as I see it, is that he dithers.
Too slow to make changes when things are not going well.
Too naive in his tactics. Plenty of evidence for that over the years.
Training methods - i.e we have people who can't kick a good corner.

He now also has the money as many have said yet he dithers over spending. Get in early and get your man is not his way. Then he complains that the market is bad and the players are not there. The small hole becomes a chasm before he attempts to fix it.

Tayto, you love to bang the Arsenal bad at corners drum. We actually pretty reasonable at them compared to the rest of the EPL

http://www.espnfc.com/blog/tactics-and-analysis/67/post/2256611/corner-kicks-a-dying-art-in-the-premier-league

Ken Shamrock · 28-08-2015 11:46am

greendom wrote: »

Tayto, you love to bang the Arsenal bad at corners drum. We actually pretty reasonable at them compared to the rest of the EPL

http://www.espnfc.com/blog/tactics-and-analysis/67/post/2256611/corner-kicks-a-dying-art-in-the-premier-league

In a league where corners are a dying art, we are the 11th best at them?

You realise this just reinforces the fact that we are poor at taking corners.

Marcus Antonius · 28-08-2015 11:49am

greendom wrote: »

Tayto, you love to bang the Arsenal bad at corners drum. We actually pretty reasonable at them compared to the rest of the EPL

http://www.espnfc.com/blog/tactics-and-analysis/67/post/2256611/corner-kicks-a-dying-art-in-the-premier-league

We had a 166 corners and got 4 goals...we had the most corners and half the amount of goals of the highest scoring team. Our corners frustrate the hell out of me also, so often not getting past the first man. There's no excuse.

greendom · 28-08-2015 11:54am

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

In a league where corners are a dying art, we are the 11th best at them?

You realise this just reinforces the fact that we are poor at taking corners.

It means we're average at them, not dire as Tayto suggests. When you consider that we don't have a particularly tall/imposing squad, that's a reasonable amount imo.

Yes 11th but we're pretty close to the 5 or 6 teams above us.

Not saying we can't improve, but unless we change the physical nature of our squad then it's going to be pretty difficult.

Mickeroo · 28-08-2015 11:56am

greendom wrote: »

It means we're average at them, not dire as Tayto suggests. When you consider that we don't have a particularly tall/imposing squad, that's a reasonable amount imo.

Yes 11th but we're pretty close to the 5 or 6 teams above us.

Not saying we can't improve, but unless we change the physical nature of our squad then it's going to be pretty difficult.

The delivery is usually really bad though, high looping balls that are very easy to deal with.

Ken Shamrock · 28-08-2015 11:59am

greendom wrote: »

It means we're average at them, not dire as Tayto suggests. When you consider that we don't have a particularly tall/imposing squad, that's a reasonable amount imo.

Yes 11th but we're pretty close to the 5 or 6 teams above us.

Not saying we can't improve, but unless we change the physical nature of our squad then it's going to be pretty difficult.

It doesn't mean we're average, It means we are average/below average In a league where the corner conversion rate Is poor to begin with.

You don't need stats to see that the majority of our corners have poor delivery's and In a lot of cases end up with the opponents launching a counter attack.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:01pm

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

It doesn't mean we're average, It means we are average/below average In a league where the corner conversion rate Is poor to begin with.

You don't need stats to see that the majority of our corners have poor delivery's and In a lot of cases end up with the opponents launching a counter attack.

11th is bang average, with or without negative gloss

Marcus Antonius · 28-08-2015 12:02pm

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

It doesn't mean we're average, It means we are average/below average In a league where the corner conversion rate Is poor to begin with.

You don't need stats to see that the majority of our corners have poor delivery's and In a lot of cases end up with the opponents launching a counter attack.

Exactly, it'd be interesting to see how many of our own corners we concede from. I'm always more worried about letting a goal in from a counter attack when we're taking a corner than actually scoring one!

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:04pm

Marcus Antonius wrote: »

Exactly, it'd be interesting to see how many of our own corners we concede from. I'm always more worried about letting a goal in from a counter attack when we're taking a corner than actually scoring one!

It's hard enough finding data on scoring from corners (the article I quoted was from January) so good luck in finding that !

Needless to say I imagine it will be less than you imagine!

Ken Shamrock · 28-08-2015 12:04pm

greendom wrote: »

11th is bang average, with or without negative gloss

Whatever way you want to paint It, we're poor at corners, they need to improve.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:06pm

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

Whatever way you want to paint It, we're poor at corners, they need to improve.

We'd need to improve on the physical dominance and height of our players.

Unless we do that I don't think we'll ever be particularly strong at them.

Nemeses2050 · 28-08-2015 12:06pm

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

It doesn't mean we're average, It means we are average/below average In a league where the corner conversion rate Is poor to begin with.

You don't need stats to see that the majority of our corners have poor delivery's and In a lot of cases end up with the opponents launching a counter attack.

Have to agree with Bob here, irrespective of whether we're average or not, we concede so many times straight from our Corners/set pieces, That's just poor delivery/tactic's/Naivety/stupidity whatever you wanna call it.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:08pm

Nemeses2050 wrote: »

Have to agree with Bob here, irrespective of whether we're average or not, we concede so many times straight from our Corners/set pieces, That's just poor tactic's/Naivety/stupidity whatever you wanna call it.

You'll need to refresh my memory on this? I probably filter out bad stuff, but I can't remember that happening much last season

Mickeroo · 28-08-2015 12:15pm

Yeah, as bad as our corners are I'm not sure I buy that we concede a lot from them, people say it a lot but I can't think of any instances. Anyone remember any?

Ken Shamrock · 28-08-2015 12:19pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah, as bad as our corners are I'm not sure I buy that we concede a lot from them, people say it a lot but I can't think of any instances. Anyone remember any?

I never said we concede from them, It's just a lot of the time our corners end up being a counter attack for our opponents.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:20pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah, as bad as our corners are I'm not sure I buy that we concede a lot from them, people say it a lot but I can't think of any instances. Anyone remember any?

There was that one from a couple of seasons ago away to Palace I remember, where the positioning was simply awful and Hansen banged on about it for about 20 minutes on MOTD.

Kirby · 28-08-2015 12:21pm

greendom wrote: »

We'd need to improve on the physical dominance and height of our players.

Unless we do that I don't think we'll ever be particularly strong at them.

Scoring from corners has very, very little to do with height. If you examine the dangerous players in the from set pieces around europe, many of them are of average height. There are plenty of tall players out there who have never scored from a corner.

It's about the delivery. If you put the ball between both posts in the six yard box, with a ton of pace, you will score quite alot of goals based on physics alone. You could have zero attackers in the box and only opposition defenders and if you whip the ball in well, eventually it's going to go in off them.

Simply put, if you do it enough times its eventually going to go in. But an underhit, overhit or short corner has zero chance of this happening and thats the issue. It's similar to the old saying about missing every shot you dont take.

It's the delivery. Players arent robots and they are going to mess up a few corners every now and then but if you can get a guy to put 7 out of 10 corners in the same area every time, you are going to score a lot of goals from it.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:25pm

Kirby wrote: »

Scoring from corners has very, very little to do with height. If you examine the dangerous players in the from set pieces around europe, many of them are of average height. There are plenty of tall players out there who have never scored from a corner.

It's about the delivery. If you put the ball between both posts in the six yard box, with a ton of pace, you will score quite alot of goals based on physics alone. You could have zero attackers in the box and only opposition defenders and if you whip the ball in well, eventually it's going to go in off them.

Simply put, if you do it enough times its eventually going to go in. But an underhit, overhit or short corner has zero chance of this happening and thats the issue. It's similar to the old saying about missing every shot you dont take.

It's the delivery.

Accoring to this table in Santi Cazorla we have one of the best corner takers in the league. But only 1 of his 14 key passes (excellent corners) resulted in an assist. Surely that would improve if he was banging the ball in to bigger players?

whoscored_800x450.jpg&w=738&site=espnfc

Mickeroo · 28-08-2015 12:27pm

Depends what they've defined as a key pass really.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:28pm

Ken Shamrock wrote: »

I never said we concede from them, It's just a lot of the time our corners end up being a counter attack for our opponents.

It was Nemeses2050 who said that

Nemeses2050 · 28-08-2015 12:28pm

greendom wrote: »

You'll need to refresh my memory on this? I probably filter out bad stuff, but I can't remember that happening much last season

I'm sure if you google it you can get all those stats, clearly remember United/Chelsea hitting us on the break from our set-pieces many a times anyway here's one from our defeat to United last season.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/9575594/premier-league-counter-attacking-united-punish-wasteful-arsenal

AdamD · 28-08-2015 12:29pm

A key pass is a pass which leads to a shot. So Santi's corners have led to 14 shots/headers on goal with only 1 going in.

Kirby · 28-08-2015 12:30pm

greendom wrote: »

Accoring to this table in Santi Cazorla we have one of the best corner takers in the league. But only 1 of his 14 key passes (excellent corners) resulted in an assist. Surely that would improve if he was banging the ball in to bigger players?

Thats very broad statistical analysis. What constitutes a key pass? A chance? How good a chance? What areas is he putting them into? and so on. How long is the timer on their "key pass" metric? For example if it gets cleared to the edge of the box and a shot comes in.....does that count? Nobody knows.

Hitting the ball to near post to the run Mertesacker makes isnt going to score many goals because you are outside of the posts. It's incredibly difficult to score from there. So that might be considered a "key pass" but in actuality you could give him that chance 20 times and he will likely wont score.

Similarly, floating one into the penalty spot is just as fruitless. With no pace on the ball, the defenders can set themselves and also the keeper can come collect it. Just because an Arsenal man gets a head on it and it floats over the bar doesnt make it a good chance or even a good corner.

As I said, whipped in to the six yard box, between the posts with pace. It's the most efficient way to do it.

greendom · 28-08-2015 12:31pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Depends what they've defined as a key pass really.

presumably not over-hit, but passing the first man without going straight into the goal-keepers hands ?

Mickeroo · 28-08-2015 12:32pm

AdamD wrote: »

A key pass is a pass which leads to a shot. So Santi's corners have led to 14 shots/headers on goal with only 1 going in.

The corners Santi usually takes, in my opinion, are usually delivered in a way that makes it very hard for whoever is on the end of it to get much power into a header.

AdamD · 28-08-2015 12:33pm

To clarify: A key pass is a pass which directly leads to a shot. So Santi passing it to the shooter without anyone touching it in between.

Mickeroo wrote: »

The corners Santi usually takes, in my opinion, are usually delivered in a way that makes it very hard for whoever is on the end of it to get much power into a header.

I agree. Theo's my favourite corner taker in our squad as he really whips them in. Ox and Ramsey are dreadful when they take them as the just float them, Ozil's pretty good.

Kirby · 28-08-2015 12:36pm

AdamD wrote: »

To clarify: A key pass is a pass which directly leads to a shot. So Santi passing it to the shooter without anyone touching it in between.

Which is where a stat like that can lead you down the garden path. According to that type of "key pass" stat, a corner powered in where a player has merely to get any touch on it at all to score.....is the same as floating a ball outside the box for a volley.

Both are very different in actuality but that stat would have you believe they are the same. You have to use your own judgement and eyes on something like this. You know a good corner when you see it.

Ken Shamrock · 28-08-2015 12:37pm

greendom wrote: »

Accoring to this table in Santi Cazorla we have one of the best corner takers in the league. But only 1 of his 14 key passes (excellent corners) resulted in an assist. Surely that would improve if he was banging the ball in to bigger players?

You really love that table, I'd be fairly confident In saying that Joey Barton Is not the best corner taker In the league. But It was clear watching QPR last year that corners were something they practiced In training and took very seriously. I really wish I could say the same for us, and that's the main issue here.

wonga77 · 28-08-2015 12:47pm

We were second in total last year to Man City by the end of the season in corners gained. Its been a recurring theme the last few seasons that we get a large amount of corners and yet its not an area we excel in, I would wonder are teams happy to concede to us knowing we cant punish them?

Every time I watch a game and see us failing to beat the first man I imagine Tayto at home turning to the wife saying - I told you so, didnt I tell you he wouldnt put it over him

Bobby Baccala · 28-08-2015 12:53pm

Alexis a great corner taker, not sure why we still let Cazorla take them, average at best.

Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread Summer 2015

Comments