Arsenal Thread

Arshavin to call it a day at playing football?? Shocking stuff!
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...in-is-ready-to-retire-at-just-32-8565388.html

No doubt he's extremely gifted, but he does not seem to have a fighter's spirit and just turns away when faced with adversity. That sort of sums him up at Arsenal. Such a crying shame.

Especially saddening that he would probably prove his critics wrong if he were to play for another team, being used in his correct position, of course.

The truth is Wenger's system has never really suited him after around 2009-10 when Wenger decided 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 is the only way to play football. Which pisses me off, by the way. Just look at how Ferguson juggles different formations at United in order to get the best out of his players.

Sorry, I digress. Bottom line is it'd be such a shame if this is true.
 
That would be a shame, Arshavin is such a talented player, i would like to see him play for Spurs (or any other EPL club).

I'm not sure if it's Arshavin who wasted his talent or Wenger. I'm tempted to think Wenger.
 
I think both. Wenger insisted on playing him out of position, even when it became clear that he is terrible at going back and defending. Arshavin is a specialist, and Wenger's system is one aimed at versatility.
Look at Cazorla, who is a brilliant player. When he is played on the wings he doesn't do very well. Bayern scored the 3rd goal at the Emirates because he failed to track back. If Wenger decides Cazorla is a winger, he could be Arshavin MkII, who knows...
Maybe not. Because Arshavin has his share of responsibility in this. He had several chances to leave Arsenal, but didn't. He decided to sit on his contract and refused chances to play for Reading and other sides at Russia, like Anzhi.
In other words, he put lifestyle and status ahead of his career's sake.

Even if moving to another club to earn less money, I'd like to think I would move for the sake of my career if I was in Arshavin's place. I'd leave the Emirates with middle fingers flying high :LOL:
Anything but give up.
I hope he sees some sense and takes a turn for the best.
 
He was the ultimate definition of a confidence player. A lot of players are like that in the modern game but it was especially true of Arshavin. You could see how good he was when Dick Advocaat made him the key in the Zenit team and even more so when Hiddink built the Russia team from 2007-2010 around him. At first when he moved to Arsenal he was sensational, the 4-4 at Anfield was probably the best performance of an Arsenal player in a single game post Henry. But being pushed out to the periphary of the team either on the wings or the bizzare Wenger experiment of having him as a lone striker in some games utterly dented his confidence. The nail in the coffin was when Hiddink quit the Russia job (after they lost in the WC 2010 playoffs to Slovenia) and his form just ebbed away even more. Even when he did play the media would often critise him for being lazy when that was simply his style of play. The best example being the Gary Neville induced blaming of him for the Wellbeck goal at the Emirates last season. Neville said that "the lazy Arshavin didn't tackle Valencia and gave him free room to set up Wellback", but that ignored the fact that he tracked Valencia's run and showed him inside to the point where other Arsenal players (there actual defenders) should have been able to deal with the threat by either doubling up on Valencia or marking Wellbeck. Arshavin was never a defender and he did his job by blocking the shooting angle, slowing him and showing him inside to where the defenders where, what was he meant to do? Dive in and commit a rash tackle?

Both Wenger and Arshavin are to blame to an extent, but this is a Wenger who has extinguished the careers of many promising footballers by playing in the wrong positions or bizzare formations, or simply not playing them at all. So if you a promising attacking player who maybe has transient confidence it might be worth thinking about the risks of joining a team managed by Wenger. Last year he took the top scorer in the French league (Giroud) and has at best stagnated him this year, the year before he signed a promising 26 year old who had averaged 1-in-3 in a poor Monaco team who completely vanished for a year under Wenger but is now reviving his career at Vigo in Spain. Talking of attacking players in Spain there is Carlos Vela (never given a chance in 5 years under Wenger) who has now scored 25 goals in a season and a half in Spain. I do wonder could some of these players (and I'd include Arshavin) might had better careers at Arsenal if they'd been given as many concrete chances as say Wallcott (who has been indulged and allowed to masquarade as a striker) or especially Ramsey?
 
BobbyBox said:
The guys attitude was his biggest downfall, he only has himself to blame.
Click to expand...

If you mean in the sense that he could have done something about it, but didn't, then you're right.
He has a motivation problem, and probably accepted defeat at this Arsenal squad. When instead, he could have sought better fortune at pastures new, with a new manager who would play him in a role that suits him.

He loses all respect as a professional by making the choices he's made.

On the other hand, there's Wenger's terrible man management. You seem to leave Wenger completely exempt of any guilt, Bobby, but that's not the truth.

Wenger is way too stubborn with his ideas and right now he thinks football is only meant to be played in a 4-3-3 or 4-5-1, preferably with players of similar physical attributes and qualities all around the pitch.

I think he extends his socialist approach to management taking it to the football side as well.
Some players are different. Someone like Giroud or Bendtner are out and out strikers. However, the latter used to be deployed as a right winger! In the same sense, Cazorla is for the most part a creative player, and so is Arshavin. He is a specialist.
Wenger wants versatility and anything else that stands in the way of his philosophy will suffer.

Arshavin is meant to be a number 10 in a well balanced team that possibly has a dogfighter DMF. Brazilian teams are usually built like this, with specialists. A playmaker will have freedom to create without much defensive burden. While there will be a DMF focused on destruction, say a guy like Felipe Melo, Gilberto Silva, Emerson...
Something similar occurs in the Russia National Team, usually there are defensive minded midfielders focusing on destruction.
At Arsenal though, look at our team. We don't even have a DMF anymore to protect our already exposed back 4. Our DMF is Arteta! That says it all.

Sometimes I think Wenger's socialist dream applied to football is to have a team with 11 Aaron Ramseys. Players who do a little bit of everything, but don't excel at anything in particular.
I hope I'm wrong and this day never comes.
 
What a good post Edmundo.
Some English jouranlists-pundits only look at "work ethic", they put transpiration before inspiration...
Arshavin never deserved the negative commentaries he good after that Wellbeck goal.

I also agree about Walcott...
 
Was it Wenger that wanted him to track back and tackle all of the time? or was it the pundits pointing it out and then the fans?

Wenger kept playing him at the time. I still want to see the formations and the positions he played in when he had his best games for Arsenal? does anybody have a link to them? because I looked for them a while ago and couldn't find them.

For me Arshavin takes 90% of the blame, he is very weak mentally and that was his major downfall.

They say that 70% of running a marathon (Long distance) is mental and I would say the same for footballers. So many footballers have not fulfilled their talent to the max because of their mentality. Arshavin falls into this category for me big time.

There are quotes about him thinking of giving up football in the early days/middle of career because he wasn't that into it and his attitude about just wasting away at Arsenal shows he just hasn't got that attitude/mentality to have progressed any further. This attitude has blighted his career.

Edmundo good post but I disagree with some points you make. Giroud has had a decent first season and I think most would say going from the French to the Premier League is a bit of a step up and also a different style of play.

Bendtner is another whos mentality has ruined him more than Wenger ever has. The only way I will think WEnger was wrong if he starts banging in the goals on a regular basis and is near the top of the charts for whatever team he is in. Him going to Juventus was just stupid as well, he should have gone to a team where he was going to get lots of games and tried to prove himself (I know he was injured as well). Now he has his drink driving to add to the list of his stupidity.

People keep going on about Bendtner being a right winger as well, he was given many more chances as a centre forward but many people keep harping on about him being on the right wing. The ratio of games from him being a striker to a right winger would be 20/1 or something, so to keep berating Wenger for this is just highlighting the wrong thing (He also played a good few games in the time he was deployed as a right winger). Bendtner just wasn't good enough.

Vela was given quite a few chances and went out on loan a few times and never really set the world on fire. He has always shown promise but never really showed it when the chance was given to him at Arsenal. I think the Spanish style of play and teams just suits his style better, it happens. But Wenger also put a clause in that we could buy him back if we wanted, so Wenger always knew what a talent he was, that is why he kept him for so long.

Ju Young Park is a mystery, but do you really think if he was doing it in training he wouldn't have picked him? I don't understand peoples logic here. He must have just been terrible in training, why should Wenger pick him? Why would Wenger buy him and then deliberately not play him if he was playing well and showing signs he would do well? Is he doing that well at Vigo? I heard the other day he has about 3 goals in 20 odd games? (Correct me if I'm wrong)

To say Arshavin wasn't given concrete chances is just wrong as well, he was given chance after chance.

To say he has extinguished the careers of many promising young footballers is in my opinion a gross over statement as well. He has created many more successful careers than any he has arguably extinguished. If anybody can be bothered I would like to see a list for players he has made against players he has extinguished career wise. I can't be bothered, but I would be happy to be proved wrong :))

Some people talk about Arshavin like he is a bloody 9 year old, the guy is an adult, if he hasn't got the gumption to fucking pull himself together and play football the way he should, then he has no sympathy from me.

He is the main culprit for the way his career has gone, blaming Wenger for a big part of that is just a major cop out imo.
 
People just keep going on about Bendtner on the right wing simply because it's fucking absurd, don't you think?
A 6'4 striker who's not exactly a trickster as Gervinho or has the pace of Walcott. People go on about this because it's a classic case of Wenger sacrificing a player to fit into his sacred and unchangeable system.

I'd like to see the Bendtner matches too, I bet he didn't have nowhere near as many chances as a central striker as you suggest.
Some memories of him coming on as a sub and scoring as a CF comes to my mind. So do many memories of him starting as a winger and doing nothing.

Now, Bendtner is a nut case whose antics outside the pitch don't do him any favours. I don't feel much sympathy for him either, but I'm just throwing it out there.

Some managers change their system to adapt to the strengths of the players they have available, with the intention of getting the best out of them. And especially they adapt their team according to the opposition.
Wenger doesn't adapt nothing. We play the same way against Wigan or Man United. And that drives me crazy.

And yes, by deploying Arshavin in the left flank, he's expecting him to do exactly the things you said. Track back and tackle people. I think that's what English fans expect from wide players.
I know it's cultural, I get that. A mediocre player with a high work rate is always preferred than a 'lazy genius'.

What I don't get sometimes is that the work rate of Theo Walcott doesn't look that different from Arshavin's.
The masses are so easily manipulated, as we know. So when there are pundits like Neville saying that on Sky or Alan bloody Shearer and Alan Hansen bashing him on MOTD, things escalate.

Edmundo said it all, he got an undeserved and disproportionate amount of stick for that Man United goal, that was the pinnacle of his crisis at the club.

For Arshavin and other players it hasn't worked out well. But come to think of it, at least Andrei hasn't gone to the press criticising Wenger and doesn't drink and drive and smash cars.

I feel for the guy, but he should have fucked off a long time ago to rescue his career and prove his detractors wrong. I know he would.
 
Rentboy said:
People just keep going on about Bendtner on the right wing simply because it's fucking absurd, don't you think?
A 6'4 striker who's not exactly a trickster as Gervinho or has the pace of Walcott. People go on about this because it's a classic case of Wenger sacrificing a player to fit into his sacred and unchangeable system.

I'd like to see the Bendtner matches too, I bet he didn't have nowhere near as many chances as a central striker as you suggest.
Some memories of him coming on as a sub and scoring as a CF comes to my mind. So do many memories of him starting as a winger and doing nothing.

Now, Bendtner is a nut case whose antics outside the pitch don't do him any favours. I don't feel much sympathy for him either, but I'm just throwing it out there.

Some managers change their system to adapt to the strengths of the players they have available, with the intention of getting the best out of them. And especially they adapt their team according to the opposition.
Wenger doesn't adapt nothing. We play the same way against Wigan or Man United. And that drives me crazy.

And yes, by deploying Arshavin in the left flank, he's expecting him to do exactly the things you said. Track back and tackle people. I think that's what English fans expect from wide players.
I know it's cultural, I get that. A mediocre player with a high work rate is always preferred than a 'lazy genius'.

What I don't get sometimes is that the work rate of Theo Walcott doesn't look that different from Arshavin's.
The masses are so easily manipulated, as we know. So when there are pundits like Neville saying that on Sky or Alan bloody Shearer and Alan Hansen bashing him on MOTD, things escalate.

Edmundo said it all, he got an undeserved and disproportionate amount of stick for that Man United goal, that was the pinnacle of his crisis at the club.

For Arshavin and other players it hasn't worked out well. But come to think of it, at least Andrei hasn't gone to the press criticising Wenger and doesn't drink and drive and smash cars.

I feel for the guy, but he should have fucked off a long time ago to rescue his career and prove his detractors wrong. I know he would.
Click to expand...

He actually did some quite good assists and crosses while out on the right wing. He just wasn't scoring goals, I think that is why everybody was thinking he was playing shit, when in fact the majority of games you could say he played really shit were few and far between in that role.

I don't know how you find out these things, but it would be great if anybody can see how many times Bendtner played as a striker to a winger?

He had 79 (another 78 as sub) starts for Arsenal and scored 45 goals if most of those were as a right winger as you suggest, that isn't a bad return is it for a 6"4' Winger with no pace etc etc?

In my mind it was the last full season that he was deployed in this role as winger, the other 3-4 seasons he played in his preferred striker role. Again I don't mind being proved wrong at all? if I'm wrong I am wrong.

Theo Walcott is our top goalscorer at the moment isn't he and also has quite a high number of assists? If Arshavin did the same I am sure he would be given the chance....but he rarely reached those heights of consistency for us and if he did, it was a very long time ago.

Look just for the record I think he was harshly criticised, he did a lot better than people suggested, even when he was not playing well. But at the time we needed somebody who gave more on the pitch and he was an easy scape goat, because when you are losing and you see a player not giving his all in games and coasting around, it is the first person you go to. He has himself to blame for this as well, don't just blame the pundits and Arsene Wenger, he could have given more to the cause (He did start to near the end, I will give him that, but it was too little too late).

He hasn't been a dick off the field that is true, because I just don't think he can be arsed, he is in his own little world and unfortunately his own little world has hampered him and the rest of us from seeing the player Arshavin could have been at Arsenal.
 
I agree that Bendtner wasn't good enough for a club like Arsenal. I think he also had attitude problems.
I always thought Arshavin was home sick, he played quite well when on loan with Zenith. If i can believe that article he will stay in England, so he isn't homesick.

But it is a fact that most Russian players never reach the same level aboroad as in Russia. Must be something cultural. I have 3 Russian colleagues at work and their mentality is miles off from how we think. The difference is much more huge than with people from Asian or Northern African background. I know this sounds almost racist, but i don't mean it in a bad way. I even like those people a lot, but sometimes we don't understand their reactions. Sometimes they react really radical...it's strange.
 
That's where I disagree with you and arseblog. The system Wenger implemented doesn't suit Arshavin to play him as a forward. When he was played as a central lone striker it was as bizarre as putting Gervinho there. And wide positions don't suit him either.
You just have to watch how he played as a free roaming playmaker for Russia to see the difference.

Under this system, the position where he could fit would be as the most advanced midfielder, the position where Cazorla plays today. But the Russian never had a chance there.

Wenger was somehow convinced he is a wide player, and never changed his mind, with typical stubbornness.

In the beginning of his Arsenal career, when everything was still alright and the fans were still on his side, Arshavin gave an interview to the Russian papers saying the boss asked him to play in different positions, but he would try to get on with it and adapt.

For me, it's clear Arshavin made his career as a free roaming second striker, playing centrally. That's how he played at Zenit and the Russian National team.
You just have to accept there are players like this, who are very specific and it won't work if you play them as a wide players (and please note that Wenger would play him as a wide midfielder too, in a 4-5-1 position). It's like a square peg in a round hole.

Before you ask how then he played so well in the beginning of his Arsenal career, I should remind you that Wenger changed formations in the 2009-10 season, when he was convinced that the Barcelona way is the only way to play football. But at Barcelona, the front 3 are interchangeable and they're free roaming (not to mention they're Messi, Villa and Sanchez).

As I said, Walcott's defensive work rate isn't much different from Arshavin's. And look at him, he's always on about being played as a central striker, that's all he ever says.

Another thing, what people haven't been mentioning (and nobody knows for sure) is the impact of his broken marriage. Nobody could know for sure what went on there, but we do know it can break some people.
I remember something similar happened to Rivaldo after he moved from Barcelona. He split with his wife, got distanced from his kids, and after that he hit rock bottom, he was just a shadow of the player he once was. Be it depression or mental illness, I don't know, but these things happen. It's just conjecture anyway.

What I can't get my head around though, is why he didn't move from Arsenal if it wasn't working for him. If he chose to stay for the fat wages and living in London, then it just shows he doesn't care anymore really.

Unlike other people, I don't hate him for it. It's just a sad story.
 
Rentboy said:
That's where I disagree with you and arseblog. The system Wenger implemented doesn't suit Arshavin to play him as a forward. When he was played as a central lone striker it was as bizarre as putting Gervinho there. And wide positions don't suit him either.
You just have to watch how he played as a free roaming playmaker for Russia to see the difference.

Under this system, the position where he could fit would be as the most advanced midfielder, the position where Cazorla plays today. But the Russian never had a chance there.

Wenger was somehow convinced he is a wide player, and never changed his mind, with typical stubbornness.

In the beginning of his Arsenal career, when everything was still alright and the fans were still on his side, Arshavin gave an interview to the Russian papers saying the boss asked him to play in different positions, but he would try to get on with it and adapt.

For me, it's clear Arshavin made his career as a free roaming second striker, playing centrally. That's how he played at Zenit and the Russian National team.
You just have to accept there are players like this, who are very specific and it won't work if you play them as a wide players (and please note that Wenger would play him as a wide midfielder too, in a 4-5-1 position). It's like a square peg in a round hole.

Before you ask how then he played so well in the beginning of his Arsenal career, I should remind you that Wenger changed formations in the 2009-10 season, when he was convinced that the Barcelona way is the only way to play football. But at Barcelona, the front 3 are interchangeable and they're free roaming (not to mention they're Messi, Villa and Sanchez).

As I said, Walcott's defensive work rate isn't much different from Arshavin's. And look at him, he's always on about being played as a central striker, that's all he ever says.

Another thing, what people haven't been mentioning (and nobody knows for sure) is the impact of his broken marriage. Nobody could know for sure what went on there, but we do know it can break some people.
I remember something similar happened to Rivaldo after he moved from Barcelona. He split with his wife, got distanced from his kids, and after that he hit rock bottom, he was just a shadow of the player he once was. Be it depression or mental illness, I don't know, but these things happen. It's just conjecture anyway.

What I can't get my head around though, is why he didn't move from Arsenal if it wasn't working for him. If he chose to stay for the fat wages and living in London, then it just shows he doesn't care anymore really.

Unlike other people, I don't hate him for it. It's just a sad story.
Click to expand...

He didn't play him in that central striker position for long and it was only due to injuries he was put there.

In my opinion Wenger played him as a left forward with permission to drift centrally into the center. His best games for Arsenal (From what I can remember) he did exactly that and it worked. (Again if somebody can find the formations played in his best games for us and prove that wrong then I am all ears/eyes ;)) ).

I just watched the Liverpool highlights of the 4-4 where 3 of his goals were from him coming in from the left.

So he managed to play very well in that position, so why shouldn't Wenger expect him to play well there in that same role? he obviously excelled there for that game and the few others he did well in. He had the freedom to come more centrally when we had the ball in attacking areas. But when we didn't have the ball he didn't do much. Walcott imo helps out the right back much more than Arshavin ever did for his left backs.

I don't think anybody hates him? they are just disappointed in him.
 
That's the salient point - you get some players who can only play in one position, they excel at that position but struggle to play in any other role. It doesnt mean the player is a bad footballer, it just means that they lack versatility, which in a lot of footballing cultures isnt a massive problem. Again it's one of the quirks of the English game that an average player who can play (averagely well) in a lot of positions is viewed as being superior to a player who excels at one position. It's like an extreme version of total football, except unskillfull players are lauded for being mediocre in several positions.

Wenger seems to be obsessed with converting players from their original role to other new roles. It's like some sort of twisted football alchemy, sometimes it can work very well (Henry) but a lot of times it runs a big risk of ruining a players mentality especially if they have fragile confidence. Why take the risk would be my question. If you want a striker play your number nine or sign a striker, if you want a winger play a winger (or sign one if you havent got one).

We're seeing this exact scenario happen now will Wallcott and Giroud. Wallcott is a pure winger, he has the physique of a winger and the speed of a winger and he doesnt quite have the finishing of a quality striker nor does he make the correct decisions. In Giroud you have the diametric opposite a big strong, hurley burley striker who bullys the opposition (in a good way) and is effective in the air, willing to get his head on the end of things, and usually makes good decisions in the box. This Giroud is a player who was top scorer in France last year (and he's been near the top of the scoring charts for a few seasons now), he was one of the major reasons why unfancied Montpellier won the league ahead of teams like PSG, Marseilles, Lille and Lyonnais. Yet was does Wenger do, he picks Wallcott to start the bulk of the season as a striker and leaves Giroud on the bench. Before mid Jan there was a whole spate of games where he benched Giroud (Sunderland, Southampton, City, Chelsea, Olympiacos, Schalke (H), Reading, Newcastle, Southampton again, Man City again).
 
cfdh_edmundo said:
That's the salient point - you get some players who can only play in one position, they excel at that position but struggle to play in any other role. It doesnt mean the player is a bad footballer, it just means that they lack versatility, which in a lot of footballing cultures isnt a massive problem. Again it's one of the quirks of the English game that an average player who can play (averagely well) in a lot of positions is viewed as being superior to a player who excels at one position. It's like an extreme version of total football, except unskillfull players are lauded for being mediocre in several positions.

Wenger seems to be obsessed with converting players from their original role to other new roles. It's like some sort of twisted football alchemy, sometimes it can work very well (Henry) but a lot of times it runs a big risk of ruining a players mentality especially if they have fragile confidence. Why take the risk would be my question. If you want a striker play your number nine or sign a striker, if you want a winger play a winger (or sign one if you havent got one).

We're seeing this exact scenario happen now will Wallcott and Giroud. Wallcott is a pure winger, he has the physique of a winger and the speed of a winger and he doesnt quite have the finishing of a quality striker nor does he make the correct decisions. In Giroud you have the diametric opposite a big strong, hurley burley striker who bullys the opposition (in a good way) and is effective in the air, willing to get his head on the end of things, and usually makes good decisions in the box. This Giroud is a player who was top scorer in France last year (and he's been near the top of the scoring charts for a few seasons now), he was one of the major reasons why unfancied Montpellier won the league ahead of teams like PSG, Marseilles, Lille and Lyonnais. Yet was does Wenger do, he picks Wallcott to start the bulk of the season as a striker and leaves Giroud on the bench. Before mid Jan there was a whole spate of games where he benched Giroud (Sunderland, Southampton, City, Chelsea, Olympiacos, Schalke (H), Reading, Newcastle, Southampton again, Man City again).
Click to expand...

Walcott playing centrally ahead of Giroud was more political than anything in my opinion. Before the end of Walcotts contract saga, he didn't even entertain the idea by playing him there, at the time he was playing centrally, taking free kicks and corners all of the time etc.

I would generally like to know what players you feel Wenger has tried to play in the wrong positions (and has been really detrimental for them and the team)? I feel the number is miniscule, but I would expect you to provide quite a compelling list to justify calling Wenger obsessed with doing it?

Wenger does make bad decisions that are sometimes baffling, but I really think people exaggerate quite a bit with it though.
 
BobbyBox said:
He didn't play him in that central striker position for long and it was only due to injuries he was put there.

In my opinion Wenger played him as a left forward with permission to drift centrally into the center. His best games for Arsenal (From what I can remember) he did exactly that and it worked. (Again if somebody can find the formations played in his best games for us and prove that wrong then I am all ears/eyes ;)) ).

I just watched the Liverpool highlights of the 4-4 where 3 of his goals were from him coming in from the left.
Click to expand...


But I think the key was he had a free role in those games you describe. He wasn't positionally deployed as an out and out left winger or left midfielder. He was playing off (or behind) Bendtner, the Danish player was his foil (in exactly the same way Pogrebnyak and to an extent Kerzakhov were his foils at Zenit and for Russia). Bendtner would be physical and occupy at least one of the Liverpool center backs (Agger / Carragher) and Arshavin had total freedom. Positionally he was supposed to be just behind Bendtner but in fact he could move whereever he wanted to, and he dragged Liverpool's defenders all over the place. He scored some of his goals from the left, but he also drifted out to the right and played 1-2 centrally with players like Fabregas. He had no defensive duty so he could drag Liverpool defenders all over the place and ruin their formation. It's exactly the syle he played with at Zenit when they won the UEFA in 2008 and excatly his role with Russia when they were senational in Euro 2008.

As soon as he was given the orthodox "Left Winger" role he was confined to that side of the pitch and given defensive duties. He couldnt roam the attacking half and drag the opposition full back around as he was restriced to moving up and down the side of the pitch. It's the same with playing as a lone striker he had to battle the opposition center backs on his own, (and that was a hideous decision to play someone of his physique as a lone striker, an utterly inept idea as he had no chance of winning the ball or doing anything against big physical centerbacks in the PL on his own).
 
BobbyBox said:
I don't think anybody hates him? they are just disappointed in him.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised to see the amount of abuse he got coming from the stands. I think I posted here before about my experience during an FA Cup tie against Aston Villa that I attended at the Emirates?
Arshavin was on the subs bench that night and, I kid you not, the mere mention of his name by the arena announcer prompted "fans" to boo him. My biggest disgust about it all is that he was roundly booed by a majority and those "fans" were the majority!
I had taken my girlfriend to that match and she was very surprised like "woah, this guy is not popular around here".

I mean, being abused by your own fans before you even had a chance to enter the pitch? I don't know how this hostile atmosphere would help any player.


cfdh_edmundo said:
Before mid Jan there was a whole spate of games where he benched Giroud (Sunderland, Southampton, City, Chelsea, Olympiacos, Schalke (H), Reading, Newcastle, Southampton again, Man City again).
Click to expand...

You nailed it. And you even forgot to mention that Walcott started against Bayern Munich too, in the first leg, and played more than 60 minutes as our lone striker in one of the most important matches of the season.

Walcott was kept inside their defence's pocket that whole night and it took over 1 hour for Wenger to make a change.
That's where we lost the tie IMO. Then for the 2nd leg, Giroud scored from the middle with an assist by Walcott coming from the flanks. Bingo! But it was too little too late.

I won't ramble on and on and on. All I'm saying is that I'm sick and tired of Wenger sticking to experiments that clearly are not working, such as Ramsey as a winger, Gervinho and Walcott as a centre forward (when Giroud was fit, which is disrespectful for such a hard working player), etc.
Wenger tried for too long to emulate a Barca side, but we haven't got a Messi. Instead, Gervinho was our false 9 in the beginning of the season. Pathetic!
I miss the good old Arsenal Wenger assembled based on his team's strengths.
 
cfdh_edmundo said:
But I think the key was he had a free role in those games you describe. He wasn't positionally deployed as an out and out left winger or left midfielder. He was playing off (or behind) Bendtner, the Danish player was his foil (in exactly the same way Pogrebnyak and to an extent Kerzakhov were his foils at Zenit and for Russia). Bendtner would be physical and occupy at least one of the Liverpool center backs (Agger / Carragher) and Arshavin had total freedom. Positionally he was supposed to be just behind Bendtner but in fact he could move whereever he wanted to, and he dragged Liverpool's defenders all over the place. He scored some of his goals from the left, but he also drifted out to the right and played 1-2 centrally with players like Fabregas. He had no defensive duty so he could drag Liverpool defenders all over the place and ruin their formation. It's exactly the syle he played with at Zenit when they won the UEFA in 2008 and excatly his role with Russia when they were senational in Euro 2008.

As soon as he was given the orthodox "Left Winger" role he was confined to that side of the pitch and given defensive duties. He couldnt roam the attacking half and drag the opposition full back around as he was restriced to moving up and down the side of the pitch. It's the same with playing as a lone striker he had to battle the opposition center backs on his own, (and that was a hideous decision to play someone of his physique as a lone striker, an utterly inept idea as he had no chance of winning the ball or doing anything against big physical centerbacks in the PL on his own).
Click to expand...

For me I don't think he was told to be that rigid while out on the left. When he was going through his 'bad patches' you could still see he had permission to get central and Arsene Wenger wanted him to do that.

The pundits and fans started to point out his defensive frailties and the vulerability of the full back behind him, fans got on his back about it. Wenger gets blamed for giving him more defensive duties, but did he really? or was it one of those things that was just assumed, because of what analysts and fans were saying and reacting to him at games?

For me he was still getting into the positions he was getting into when he had his best games, he was just less effective.

When you hear people saying he asked to reduce training sessions and his problem putting on the pounds. If he actually trained harder, then it might not have been that much of a problem for him to get back to help the full back once in a while. Just as he had the energy to run and roam from each side of the pitch, he could do the same just going in the opposite direction and tracking runs and still be effective going forward.

I admit, we may have seen more from him in that more central free roaming role just behind the striker. But he should have performed well in the position he was in (and he proved he could play well in anyway).

I do think he was a victim of the times though, we were struggling to win games at times and we needed a different player with a different mentality to play for us at that time. If he was playing in the team in the late 90's early 2000's he may have had more freedom.

But he wasn't, to be fair Wenger knew this a couple of seasons ago and has been trying to get rid of him for a while now and he just won't budge.

I can understand him wanting to stay in England so he can stay in EBRitain beyond his playing days, but he could have gone to a few teams over the last 2 years from Britain that would have been happy to have him, where he would have been playing regularly etc but he chose to not play and collect his money, he seems quite content.

As I said Wenger is about 10% responsible for him not fulfilling his potential. But hearing about him in training, his attitude, his mentality and how he hasn't seemed to have wanted to play football in the last couple of years or push the manager to play him, I don't see how people can blame Wenger for a large proportion of this?
 
Rentboy said:
I won't ramble on and on and on. All I'm saying is that I'm sick and tired of Wenger sticking to experiments that clearly are not working, such as Ramsey as a winger, Gervinho and Walcott as a centre forward (when Giroud was fit, which is disrespectful for such a hard working player), etc.
Wenger tried for too long to emulate a Barca side, but we haven't got a Messi. Instead, Gervinho was our false 9 in the beginning of the season. Pathetic!
I miss the good old Arsenal Wenger assembled based on his team's strengths.
Click to expand...

Does he stick to experiments that clearly don't work? is Ramsey still played on the wing? Is Gervinho still played in the centre of attack?

He tried them for a few games, again how many games has Ramsey been played as a winger?

It was so pathetic to have played Gervinho as a central striker at the beginning of the season, but he was scoring goals for a few games in a role in that position?

Please come on, this is what really annoys me, exaggerations being used time and time again to beat Wenger with, when in fact if you look into it it isn't half as bad as you are trying to make out.
 
BobbyBox said:
I would generally like to know what players you feel Wenger has tried to play in the wrong positions (and has been really detrimental for them and the team)? I feel the number is miniscule, but I would expect you to provide quite a compelling list to justify calling Wenger obsessed with doing it?
Click to expand...

It mainly seems to be wingers as strikers and vice-versa. We already talked about Bendtner being played on the wing and Arshavin as both left wing and a striker, and Wallcott being played as a striker, when all three have better natural fits in other positions.

Ramsey - I dont think he's a great footballer anyway but he appeared on the right wing last year (QPR I think was biggest example) when he really is a central midfield player (if he's going to experiment why not try someone like Eissfeld there)

Gervinho - He's been deployed as a striker and at times a lone striker, when he's never played that kind of role at any of his clubs nor for Ivory Coast.

That's 5 from the last 2 years or so, if you go back further there were experiments with players like Song (a natural DM) at centerback and Pennant playing centrally. I'm not saying he does it with every player, and you're probably right that saying "obsessed" is an overstatment but I do think it's a problem and if I was an Arsenal fan I would be fairly concerned about it.
 
cfdh_edmundo said:
It mainly seems to be wingers as strikers and vice-versa. We already talked about Bendtner being played on the wing and Arshavin as both left wing and a striker, and Wallcott being played as a striker, when all three have better natural fits in other positions.

Ramsey - I dont think he's a great footballer anyway but he appeared on the right wing last year (QPR I think was biggest example) when he really is a central midfield player (if he's going to experiment why not try someone like Eissfeld there)

Gervinho - He's been deployed as a striker and at times a lone striker, when he's never played that kind of role at any of his clubs nor for Ivory Coast.

That's 5 from the last 2 years or so, if you go back further there were experiments with players like Song (a natural DM) at centerback and Pennant playing centrally. I'm not saying he does it with every player, and you're probably right that saying "obsessed" is an overstatment but I do think it's a problem and if I was an Arsenal fan I would be fairly concerned about it.
Click to expand...

I see it a completely different way, I see it as a VERY positive thing.

Wenger is experimenting and trying out new things. I think Wenger tries players in different positions to enhance their game overall and to see if it works.

If it doesn't work, then he reverts them back, or if there isn't a place for them after he will sell them...or try to sell them.

If Song didn't have the experience as a centre back, who knows what sort of a player he would be now? he was young and it was part of his education as a player. Can it be worrying that he turned into the player he did?

Bendtner could have learned a lot from playing out wide, it could have helped him with his positioning as a centre forward as he now has the mindset of what a winger is looking for in the striker he is trying to target etc etc

I don't see the harm in trying players in different positions? I don't see the big deal, I would if he did it forever, but I think he has shown that if it doesn't work, then he reverts back. What is the problem with that?

My last argument is that has any of them been really that bad? Gervinho's experiment up front I would say was a 50/50 half the games he scored half he played badly (Although everybody seems to just remember the bad). Walcott wasn't that much of a failure in that centre role, it was just that he is better on the wing. But I assume Wenger played him there just to prove to himself and Walcott that that is the case.

Pennant was very young when he was with us and is it such a crime to try him in a different position to see how he does? the player is still learning his game to some degree.

Also Ramsey had a couple of promising games on the wing, which is why I think Wenger persisted a bit longer with him in that role (I think he was there because of injuries as well?) but again people concentrate on the bad games more.

Again I just think it is extremely exaggerated the stuff that is thrown at Wenger sometimes, it's true to some extent, but it has been blown up by another 80% say.

I'm not trying to purposefully argue with you Edmundo, I think you speak some of the most sense I have seen on this forum and I agree with you most of the time, just not on this occasion.

I am more arguing with what a lot of people do and generalise and take a few episodes of what Wenger has done and try and make it the norm of something Arsene Wenger does, when I think most of the time it is not.
 
I love Giroud , his strength on top is so good for us. Why Wenger was experimenting , Him and Podolski upfront was strange enough at the start of the season. Pod thought he was battling Giroud for striker . He started hating the wing lol.

Ramsey a jack of all trades , a master of none. That's the problem doing a little here and there and never reaching full potential. It's better to master one position before moving to another . I only see Alex Ox benefiting from Cazorla's style a winger to CAM.

I see Gibbs becoming a winger next, at least their duties are similar to a fullback 'wingback' . I guess finding a similar duty to a position is more valuable in today's market.
 
BobbyBox said:
Does he stick to experiments that clearly don't work? is Ramsey still played on the wing? Is Gervinho still played in the centre of attack?

He tried them for a few games, again how many games has Ramsey been played as a winger?

It was so pathetic to have played Gervinho as a central striker at the beginning of the season, but he was scoring goals for a few games in a role in that position?

Please come on, this is what really annoys me, exaggerations being used time and time again to beat Wenger with, when in fact if you look into it it isn't half as bad as you are trying to make out.
Click to expand...

Am I exaggerating then? If you had Giroud and Podolski available, would you still go with Gervinho as a lone striker?

When push comes to shove and we need a goal to go through, here's Gervinho at his worst:
YouTube - Gervinho Miss in Bradford city-Arsenal! 11-12-12
 
Maybe there is a case for experimentation, but I would do it in training, pre-season friendlies, possibly the Carling Cup (although I would be tempted to play the strongest team possible to try and win it), possibly a dead rubber CL group game (when/if you were already guarenteed to finish 1st). Maybe at the tail end of the league if you were comfortably in 2nd/3rd (if 4th I would say go for 3rd because ideally you wouldnt want the CL playoff or to be bumped like Spurs last year) - if I did it, I'd do it in no pressure games, ideally away from home. That way if the experiment goes wrong it's not a dramatic issue, and if the player in question makes a mistake he's like likely to get grief for the next few matches from the supporters.

Again if I was doing it I'd probably only do it with younger players who havent really mastered a position. I'm not sure I'd do it on players who have, to a degree, already proven themselves in a position. Take Gervinho, he's proven himself at Lille winning the Cup and League the year before he left. Internationally he'd proven himself for the Ivory Coast playing something like 50 games and being in ACN, World Cup and Olympic squads. Almost every time he's played for Lille or the Ivory Coast he's played with an othordox striker (Moussa Sow and Drogba). It's the same with Arshavin, he's played off the striker at Zenit and won everything domestically and the Europa League, he'd been senational in that role for Russia in Euro 2008. Regarding Bendtner at 6ft4 he's among the tallest players in the Arsenal squad, he doesnt have a low center of gravity so he'll struggle with aspects of wing play. He's never been blessed with what one might call blistering pace and doesnt outwit defenders with speed, I really dont know why Wenger experimented with him on the wing as he doesnt have the pace to beat a fullback and one wouldnt imagine his crossing would be sensational. Its the same for Ramsey, decent at holding the ball and short passes but can you see him beating a full back time after time?

There are some strikers who have the build and skill set to potentially suceed as wingers, within the British game possibly Tevez, Javier Hernandez, ten years ago perhaps Micheal Owen or Robbie Keane. And perhaps the reverse is true with pacey players like Bale or Cristiano Ronaldo (in his last few years at Man Utd) perhaps having the physique to play more centrally as a striker. I'm not saying I would do it with any of these players as I think by and large they are already in their optimal positions, but (if they werent already so good in their normal roles) there would be more of a case for experimenting with them than players like Bendtner, Ramsey and Arshavin playing out of position. Looking at the Arsenal squad I'd only really experiment with the youth players like Eisfeld, Gnabry, Yenarris, and Ryu Miyaichi not generally established memebers of the squad.
 
I think crazy experimentations like those have a place and time. Like Edmundo says, pre-season or games where we can afford to play our 2nd string, etc.

To play the guys out of position in vital games is really poor judgement. The stakes are too high at this level.
To say things like Bendtner could learn by playing in the wing, is a step closer to accepting Arsenal as a football academy. A player may strengthen his game by playing in a different position, but the team and its results might suffer. It saddens me to realise how we endured seasons of this, only for the player to peak and move on to another club (BTW, I'm talking about Song for example).
When the new sponsorship money comes this academy mentality has to end.
 
Last edited:
Rentboy said:
Am I exaggerating then? If you had Giroud and Podolski available, would you still go with Gervinho as a lone striker?

When push comes to shove and we need a goal to go through, here's Gervinho at his worst:
YouTube - Gervinho Miss in Bradford city-Arsenal! 11-12-12
Click to expand...

You said it was pathetic to put Gervinho as a central striker, yet he scored 4 goals in 5 games in that position when he started there.

How was it pathetic to use him there?

You can post videos of him missing chances, but as I said if you look at his games as a central striker about half were not bad at all and he was scoring. Which would in any managers mind would try that same player again in that position, as he seemed to be playing well there initially.

It turned out overall he isn't suited to it there, but it was hardly pathetic putting him there. Again an exaggeration of what actually happened in my opinion and things you are using to bash Wenger with really aren't as bad as you make them out to be.
 
cfdh_edmundo said:
Maybe there is a case for experimentation, but I would do it in training, pre-season friendlies, possibly the Carling Cup (although I would be tempted to play the strongest team possible to try and win it), possibly a dead rubber CL group game (when/if you were already guarenteed to finish 1st). Maybe at the tail end of the league if you were comfortably in 2nd/3rd (if 4th I would say go for 3rd because ideally you wouldnt want the CL playoff or to be bumped like Spurs last year) - if I did it, I'd do it in no pressure games, ideally away from home. That way if the experiment goes wrong it's not a dramatic issue, and if the player in question makes a mistake he's like likely to get grief for the next few matches from the supporters.

Again if I was doing it I'd probably only do it with younger players who havent really mastered a position. I'm not sure I'd do it on players who have, to a degree, already proven themselves in a position. Take Gervinho, he's proven himself at Lille winning the Cup and League the year before he left. Internationally he'd proven himself for the Ivory Coast playing something like 50 games and being in ACN, World Cup and Olympic squads. Almost every time he's played for Lille or the Ivory Coast he's played with an othordox striker (Moussa Sow and Drogba). It's the same with Arshavin, he's played off the striker at Zenit and won everything domestically and the Europa League, he'd been senational in that role for Russia in Euro 2008. Regarding Bendtner at 6ft4 he's among the tallest players in the Arsenal squad, he doesnt have a low center of gravity so he'll struggle with aspects of wing play. He's never been blessed with what one might call blistering pace and doesnt outwit defenders with speed, I really dont know why Wenger experimented with him on the wing as he doesnt have the pace to beat a fullback and one wouldnt imagine his crossing would be sensational. Its the same for Ramsey, decent at holding the ball and short passes but can you see him beating a full back time after time?

There are some strikers who have the build and skill set to potentially suceed as wingers, within the British game possibly Tevez, Javier Hernandez, ten years ago perhaps Micheal Owen or Robbie Keane. And perhaps the reverse is true with pacey players like Bale or Cristiano Ronaldo (in his last few years at Man Utd) perhaps having the physique to play more centrally as a striker. I'm not saying I would do it with any of these players as I think by and large they are already in their optimal positions, but (if they werent already so good in their normal roles) there would be more of a case for experimenting with them than players like Bendtner, Ramsey and Arshavin playing out of position. Looking at the Arsenal squad I'd only really experiment with the youth players like Eisfeld, Gnabry, Yenarris, and Ryu Miyaichi not generally established memebers of the squad.
Click to expand...

Again this post seems to suggest that every game Wenger has played players in different positions and experimented with has been a failure. When that just wasn't/isn't the case and I really don't see it as as big a deal and as damaging as you suggest.

It also assumes that Wenger just waits for a game to come along and just puts those players in different positions? When he would have tried them in those positions in training and tried them out and they would have played well there for him to try it in an actual match.

Gervinho initially played well in the central role (Or at the very least scored goals), so Wenger tried him for longer. It didn't work in the end and he doesn't put Gervinho there any more.

Ramsey played a couple of good games initially in that winger role, but on further games it was proved that it wasn't good in the long term and Wenger hasn't put him back on the wing since.

How can it be worrying for fans that Arsene does this? I just don't get it. He is bashed for not changing his game plan and when he tries to, by having different options and trying to change things, he is bashed for that as well.

Again I just think that things are blown out of proportion a bit with some of the things that people beat Wenger with over and over again.

Of course these things are happening and sometimes they don't work and it is frustrating but the way you and Rentboy describe things, it just makes them look 100 times worse than they actually are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom