We need a DM against everyone. The smaller teams get most of their chances against us from counter attacks, so we need one back to make up the numbers and to break down their attacks.
We need a DM against everyone. The smaller teams get most of their chances against us from counter attacks, so we need one back to make up the numbers and to break down their attacks.
Indeed.Originally Posted by Penguin
I dont agree with this completely. If we stop playing a super high line then this can be mitigated against the lone forwards or runners from other teams. Let the creative players do what they are supposed to do. When the full backs move forward, have the CB's and a couple of the midfielders stay a little deep. I still think we will tippy tappy all day, but may be one of the 6 midfielders/forwards will get behind the opposition defense.
Arsene Wenger, the only football manager that got paid 8 million quid to do nothing but sit on his arse..
Then why does every top team use a DM against the 'small' teams? Even Guardiola's Barca and Bayern use a DM, and they hardly ever lose the ball!
Playing someone like Ox at DM won't make a difference in our ability to break down defenses, so it's hard to justify dropping a DM who will give us much more assurance defensively.
I am also intrigued as to why Campbell doesn't really seem to be in wengers plans. If reports are true we tried to offer him to Lisbon with cash for carvalho & a deal for him nearly went through with benfica but wenger changed his mind at the last minute ad wanted to keep him as a backup forward.
Only 3 games in. Wenger usually puts new forwards into a fitness bootcamp to toughen them up. Only 3 games in. Wenger kept saying he wanted to keep Campbell and since we're well stocked in that position, he had no reason to keep him if he doesn't rate him. Only 3 games in.
Barca & Bayern play with very attacking full backs, so they need that extra cover. We don't. Most smaller teams come to the Emirates & play 1 up top, I know our defence are poor at times but are you saying our back 4 can't handle 1 or 2 strikers. We don't even need 4 at the back at times but to have a DM in those games is rubbish tactics. It simply means we have 1 less player in attacking positions & the reason we spend 60% of the game fucking about with the ball 30 yards from goal unable to get in behind teams - this has been happening for a few years now. If we gonna play a DM then we need our full backs to attack all game. Imagine the Everton game if we had swapped full backs from the start. We only got our full backs moving forward when we were 2-0 down & guess what happened - we looked more of an attacking threat. If we started games like this you might find us 2 or 3 up by half time like the good old days, rather than chasing a game or beating pub teams like Palace at home with the last kick of the game.Then why does every top team use a DM against the 'small' teams? Even Guardiola's Barca and Bayern use a DM, and they hardly ever lose the ball!
Playing someone like Ox at DM won't make a difference in our ability to break down defenses, so it's hard to justify dropping a DM who will give us much more assurance defensively.
Might have something to do with Park leaving. Recently Wenger has needed a player who's career he can totally destroy for no apparent reason. I think Campbell may be the man to fill the void left by Park.
Für eure Sicherheit
Even if teams play with one striker they never counter with just one player. That's the whole point of counter attacks - the quick transition between defense and attack, with two or three other players anticipating it and bursting forward quicker than our midfielders.
When we attack one of our fullbacks goes up too, depending on which side we're attacking. With the way Ramsey plays he is normally high up the pitch too when the opponents win the ball from us. So during a counter attack we usually have the 2 CBs, 1 fullback and the DM back. We can easily get into 3v4 (their attackers vs our defenders) or 4v4 situations, and we did last season and every season before that.
Our defenders are good enough to defend against an equal number of attackers, but remember it is much harder to defend when you're running backwards. Taking away the DM in those situations is just suicide. Even the 'shit' teams can mess you up if you give them the chance, so why give them the chance?
Our inability to break teams down has nothing to do with playing a DM. The invincibles side was one of the best attacking sides I've ever seen and that was with Gilberto Silva, the most passive of all DMs as a regular in the side. The reason we can't break down teams is because we play a stale brand of slow-paced possession football without enough inventiveness, directness or risk-taking in the final third. Adding another attacker won't change that, it will just make us weaker defensively.
If it's 'rubbish tactics', why does every top team play with a DM?to have a DM in those games is rubbish tactics
Ah I see, so joint career destruction alongside Ozil then.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote