But I tell you what, I’ll give you a chance
Tell me why my opinion on Martinelli isn’t just one you disagree with but is wrong. Same with Havertz. Try to avoid the “everyone who understands anything about football” it’s empty filler. And leaves me to conclude that you don’t have an argument.
At least Mac76 as interminable as he is, actually shows the ability to learn and didn’t try and parse his opinions as indisputable fact.
:lol:
Ok, let's test and see if you can resist the temptation to double down disregarding plain logic. You said:
Now lets see. We offered £80m+ for Mudryk, that's a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
So please tell me what position he usually plays? (that's also a fact, but lets see what you conjure)
Secondly, do you think Arteta would offer that much for a player and not start him? (you can give your opinion here)
Fingers crossed.
Ahh didn't see this earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
Responding......
Anyway before IQ of 21’s needless diversion, i was about to say that according to Arteta both White and Timber will be in the squad tomorrow.
The serious injury Arteta alluded to appeared to be Raya…and given he’s not ruled him out even for tomorrows game, I suspect the worst we are looking at is him being out till after the October internationals. Would prefer to have him than not for PSG, but the other two games I'm not so concerned.
Hopefully should see Merino feature from the bench by the time we play Shatkah. Enough to maybe play some part against the helpful trilogy of games against Liverpool, Newcastle and Chelsea
He didn’t. That’s the point, the 80 million was more than we wanted to pay?. And then ended up buying Trossard as a squad player for much cheaper. Suggests to me that we were looking to bolster the squad rather than replace one of our best players at the time. Wouldn’t logic suggest that a desire to replace Martinelli would have made the 80 million worth paying??, after all it’s less than what we offered Brighton for Caicedo and what we paid West Ham for RiceQuote:
Originally Posted by 21_GOONER_SALUTE
Again, i will have to remind you that calling something logical doesn’t make it so. Nor does changing the past to fit in with a current view
Your opinion on Martinelli is what it is, an opinion. You could be right, but IMO you are likely wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
Crazier things have happened in football than him suddenly being better than Saka. On this forum, if you had been here long enough, you would have been around when I wrote off players like Song and Flamini and said over and over again they would never amount to anything. Guess what, I was pretty pleased to be wrong and they easily became my favourites. I have got no problem in eating my words as long as its a plus for Arsenal.
Now as for Havertz, technique is a bit subjective, but usually most serious football fans tend to come to a consensus and agree on things like Messi is more technically gifted than Ronaldo and Bergkamp was one of the most gifted players we ever witnessed in Arsenal etc.
Now note, there are no stats that actually prove any of the two previous assertions but there is a general silent consensus on this.
So going back to Havertz, would you consider a player technically gifted if stats cannot even support simple things like successful dribbles, take ons or even successful pass%. Didn't we just witness him achieve the unholy record of not being able to complete one pass in 90 mins in the EPL? Is their anyone of our current attacking players who you would say Havertz is more technically gifted than?
IMO there are some arguments that are just needless and no need to pester on. But obviously you are built differently.
I see you’ve talked yourself down a bit
Of course consensus exists in football, but to assert its existence to give your opinion more gravity is a little daft.
There is no consensus that Havertz is technically lacking (and using the stats from the Man City game is the last refuge of the scoundrel) and the stats show that he’s a decent dribbler, can hold the ball up well, good passing and can read the game well. Is he the most technically accomplished player in the team ? No but neither do I think the gap is enormous either. Bergkamp as you say was one of our greatest technical players, after that it was probably Mesut Ozil…I’m not sure any of our current squad are at their level.
But with much in life it’s all relative
Also I should reiterate that I said that Martinelli has the potential to be better than Saka, it’s reasonable to say that thus far he hasn’t come close to that potential (and perhaps he never will). My personal view is that although Martinelli is primarily right footed he’s more comfortable shifting to his left than Saka is shifting onto his right. I also think both in terms of technique and strength he’s better at beating his full back than Saka and I think he has more raw explosive pace.
Saka is more consistent, puts in more work and clearly has a stronger mentality. At the risk of agreeing with Mac76, he also contributes more to the team from a defensive perspective.
Seeing as my name has been mentioned a few times here...
I think we were very close to buying Mudryk which, whether he's good or not, would have been a disaster as as world without all of Trossard, Jorg and Kiwior would have seen us fall away very significantly last season and be nowhere near the title by the last day
I think it was a big error of judgement but this summer seems to show they've at least partly learnt from it by bringing in more squad players, plus bringing in some youth players in pre-season, which I think wil really pay off
On Leicester, if we're in good control on 60 mins I'd like to see Nwaneri, Nicholls, MSL given more minutes, lets really fill out our options here
You see why I compare you with Trump, you seem to like bending fact everytime it suits you and disregarding anything that does not fit with your narrative.Quote:
Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn
We argued this on another thread, I proved to you we offered the exact same money as Chelsea, the only difference was they went the extra mile by having top executives fly over and altering the payment plan. But as usual, you have chosen selective amnesia again.
But for the sake of this argument, lets even agree that we offered less, lets even drop it all the way down to £60m to make you feel better about letting £60m sit on the bench. Here's a list of Arteta's top 5 signings:
1. Rice: €116m
2.Havertz: €75m
3.White: €59m
4 Jesus: €52m
5.Partey: €50m
Besides Jesus, there is none of those guys who got into the team without taking a shirt from a recognised starter.
Your argument is why would Arteta replace his "best" player when he is on a high? But that is a silly argument that chooses to disregard history as he has done that over and over again. I mean this is a coach who replaced Ramsdale, who was chosen in the PFA team and almost equalled our best defensive record!
If Arteta sees he can improve the team, he is ruthless, he will do it. The thing is that even with Trossard, we are stil being linked with wingers that predominantly play on the left because its clear that Arteta is unhappy with something. However note that since the emergence of Saka we have not been linked seriously with any world class winger that mainly operates on the right. If I am wrong, please do tell
So, is it logical for me to assert that Mudryk would have started over Martinelli or should I inhabit your La La Land that ignores precedent and the value of money and just accept that Arteta has been pleased with Martinelli and has seen no reason to upgrade him, all because you say so.
Mac, clearly now with hindsight (and obviously the bargain that was Trossard) its clear that we got the better of that deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac76
The only reason this is being brought up is to point out that Martnelli's form is a problem that has been identified and is yet to be solved...no matter how badly some people on here want to lie down with him and have his babies.