Chelsea 1-1 Arsenal Player Rating and Match Reaction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn

I think they massively rely on Salah.

Nunez, Gakpo, Diaz can all blow hot and cold

Salah has scored in ten of their seventeen games this season

For me it’s telling that we have horrendously neglected recruitment to our forward line for years and they are only marginally more dangerous in attack.

---

The respective forwards' EPL tally this season - Salah (10); Diaz (5); Nunez (2) and Jota (2) compares pretty unfavourably with Havertz (4); Martinelli (3); Saka (3) and Trossard (2). Salah might be their go to guy, as Haaland is for City but most successful teams have a star striker, and as you say, our lack of one seems to be an Achilles heel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IBK

The respective forwards' EPL tally this season - Salah (10); Diaz (5); Nunez (2) and Jota (2) compares pretty unfavourably with Havertz (4); Martinelli (3); Saka (3) and Trossard (2). Salah might be their go to guy, as Haaland is for City but most successful teams have a star striker, and as you say, our lack of one seems to be an Achilles heel.

---

Oh true, the point is that they aren’t massively outscoring us (or anyone else for that matter). And I don’t think there’s an extra level they can get to. This is as good as it gets for them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IBK

The respective forwards' EPL tally this season - Salah (10); Diaz (5); Nunez (2) and Jota (2) compares pretty unfavourably with Havertz (4); Martinelli (3); Saka (3) and Trossard (2). Salah might be their go to guy, as Haaland is for City but most successful teams have a star striker, and as you say, our lack of one seems to be an Achilles heel.

---

I think you mean 'favourably' i.e. Liverpool's is better - given their top scorer has twice the amount of goals than ours?

8 goals (2 of which have been pels)

And overall they’ve scored three goals more than us

If the argument is that Salah is better than any of our forward players. Great, it’s not an argument I’ve tried to contradict

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn

8 goals (2 of which have been pels)

---

you said "Salah (10); Diaz (5); Nunez (2) and Jota (2)"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mac76

you said "Salah (10); Diaz (5); Nunez (2) and Jota (2)"

---

No I didn’t, another poster did

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn

No I didn’t, another poster did

---

ok, fair enough I took it at face value

However my point still stands that to say Liverpool's performance is 'unfavourable' - i.e. worse - compared to ours is clearly not true and I actually wondered if he'd meant to say favourable

Yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mac76

I think you mean 'favourably' i.e. Liverpool's is better - given their top scorer has twice the amount of goals than ours?

---

Nope - I meant unfavourably - ie to our disadvantage...;)

unfavourably
/ʌnˈfeɪv(ə)rəbli/
adverb
1.
to the disadvantage of someone or something.
"the plan unfavourably impacted on sales"
2.
with a lack of approval or support.
"his books were viewed unfavourably and fell out of print"

:geek:

...and I was referring to Liverpool's goals, not performances...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IBK

Nope - I meant unfavourably - ie to our disadvantage...;)

unfavourably
/ʌnˈfeɪv(ə)rəbli/
adverb
1.
to the disadvantage of someone or something.
"the plan unfavourably impacted on sales"
2.
with a lack of approval or support.
"his books were viewed unfavourably and fell out of print"

:geek:

...and I was referring to Liverpool's goals, not performances...

---

Yes I know what it means thank you ;)

So you've put it the wrong way round - if Liverpool's record is better than Arsenal's it compares favourably, not unfavourably, with Arsenal's