The Ox is talented and can be a real star for us. However, he is definitely NOT a CM as he can only run in straight lines with the ball and doesn't move the ball quickly enough. He is very much like Gibbs, with the ball at his feet, he can only run in straight lines and looks uncomfortable in posession.
Wenger seems to have issues with width, I can't stand Arteta but the fact remains we looked better in central midfield when he came on, on Saturday. With Ox there we looked shapeless as he was drifting wide anyway.
Far too early to judge what he can or can't do in that position to be fair. If he manages to clock up a good number of games in that position, then judge.Originally Posted by AFC Leveller
I think box-to-box abilities and attributes are coming back, but not necessarily box-to-box midfielders, if that makes sense? First and foremost, I still think we're looking at these guys being holding midfielders - positionally disciplined players who keep the team's shape, and can control the ebb and flow of the game - we're just looking at a new breed of holding midfielder, who can also suddenly surge forward with the ball once they've won it (and if it's safe). It may very well just be a question of discipline, like you say, but that, for me, is a small but significant difference. It means that there's a primary job to do first, and that we're not just giving them a free role to charge about all over the pitch, with everyone else as their supporting act.
Yeah, I agree - that's pretty much what I was trying to say. I see no reason why any type of player can't find a way to apply their talents to a new system and a new role, provided that it's not radically different - it just feels like some of them fight any kind of change a little more than others, and it usually seems to be the British lads? I've never heard a word out of Arteta or Cazorla, for example, about being pushed into a deeper, more defensively disciplined midfield role - they just quietly got on with it - but when you ask Walcott or Ramsey to play on the right, they'll do it, but they won't be able to resist mentioning that they're really a central player, and they'd rather be playing there. It just makes me feel like they're not really committing to the new they've been given?
In regards to box to box players, it's really not a huge difference from what we've seen before. What were Petit and Vieria when first arriving at Arsenal? What was Edgar Davids for Juventus? Ballack started off as a DM that could surge forwards and make passes and just ended up being pushed further up the pitch. Same happened with Zidane and it's what we've seen with Yaya Toure. Diaby, Song and even Coquelin like to attack but it all depends on the instructions from the coach and how much free reign they give or whether they reign their attacks in.I think box-to-box abilities and attributes are coming back, but not necessarily box-to-box midfielders, if that makes sense? First and foremost, I still think we're looking at these guys being holding midfielders - positionally disciplined players who keep the team's shape, and can control the ebb and flow of the game - we're just looking at a new breed of holding midfielder, who can also suddenly surge forward with the ball once they've won it (and if it's safe). It may very well just be a question of discipline, like you say, but that, for me, is a small but significant difference. It means that there's a primary job to do first, and that we're not just giving them a free role to charge about all over the pitch, with everyone else as their supporting act.
Yeah, I agree - that's pretty much what I was trying to say. I see no reason why any type of player can't find a way to apply their talents to a new system and a new role, provided that it's not radically different - it just feels like some of them fight any kind of change a little more than others, and it usually seems to be the British lads? I've never heard a word out of Arteta or Cazorla, for example, about being pushed into a deeper, more defensively disciplined midfield role - they just quietly got on with it - but when you ask Walcott or Ramsey to play on the right, they'll do it, but they won't be able to resist mentioning that they're really a central player, and they'd rather be playing there. It just makes me feel like they're not really committing to the new they've been given?
In regards to players complaining about where they play, do you pay attention to the complaints? I can find a quote from Cazorla saying he prefers playing in the middle and also quotes on why he's happy in this new role. He likes to be involved and get touches on the ball. That's different to being asked to play wide. Same goes for Ozil. You can find a quote from Wenger saying Ozil would prefer playing in the middle. Our British players have more access to the press so that's maybe why you hear it so often. Also, when a player isn't playing well in that position or feel uncomfortable with the position, they speak out. It's not uncommon. I remember Wiltord not being happy about being played wide, Song wanting to play in the middle and not CB, Flamini wanting a shot at DM and not LB....plenty.
I don't think the players can commit to a role they're not comfortable with or when the manager gives out hints to the press that such and such player's future is in the middle or wherever. The manager lays out that message to the press quite often.
Like so many young Arsenal players for reasons unknown he has failed to progress at club level .
I think you are probably right that players don't think too much about what their position is called - or whether they are holding; passing; box-to-box etc. I can see why players might prefer central roles to being out wide because they may feel they are more involved more centrally, and don't have to track back so much there. The truth is that there is a mixture of approaches these days. I remember when Essien was regarded as the future of football - all athleticism and power. Now Barca are the best team in the world with small, technical players. I think British football is more brawn than brain - and athletes tend to flourish - but formations - not sure there is a hard and fast rule.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
he is not a good enough passer for this role.
This one needs a bump.
This boy has really stagnated, he genuinely looked a bright and exciting talent when he first came here at the age of 18? He has got progressively worse every single season.
At the moment his confidence looks to be totally shot, he was an embarrassment last night, can't pass, can't run, won't tackle, won't track back, his decision making is horrendous too, at times last night he got hold of the ball and ran head down into a crowd of players in the middle of the park. He also offers absolutely nothing offensively.
I really want to like him and for him to develop but I think his time is up here, he needs to be sold IMO.
We need to re-evaluate the quality of a few players. I’ve defended Ox but I can’t anymore. This is the same pattern as last season. A good preseason but then he chokes when the season kicks off. He’s lucky Wenger played him yesterday considering how poor he played over the weekend. It’s not down to a lack of effort. That’s for sure. We need someone to have a word in his ear. It won’t come from the manager and I have no idea who in the squad can talk some sense into him. He shouldn’t be starting games until he figures it out. It’s gone horribly wrong for him.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote