Not sure why Adams' opinion is being ridiculed, it's far more valid than any of ours.
Not sure why Adams' opinion is being ridiculed, it's far more valid than any of ours.
All he does anyway is allude to Graham focusing more on the fundamental aspects of the game, the same aspects many of us think are currently missing from Wenger's side.
![]()
Coaching technical ability. He's played under Wenger and Graham. Have you?
Nobody knows how much time is spent doing what in training. There is also a technical side to defending that isn't all about a silky first touch and passing. Many old Arsenal players say Wenger doesn't give players instructions or try to teach them what to do on certain situations. He leaves them to figure it out for thenselves so they develop a natural game. May be worth digging out the quotes if anyone can find them.
Graham would have been much better than Wenger in the champions league. He was unlucky in his first attempt at it.
Seems to be talking sense to me, just look at the shambles our defence is in, that just highlights poor coaching methods, couldn't say that during the Graham era, we may not have always been that good due to having average players in areas but the coaching couldn't be questioned.
I'd trust Tony Adam's opinion on coaching over most people seeing as he's played under both and knew exactly how to defend himself.
Tactically Graham was superb, given the number of chances and the quality Wenger has had at his disposal I don't doubt he would.
Wenger is a proven failure in Europe, he's had so many attempts at winning a trophy and never won any. Tactics are important, you can't just send your team out to play their own game and ignore the opposition.
wonder if George would be interested in taking Pat Rice's place?