Originally Posted by Bob Loblaw
I have plenty of issues with Wenger but I also appreciate what he has done and is doing. I just call it as I see it!
I have plenty of issues with Wenger but I also appreciate what he has done and is doing. I just call it as I see it!
the problem with Oxlade-Chamberlain is that he will want a lot more playing time than he is getting and may agitate for a move. He doesnt have the brand concerns like Wilshere will have but I can def see Oxlade-Chamberlain being antsy and jumping at a chance to goto Swansea or Southampton, etc. As long as we get the 20-25 million that we deserve, then I am cool with it. (he gets 15 million added because he is English)
Fair play, if he agitates for a move then cool we either loan him out or sell him if we get a great offer. I think 25-30million is probably what we would get for him in the current market, maybe even more!
Ox comes across to me as someone who is fairly patient and level headed, if he's honest with himself he is in a good club right now and does get games, albeit he's not first choice.
He's not first choice for a reason and he should understand that.
My opinion is that we should persevere with him.
Wenger talking about how he sees Ox as more of a box-to-box CM and, perhaps more interestingly, 433 being a good fit for him...
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-arc...s-vital-for-ox
I still think 4231 is the best fit for our best players, but 433 would solve a couple of problems? I can see it being a great fit for Ramsey and Wilshere, as well as Ox (pick any 2 and have the usual DM as the 3rd, deepest midfielder), and it might even give us an indirect way of giving Özil a rest without necessarily needing a like-for-like replacement?
Interesting. Yeah agree with your assessment, I suspect OX will only be in the 4-3-3 when Ozil is rested.
Worryingly a number of our home growns appear to be turning into "jack of all trades". Jack, OX, Chambers & Ramsey to a lesser degree don't appear to have nailed down a dedicated position, Walcott too...but to a lesser extent.
I know Wenger likes moving players all over the place but in the case of Jack, OX & Chambers, I think they need dedicated positions. Ramsey to a lesser extent.
I think we tried a 4-3-3 before with Rambo and Wilshere last season and it wasn't working. Interesting to hear Wenger talk about Ox as a box to box player. Seems like his time on the flanks is over.
I don't think it's a problem with them being jacks of all trades, so much as they all seem to model themselves on former players and redundant roles that none of the top sides really use any more? For example, we touched on it the other day, but the top sides don't really want a Steven Gerrard type midfielder any more, who's going to charge around wherever the play is - it's too indisciplined. And they don't want a small, goal-poacher type striker from the days of classic 2-man strike pairings - that shit is 10 years out of date. The modern game demands defensive and holding midfielders who can control the play - midfield 'specialists' and deep lying playmakers. It demands lone strikers with wide forwards either side of them - no one gives a shit about 442 any more.
What worries me isn't so much that they don't have it in them to perform one of these more modern roles - I absolutely believe that they do - it's that I never feel like they fully embrace the roles that they're given, because they're holding out for their ideal role to suddenly come back in vogue? It's like they think the game is going to revert back to the one that they grew up watching, 10-15 years ago, just because that's how they want to play? You contrast that to a lot of the foreign lads, and you never here them going on about how they're really a striker, or a central midfielder, or dropping little reminders to the manager into interviews about how it's great to get a run out in their 'best position' so they can 'show what they can do' - they just quietly get on with any job their given, and try their best to make it their own.
Yeah I hear ya and you've touched on an interesting point regarding them not really embracing their roles, especially Theo & Ramsey
Interesting, but then you look at the likes of Leicester and Watford, who play in a more traditional way, and are profiting from it. For me, its as much about players themselves recognising their strong points - and playing to them - but also being prepared to work their asses of without the ball. Its this latter trait that has lessened the gap between the EPL teams more than anything else. In our team, the likes of Campbell; Coquelin, Bellerin; Monreal and even Ramsey epitomise this. The Ox's main problem is that he doesn't defend/hussle well when not on the ball. I'm not sure that this issue will be addressed simply by playing him centrally. Wenger has always tended to 'blood' players out wide in preparation for more central roles, but I'm not sure that this is always the right blueprint.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
I think Atletico Madrid sometimes play a 4-4-2 sometimes and they are top of La Liga. Juve made it to the final with a two striker system. I agree with IBK on this one. Football moves in cycles. Maybe 10 years ago the game demanded a holding player but now we're seeing more box to box players coming back with nobody just holding like the old Makelele types. I think it's just as dangerous to assume football is going to go a certain way. But I don't think the players think that deeply about it. They just need to be the best they can possibly be and they'll find a spot. I don't think a player like Gerrard is redundant. If the game required him to be more disciplined I don't think he'd have a problem adapting. Systems change but players adapt. Would players like Henry, Zidane be redundant in the game today even though they played in totally different systems? Even old fashioned strikers like Wright, Shearer and Batistuta would find a way to play in the modern game today. Take Giroud as an example. He has the style of an old player but he makes it work.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote