Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The Arsenal Thread XX Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    There was an interview when Cesc was at Barca, they asked him who the most intelligent midfielder he had played with was?>

    ''Tommy''
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I also love Tommy because whenever we score against the scum, even if he hadnt scored or is even involved, he goes straight for the Yid end, and really gives the big un to that lot :laugh:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zürich)
    ''Tomas Rosicky is the most underrated player in the PL'' I have said time and time over.

    He genuinely has a better turn of pace than he did 6 years ago, I'm not sure why. But he genuinely plays with speed, intelligence and commitment.

    Technique invariably flawless:



    How must he feel watching Ozil from the bench?
    I also think he would make a great manager, seems like he's got a solid philosophy about football. Genuinely don't think he minds being on the bench, he strikes me as being one of the most modest and decent guys at the club. Always willing to fight for his place, no arguments. Great read btw if you haven't seen it;

    http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...l-9658051.html
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kim-Jong-Illest)
    I also think he would make a great manager, seems like he's got a solid philosophy about football. Genuinely don't think he minds being on the bench, he strikes me as being one of the most modest and decent guys at the club. Always willing to fight for his place, no arguments. Great read btw if you haven't seen it;

    http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...l-9658051.html
    Agree 100%. His intelligence on the ball is flawless and he seems like a genuinely sweat fella. Always calm. You know why Wenger loves him!

    Not alot of people know this, but his wife had a miscarriage around 2008 and alot of his 'injury' was mental. Ive heard he was in a really bad place for over a year, understandably. When I see the way he came back, you wonder what might have been...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Probably easier to list the thing I don't like about Rosicky, wouldn't take half as long.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by qua)
    Depends on your definition of great, but they played in a way didn't allow Arsenal to find into their game at all and that would be challenging for most teams. The only thing they really lacked was efficiency in front of goal. They pressed extremely well from front to back, especially in midfield where playing with Kehl AND Bender really payed off, helped them win loads of balls there and made up for Hummels not playing/Subotic not being 100%, and managed to keep the intensity really high for most of the game. Their team movement was great, they were constantly blocking Arsenal's passing lanes and rarely ever lost their team shape.
    I'd certainly agree with that, very much so in the early stages of the game. However I don't think that intensity Dortmund opened the game with remained beyond the half hour mark. Arsenal were able to get on the ball, and advance further up the pitch as the match went on. Neither of Dortmund's goals came after a period sustained pressure, clever passing combination or a some kind of wonder striker, they were as much due to defensive errors as quality, particularly the first goal. I don't think that should have been enough for Arsenal's loss (which is the context of this thread) to be dismissed as a great Dortmund performance. Perhaps if we were discussing a plucky underdog's victory I would have said it was brilliant/great.

    Not sure what you mean with "didn't control the ball"
    I mean exactly what I wrote, they had 44% possession significantly less than they would normally have in game. In ceding possession, tactically or otherwise, Arsenal were not deprived of the benefits that possession brings. Arsenal are team which likes to keep hold of the ball( they are certainly geared towards requiring the ball), and to get the majority of the team to advanced areas. In the game was a whole Dortmund did not deny them either of those things.

    Didn't see sloppy defending either.
    Neither did I, hence why I didn't write it. However Arsenal had their chances, it wasn't a defensive shut out. Welbeck miscued at the far post, the chance just before half time, he had another after a good chance after a turn late on. Those are just notable chances for the main striker. Was it possible for Arsenal to score and should Welbeck have at least demanded a good save from those positions. I would say yes to both of them.

    Not a perfect or unmanageable performance from BVB,
    Which is the point I was contesting. Arkasia was suggesting that regardless of Arsenal being poor, Dortmund's performance was one of such quality Arsenal could not have won the game regardless. I simply don't see it that way.

    but if you consider their injuries and the rotations they made even in their "second string" team (no Jojic, Kagawa, Piszczek), they fared extremely well.
    Yes, and I would say that the result in the circumstances was great result for Dortmund. To play the strongest of your opposition with weakened team and to convincingly beat them, is something I'm sure they will be aware of in the second meeting.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I ****ing love Rosicky, everything about him.

    Ozil is....well, he is...

    He'll have his testimonial before long, Arsenal vs Sparta I guess?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jam278)
    He needs to play in his correct position atm for starters but Wenger is more interested in fitting Ramsey and Wilshere together. Either drop Ozil or play him as no.10. Anyway Rosicky should play regardless. Ozil should only play when Sanchez and Chamberlain/Walcott are flanking him.
    I think I wrote before, I saw someone making the argument (some stat guru) that if Ozil is indeed on the pitch from the moments of brilliance he provides, then playing him on the left isn't such a big deal. In terms of his offensive output, there is very little difference between him centrally and wide, its difficult to say how much truth there is in that. The 10 position does often require someone with a good work rate though, and his work rate is pretty poor. I can see why if that is to be believed Wenger might favour playing him wide and a more putting someone more industrious at 10.

    Don't see why Wenger doesn't realise this.

    Bugs life needs to be dropped.
    How many other things could this be applied to with Wenger and Arsenal? Wenger is pretty stubborn, if he believes in him and in the system he's going to keep playing him in that way, and I don't think popular opinion has much weight. I do wonder how many people will be switching sides on your Ozil-v-Mata position.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    will deffo miss my favourite social media enigma too
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh so now all you guys are warmed up to getting a new manager
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by New God Flow)
    Oh so now all you guys are warmed up to getting a new manager
    No Wenger stays. Till we literally wheel him out at 89 when he's muttering about how ''Jose Antonio Reyes did't like the weather but still a top player''
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kim-Jong-Illest)
    will deffo miss my favourite social media enigma too
    I genuinely want to know who took his shin pad.

    I think it was Gnabry the cheeky kent.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by swarly)
    I genuinely want to know who took his shin pad.

    I think it was Gnabry the cheeky kent.
    Nah he hid it himself, reckon he's been plannin that insta post for a good week.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Podolski's IQ is roughly 90. genuinely serious.

    he probably couldnt find his way out of the Koln metro without help.
    Without wifi for his selfies, genuinely in trouble
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kim-Jong-Illest)
    Nah he hid it himself, reckon he's been plannin that insta post for a good week.
    ahhh man is so bait :lol: surprised he doesnt put #tfl
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    I think I wrote before, I saw someone making the argument (some stat guru) that if Ozil is indeed on the pitch from the moments of brilliance he provides, then playing him on the left isn't such a big deal. In terms of his offensive output, there is very little difference between him centrally and wide, its difficult to say how much truth there is in that. The 10 position does often require someone with a good work rate though, and his work rate is pretty poor. I can see why if that is to be believed Wenger might favour playing him wide and a more putting someone more industrious at 10.

    How many other things could this be applied to with Wenger and Arsenal? Wenger is pretty stubborn, if he believes in him and in the system he's going to keep playing him in that way, and I don't think popular opinion has much weight. I do wonder how many people will be switching sides on your Ozil-v-Mata position.
    Yeah I can see that. Personally I just think that Ozil doesn't have the requisite pace to play on the wing or the work rate. If you can get 2 hardworking players behind him and hardworking players on the flanks that have pace that's where Ozil thrives. Ozil's strengths out wide is that he has a good cross on him, he doesn't have blistering pace and his technique alone and dribbling ability can't get past people like Iniesta can out wide. Ozil doesn't seem to take players on unless in space at Arsenal.

    I agree wrt popular opinion, it depends on many factors, media exposure mainly. You hear Ozil come in as this top player who played at Real Madrid for a big price tag to Arsenal who needed a big signing and hes heralded as the saviour despite Arsenal being covered in the position. I doubt many people watched Ozil bar for the odd champions league game so couldn't talk too much about his consistency and just saw stats. I think he'll become a relative success though like Benzema at Real.

    Wenger hasn't really played with an archetypical no.10 this year though and if he wants high work rate in the central midfield why does he continue to use Arteta?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So a Torino goalkeeper who had a game on Sunday, and a game at the weekend, just happened to be in a random bar in London on a Tuesday night, and overheard the same guy who claims to have footballers here, there and everywhere. K den.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I'd really like to see Chambers at DM if we had another versatile defender.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ArsenalWenger)
    Unbeaten in the league :yy:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well once you start being "austere" with money just because you built a stadium and ended up with lots of debt, the "austere" attitude continues even if you no longer have the debt
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    I'd certainly agree with that, very much so in the early stages of the game. However I don't think that intensity Dortmund opened the game with remained beyond the half hour mark. Arsenal were able to get on the ball, and advance further up the pitch as the match went on. Neither of Dortmund's goals came after a period sustained pressure, clever passing combination or a some kind of wonder striker, they were as much due to defensive errors as quality, particularly the first goal. I don't think that should have been enough for Arsenal's loss (which is the context of this thread) to be dismissed as a great Dortmund performance. Perhaps if we were discussing a plucky underdog's victory I would have said it was brilliant/great.

    I mean exactly what I wrote, they had 44% possession significantly less than they would normally have in game. In ceding possession, tactically or otherwise, Arsenal were not deprived of the benefits that possession brings. Arsenal are team which likes to keep hold of the ball( they are certainly geared towards requiring the ball), and to get the majority of the team to advanced areas. In the game was a whole Dortmund did not deny them either of those things.

    Neither did I, hence why I didn't write it. However Arsenal had their chances, it wasn't a defensive shut out. Welbeck miscued at the far post, the chance just before half time, he had another after a good chance after a turn late on. Those are just notable chances for the main striker. Was it possible for Arsenal to score and should Welbeck have at least demanded a good save from those positions. I would say yes to both of them.

    I didn't say you write it used the wrong word, however, it was your "not defensively solid" notion I was contesting, which

    Which is the point I was contesting. Arkasia was suggesting that regardless of Arsenal being poor, Dortmund's performance was one of such quality Arsenal could not have won the game regardless. I simply don't see it that way.
    I don't really see the point of dissecting a post into little pieces unless you take point for point or unit of meaning for unit of meaning (rather than the starting sentences of each paragraph, which don't represent the whole point, and only focusing on them rather than the point as a whole), it doesn't really reflect what I wrote. But anyway, my main point was simply to contest the notion that Dortmund were "in no way" great/brilliant, regardless of your convo with Arkasia, and not to necessarily contradict all of your points/implications (I don't disagree with all of them). I just don't think that Arsenal being poor or potentially able to win with a different approach to the game takes anything away from Dortmund's performance (even though I agree that similarly, Dortmund's performance is no excuse for Arsenal's), so that was the whole point. I guess it's rather subjective though. But while we're discussing it:

    Neither did I, hence why I didn't write it. However Arsenal had their chances, it wasn't a defensive shut out. Welbeck miscued at the far post, the chance just before half time, he had another after a good chance after a turn late on. Those are just notable chances for the main striker. Was it possible for Arsenal to score and should Welbeck have at least demanded a good save from those positions. I would say yes to both of them.
    It was your "not defensively solid" notion I was contesting, which became clear in my whole paragraph (I used the wrong word(ing) however). I'd say there's some spectrum between "defensive shut out", "defensively solid" and "not defensively solid", so not showing a defensive shut out does not mean that the performance as a whole wasn't solid. I'd say the overall performance was considering how little chances they allowed Arsenal (ofc debatable how much this can be accredited to BVB and how much to Arsenal) and how they isolated Welbeck for the most part, despite the few chances he had (although I'd say only one of those was a sitter).


    I mean exactly what I wrote, they had 44% possession significantly less than they would normally have in game. In ceding possession, tactically or otherwise, Arsenal were not deprived of the benefits that possession brings. Arsenal are team which likes to keep hold of the ball( they are certainly geared towards requiring the ball), and to get the majority of the team to advanced areas. In the game was a whole Dortmund did not deny them either of those things.
    I don't think the possession stats necessarily correlate with the other aspect of your point. The "benefits that possession brings" aren't automatic and not worth a lot if most of your passing lanes are blocked, the players in advanced areas can't be reached and your build-up play is more of less suffocated by the opponent. So for the most part of the game, BVB did deny them the possession "benefits". On top of that, iirc Dortmund were dominating possession until they dropped intensity in the latter stages of the game; it was only from around the middle of the second half that Arsenal got longer and longer spells of possession; which was in the last 10 or so minutes further facilitated by Dortmund switching to a formation with 2 defensively-minded CMs/DMs and another DM-CB hybrid between midfield and back 4 and mostly focused on not condeding, allowing Arsenal more time on the ball. Again, Arsenal could have dealt with this better and avoided some of these problems, but that doesn't mean that Dortmund weren't great, both in their approach to the opponent and in general.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: September 22, 2014
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.