The Giroud Question

[donaldo71]

16, 14 and 16. Not exactly far off 20 though is it. Unless you sign someone really fucking good i'm not sure it's worth removing what Giroud does bring to the side.

Look, even Smudger's a fan

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... but-he-de/

You left out his mighty first season of 11 goals!! He plays for Arsenal yet scores less goals than Defoe at relegation threatened Sunderland

[BFG4]

There is definitely an element of Giroud not being helped by the system we ask him to play at Arsenal. The amount of times he finds himself isolated up front with no one to play off, is just criminal. Having said that, the guy isn't a good finisher, and for a club with supposed league title aspirations, he isn't up to the mark.

[GranadaJoe]

16, 14 and 16. Not exactly far off 20 though is it. Unless you sign someone really fucking good i'm not sure it's worth removing what Giroud does bring to the side.

Look, even Smudger's a fan

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... but-he-de/

You left out his mighty first season of 11 goals!! He plays for Arsenal yet scores less goals than Defoe at relegation threatened Sunderland

So he's scored 71% of the minimum goals we'd expect from a top striker over the last four seasons. That's 23 less goals than expected. I think there's a fair chance that those 23 goals, if they'd been scored, would have earned us a fair few extra points. Ergo (as we all know) a top striker is the difference between success and failure.

Statistics aside, I can't imagine that Giroud takes up too much time in opposition team-talks. In better days IWWW, TH14, DB10, RvP etc would have occupied the thoughts of the opposing manager, leaving the rest of the team a bit freer.
When a striker beats the last man the crowd should expect a goal. With Le Lampost we know that even on the good days when he can control the ball, the slowest of defenders is going to run him down.

[Yankee_Gooner_Dandee]

16, 14 and 16. Not exactly far off 20 though is it. Unless you sign someone really fucking good i'm not sure it's worth removing what Giroud does bring to the side.

Look, even Smudger's a fan

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/201 ... but-he-de/

You left out his mighty first season of 11 goals!! He plays for Arsenal yet scores less goals than Defoe at relegation threatened Sunderland

So he's scored 71% of the minimum goals we'd expect from a top striker over the last four seasons. That's 23 less goals than expected. I think there's a fair chance that those 23 goals, if they'd been scored, would have earned us a fair few extra points. Ergo (as we all know) a top striker is the difference between success and failure.

Statistics aside, I can't imagine that Giroud takes up too much time in opposition team-talks. In better days IWWW, TH14, DB10, RvP etc would have occupied the thoughts of the opposing manager, leaving the rest of the team a bit freer.
When a striker beats the last man the crowd should expect a goal. With Le Lampost we know that even on the good days when he can control the ball, the slowest of defenders is going to run him down.

Team talks? Tactics? What is this madness you speak of. Don't all players just go out and play their style regardless of the opposition?

[Andrew]

He plays for Arsenal yet scores less goals than Defoe at relegation threatened Sunderland

Fewer.

#justsayin

[supergeorgegraham]

He is quite good against average defenders but up against the better teams he fails.

[OneBardGooner]

The Giroud Question:

Is he faster than a lampost?

Is he a right vain bartseward?

Is he as good as he thinks he is?

Is he as bad as many on here think?

Was he cupping his ears because he is an arrogant *word censored* or is he really going deaf?

Answers on a postcard from the Bowl.

[Sean]

I would say that the final solution to the Giroud question is to sign a better striker. TOF disagrees, however

There is definitely an element of Giroud not being helped by the system we ask him to play at Arsenal. The amount of times he finds himself isolated up front with no one to play off, is just criminal. Having said that, the guy isn't a good finisher, and for a club with supposed league title aspirations, he isn't up to the mark.

True. Expecting him to play like a number nine and a number ten is a joke. He's either isolated or playing too deep. Expecting a number nine to hold up the ball is stupid; he should be on the end of attacks. Fuck this pretentious 'total football' shit.

We all know TOF will never go back to a 4-4-2, so Giroud limited talent will be wasted.

[foxinthebox2001]

I think I must have posted this so many times over the past 2 or 3 seasons I could probably cut and paste it.
It stems from the centre backs, if you opt for Mertesacker, (and who thinks Wenger wont?) then you need 2 (mostly) holding midfielders to protect him from his non-existent pace, a rigid 4-4-2.
That means either going light on an attacking midfielder, or play the lone striker. That lone striker is the barely adequate Giroud. Okay as a foil for a high quality strike partner.
Solution, upgrade the centre back position....... and it aint happening.

[augie]

I think I must have posted this so many times over the past 2 or 3 seasons I could probably cut and paste it.
It stems from the centre backs, if you opt for Mertesacker, (and who thinks Wenger wont?) then you need 2 (mostly) holding midfielders to protect him from his non-existent pace, a rigid 4-4-2.
That means either going light on an attacking midfielder, or play the lone striker. That lone striker is the barely adequate Giroud. Okay as a foil for a high quality strike partner.
Solution, upgrade the centre back position....... and it aint happening.

Sell BFG in the morning and the system still wont change. It isn't the system that is wrong, it's the opposition players and referee's

[GranadaJoe]

I think I must have posted this so many times over the past 2 or 3 seasons I could probably cut and paste it.
It stems from the centre backs, if you opt for Mertesacker, (and who thinks Wenger wont?) then you need 2 (mostly) holding midfielders to protect him from his non-existent pace, a rigid 4-4-2.
That means either going light on an attacking midfielder, or play the lone striker. That lone striker is the barely adequate Giroud. Okay as a foil for a high quality strike partner.
Solution, upgrade the centre back position....... and it aint happening.

You could replace BFG with Pique, Varane, or Bobby Moore in his prime and Giroud will still be slow, with poor movement and one-size-fits-all swing-a-leg-at-it finishing.

We definitely need a CB, but Giroud has had plenty of time to show he's the man to win us the league and, if anything, he's getting worse.

[falkirk goon]

If the question is, is giroud shite? then the answer is yes.Is he an arrogant furburger? yes.Is he slow as fuck and a hair flicking pain in the tits? yes again.

[Swifty]

Giroud a decent enough player but just like Bendtner and Chamahk, his style does not suit the style the rest of the team plays. Why have blokes with the speed and/or finesse of Sanchez and Ozil then give them a guy who lives off long crosses to score. For some reason Wenger has developed an idea that his main striker has to be a big slow lump. It's ridiculous. I'd consider playing Sanchez at the point with Ozil's sole job to get him the ball to feet in the box.