As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Wenger added: "The situation is that we have the goalkeepers we have. Fabianski conceded three goals in the first half and you could not especially say that he could do something about it."
Bloody hell, even the media are now picking up on the fact that we're a catastrophe at the back. It must be serious!
Hopefully this outdated concept of us playing "beautiful football that's a joy to watch" can be put to bed once and for all.
Until we actually start playing it again, obviously.
Edit: I raised my eyebrows at this AW quote too: "Kieran Gibbs is slowly coming back to his best". If his best is bringing the ball down in his six-yard box for strikers to knock it in, then yes, I'd agree.
You say that but there are some on here who would pick him ahead of Clichy. A notion which i find hard to understand. But hey, he can cross a ball... how many cross assists does he have again?
selsdon wrote:how many cross assists does he have again?
Couldn't tell you but I bet it aint that far behind Clichy.
You can bet? that will get us places surely.
Does that make him a better defender than Clichy or Eboue than Sagna. At this point we need a defence first before we start worrying about what they can do going forward.
On that basis, I wont be playing Gibbs should we play any top side in the world.
I fully agree with you GunnerDude that out defence needs to concentrate on defending rather than the attacking element of their game, especially in the big matches and tougher away games. But the truth of this is that this is how these players perform - we need defensive minded defenders!
I was going to make this comment earlier in the week but figured I'd be slaughtered for it!
Anyway last year in the league Sagna had 5 assists and Eboue 3. Clichy had 1.
The previous season Eboue had 3, Sagna 1 and Clichy none.
In the 07/08 season Clichy & Sagna has 4 four assits each and Eboue with 2.
These stats could be wrong but the database I have is usually 99% correct.
M-50
In 07/08 season Clichy and Sagna were voted the best full backs in the prem.
These are things I have pointed out before along with certain elements that were in the team then and aren't there now, elements which helped them flourish like; an energetic dm, wingers who helped out defensively, a consistent cb partnership e.t.c.
GunnerDude wrote:M-50
In 07/08 season Clichy and Sagna were voted the best full backs in the prem.
These are things I have pointed out before along with certain elements that were in the team then and aren't there now, elements which helped them flourish like; an energetic dm, wingers who helped out defensively, a consistent cb partnership e.t.c.
Watched the highlights on youtube and Flappyhandski was shite! Totally to blame for the second, useless idiot falling over and the third he cowered like a little kid at school when a big kid smashed a football at him!
selsdon wrote:Does that make him a better defender than Clichy or Eboue than Sagna.
He's as good as Clichy, Sagna imo and better than Eboue.
Just my opinion GD, don't get the hump about it m8.
I wont be getting the hump but I do need a rational explaination and why you would play him against a top side over Clichy if both are in form.
Normally I can't be arsed with your high and mighty, self-important tone GD. You choose to read into people's posts what u want to see regardless of what they say. Which is why I'm replying here to prove my point:
You can need a rational explantion all you want m8 and if you can show me where I said I'd play Gibbs over Clichy I might consider giving one.
selsdon wrote:Does that make him a better defender than Clichy or Eboue than Sagna.
He's as good as Clichy, Sagna imo and better than Eboue.
Just my opinion GD, don't get the hump about it m8.
I wont be getting the hump but I do need a rational explaination and why you would play him against a top side over Clichy if both are in form.
Normally I can't be arsed with your high and mighty, self-important tone GD. You choose to read into people's posts what u want to see regardless of what they say. Which is why I'm replying here to prove my point:
You can need a rational explantion all you want m8 and if you can show me where I said I'd play Gibbs over Clichy I might consider giving one.
And you say I am reading into people's post what I want to see. Clearly it works both ways.
Apologies if I came across that way but I prefer a debate/discussion not oneliners with no explanations.