BOULDY THE NEW PAT RICE??

[DB10_TH14]

it will work when the current manager isnt here no more

[Its Up 4 Grabs Now]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ks-1434373

Have often thought that perhaps we should use 3 centre-backs (with one playing the 'sweeper' role behind the other 2, as opposed to a tradition DM in front of them), and 2 wing backs as it might make up for Wenger's refusal to strengthen the obvious defensive weakness at left back and play more to the strengths of the other defenders available. The only thing that stopped me suggesting it was the realisation that it would only take an injury to one of them to bring Djourou into the team. At least with a back four it would need at least 2 of the centre halves to be injured before that clown got a place back in the side.

I suggested a 3-5-2 formation a long time ago - it isnt that I am some geek that puts too much emphasis on systems/formations but I just feel that the system we use should suit the players we have available as opposed to the current policy of putting players in wrong positions just to suit the CIC's shite formation I have never been happy with the idea of playing 1 up front and this system would (probably) see podolski moved up top alongside giroud leaving cazorla to float around behind them which would suit all parties
My only concern with be the impact it would have on sagna - imo he is the best right back around but I dont think that wing back would suit him. Personally I would play him as the right sided centre back but in wengerland fcuk knows where he would be played

Anyway this is most likely a moot discussion - wenger has shown that he hasnt a scooby doo when it comes to tactics and flexibility is not something in his mindset

May work for some teams but I can only see 3 CBs for us ending up a shambolic disaster. They struggle to operate in unison when there's only 2 of them, never mind adding another. Plus, seeing as Wenger sticks so rigidly to a formation once he's settled on it, all it would take is one injury to Kos, Per or Vermaelen and we'd have Djourou or Squillaci back in the team. Fuck no.

[gingeadams]

We never have three fit centre backs in the squad, let alone three on the pitch at one time

[Its Up 4 Grabs Now]

Not to go all super championship manager wannabe, but seeing as we have no actual wingers (with the possible exception of Ox) I'd rather we tried a 4-4-2 with a sort of diamond midfield. Not ideal but maybe the best use of our current options.

2 from Podolski, Walcott or Giroud up top.

Arteta pretty much as he is now. Jack and either Ox or Coquelin (or Diaby if he ever returns from the paper cut on his labia) in more box-to-box roles. And Cazorla essentially as the attacking fulcrum but basically given complete free reign to go wherever the fuck he wants to find space. Should help Cazorla escape the shackles and give us some more dynamism and powerful, direct running to balance out the midfield.

Would obviously mean the full-backs bombing on at times to provide the width, but they do that anyway and that's where you'd hope Arteta would track across laterally to cover and/or Jack/Ox/Coq(ooh-er) would shuffle across on their respective sides to double-up. Plus Podolski and/or Walcott could naturally peel out wide at times without leaving us striker-less in the middle, and between Cazorla finding space on the flanks and the box-to-box midfielders moving into the space there at other times it's not as though the full-backs would have to be suicidal.

No idea why I've posted any of that cos none of it's gonna happen. No idea what it's got to do with Uncle Bouldy either. If only Percy was still here to join in the tactical debate.

[DB10GOONER]

Not to go all super championship manager wannabe, but seeing as we have no actual wingers (with the possible exception of Ox) I'd rather we tried a 4-4-2 with a sort of diamond midfield. Not ideal but maybe the best use of our current options.

2 from Podolski, Walcott or Giroud up top.

Arteta pretty much as he is now. Jack and either Ox or Coquelin (or Diaby if he ever returns from the paper cut on his labia) in more box-to-box roles. And Cazorla essentially as the attacking fulcrum but basically given complete free reign to go wherever the fuck he wants to find space. Should help Cazorla escape the shackles and give us some more dynamism and powerful, direct running to balance out the midfield.

Would obviously mean the full-backs bombing on at times to provide the width, but they do that anyway and that's where you'd hope Arteta would track across laterally to cover and/or Jack/Ox/Coq(ooh-er) would shuffle across on their respective sides to double-up. Plus Podolski and/or Walcott could naturally peel out wide at times without leaving us striker-less in the middle, and between Cazorla finding space on the flanks and the box-to-box midfielders moving into the space there at other times it's not as though the full-backs would have to be suicidal.

No idea why I've posted any of that cos none of it's gonna happen. No idea what it's got to do with Uncle Bouldy either. If only Percy was still here to join in the tactical debate.

Fantastic post though. And it's a sytem that could work well with the players we have.

But, oh dear God, what are you thinking? Matching the system to the players abilities? NOT trying to wedge the players into a system that they are obviously ill-suited to?! Are you mentally ill? HAVE YOU EVER WORKED A DAY IN FOOTBALL??!!

[northbank123]

"Why don't you play two people up front instead of one?"

"With Rufus [Walcott/Giroud] and Fairbrother [Podolski] alongside each other up front you've got an effective partnership of strength and skill"

Even Mike Bassett knows the answer lads...

[I Hate Hleb]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ks-1434373

Have often thought that perhaps we should use 3 centre-backs (with one playing the 'sweeper' role behind the other 2, as opposed to a tradition DM in front of them), and 2 wing backs as it might make up for Wenger's refusal to strengthen the obvious defensive weakness at left back and play more to the strengths of the other defenders available. The only thing that stopped me suggesting it was the realisation that it would only take an injury to one of them to bring Djourou into the team. At least with a back four it would need at least 2 of the centre halves to be injured before that clown got a place back in the side.

I suggested a 3-5-2 formation a long time ago - it isnt that I am some geek that puts too much emphasis on systems/formations but I just feel that the system we use should suit the players we have available as opposed to the current policy of putting players in wrong positions just to suit the CIC's shite formation I have never been happy with the idea of playing 1 up front and this system would (probably) see podolski moved up top alongside giroud leaving cazorla to float around behind them which would suit all parties
My only concern with be the impact it would have on sagna - imo he is the best right back around but I dont think that wing back would suit him. Personally I would play him as the right sided centre back but in wengerland fcuk knows where he would be played

Anyway this is most likely a moot discussion - wenger has shown that he hasnt a scooby doo when it comes to tactics and flexibility is not something in his mindset

May work for some teams but I can only see 3 CBs for us ending up a shambolic disaster. They struggle to operate in unison when there's only 2 of them, never mind adding another. Plus, seeing as Wenger sticks so rigidly to a formation once he's settled on it, all it would take is one injury to Kos, Per or Vermaelen and we'd have Djourou or Squillaci back in the team. Fuck no.

I did point that out as being the main draw back!!

[Its Up 4 Grabs Now]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ks-1434373

Have often thought that perhaps we should use 3 centre-backs (with one playing the 'sweeper' role behind the other 2, as opposed to a tradition DM in front of them), and 2 wing backs as it might make up for Wenger's refusal to strengthen the obvious defensive weakness at left back and play more to the strengths of the other defenders available. The only thing that stopped me suggesting it was the realisation that it would only take an injury to one of them to bring Djourou into the team. At least with a back four it would need at least 2 of the centre halves to be injured before that clown got a place back in the side.

I suggested a 3-5-2 formation a long time ago - it isnt that I am some geek that puts too much emphasis on systems/formations but I just feel that the system we use should suit the players we have available as opposed to the current policy of putting players in wrong positions just to suit the CIC's shite formation I have never been happy with the idea of playing 1 up front and this system would (probably) see podolski moved up top alongside giroud leaving cazorla to float around behind them which would suit all parties
My only concern with be the impact it would have on sagna - imo he is the best right back around but I dont think that wing back would suit him. Personally I would play him as the right sided centre back but in wengerland fcuk knows where he would be played

Anyway this is most likely a moot discussion - wenger has shown that he hasnt a scooby doo when it comes to tactics and flexibility is not something in his mindset

May work for some teams but I can only see 3 CBs for us ending up a shambolic disaster. They struggle to operate in unison when there's only 2 of them, never mind adding another. Plus, seeing as Wenger sticks so rigidly to a formation once he's settled on it, all it would take is one injury to Kos, Per or Vermaelen and we'd have Djourou or Squillaci back in the team. Fuck no.

I did point that out as being the main draw back!!

You dont think I actually read your posts do you? I didn't even read this one I'm responding too.

[I Hate Hleb]

*word censored*!!

[Herd]

If only u knew DB ,fella I know u get annoyed with my rantings which you say I cant substantiate I can assure you that if I say something on here it's not based on hearing from the guy in the chip shop it comes from within the club and not the tea lady either.
It's your choice entirely whether you believe it or not as there's no way I'm naming sources but they are multiple and some are out on that training field every day in Walthamstow and In London Colney others are in the admin from the Box Office to Boardroom although whispers from that department have all but dried up since Gazidis took over since he holds the cards very close to his chest .

[QuartzGooner]

Steve I know for a fact that Wenger over ruled Bould on set piece defending ,and it led to a very heated row .
They now hardly speak to each other .
Bouldy now has a dilema he either quits or hangs in and tries to change things as the pressure mounts on the Prof .

The problem is Wenger will not change ,he will continue down the same road regardless,unless he changes and he wont we will continue to fail.

People long ago realised how to play us and now more and more teams are finding it easy particularly at home where we go forward so much !

This is painful to watch but as I've said you cannot solve an old problem by using the old mindset ,you solve it by looking at it fresh and from another perspective !

I'm not sure how you know its a fact mate,

Must be true - bloke on internet forum said it!

But TBH, it wouldn't surprise me if it was true...

For me, and quite a few others on this Forum including Augie, the whole issue of Bould getting the first team coach position was:
Will he get enough time to work with the players, or will he end up an executor of Wenger's directives but not able to put his own point of view across?

No one would think of Bould as a shrinking violet.
Pat Rice came in for a lot of criticism for being a "yes man", but remember that argument he had with Wenger in the second half of the home game versus Spurs 2010-201 season?

I think it has to be odds-on that seasoned defenders such as Rice and Bould had/have issues with Wenger's ability to effectively teach defence.
The question remains: just how much time does Bould get to work with the defence?

It seems not a lot; and if what Herd says is correct, then all the time in the world will not help, because Bould is being forced to teach a method he does not think is best.

I do not buy into the myth that Wenger cannot build a defence, because he built the main Invincible defence:
Cole-Toure-Campbell-Lauren.

But this was surely with indirect help from the legacy of the famous Graham defence, all of the above would have trained with them for long or short periods of time prior to be being first choice defenders themselves.

It is "ever decreasing circles" since summer 2008.

[QuartzGooner]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... dford.html

By Jeremy Wilson

11:00PM GMT 12 Dec 2012

Arsène Wenger’s training methods and relationship with Steve Bould, his new assistant, have been called into question following the embarrassment of Tuesday’s Capital One Cup defeat against Bradford City.

Wenger overhauled his coaching staff during the summer but, even amid faltering results, has remained unwilling to delegate significant parts of training.

There have been long-standing doubts about whether Wenger pays enough attention to defensive training and it is understood that Bacary Sagna’s current uncertainty about his future is partly linked to a feeling that he is not being sufficiently improved.

Bould, who was part of George Graham’s famously miserly back four as a player, had been allowed to work separately with the defence during pre-season but these sessions have since been stopped. It is also understood that, when Wenger was unable to take training on the day before the recent 2-0 defeat to Swansea, the session was not led by Bould.

Questions are also now being raised over the working dynamic between Wenger and Bould, who was promoted to the job of assistant manager following the retirement of Pat Rice. With Neil Banfield also becoming first-team coach, it was the most significant shake-up that Wenger had made to his coaching team in 16 years as manager.

Wenger, though, has accepted only a limited input from Bould and, when the team made a strong start to the season defensively, it was noticeable that he played down his new assistant’s impact.

Stewart Robson, the former Arsenal midfielder, described Wenger as a “dictator” in his approach to training in an interview on TalkSport on Wednesday. “Steve Bould is a very good coach but he’s not allowed to coach them – he doesn’t do any coaching,” he said.

“Arsène Wenger is not doing enough on the training field. He’s not coaching the players, they have got no game strategy and, because he won’t let anyone else do it, Arsenal are going backwards and some of their players are going backwards.

“Sir Alex Ferguson is not a coach. He realises that, to get the best out of his players, he has to get the best coaches. He’s made sure his number two is not just a yes man, which Arsène Wenger likes to appoint.

"Arsène Wenger, because he has got a massive ego, because he’s a dictator when it comes to Arsenal football club, he’s not allowing Steve Bould to do any work.”

Wenger’s coaching methods, however, have always been known to focus on possession-based drills and his track record of delivering both results and flowing football is among the best in modern Europe.

Arsenal are adamant that there is no rift within the coaching staff and, inside the club, there is a sense that a period of adjustment was inevitable following Rice’s departure.

Wenger publicly defended his players after Tuesday’s penalty shoot-out defeat against Bradford but there were recriminations in the dressing-room both at half-time and after the match.

Arsenal had fielded a full-strength team but did not manage a shot on target until the 69th minute against opposition some 64 places below them in the league pyramid. Ivan Gazidis, the chief executive, apologised for the performance at a Christmas drink with supporters on Wednesday evening.

“I think I am frankly tired of getting up here and delivering the same message,” he said. “Last night was not good enough and it made us all upset and angry. I would like to apologise to all of you, especially the fans who travelled up there. You deserved better.

“We all work hard here and are desperate to deliver the success and trophies we all want. We will get this right.”

Wenger retains the complete support of majority owner Stan Kroenke and the club’s full transfer fund, which will amount to around £70 million next year, will be available to him.

While also extremely disappointed with the result, Kroenke recognises that the Capital One Cup is the club’s fourth priority. He believes that Wenger’s record of finishing in the top four every year for the past 16 seasons is still strong evidence that he remains one of the best managers in the world.

Alisher Usmanov, the club’s second largest shareholder, also still regards Wenger as the right man for the job but does believe that he is forced to take on too much responsibility.

Usmanov is still calling for change in the club’s boardroom and a rights issue of shares that would eradicate the club’s debt on building the Emirates Stadium.

The Arsenal Supporters’ Trust, meanwhile, has warned that the club must “change direction quickly if Arsène Wenger’s wonderful era is not to end on a sad note”.

A spokesman added: “One man cannot direct all transfer targets, wages, coaching methods and manage the team at games. It’s too much for one man.”

[DB10GOONER]

I remember all the delirious joy on here when "yes man" Rice was replaced by Bouldy. I said it at the time; Wenger would not allow anyone to have significant input that might take away from his self image as a genius.

You can see in the body language between Wenger and Bouldy there is a real problem there. Bouldy has the air of a proud man that has been forced to give up his principles for the benefit of earning a wage for his family. How long he can do that and look himself in the mirror is anyone's guess.

[Glitch33]

I remember all the delirious joy on here when "yes man" Rice was replaced by Bouldy. I said it at the time; Wenger would not allow anyone to have significant input that might take away from his self image as a genius.

You can see in the body language between Wenger and Bouldy there is a real problem there. Bouldy has the air of a proud man that has been forced to give up his principles for the benefit of earning a wage for his family. How long he can do that and look himself in the mirror is anyone's guess.

I agree. Bould seems stuck in his seat during games when he should be on the touchline.

I doubt it will happen but Wenger should withdraw from coaching, tactics and team selection and leave it to Steve Bould. A step towards AW moving upstairs or leaving.

The annoying thing is that our first eleven at their best should be competitive.

[flash gunner]

Bould is another Wenger disciple, there is no way Wenger would have taken him on as his number 2 if he thought he would be challenged. No change im afraid

I wrote this on the 19th of July