Abou Diaby - Injuries Thread

[highburyJD]

we gamble in the market, on some gambles we've won
Overmars, Kanu were big risks that paid off for Wenger
even the almost trophy free vanStaplec*nt wasn't a total failure, he scored 100 goals and we made a profit
Rosicky's career has been nowhere near the level it should have but he's still done more than Diaby

I understand these gambles - if those players had always stayed fit they would prob have signed for bigger clubs

this idea it's "indicative of all that's wrong" is IMO wrong
we have much bigger problems than a few injury based gambles not paying off

[northbank123]

But it's one thing making those gambles and another thing blindly sticking by them.

You could reel off a list of failed signings/gambles for any manager - take Ferguson as an example, plenty of his signings have flopped or not worked out as hoped. But the difference is he hasn't given them contract after contract and continued to play them when it's obvious they weren't going to cut it. Bebe was a dreadful signing (and not that cheap either) but do United fans have to put up with watching him stumble around Old Trafford every week? And is he likely to get a lengthy contract extension?

[highburyJD]

Diaby played 40 odd games in a season - then got a contract extension
hardly the same thing...

[DB10GOONER]

I just can't believe the amount of players we have or had on long contracts that are extremely fragile, injury prone or plain unlucky.

You can add Jack to the diaby and rosicky list, other players that were damned unlucky but nonetheless missed more than a season and will probably never be the same player again, eddy and ramsey.

Van Skunk only played one full season out of the 7 he was with us the rest of the time he spent on the treatment table.

Gibbs is fragile and missed chunks of seasons, Sagna too over the last 3 seasons has missed most of that.

Flappyhandski has had his share of injuries too and now injured again.

If you look at our players on loan they've had their fair share too.

Fuck me sideways.....when you look at our list of perenially injured players DB10 looks positively indestructable

In my defence, my injuries were spread out over a 38 year playing career.

These fucking ladymen we employee can't last 5 years!

[northbank123]

Not exactly the same, no.

But part of the reason that Auxerre were happy to ship him out was repetitive injuries, and notwithstanding that 40-game season he'd still spent a massive portion of his Arsenal career until that time injured. There was plenty of risk to awarding him a 4 or 5 year contract on substantial wages and absolutely no security for the club if things went bad.

[highburyJD]

Not exactly the same, no.

But part of the reason that Auxerre were happy to ship him out was repetitive injuries, and notwithstanding that 40-game season he'd still spent a massive portion of his Arsenal career until that time injured. There was plenty of risk to awarding him a 4 or 5 year contract on substantial wages and absolutely no security for the club if things went bad.

all applies to vanStaplecunt, are we happy he left?

[northbank123]

Not exactly the same, no.

But part of the reason that Auxerre were happy to ship him out was repetitive injuries, and notwithstanding that 40-game season he'd still spent a massive portion of his Arsenal career until that time injured. There was plenty of risk to awarding him a 4 or 5 year contract on substantial wages and absolutely no security for the club if things went bad.

all applies to vanStaplecunt, are we happy he left?

I've argued in the past that we weren't really to blame for the contract situation itself. It can't be said he merited a new contract until he came back on fire for second half of 2010/11 season (more importantly staying fit for 5 months straight or so)- decided not to discuss a new deal that summer/the next season so not much we could do.

I'm going to stick my head above the parapet and say we handled things right with van Judas' contract - giving him a contract earlier based on his record would have been reckless and when he showed he merited one then he chose not to sign it.

Besides the point a bit really anyway - he didn't move because he had 12 months left on his deal, he left because we have no ambition. May have given him some leverage in forcing a move but we all know if he'd gone public in his desire to leave we'd have sold him even if he had 5 years left on his contract.

[highburyJD]

who knows, doubt a player on a 5 year contract would say they want to go
because they would know ultimately they can't force it through...

pity vanStaplecunt broke his goal drought instead of his cock
lying scumbag

[northbank123]

who knows, doubt a player on a 5 year contract would say they want to go
because they would know ultimately they can't force it through...

pity vanStaplecunt broke his goal drought instead of his cock
lying scumbag

Don't know about that - club captain comes off and slags off the club and by extension his team-mates also (essentially what he did). Manager with a propensity for realising value on players. Dubious past record regarding injuries and approaching 30. Think we'd have taken the money anyway.

Although if he was that desperate to leave he'd never have been in a position where he had 5 (or even 3) years left to run - hence why he refused to discuss a new deal and the whole debate is somewhat circular.

At the end of the day contracts give the club very little security as if the player wants to force a move, especially if they're willing to play dirty, there isn't much point in trying to stop them most of the time. Whereas if the club wants to move a player on who has years left to run, we've seen more than anyone that he can just put his feet up, treat the place like it's a holiday spa and pick up his wage exactly the same.

[beck]

I just can't believe the amount of players we have or had on long contracts that are extremely fragile, injury prone or plain unlucky.

You can add Jack to the diaby and rosicky list, other players that were damned unlucky but nonetheless missed more than a season and will probably never be the same player again, eddy and ramsey.

Van Skunk only played one full season out of the 7 he was with us the rest of the time he spent on the treatment table.

Gibbs is fragile and missed chunks of seasons, Sagna too over the last 3 seasons has missed most of that.

Flappyhandski has had his share of injuries too and now injured again.

If you look at our players on loan they've had their fair share too.

Fuck me sideways.....when you look at our list of perenially injured players DB10 looks positively indestructable

sagna has played 96 of our 158 games in the last 3 seasons he has played 61 percent of all games.
his record while on the pitch in his 6 year career at the arsenal is that we have conceded a goal every 108 mins
in the george graham era that was considered the high watermark for our defending we conceded a goal every 104 mins.
i find it hard to understand why people are so ready to accept sagna leaving

[LeftfootlegendGooner]

I just can't believe the amount of players we have or had on long contracts that are extremely fragile, injury prone or plain unlucky.

You can add Jack to the diaby and rosicky list, other players that were damned unlucky but nonetheless missed more than a season and will probably never be the same player again, eddy and ramsey.

Van Skunk only played one full season out of the 7 he was with us the rest of the time he spent on the treatment table.

Gibbs is fragile and missed chunks of seasons, Sagna too over the last 3 seasons has missed most of that.

Flappyhandski has had his share of injuries too and now injured again.

If you look at our players on loan they've had their fair share too.

Fuck me sideways.....when you look at our list of perenially injured players DB10 looks positively indestructable

sagna has played 96 of our 158 games in the last 3 seasons he has played 61 percent of all games.
his record while on the pitch in his 6 year career at the arsenal is that we have conceded a goal every 108 mins
in the george graham era that was considered the high watermark for our defending we conceded a goal every 104 mins.
i find it hard to understand why people are so ready to accept sagna leaving

Two leg breaks, over 30, been pretty poor at times this season and worse than that at others too.

His position and our formation demands a full back to be extremely athletic and he is at the end of his career in that regard.

For the record I like Sagna and he has been great for us in the past but so has Wenger.

[highburyJD]

Bellerin and Jenks are very good prospects
Sagna is our only player who has consistently been the Prem's best in his position
but his form has dipped after the 2nd leg break
if PSG, who he supports, want him and offer good money...

[Top Londoner]

This farce is indicative of everything that is wrong at Arsenal nowadays.

if our main problem was injuries, it would be easily arguable that it's not the manager, board or owners fault
I think you're wrong - there have been contract management errors
maybe even more errors than our rivals (personally wouldn't think there's a huge difference in unavailability wage wasteage)
but it's far from our main problem

I'm much more concerned about tactics, ambition, planning and scouting quality
than I am about paying wages to injured players - which is a risk all clubs take

Okay. You made my point better than I did. Thanks.

[OneBardGooner]

Forget the ice packs Abou ere pack this around your injury I'm sure it'll help!

[franksav63]

Forget the ice packs Abou ere pack this around your injury I'm sure it'll help!

Knowing that dopey injury prone *word censored* he'd probably put his back out picking up a wad of that size...