Yes but we've been told numerous times that Arsenal do have the money to spend so why doesn't paedo Wenger spend it? Simples, would appear that he is just focusing more on balancing the cheque book than showing a bit of ambition.
Liverpool V Arsenal Match Thread
- Thread starter Calum
- Start date
- Replies 399
- Views 22K
- Status
Yes but we've been told numerous times that Arsenal do have the money to spend so why doesn't paedo Wenger spend it? Simples, would appear that he is just focusing more on balancing the cheque book than showing a bit of ambition.
I don't think we need a goalscorer, we only scored 3 less goals than United last term, and we played 6 months without our star striker. He not only scores but creates, and this got us to become the first to 50 goals (I think) last term.
People say why not buy 'so and so' but you don't know the in's and out's. Perhaps Wenger has enquired, or perhaps he isn't worth the money, after all, it's not as if we all watch the Russian league regularly?
And then people always criticise us for signing a youth prospect, so it looks like we're going to sign an Experienced goalie, who has barely done anything wrong in the EPL and we're criticised for him being 'too old'. So you want us to sign a keeper who's younger and will be good in a few years, and completely contradict the notion that we need players now?
Saying Chamakh is not a good/big signing is unfair, he is proven at Champions League level, and is in the peak of his career. Koscielny is unknown yes, but how many available centre backs are there in this ultra tight transfer market, that will give good value.
As for 'having the money' there's no point spending when it's not good value. We do still have a stadium to pay for.
It's not ****, it's an opinion, much like yours.
Vermaelen was a good buy, for £10m, he's young, he's got great technical ability and can score from range. His defensive positioning may be poor at times, but then defenders always get caught out at times, especially with the quality of strikers in the Premier League. It was his first season in the Premier League, he's young, give him a chance.
Wenger told a press conference, I quote 'Arsenal can outspend Chelsea'
I fail to see how your point can fit with that statement.
Arsenal don't seem to have much ambition, they don't go and sign anyone 'big', Wenger just want's to sign players nobody has heard of and hope.
Don't get me wrong he does have a good record with his previous signings, but while Chelsea sign Ramires and are linked with Neymar, Arsenal just seem happy to buy a load of players like Abou Diaby, the only 'quality' player they've signed is Chamakh and that was on a free.
Don't get me wrong he does have a good record with his previous signings, but while Chelsea sign Ramires and are linked with Neymar, Arsenal just seem happy to buy a load of players like Abou Diaby, the only 'quality' player they've signed is Chamakh and that was on a free.
So you want him to lie and say he saw it and give a judgement if he didn't see it?
Well...
The first half was dull, two teams playing the same formation cancelling each other out. A 4-5-1 against a 4-5-1. Only difference was Nasri played the role of AMC a little better than Joe Cole who never really got into the game. First half, only interesting thing to happen was Joe Cole getting sent off.
Second half started off much better entertainment wise. N'gog seizing an oppurtunity from a very poor pass from an aresnal player and delivering a fairly good shot at goal. A shot that in all honesty Almunia should have dealt with without too much problem. He didn't. Again. Wenger really needs to get a clue about this goalkeeper position. I mean really.
Liverpool then go and do the smart thing 10 men down, they defend deep against Arsenals posessional football. A tactic Tottenham used against Arsenal last year and Inter Milan used against Barca. Arsenal were able to absolutely boss the midfield as they were completely unchallenged in that area but then got to just outside the Liverpool penatly area and had nowhere to go. Nasri was left with no space to move about in as there was no room between the the Liverpool defense and midfield to work in. They essentially hit a wall of red shirts and were unable to create anything much at all. Not fun to watch but effective.
Then Arsenal got a lucky break from a dangerous cross into the box which the Reina surprisingly dealt with poorly scoring an own goal.
Overall I would say a draw was fair for both teams. Both goals came from **** ups and the first half was a fairly even contest.
As for some of the comments about how Liverpool played tactically. I would say that 10 men down against Arsenal it was actually a good move. If they hadn't done that the extra man Arsenal had in midfield would of been a lot more effective than it turned out to be as they would have been able to open them up no problem, and it could of led to a very different result. I would look more closely at the first half as an indicator of how they are likely to play this season, I think that the sending off meant that they had to revert to a completely different style of play than they are looking to use this season (hopefully) so I dont think they can really be judged based on just that.
As for Arsenal needing another goalscoring striker and Chamakh playing ****. I would have to disagree with this as well. Chamakh seems to have been brought to Arsenal for his ability to score goals but its not his role in the team to create them. If he isn't presented with the oppurtunities to score he won't. Arsenal had loads of possession but hit a wall of defenders and wern't able to create anything. I think their problem is that they need a plan B when passing the ball around the penalty area endlessly looking for an opening is clearly not going to work. All the possession in the world today but no way round the defence, thats where Wenger needs to look at other options.
Just my opinion
The first half was dull, two teams playing the same formation cancelling each other out. A 4-5-1 against a 4-5-1. Only difference was Nasri played the role of AMC a little better than Joe Cole who never really got into the game. First half, only interesting thing to happen was Joe Cole getting sent off.
Second half started off much better entertainment wise. N'gog seizing an oppurtunity from a very poor pass from an aresnal player and delivering a fairly good shot at goal. A shot that in all honesty Almunia should have dealt with without too much problem. He didn't. Again. Wenger really needs to get a clue about this goalkeeper position. I mean really.
Liverpool then go and do the smart thing 10 men down, they defend deep against Arsenals posessional football. A tactic Tottenham used against Arsenal last year and Inter Milan used against Barca. Arsenal were able to absolutely boss the midfield as they were completely unchallenged in that area but then got to just outside the Liverpool penatly area and had nowhere to go. Nasri was left with no space to move about in as there was no room between the the Liverpool defense and midfield to work in. They essentially hit a wall of red shirts and were unable to create anything much at all. Not fun to watch but effective.
Then Arsenal got a lucky break from a dangerous cross into the box which the Reina surprisingly dealt with poorly scoring an own goal.
Overall I would say a draw was fair for both teams. Both goals came from **** ups and the first half was a fairly even contest.
As for some of the comments about how Liverpool played tactically. I would say that 10 men down against Arsenal it was actually a good move. If they hadn't done that the extra man Arsenal had in midfield would of been a lot more effective than it turned out to be as they would have been able to open them up no problem, and it could of led to a very different result. I would look more closely at the first half as an indicator of how they are likely to play this season, I think that the sending off meant that they had to revert to a completely different style of play than they are looking to use this season (hopefully) so I dont think they can really be judged based on just that.
As for Arsenal needing another goalscoring striker and Chamakh playing ****. I would have to disagree with this as well. Chamakh seems to have been brought to Arsenal for his ability to score goals but its not his role in the team to create them. If he isn't presented with the oppurtunities to score he won't. Arsenal had loads of possession but hit a wall of defenders and wern't able to create anything. I think their problem is that they need a plan B when passing the ball around the penalty area endlessly looking for an opening is clearly not going to work. All the possession in the world today but no way round the defence, thats where Wenger needs to look at other options.
Just my opinion
Last edited:
You've made enough profits in the recent transfer windows to have a bit of cash to spend, even Wenger said you've got the money. If he doesn't like spending money, then fair enough, but he's not getting very far without doing it is he?
It's not that, I think it's more of a case of Wenger not seeing any incident that changes the game. If asked about it, he probably didn't see the Liverpool goal.
maybe he didn't see the incident but this isen't the first time its happend is it. he never seems to see anything.
I think people have had these Impressions over wenger for a long time. He is always building for the future. These arent really becuase of this game.
We arent just talking about this season though, We are talking about the last 3 or 4 seasons, Was Flamini the right time to leave? Wenger should of tied him down sooner, Instead of his policy of waiting. Gallas is still a good player. You sold Ady, and replaced him with who? Van Persie is always injured so he cant really be relied on. You now sold Eduardo. You need a new keeper, who is top notch, and your signing a 37 year old aussie.
Who to say keeping hold of fabregas is a good move, he hasnt kicked a ball yet, and people are saying jumping to conclusions is bad, he could play **** this season. Your Got what 3 center backs at the club now i think. So hardly progressing massively.
You keep referring to this one article where Vermaelen made a few positional errors, but I don't think you look what he has done. He is tough tackling, good in the air, dangerous from set pieces (both aerial and actually taking them now it seems
). He's clearly been told by Wenger to follow the ball when it drops, as he does, Wenger wouldn't 'let him off'. It's hard to explain, but it's his job to go out and try and close down. If the ball goes over him, it's easy to say he's caught out of position, but I think that's the role he is playing. It's hard to explain over here. 10m is a steal for him.
---------- Post added at 09:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 PM ----------
tbf it was in a hard area to see, i'm sure Hodgson said he couldn't see it at the time?
Completely agree. If you actually look at the article, it has a few quotes with contradict the point of Vermaelen 'not being a good defender'. It says "he's a top notch player" at some point, and also states "he's had a very good season" or something along those lines.You keep referring to this one article where Vermaelen made a few positional errors, but I don't think you look what he has done. He is tough tackling, good in the air, dangerous from set pieces (both aerial and actually taking them now it seems
10m is a steal for him.
Also states he just has that one flaw in his game, but nobody is realistically the perfect player are they? Not even Messi.
Yeah. That's right, because he just finds a random players who no-one has ever heard of and signs him up, for precisely that reason. It's not like he asks scouts to go and look at him, and then when they recommend someone, have a look at them himself.. (Y).
Chelsea are linked with a young brazilian with talent, aren't Arsenal linked to them all the time? Besides Chelsea have signed one player this year, for near enough £20m on the basis of one WC, and their Neymar bid was rejected, so they go and speak to him anyway? Good example to show...
Chamakh is a 'quality' player, signed on a free: Does this not show good business sense? And why should be believe the Sun because they say we have money? What's wrong with Diaby? He scores goals, and does his job fairly well, OK he's not Michael Essien, or Darren Fletcher but he's not done too badly. Clichy no one knew, until he stepped up and replaced Cole in the first season. Our youth policy can't be all bad, if our 18 year old midfielders, and 20 year old left backs are getting into the England team? I suppose buying Fabregas shows a lack of ambition as well?
Enough from me.
Ramires has been well known for 2-3 years now and has progressed greatly every year. so no not just because of 1 world cup.
Yeah but how I see it, Vermaelen scored a couple of cracking goals at the start of last season and then everybody turns round and says what an absolute beast he is, I know I've probably went too far by calling him **** but he is definatley not as good from what I've seen as what people make him out to be. You say 10M is a steal, I'm not so sure in all honestyYou keep referring to this one article where Vermaelen made a few positional errors, but I don't think you look what he has done. He is tough tackling, good in the air, dangerous from set pieces (both aerial and actually taking them now it seems
10m is a steal for him.
a lot of people seem to think winning th league is that easy, that all wenger need to do is go out and spend 35 million on two players, and he's gonna beat united and chelsea to the league. This isnt football manager it doesnt work that way. By that thinking city would be dead certs for the title, but they are not, they face a fight just to finish in the top 4. Far too much these days is made of the individual, and not of the team.
He was like Benificas best player last year, in europe aswell. He starts for Brazil.
- Status