Player Ratings - CL: Arsenal vs Ajax | 07/12/05

[RammiXP]

neither team looked like they were going to score. Even though we should have. It was just a very poor game and im sure the ajax fans would be far from happy with there teams performance but they were away.

 

[asajoseph]

No surprise that everyone is on Flamini's back again depsite him being the player who completed the most forward passes :roll:

It's not surprising really. Flamini, like almost everyone else we had on display yesterday was poor. Just because everyone else on the team was down at his level, doesn't really make his performance any better, and just because the rest of the midfield was absolutely dreadful at passing the ball, doesn't make Flamini's performance any better. All I saw was the same rash tackles, the same lack of ideas in possession in the middle, and the same inability to ride a challenge. He was average yesterday, at best. Fortunately for him, the rest of the team with only a couple of exceptions, ranged from average to bloody dreadful.

 

[celestis]

This is going to sound ludicrous , but I felt that Henry hindered our passing game by ,being everywhere he was not mean to be . He was demanding ball to feet in the middle of the park, instead of making runs into space and drawing defenders and midfielders away giving our midfielders more space to attack and options to pass to . In the 2nd half Quincy made a driving run into space that Henry was occupying instead drawing defenders away Henry just stood there and they nearly collided into each other. By the way Quincy was ****e - but what I saw of him , he is a stupendous talent and when he learns to channel it will be an absolute nightmare to face.

 

[sabret00the]

No surprise that everyone is on Flamini's back again depsite him being the player who completed the most forward passes :roll:

It's not surprising really. Flamini, like almost everyone else we had on display yesterday was poor. Just because everyone else on the team was down at his level, doesn't really make his performance any better, and just because the rest of the midfield was absolutely dreadful at passing the ball, doesn't make Flamini's performance any better. All I saw was the same rash tackles, the same lack of ideas in possession in the middle, and the same inability to ride a challenge. He was average yesterday, at best. Fortunately for him, the rest of the team with only a couple of exceptions, ranged from average to bloody dreadful.

you slay me

 

[Lukazan]

I like Flamini ops: ..

 

[longrufus]

have to agree with asa
and flamini better than gilberto, what, fair enough he was poor at the weekend, but is one of our most consistant players, flamini isnt even on the same planet as gilberto.

 

[IBL]

We have too many Squad standard players and not enough first team standard players at the moment :x

What happened to competition for players, especially in the middle of the park!

 

[Lukazan]

Both buggered off to foreign countries.

 

[Gurgen]

No surprise that everyone is on Flamini's back again depsite him being the player who completed the most forward passes :roll:

It's not surprising really. Flamini, like almost everyone else we had on display yesterday was poor. Just because everyone else on the team was down at his level, doesn't really make his performance any better, and just because the rest of the midfield was absolutely dreadful at passing the ball, doesn't make Flamini's performance any better. All I saw was the same rash tackles, the same lack of ideas in possession in the middle, and the same inability to ride a challenge. He was average yesterday, at best. Fortunately for him, the rest of the team with only a couple of exceptions, ranged from average to bloody dreadful.

Utter crap.
He lost the ball about twice times in 90 minutes while usually passing forward, that doesn't make him average.

But there's no use defending Flamini I guess, he is '****e' and he never will be anything else because people have decided so a few weeks ago.

 

[kamikaze80]

rohit, both defences were solid (or offences poor, however you want to look at it). the best chance in the match was senderos' near ajax-assist (maybe quincys blown assist from the corner area, which in hindsight, maybe he expected henry to make a run towards goal).

flamini is only 21. i think i underrated him by a point or so in my ratings, but he will definitely be a useful squad player for us in the coming years. if he can learn a bit of creativity and hone his technical skills and variety of passing, he could be very good.

celestis, youre absolutely right about that incident where quincy drove with the ball and henry just stood there in his space, i noticed that as well.

i would much rather have seen rvp in henrys place, and have lupoli on as a sub later. if we're going to run the kids out, why not see if they can beat ajax at home? if anything, it couldve sent a message to the first team that maybe theyre not as good as they think they are...

 

[asajoseph]

No surprise that everyone is on Flamini's back again depsite him being the player who completed the most forward passes :roll:

It's not surprising really. Flamini, like almost everyone else we had on display yesterday was poor. Just because everyone else on the team was down at his level, doesn't really make his performance any better, and just because the rest of the midfield was absolutely dreadful at passing the ball, doesn't make Flamini's performance any better. All I saw was the same rash tackles, the same lack of ideas in possession in the middle, and the same inability to ride a challenge. He was average yesterday, at best. Fortunately for him, the rest of the team with only a couple of exceptions, ranged from average to bloody dreadful.

Utter crap.
He lost the ball about twice times in 90 minutes while usually passing forward, that doesn't make him average.

But there's no use defending Flamini I guess, he is 's***e' and he never will be anything else because people have decided so a few weeks ago.

Like I said before, my view of the game was from the touchline without the benefit of many instant replays, so it's hardly perfect. But I could have been standing on the Avenell and I'd have known that our midfield was absolutely rubbish. And no matter how hard you apologise for the guy, you can't absolve Flamini of blame for that. Was he any worse than anyone else that night? Not really. In fact, considering how dire everyone else was in the middle of the park, he was probably one of our better performers. But that certainly doesn't make him good. The fact that we couldn't string two passes together in the middle of the park, and gave the ball away time after time after time was as much the fault of the forwards failing to move as it was the defenders and midfielders being unable to pass the ball anywhere near them. The fact that two of our best attacks came from defenders dribbling the ball from our own half (Senderos on one occasion, and Lauren on the other) says it all - Flamini, for all his endeavour, is not creative enough to scare defenders, not strong enough to ride challenges in the midfield, not skilled enough to pick out passes or beat anyone one on one, not intelligent enough to block attacks with positional sense alone and not co-ordinated enough to time his challenges. And I didn't see anything different last night. Passing it forward is all well and good if you're standing on the edge of your own box. But it takes a player of genuine quality to do it on the halfway line, and Flamini, plain and simple, can't.

You know, perhaps there is a little bias going on towards him. Perhaps plenty of fans have closed the book on his career before it's even taken off. But you know what would really help put those (and heck, maybe that includes me) people in their place? Just a hint that he was anything more than average. Just a suggestion that he perhaps possesses one particular skill that will make opponents worry if they see his name on the teamsheet. Flamini looked only marginally better than Larsson last night, and that's still bearing in mind that he appeared to want to recieve the ball far less than the Swede. Larsson's not a bad player, but it's hard to imagine that he's got a future at Arsenal in the middle of the park. And to suggest that someone who's only so slightly better than him is a player of genuine Arsenal calibre (whatever that means these days) is laughable, in my oppinion.

 

[Canuck]

Didn't see the match so obviously I won't comment on his performance.
But...

Flamini, for all his endeavour, is not creative enough to scare defenders,

While Cesc is more creative than the rest of the MF put together but still is not scaring defenders...

not strong enough to ride challenges in the midfield,

I just plain disagree. Plus if it's physcial strength that's your problem, well that's pretty easy to rectify...

not skilled enough to pick out passes

Oh, I know that's not true, he's layed some brilliant passes out, albeit against lesser teams...

or beat anyone one on one,

I'll concede that point.

not intelligent enough to block attacks with positional sense alone and not co-ordinated enough to time his challenges.

He's one of the most willing students that Wenger has, so only time will tell if he's 'intelligent' enough to improve his positioning for both blocking channels and putting in challenges.

You know, perhaps there is a little bias going on towards him. Perhaps plenty of fans have closed the book on his career before it's even taken off. But you know what would really help put those (and heck, maybe that includes me) people in their place? Just a hint that he was anything more than average. Just a suggestion that he perhaps possesses one particular skill that will make opponents worry if they see his name on the teamsheet.

People here tout their opinions. That's what a forum is for. Some are more informed than others, of course, and if someone doesn't like Flamini then that's their prerogative. Plus I think there has been alot of expectation heaped upon Mathieu. What with the fracas surrounding his signing and both Arsène and Thierry making comments. I know I've been tagged as a Flamini defender, and I am. But I do not want people to start irrationally defending him when he performs poorly. (nor will I)
He had some promising matches pre-season and got some starts in the league, but didn't really impress so he now rides the bench as a 3rd/4th choice MF. But at least he's there challenging for a spot. Another option, another arrow in the quiver. Some players are instant success' and it's obvious from the outset. Some players grow into it. He's not lighting the world up with talent, but I think he's acquited himself well enough to continue on as an Arsenal player. Time will tell and I've been wrong before but I think he's good enough for Arsenal. Take that how you want.

 

[Gurgen]

Asa, you want a hint that he is more than average?
How about the fact that he hasn't cost us a single goal in his time here, but he has created goals for us with his interceptions and quick passing? His passes actually stay on the ground instead of bouncing up and down every ten yards like Gilberto's.
It's true, he doesn't have a special 'skill' expect for his work rate and stamina, but he doesn't do much wrong. What the hell do you expect from him anyway? He work his arse off, passes the ball immediately and then makes himself available again. A principle of football that Gilberto and Reyes are yet to understand. All the basic qualities are there, he just needs some polishing. Besides, he has never even had an extended run in the side.
Yesterday he had a pretty much flawless performance apart from some rash tackling early on, and it's very unfair to slate him for that. Slate him when he's actually playing crap (which hasn't been that often).
I'm pretty sick of discussing this tbh. I rate him and think he'll be a very good player one day, you don't. Fair enough, we'll see in a few years.

 

[Killer7]

I'm quite hopeful of Flamini - seems a decent prospect and at the moment I would say he's a 'good' player.

Anyone who says he can't pass is quite clearly stoopid. I've seen him play some lurvely balls, especially impressed with one to Henry earlier in the season that led to a goal.

Weren't some of his critics here just a day or three ago calling for a more 'hard' midfield, yet complain when he gets booked for a hard midfield challenge :?

Oh well.

 

[RammiXP]

Asa, you want a hint that he is more than average?
How about the fact that he hasn't cost us a single goal in his time here, but he has created goals for us with his interceptions and quick passing? His passes actually stay on the ground instead of bouncing up and down every ten yards like Gilberto's.
It's true, he doesn't have a special 'skill' expect for his work rate and stamina, but he doesn't do much wrong. What the hell do you expect from him anyway? He work his arse off, passes the ball immediately and then makes himself available again. A principle of football that Gilberto and Reyes are yet to understand. All the basic qualities are there, he just needs some polishing. Besides, he has never even had an extended run in the side.
Yesterday he had a pretty much flawless performance apart from some rash tackling early on, and it's very unfair to slate him for that. Slate him when he's actually playing crap (which hasn't been that often).
I'm pretty sick of discussing this tbh. I rate him and think he'll be a very good player one day, you don't. Fair enough, we'll see in a few years.

im glad im not the only one here who thinks this way. its nice to see someone with my point of view. Here here to all you said gurgen.

 

[Viper]

I thought Flamini looked more composed on the ball than Eboue, Larsson and Reyes put together. Sure he makes some rash tackles, but he hardly gave the ball away last night, while everyone else was passing to the opposition. At least he is tackling players, unlike Gilberto.

Agreed.

Thats what I love about Flamini - he isn't scared to stick a leg in, although he does get booked quite a bit.

 

[RockyRocastle]

Flamini is a decent player to have around the squad, but it is a sorry state of affairs to be in when he is the first player to come into our midfield when we get an injury. It is made even worse that our first choice midfield pair is an 18 year old and Gilberto.

It really does begger belief that Wenger thought that we could get through a season and be successful with a midfield as weak and as average as ours.

 

[asajoseph]

How about the fact that he hasn't cost us a single goal in his time here, but he has created goals for us with his interceptions and quick passing?

Has he cost us goals? Well, if you're looking for horrendous howlers, admittedly you'll find little (at least I can't think of much). But I can recall plenty of times he's left the defence exposed as teams break through the middle, in ways that just couldn't happen when Vieira was here (and yes, even when he was playing badly). And on at least one occasion, whilst he's not been the guy to miss the last tackle, it's lead to a goal.

And the fact that you have to highlight his lack of glaring errors first, when trying to defend him, says an awful lot. No, perhaps he's never passed the ball to an onrushing centre forward. But if his overall game wasn't so completely non-descript, I hardly think that this would be the first thing to spring to mind.

His passes actually stay on the ground instead of bouncing up and down every ten yards like Gilberto's

Generally, I think that's just plain wrong. I think that his passes generally DO bobble in the same way that Gilberto's tend to. But short of sitting down with you, watching a game, and keeping a tally, there's no real way of actually proving that point so I won't labour it.

But again, it's no real measure that he's any good, just because pass better than Gilberto (and again, I'd have them more or less on a par). Gilberto's a player with his own strengths and his own weaknesses (which we've seen a lot of recently). He's never been a particularly good passing player, but on the whole he's justified his selection based upon other areas of his game. So Flamini may be a better passer than Gilberto, he may be a better tackler than Pires, he may have a better shot than Senderos, and he may dribble better than Lehmann. But this is just meaningless if no areas of his game actually qualify as strengths, other than his workrate. Which, on it's own, is not enough.

What the hell do you expect from him anyway? He work his arse off, passes the ball immediately and then makes himself available again.

What do I expect from him? Well, more than I see. You say yourself that the guy's got no particular strengths other than stamina and workrate. Well, if it's genuinely come to a time when such a player is supposed to be the first choice backup in centre midfield (to a teenager and an unspectacular Gilberto to boot), we've slipped a long long way. I'll never fault him for his workrate, and I admire his commitment. But it would be a flat out lie of me to say that I thought that he was a talented enough footballer to play any kind of significant role in a competitive Arsenal team now, or indeed at any point in the future.

As for 'making himself available', again, I just don't think that's true - as a player, he seems very reluctant to take the ball in the central third. He will sometimes make forward runs, granted, and he does often hang back for a return pass, but as a 'go to' guy in the middle of the park he just doesn't stack up. Even last night we saw Larsson, a player lower down the hierachy than Flamini, more keen to get time on the ball. But, just like the passing argument, there's no real way of proving it short of sitting down with you and watching a game.

Yesterday he had a pretty much flawless performance apart from some rash tackling early on, and it's very unfair to slate him for that

With regards to last night, which was a pretty dreadful team performance on the whole, I believe I gave him 5/10. To call his performance close to flawless would be a gross exaggeration. At 5/10, he was probably slightly better than our average player last night, and deserves no particular blame ahead of anyone else. But to call our midfield as a whole effective would be a complete lie, and to exonerate Flamini of blame for that would again be unfair on everyone else who played badly. His distribution was perhaps better than Larsson's, but far, far from effective. Again, the fact that the team as a whole was not moving well impacted that, but that doesn't change the fact that his performance was, at best, average.

I'm pretty sick of discussing this tbh. I rate him and think he'll be a very good player one day, you don't. Fair enough, we'll see in a few years.

Fair enough. I'll put it in my diary. Personally, I don't think he'll even be an Arsenal player in 3-4 years, and I certainly don't think he'll ever be a first team regular at a top european club. But then, I've been wrong before and I'm sure I'll be wrong again. So we'll see.

 

[longrufus]

i use to be like some of you, defend flamini, but i have now moved to the dark side, yes folks, im with asa. He is simply is not good enough, full stop. Does not have the qualaties to be a top midfielder, working at things can only get you so far, you need a little thing called ability.

Ok lets play a wee game.

Rank these young Frenh players in order(1(best)-4(worst))

Flamini, Bodmar, Toulalan, Mavuba

Now honestly and i mean honestly, where does flamini come in, third at best i'd imagine. I'd probobly rate him 5th, as im sure i could find another CM better.

Another question. Can anyone imagine an arsenal teamsheet 3/4 years from now? Will Flamini be there?

 

[asajoseph]

While Cesc is more creative than the rest of the MF put together but still is not scaring defenders...

I'm not so sure. Cesc is a player well capable of playing a killer final ball through the middle of the park, and he's been getting better at that this season. He can pass the ball in any area of the pitch, and at a variety of distances. Also, he's got a modicum of skill. He's no C. Ronaldo, but he is well capable of beating his man from time to time. If only he'd shoot a little more regularly (and he can give it a fair old crack from distance), he'd be a player far more feared by other teams than he is.

I just plain disagree. Plus if it's physcial strength that's your problem, well that's pretty easy to rectify...

In what way do you disagree? You think he's a strong player on the ball? And as for 'rectifying physical strength', I think it's a lot easier said than done.

Oh, I know that's not true, he's layed some brilliant passes out, albeit against lesser teams...

Brilliant passes? I'm not sure I can think of many. He had a very good moment against Ajax in the first group stage match for the first goal, but laying out brilliant passes? They must be when I'm buying my halftime pie...

Plus I think there has been alot of expectation heaped upon Mathieu.

You know that's probably true. Personally, I had the same cautious excitement as I have for most players his age that Wenger signs. Perhaps that's why I'm so disappointed in him. But, to be honest, if he was our 4th or 5th choice CM, I wouldn't be too bothered. It's just like the situation with Cygan - for a player down the pecking order at CB, he's not so bad. But as a player in the position where he'll get regular football, I feel compelled to put him under closer scrutiny. And so far, as I'm sure you've guessed, I'm not to excited with what I've seen.

Anyway, I can't really say much more without repeating myself. But one thing I will say again, is that I've been wrong before. Very wrong. I think I once said RVP would never make it at Arsenal, so when I say it about Flamini you're more than welcome to take it with a pinch of salt. But I can only be honest about my oppinion, and as for the rest, time will tell.

Oh, and for the record, I have occasionally been right too...