- Thread starter
- #21
-
! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !
Discussions about police investigations
In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.
Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.
Would Love to Hear Our Young English Kids Say This:
- Thread starter Ziontrain
- Start date
- Replies 39
- Views 1,802
sabret00the
Established Member
correction: he can not play left wing/left midfielder/far left in the centre on park. he's proved that with each and every performance he's put in there.Ziontrain said:
RocktheCasbah
Established Member
I kinda agree with sabre on Clichy at left mid. As a stop gap fine, but seriously expected to replace Pires? I haven't seen much from Gael that shows he can replace 15 goals and at least ten assists per season..
- Thread starter
- #24
You'll note - read above - that I said the potential future partnership includes Cole at left midfield! Cole has more potential there offensively than Clichy.
That said, I think you have to remember that you cannot have one just one type of player in a position. Pires plays midfield really as an extra striker. If you put Clichy there, you'd be doing it for defensive/solidity purposes. He's not yet fully molded, but at maturity I think he's do that sort of job very well.
No, of course he not going to be a Pires. Then again who is? But its quite reasonable to have the game option of a defensive worker out wide midfield for parts of a game , similar to the way that Liverpool use Riise, the way Man U used P. Neville/Fortune (the point wasn't for them to "replace" Giggs, was it?) or in fact he way we used Ray Parlour on the right to balance things out.
So it all depends. But I do see a possible partnership long term with Clichy at LB and Cole at LM.
That said, I think you have to remember that you cannot have one just one type of player in a position. Pires plays midfield really as an extra striker. If you put Clichy there, you'd be doing it for defensive/solidity purposes. He's not yet fully molded, but at maturity I think he's do that sort of job very well.
No, of course he not going to be a Pires. Then again who is? But its quite reasonable to have the game option of a defensive worker out wide midfield for parts of a game , similar to the way that Liverpool use Riise, the way Man U used P. Neville/Fortune (the point wasn't for them to "replace" Giggs, was it?) or in fact he way we used Ray Parlour on the right to balance things out.
So it all depends. But I do see a possible partnership long term with Clichy at LB and Cole at LM.
RocktheCasbah
Established Member
That's a fair point, though I suspect sabret00the's reticence is more to do with the factr he doesn't really rate Clichy.
sabret00the
Established Member
i replied to what i quoted of you and there you stated he can play at left midfield and i told you he can't, why this requires further discussion is beyond me.Ziontrain said:
Cole is a world class left back who improved as a left back every year, his ability to get forward from deep is apart of his game and even then i wouldn't make him a first choice left winger for nothing. why you'd wanna change players around to acccomodate someone who's got a long way to go and is a backup plan is beyond me also, especially when we know that Wenger has three people being groomed for the left wing position; Smith, Quincy and Reyes. do you really think he's gonna keep them three happy by adding an extra name to the rotation list? he's already deemed that Smith has surpassed the level of Reserves and Reyes definately has, not to mention that Quincy is already knocking on the door of the first team, as soon as Pires goes these players will take that burden between them. even if it's just quincy and smith if we need a defensive winger then we need to buy one as Clichy does not have the ability to provide what you're looking for.
dbergyisnumerouno
Active Member
you know what, i don't think that Arsène would be so stupid not to have played bentley, IF he is that good. do you really think that arsenal would waste all the time, money, effort put in to train the selfish prick!
we must not forget that sometimes, circumstances just doesn't allow it, eg injuries, loan, etc. probably clichy was just fortunate enough to have more playing time!
and, i cannot stress this enough, attitude counts if a player wants to be successful.
we must not forget that sometimes, circumstances just doesn't allow it, eg injuries, loan, etc. probably clichy was just fortunate enough to have more playing time!
and, i cannot stress this enough, attitude counts if a player wants to be successful.
sabret00the
Established Member
i think he's the david beckham of left backs.RocktheCasbah said:
i think he's got bags of pace and the stamina too, but when it comes to tackling he's poor, tactical brilliance is non-existence, he wins the ball with his pace rather than skill and his positioning is also not the best in the world, oh same goes for distribution. i do beleive he'll be get better and i beleive he's a good understudy for cole, however he wouldn't be my long term replacement for first choice despite me thinking he'll vastly improve with time. i think he's the perfect investment for a big return though.
Gurgen
Established Member
sabret00the said:
Reminds me of a certain Ashley Cole at the age of 21.
mood
Well-Known Member
Gurgen said:
I'd say Clichy was better than Ashley Cole at the same age.
And about Bentley.. he'll keep getting loaned out until he's eventually sold. He's an average, average player and I can't see him making it at all.
sabret00the
Established Member
IMO common misinterpretation, the only thing about young ash was he was too gung ho, positionally unaware and mis timed his tackles, that's it. but meh we'll see in the end.mood said:
- Thread starter
- #32
sabret00the said:
So other than (all the three main aspects of defense) he was a em.....perfect defender?
Also the positioning is not something he's fully got yet. You still see some major lapses from him from time to time. And its not just being out of position from attacking. Sometimes he is supposedly staying home - but totally out of place.
sabret00the said:
Sorry I differ on this.Clichy would be the defensive type at that position. And he would be useful. Of those players you mention, Reyes is trhe best defender - which pretty much speaks volumes! Smith whom I rate a lot would basically leave you playing 4-3-3 as he is weak on defense effectiveness and lacks any defensive physical presence - even at reserve level.
Far more liktey that Wenger will let Clichy develop as a full time option at full back and part time as defensive LM - that go out and spend money on a defensive LM. hell, he wont even spend money on a striker - and we need one!
polaris sc
Well-Known Member
well put Clichy, your going to get your chance soon, with out
asajoseph
Established Member
What rubbish.
RocktheCasbah
Established Member
Growler said:
Clichy's a damn sight better than Djimi Traore, mate.
Biggus
Established Member
Growler said:
Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then speak and remove all doubt.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Never heard so much bollocks. A team of seven Englishmen just beat 'our' team that consists entirely of foreigners. A disgraceful indictment of Wengers foreign only policy. To be honest my support for Arsenal is hanging by a thread at present.
As it stands Arsenal are going to struggle to qualify for the UEFA cup let alone the champions league.
As it stands Arsenal are going to struggle to qualify for the UEFA cup let alone the champions league.
Biggus
Established Member
Do you want me to hand you a scissors?
A
Anonymous
Guest
I'm 34 and have supported Arsenal since 1978. The game has transformed immesurably since then much of it to the detriment of the game and Arsenal football club.
Why should I as a Londoner and Englishman support a club that consists almost entirely of foreign mercenaries. I ask myself that question every week and my faith is being increasingly tested to the point I subconsciously welcome us getting beaten by a team largely consisting of Englishman.
Naturally as this board is full of foreign johnny come lately supporters your support is based on those foreign players remaining.
As I said football has changed. Unless Blatter gets his way and seven players on the pitch from each european club is from that home nation then I shall retain only a lukewarm support for a team belonging to a club I love.
Why should I as a Londoner and Englishman support a club that consists almost entirely of foreign mercenaries. I ask myself that question every week and my faith is being increasingly tested to the point I subconsciously welcome us getting beaten by a team largely consisting of Englishman.
Naturally as this board is full of foreign johnny come lately supporters your support is based on those foreign players remaining.
As I said football has changed. Unless Blatter gets his way and seven players on the pitch from each european club is from that home nation then I shall retain only a lukewarm support for a team belonging to a club I love.
