Re: The Official Summer Transfer Rumours Thread

[Jay29]

To start with, in no way was I saying that you can't criticise Wenger. Nor did I ever question your support. Frankly, how long you've been a supporter for and how dedicated you are makes no difference to me.

Maybe I shouldn't have phrased my post in the way I did, but the implication was that your recent criticism of Wenger - and the majority of your recent posts have been derogatory remarks about him and his decisions - had led to a bias where you are now, in my view, criticising him unfairly. You might feel that your criticisms are valid and I respect that, but I don't agree with all of them, and all I thought was that on this occasion you were overreaching in an attempt to criticise him again.

In any case, going by the tone and content of your posts this season, I didn't think it was "unfair" to say that you like to shit on Wenger. If that wording offends you, then take it to mean that you like to criticise Wenger. Whether it's a judgement or observation, it doesn't mean I don't understand your position. You can find many posts from me where I've been critical of the manager.

[Jay29]

As widely reported Lacazette is undergoing medical ahead of completing club-record move from Lyon to Arsenal. Announment unlikely today #AFC

— David Ornstein (@bbcsport_david) July 4, 2017

[Sri]

To start with, in no way was I saying that you can't criticise Wenger. Nor did I ever question your support. Frankly, how long you've been a supporter for and how dedicated you are makes no difference to me.

Maybe I shouldn't have phrased my post in the way I did, but the implication was that your recent criticism of Wenger - and the majority of your recent posts have been derogatory remarks about him and his decisions - had led to a bias where you are now, in my view, criticising him unfairly. You might feel that your criticisms are valid and I respect that, but I don't agree with all of them, and all I thought was that on this occasion you were overreaching in an attempt to criticise him again.

In any case, going by the tone and content of your posts this season, I didn't think it was "unfair" to say that you like to shit on Wenger. If that wording offends you, then take it to mean that you like to criticise Wenger. Whether it's a judgement or observation, it doesn't mean I don't understand your position. You can find many posts from me where I've been critical of the manager.

Fair enough, when you put it that way. Indeed, I am much more critical of him and and his methods in the past season, and very much frustrated that he gets to continue his reign despite finishing 21 points off the league winner and outside his CL holy grail.

However, I disagree that my view of the British core's failure is just another excuse to criticize AW. I genuinely feel that with a better manager, they would indeed have developed differently, and maybe even accomplished something relevant.

The publicity surrounding their contract extension was based on their potential. I recall AW even saying something to the tune of how the core would go on to help England win NT level trophies in the coming years, almost akin to the players from Bayern-Dortmund in Germany or Barca-Real in Spain.

Retrospectively, some of them have turned out to be scrubs, some never got around to being consistent, and some genuinely regressed. Almost every one of them have had recurring issues with injuries and niggles over the years. All this while, we have been investing in hard and soft infrastructure off the pitch to improve player fitness and mitigate injuries - be it in technology or staff personnel. And yet, we have had these players being sent on with insufficient warm-up, leading to a muscle injury, multiple times in the not too distant past. Was that not the fault of the manager? Is the manager not to blame if he doesn't leverage the support available to him?
(Of course, I am not talking about the freak injuries and leg breaks but of muscle injuries and niggles here)

This is only an example. With some concerted time and effort, I am sure we can come up with more evidence, both for as well as against.

The British core were not a bunch of no name scrubs. They are mostly players who have been around the club in the youth setup and later for a substantial amount of time. Not every young player turns out to fulfill the promise they show in their early years, but you only know that in retrospect and obviously there may be a million contributing factors. However, excluding the random factors, there is still a case for managerial deficiency to be made, in my view. And that can't be simply reduced to a bias against him over the last one year.

[El Gunner]

He's always been a pretty thick player though, i said this when everyone was hyping him after that performance at Barca that he needs to get better when it comes to decision making and intelligence.

He never did, you can argue that injuries prevented that from ever happening but i personally think he's just not a very intelligent footballer and he never would have adapted.

Chamberlain is the same, they are both pretty thick. Same case with most English players really.

I guess we can just conclude that most English people are dumb (:

[Raptorgunner]

After the abuse Wenger took from the fans, I believe this time around Wenger finally has the pressure to perform, knowing the fans wont stand for it. I think so far 2 signings have been good and lets hope we keep Sanchez and Ozil.

[El Gunner]

If Jay wasn't such a logical poster and person, we could have had Sri vs Jay for the Arsenal GL Championship.

But I'm on your side on this one Sri. These players - the supposed "British core" - had potential, not only within the club, but it was buzzing around the British media's lips as well. I do believe that a different system, tactics and development could have resulted in different (higher) level and class of football players which they are now, especially Wilshere, Ramsey, Chamberlain and Gibbs.

[urbaNRoots]

Aside from Wilshere none of them were really that talented. The English media hyped them because the club and Arsene Wenger pushed this new narrative of loyal English players that are going to be the future of the club after van Persie, Fabregas, Nasri f'd off.

It obviously failed because they were not as good as a lot of people thought. Wenger played these guys in plenty of positions and formations and they never kicked off, they are just that good.

Anyway I always like when English players get in our team but I will not miss this particular bunch. Bring on the next generation: Reiss Nelson, Nketiah, Bramall, Maitland-Niles, Crowley

[Great Leader Sprucenuce]

He's always been a pretty thick player though, i said this when everyone was hyping him after that performance at Barca that he needs to get better when it comes to decision making and intelligence.

He never did, you can argue that injuries prevented that from ever happening but i personally think he's just not a very intelligent footballer and he never would have adapted.

Chamberlain is the same, they are both pretty thick. Same case with most English players really.

I guess we can just conclude that most English people are dumb (:

Nah just football intelligence wise the players we produce tend to be pretty thick, because of poor coaching and the fact in youth football we can rely fitness and athleticism over smaller and immature players.

You can tell Barkley never at any stage needed to actually think at younger levels.

[Jay29]

I'm not saying Wenger's blameless. He did have a part to play in the fitness issues these players had, which might have hurt their development. But you can't first say "there are countless factors involved" and then conclude that a different manager would have succeeded with the same players.

My view is that, in hindsight, we could see that the British core wasn't as good as believed back when they signed contracts together. Based on that, I find it ridiculous that Wenger could be criticised for not having more success with them. Likewise, I find it very unfair to lay the blame for their current situations solely at Wenger's feet. While he might not be blameless, some of the blame has to go to the players as well. They received no shortage of opportunities in the team.

It's easy to blame a bad system or bad tactics but those aren't responsible for Wilshere's lack of understanding of where to position himself in midfield, or Ramsey's refusal to sit and be disciplined, or Chamberlain's tendency to give the ball away cheaply in how on half, or Welbeck's crappy finishing, etc.

Ultimately, the club miscalculated. They gambled on potential and it didn't work out. The idea that we had a group of players talented enough to win us trophies was a fanciful one we all brought into, but it turned out we were wrong.

[Sri]

I'm not saying Wenger's blameless. He did have a part to play in the fitness issues these players had, which might have hurt their development. But you can't first say "there are countless factors involved" and then conclude that a different manager would have succeeded with the same players.

My view is that, in hindsight, we could see that the British core wasn't as good as believed back when they signed contracts together. Based on that, I find it ridiculous that Wenger could be criticised for not having more success with them. Likewise, I find it very unfair to lay the blame for their current situations solely at Wenger's feet. While he might not be blameless, some of the blame has to go to the players as well. They received no shortage of opportunities in the team.

It's easy to blame a bad system or bad tactics but those aren't responsible for Wilshere's lack of understanding of where to position himself in midfield, or Ramsey's refusal to sit and be disciplined, or Chamberlain's tendency to give the ball away cheaply in how on half, or Welbeck's crappy finishing, etc.

Ultimately, the club miscalculated. They gambled on potential and it didn't work out. The idea that we had a group of players talented enough to win us trophies was a fanciful one we all brought into, but it turned out we were wrong.

Since you felt I was being unfairly biased and overreaching in my criticism, I moderated my comments with admission of the possibility that there could be many other factors involved. That's also why I said that despite that, the manager can't be absolved. If you thought that I meant that AW was to blame 100% and the rest doesn't matter at all, I'm afraid that was not what I wanted to convey at all. It seems that your observation of my constant criticism of AW in the last few months has biased your reading/interpretation of my original post to lead to an assumption that I fault AW completely. On the contrary, my view is that he had a *large* part to play, but I am not saying that it is *purely* his fault. I think you would now see the distinction that I am driving at.

That said, the part in bold above is *very much* the job of a manager. Let's not forget that this is the same AW who brought the best out of young talents in the first 10 years of his career. Even today, you have young players wanting to work under AW because he gives them chances and helps them develop to fulfill their potential - at least, that is the largely established image. However, you take the last 5-7 years into consideration and its easy to see how many players have not reached their potential under his mentorship - and this is very much down to poor coaching.

Young players not only need a manager who gives them (probably more than) enough chances, but also develops their game and decision making in training, helps them succeed, ensures they are not overplayed, etc.

Wenger's hands-off management built on the philosophy that the player will reflect on his own mistakes and develop organically worked for very intelligent players in the past who didn't have the distractions of super large paychecks, social media, hyperexposure to journalists and hype trains, etc. that younger players must cope with today. Being unable to tailor his methods from early 2000s to the context today is very much an example of how Wenger's stubbornness is costing him & us, in my view.

[Sri]

... there is no reason these lads couldn't have accomplished something with the right tutelage and system.

Again, going back to my original bunch of posts, I would like to highlight that I am consistent in referring to insufficient tutelage and development.

And to re-emphasize, the way the Brit core has turned out is not 100% AW's fault. However, my view remains that he has his share of the blame to shoulder.

Think we can leave this at that?

[iftikhar]

Haven't been able to follow the transfer rumors, is Sanchez and Ozil staying??? Anyone showing interest???

[urbaNRoots]

Orny:


Lacazette medical done just paperwork to finish. Arsenal have more targets but any deals now likely to depend on Sanchez/Ozil/Ox/others #AFC

That means we are concentrating on a CM and CB. Right? Right???

[Jay29]

I'm happy to leave it, but for one thing:

That said, the part in bold above is *very much* the job of a manager. Let's not forget that this is the same AW who brought the best out of young talents in the first 10 years of his career. Even today, you have young players wanting to work under AW because he gives them chances and helps them develop to fulfill their potential - at least, that is the largely established image. However, you take the last 5-7 years into consideration and its easy to see how many players have not reached their potential under his mentorship - and this is very much down to poor coaching.

Young players not only need a manager who gives them (probably more than) enough chances, but also develops their game and decision making in training, helps them succeed, ensures they are not overplayed, etc.

We're both making an awful lot of assumptions about things. The problem here is the assumption that Wenger, the teacher, is the one entirely at fault for his players' failing, without knowing for sure if he tried to teach them or not. None of us can say with certainty that Wenger didn't try to coach his players to be better. The results on the pitch might suggest he doesn't, but equally, it could also suggest that the player does not have the capacity to learn and adapt. But you don't consider this possibility, and jump straight to blaming everything on Wenger.

Take some like Deulofeu, for example. He's played under some of the best coaches in the game, but is no better now than he was as a kid, because he's just not that bright. If he came through at Arsenal you'd be saying it's Wenger's fault.

There's a fundamental difference between a manager teaching his team a system of player and coaching them as players. Wenger does give tremendous agency to his players for his system of play. Wenger does not teach systems in the way that Guardiola or Pochettino does, that might allow a young player to shine. He does, though, coach his players to be better players. He trains them in way that encourages good interplay and decision making. As much as you might bash him for young players not flourishing under him, every player that comes through Arsenal has that ability. Players like Iwobi and Maitland-Niles, two players who had successful positional changes and look natural in the Arsenal set-up.

So when you say there are lots of players who didn't reach their full potential under his mentorship, it doesn't consider the number of players that have, in fact, flourished. Players like Koscielny, Bellerin, Coquelin, Ramsey, Nasri, Fabregas, Walcott, and van Persie.

[Sri]

Fair enough, but to reiterate: I did not say I entirely blame him. My point remains that on the basis of the evidence, there is enough to suggest that he shares a part of the blame. I happen to attribute a larger part of it to him, given that he and the club stressed the potential of these players on the basis of what they saw on/off the pitch.

I could point out to issues each of the players in your list have had, and I do believe it is far too early to make a judgment on Iwobi or Maitland-Niles. Wilshere, Chamberlain, Bellerin, Ramsey, all started with excellent first/second seasons in the set up. But that will only serve to nitpick and draw out this discussion needlessly.

Depending on what evidence we choose to pick up, there is enough to support either point of view. You place greater emphasis on one side of it, and I do on the other.

[RealGunner]

No doubt Ozil is staying. It's Sanchez who is the isuse. If he stays then that would be one heck of a summer.

Only if we could add Hulk now.

and a midfield tank

[RealGunner]

fraud #2 Geoff

[Great Leader Sprucenuce]

Blimey

[RealGunner]

----------------------Cech------------------------
Bellerin-------Mustafi------Koscielny-------Kolasinac
--------------Xhaka------Ramsey/TANK----------
Lacazette-------------Ozil----------------Sanchez
--------------------Giroud---------------------


4th

[Hapless_Hans]

We should be swapping Sanchez for Douglas Costa.

That's a great idea!
Let's agree on a straight swap right now

[RealGunner]

So...apparently Giroud is joining Everton lol

shit source ofc

[MJ]

Blimey

Rooney next Don't shoot the messenger.

[RealGunner]

Arsenal are planning a £70m double move for Sporting Lisbon midfielders William Carvalho and Gelson Martins. (Source: A Bola)

MIDFIELD TANKS LADSSSSSSS


also fake news.

[MJ]

A Bola has had us sign William Carvalho every window since 2014

[urbaNRoots]

Signing Lemar would almost certainly mean that Alexis is gone (same positions if not similar playing style) so I'm starting to lean more on the Mahrez side, just to see this:

Lacazette
Alexis Özil Mahrez

Everyone in that front line is capable of double figures in a good season. So much creativity and goals in that side.

Mahrez is also way cheaper which allows us one more signing in midfield and then we are done. I would be incredibly happy with that.

[urbaNRoots]

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/leicester-city-s-riyad-mahrez-definitely-off-to-arsenal-say-bookies/story-30425684-detail/story.html

According to Leicester Mercury, Leicester City are yet to receive an offer for Mahrez from Arsenal or anyone else.

[Sponsored content]