When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago.
Not to knock down Giroud obviously, been improving every season, twice the player he is now than when he first joined.
When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
What a load of rubbish
50 (U1147)
"When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago."
---------------------------------------------
I don't think that's necessarily the case. As Wenger said, Giroud's game has vastly improved. He has scored 10 from 18 matches, which is more than Rooney (8 from 23) and RVP (9 from 21).
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
Scoring the kinds of goals RVP used to. He's scored better goals that RVP this season. Looking a real asset. Good to see an example of a player who looks twice the player that we bought within three seasons
I've never had a problem with Giroud as an Arsenal player. He's an asset and we could do much worse. He simply shouldn't be the main striker of a team of our level and our ambitions. Our competition - including Chelsea, City, Liverpool, Man U and Spurs all have better strikers.
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
--------------------------------------------
His weakness isnt his finishing. It's his cumbersome movement and sloppiness in possession. Few strikers in the league turn over the ball more than Giroud either with an errant pass overdoing his one-touch flicks or getting caught on the ball before he can get it untangled from his feet. Just tooooo many of our attacks break down when the ball gets to Giroud.
He has improved tremendously (still remember the chance he fluffed in his first two games) but he isn't clinical enough in key games (e.g. against the top 6 and away at difficult grounds). Sturridge, Costa, Suarez, Van Persie, Aguero, even Kane this season make an impact in games against difficult opposition and "big" teams. Look at Aguero's performance against Bayern. I know it is unfair because Giroud is not at their level, but that is what Arsenal needs to get to the next level. It is why I loved the Sanchez signing; he is that type of player for Arsenal, something I fear Giroud doesn't have the talent/physical attributes to become.
Giroud has scored in big games and against top opposition. He's scored against city twice this year, as well as liverpool, man utd, and everton away. So he is improving in that sense also.
comment by The Year of the Ox (U7080)
posted 52 minutes ago
Giroud has scored in big games and against top opposition. He's scored against city twice this year, as well as liverpool, man utd, and everton away. So he is improving in that sense also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right. I feel like an idiot now. Must have forgotten some of those performances. Probably my bias against him because of his first two seasons. He is a good player, but he doesn't give me the "we will win this game" assurance that top players (such as Sanchez) give. But he has been scoring, so I can't complain that much.
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 6 hours, 10 minutes ago
I've never had a problem with Giroud as an Arsenal player. He's an asset and we could do much worse. He simply shouldn't be the main striker of a team of our level and our ambitions. Our competition - including Chelsea, City, Liverpool, Man U and Spurs all have better strikers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Giroud's all round game was quite poor against Boro. You could see both Ozil and Welbeck get demonstrably angry at him. But he scored two goals and thats the job of a striker. And a job well done.
Giroud has done very well since returning to the team after injury. But this happened last season before Christmas only for his form to regress after Theo got injured. The reason for that is obvious in that Giroud requires other players to create space for him. That is doable against teams like Boro at the Emirates. But when you contrast that to his performance against Spurs shows what is lacking in his make up. He can't create space for him self and for top top striker you need to be able to do that, as we will see against the better teams in the CL if and when we get past Monaco.
49 Goals is very good, even better considering he doesnt take pens for us. If he did he could easily have had another 10 min.
When the team has pace around him he looks good as we all saw at the beginning last season. When we dont have Pace or Runners he doesnt look very good at all and we all saw that last season when everyone got injured.
Not Giroud’s biggest fan but it is impossible not to be impressed with the contribution he has made to the club, especially when his £12m fee is taken into consideration.
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 8 hours, 50 minutes ago
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
--------------------------------------------
His weakness isnt his finishing. It's his cumbersome movement and sloppiness in possession. Few strikers in the league turn over the ball more than Giroud either with an errant pass overdoing his one-touch flicks or getting caught on the ball before he can get it untangled from his feet. Just tooooo many of our attacks break down when the ball gets to Giroud.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And soooooo many of our successful attacks (and high quality goals) have only been possible because of Giroud too.
His flicks around the penalty area are high risk/high reward. Yes he doesn't always make the right decision, but when he does, and it comes off, he provides real quality link-up for the team.
For a 12M striker he scored some world class goals but because many people read a lot of twitter bolox and when let's say Harry world class Kane scores his overall contribution got unnoticed.
It does annoy me when people complain about Giroud. Purely because his goals scored in no way tell the whole story. People moan he shouldn't be the main striker for the club as 20 goals a season isn't good enough.
My problem with that is that Giroud is also inevitably responsible for another 10-15 goals a season that others score. I'd have to see stats to be sure but I'd confidently bet that he's one of the highest assisting strikers in the league, if not the highest.
A 20 goal striker who assists almost as well as the league's best wingers, to me, is just as valuable as a 30 goal striker who only gets 5 or 6 assists. Whichever way you cut it, there's 25-35 goals scored because of Giroud. I don't particularly require him personally to put it in the net to give him the credit for the goal.
I will admit that his lack of pace is a weakness in certain games, but I don't think the type of player he is requires him to be quick. Not his game.
I've always liked Giroud and feel he earned respect he's not been shown, in his first season. Foreign strikers simply don't hit the EPL and bang away 20 in their first season, check the list of top ones and see just how many of them got nowhere near the goal/assist total he did in his first year.
We constantly bang on about this league being the best and the benchmark to judge players on. Yet his first season was ignored by some as though foreign players arrive and make/score over 30 goals for the team in their first season, all the time.
It's great to see him cracking them home at the moment, had a shocker yesterday and still got two. No doubt he'll finish the season close to 20 having been injured 4 months of the season. Unfortunately I also have no doubt that 20 goals in 5 months still won't be good enough for some. Whom will still be claiming he's not good enough to be the main striker
Personally I reckon some of you just hate him cos ya missus says he's sexy
Personally I reckon some of you just hate him cos ya missus says he's sexy
-----
^this
It's actually 49 goals in 116 games. A decent but slightly average return in a team that scores a lot of goals.
comment by Scouting for Goals (U6965)
posted 16 minutes ago
It's actually 49 goals in 116 games. A decent but slightly average return in a team that scores a lot of goals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our goal scoring as a team is a bit overrated. Last season we had significantly fewer goals than City and Liverpool for example.
It does annoy me when people complain about Giroud. Purely because his goals scored in no way tell the whole story. People moan he shouldn't be the main striker for the club as 20 goals a season isn't good enough.
-----------------------------------
Disagree abt that. A strikers job is to score pure and simple. Just like attacking midfielder's job is to create and score.
Giroud's lack of pace is a hindrance in our counter attack game. When teams come to sit back at the Emirates Giroud is very effective because he is a box presence. Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
Our entire team yesterday benefited by our center backs being able to push up without the fear of being cut open because of a faster Paulista instead of slow Mertesacker. (even then Paulista was caught once when he tactically took a yellow to prevent a goal). You only have to look to the Charity Shield and how we dominated Man City!
By compressing space and playing the ball in the opposition half we made Giroud even more threatening because he was allowed to play in the opposition box where he has always been threatening (even when he joined) instead of standing on the center line trying to hold the ball up under pressure.
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
comment by BO$$™ (U6401)
posted 39 seconds ago
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Could well be. But at the moment he is doing very well.
When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.
He certainly offers options that no other player in the team can, and noting his shortcomings it is impossible to ignore his stats.
When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.
----------------------------
Thats irrelevant. The new TV deal is £5.1 Bn. Which means Arsenal and in in fact anyone finihsing in the top half could go and buy a £50m player without blinking.
Jenius99
I think you have missed the point.
Giroud was purchased for £12m. Can you name a forward acquired of similar value that has made a greater contribution at PL level? Not many around.
Sign in if you want to comment
Giroud's arsenal stats
Page 1 of 2
posted on 15/2/15
When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago.
Not to knock down Giroud obviously, been improving every season, twice the player he is now than when he first joined.
posted on 15/2/15
When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
What a load of rubbish
posted on 15/2/15
50 (U1147)
"When players like Giroud are getting a better ratio than 0.5, shows how 'easy' it is to score now than 10-15 years ago."
---------------------------------------------
I don't think that's necessarily the case. As Wenger said, Giroud's game has vastly improved. He has scored 10 from 18 matches, which is more than Rooney (8 from 23) and RVP (9 from 21).
posted on 15/2/15
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
Scoring the kinds of goals RVP used to. He's scored better goals that RVP this season. Looking a real asset. Good to see an example of a player who looks twice the player that we bought within three seasons
posted on 15/2/15
I've never had a problem with Giroud as an Arsenal player. He's an asset and we could do much worse. He simply shouldn't be the main striker of a team of our level and our ambitions. Our competition - including Chelsea, City, Liverpool, Man U and Spurs all have better strikers.
posted on 16/2/15
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
--------------------------------------------
His weakness isnt his finishing. It's his cumbersome movement and sloppiness in possession. Few strikers in the league turn over the ball more than Giroud either with an errant pass overdoing his one-touch flicks or getting caught on the ball before he can get it untangled from his feet. Just tooooo many of our attacks break down when the ball gets to Giroud.
posted on 16/2/15
He has improved tremendously (still remember the chance he fluffed in his first two games) but he isn't clinical enough in key games (e.g. against the top 6 and away at difficult grounds). Sturridge, Costa, Suarez, Van Persie, Aguero, even Kane this season make an impact in games against difficult opposition and "big" teams. Look at Aguero's performance against Bayern. I know it is unfair because Giroud is not at their level, but that is what Arsenal needs to get to the next level. It is why I loved the Sanchez signing; he is that type of player for Arsenal, something I fear Giroud doesn't have the talent/physical attributes to become.
posted on 16/2/15
Giroud has scored in big games and against top opposition. He's scored against city twice this year, as well as liverpool, man utd, and everton away. So he is improving in that sense also.
posted on 16/2/15
comment by The Year of the Ox (U7080)
posted 52 minutes ago
Giroud has scored in big games and against top opposition. He's scored against city twice this year, as well as liverpool, man utd, and everton away. So he is improving in that sense also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right. I feel like an idiot now. Must have forgotten some of those performances. Probably my bias against him because of his first two seasons. He is a good player, but he doesn't give me the "we will win this game" assurance that top players (such as Sanchez) give. But he has been scoring, so I can't complain that much.
posted on 16/2/15
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 6 hours, 10 minutes ago
I've never had a problem with Giroud as an Arsenal player. He's an asset and we could do much worse. He simply shouldn't be the main striker of a team of our level and our ambitions. Our competition - including Chelsea, City, Liverpool, Man U and Spurs all have better strikers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 16/2/15
Giroud's all round game was quite poor against Boro. You could see both Ozil and Welbeck get demonstrably angry at him. But he scored two goals and thats the job of a striker. And a job well done.
Giroud has done very well since returning to the team after injury. But this happened last season before Christmas only for his form to regress after Theo got injured. The reason for that is obvious in that Giroud requires other players to create space for him. That is doable against teams like Boro at the Emirates. But when you contrast that to his performance against Spurs shows what is lacking in his make up. He can't create space for him self and for top top striker you need to be able to do that, as we will see against the better teams in the CL if and when we get past Monaco.
posted on 16/2/15
49 Goals is very good, even better considering he doesnt take pens for us. If he did he could easily have had another 10 min.
When the team has pace around him he looks good as we all saw at the beginning last season. When we dont have Pace or Runners he doesnt look very good at all and we all saw that last season when everyone got injured.
posted on 16/2/15
Not Giroud’s biggest fan but it is impossible not to be impressed with the contribution he has made to the club, especially when his £12m fee is taken into consideration.
posted on 16/2/15
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 8 hours, 50 minutes ago
The quality of his goals has improved and his clinical nature. He's only missed one proper sitter this year and that was against Stoke.
--------------------------------------------
His weakness isnt his finishing. It's his cumbersome movement and sloppiness in possession. Few strikers in the league turn over the ball more than Giroud either with an errant pass overdoing his one-touch flicks or getting caught on the ball before he can get it untangled from his feet. Just tooooo many of our attacks break down when the ball gets to Giroud.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And soooooo many of our successful attacks (and high quality goals) have only been possible because of Giroud too.
His flicks around the penalty area are high risk/high reward. Yes he doesn't always make the right decision, but when he does, and it comes off, he provides real quality link-up for the team.
posted on 16/2/15
For a 12M striker he scored some world class goals but because many people read a lot of twitter bolox and when let's say Harry world class Kane scores his overall contribution got unnoticed.
posted on 16/2/15
It does annoy me when people complain about Giroud. Purely because his goals scored in no way tell the whole story. People moan he shouldn't be the main striker for the club as 20 goals a season isn't good enough.
My problem with that is that Giroud is also inevitably responsible for another 10-15 goals a season that others score. I'd have to see stats to be sure but I'd confidently bet that he's one of the highest assisting strikers in the league, if not the highest.
A 20 goal striker who assists almost as well as the league's best wingers, to me, is just as valuable as a 30 goal striker who only gets 5 or 6 assists. Whichever way you cut it, there's 25-35 goals scored because of Giroud. I don't particularly require him personally to put it in the net to give him the credit for the goal.
I will admit that his lack of pace is a weakness in certain games, but I don't think the type of player he is requires him to be quick. Not his game.
I've always liked Giroud and feel he earned respect he's not been shown, in his first season. Foreign strikers simply don't hit the EPL and bang away 20 in their first season, check the list of top ones and see just how many of them got nowhere near the goal/assist total he did in his first year.
We constantly bang on about this league being the best and the benchmark to judge players on. Yet his first season was ignored by some as though foreign players arrive and make/score over 30 goals for the team in their first season, all the time.
It's great to see him cracking them home at the moment, had a shocker yesterday and still got two. No doubt he'll finish the season close to 20 having been injured 4 months of the season. Unfortunately I also have no doubt that 20 goals in 5 months still won't be good enough for some. Whom will still be claiming he's not good enough to be the main striker
Personally I reckon some of you just hate him cos ya missus says he's sexy
posted on 16/2/15
Personally I reckon some of you just hate him cos ya missus says he's sexy
-----
^this
posted on 16/2/15
It's actually 49 goals in 116 games. A decent but slightly average return in a team that scores a lot of goals.
posted on 16/2/15
comment by Scouting for Goals (U6965)
posted 16 minutes ago
It's actually 49 goals in 116 games. A decent but slightly average return in a team that scores a lot of goals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our goal scoring as a team is a bit overrated. Last season we had significantly fewer goals than City and Liverpool for example.
posted on 16/2/15
It does annoy me when people complain about Giroud. Purely because his goals scored in no way tell the whole story. People moan he shouldn't be the main striker for the club as 20 goals a season isn't good enough.
-----------------------------------
Disagree abt that. A strikers job is to score pure and simple. Just like attacking midfielder's job is to create and score.
Giroud's lack of pace is a hindrance in our counter attack game. When teams come to sit back at the Emirates Giroud is very effective because he is a box presence. Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
Our entire team yesterday benefited by our center backs being able to push up without the fear of being cut open because of a faster Paulista instead of slow Mertesacker. (even then Paulista was caught once when he tactically took a yellow to prevent a goal). You only have to look to the Charity Shield and how we dominated Man City!
By compressing space and playing the ball in the opposition half we made Giroud even more threatening because he was allowed to play in the opposition box where he has always been threatening (even when he joined) instead of standing on the center line trying to hold the ball up under pressure.
posted on 16/2/15
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
posted on 16/2/15
comment by BO$$™ (U6401)
posted 39 seconds ago
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.
----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Could well be. But at the moment he is doing very well.
posted on 16/2/15
When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.
He certainly offers options that no other player in the team can, and noting his shortcomings it is impossible to ignore his stats.
posted on 16/2/15
When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.
----------------------------
Thats irrelevant. The new TV deal is £5.1 Bn. Which means Arsenal and in in fact anyone finihsing in the top half could go and buy a £50m player without blinking.
posted on 16/2/15
Jenius99
I think you have missed the point.
Giroud was purchased for £12m. Can you name a forward acquired of similar value that has made a greater contribution at PL level? Not many around.
Page 1 of 2