comment by Samir (U2630)
posted 12 hours, 36 minutes ago
DJ, I'm sorry but everything you've said there is just a justification for the decisions Arteta has made. And regardless of HIS reasons for doing what he's done, he is not exempt from criticism and he should be criticised for these decisions.

YCBC sums up the tactical nuances in midfield, the left sided 8 doesn't have to be a purely attacking role and Xhaka, though he played in a slightly more advanced role, was not fulfilling the same role as Odegaard who takes up more spaces in between the lines and a bit closer to the opposition goal.

Rice and Arteta themselves have said that he's not a fixed no.6 and that he can play as an no.8 too. That he wants to get in more advanced positions and create/score more. Whether its him or Partey in the 6, the point I'm making is a midfield 3 of Rice, Partey and Odegaard is better and more balanced than Rice, Havertz and Odegaard.

Gabriel not being good on the ball? You've just made that up to justify Arteta's decision-making.

Why can't White play as a RB like he did last season? He was one of the best fullbacks in the league. You conveniently missed him off your list. And his versatility/ability to adapt is one of his strongest traits. I'd rather this than Partey at RB, who doesn't look comfortable there and is impacting how we build up.

If Arteta thinks replacing Xhaka with a guy who has been poor for the majority of his time in England, and had no fixed position, is going to improve us, then we have to all be seriously questioning his judgment. If we wanted Havertz to replace Xhaka, there were many other Xhaka replacements we could have got that would have been better and cheaper for £65m. It was a monumental risk that we did not need to take.

Like I said, we are not in a position where we can wait for him to come good, we need players to perform straight away. If we're basing this on meritocracy, there is no reason he should be starting every week like he has been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the years, I've read and replied to many of your posts and more often than not we are thinking along the same lines.

Couldn't agree more with what you've written, well said.

I feel like DJ is just contrarian for the sake of it sometimes so I don't read too much into it (except for hating GJ), but good points made by Samir.

comment by T-SaliBAG (U11806)
posted 3 minutes ago
I feel like DJ is just contrarian for the sake of it sometimes so I don't read too much into it (except for hating GJ), but good points made by Samir.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel like you are correct and also seems to have had a long-term need to constantly try and demonstrate that he is the king of the hill here.

If he feels threatened by you he will try and attack you at every opportunity It's kinda odd to get that back when for a long time I just tried to be nice 🤷‍♂️

Although I disagree with Samirs last point - we can wait for Havertz for come good, but instead of doing that we're putting him in a position where he's under a lot of pressure rather than being eased in

White hasn't been playing RB because arteta wants an inverting full back.

To have an inverting full back, you need defenders capable of shifting across the back line to form the back 3. Ben white is the only one who can do this (from the right side) at the moment as timber is injured.

Partey is the emergency solution. With zinchenko returning, I'm pretty sure partey as a RB will end.

The question is, what does he do with the midfield? Havertz just ruins our flow.

Also, let's bear in mind, if we play that lineup against Fulham, we win that game 9 times out of 10. Fulham played well, but they were also pretty lucky.

Havertz should be on the bench, he should be a good option for us but instead Arteta seems to wanna build the team around him which is detrimental to us and him

This is the thing with arsenal fans, one bad result and we start panicking. I get what arteta is doing seems unusual, but I believe he's trying to make us more tactically versatile. This will help us later in the season and in the champions League. Timbers injury is just hugely unfortunate.

I pray to God havertz comes good though, because I think signing him was a big mistake. Surely there's somebody better out there at that price for fooks sake.

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 2 minutes ago
White hasn't been playing RB because arteta wants an inverting full back.

To have an inverting full back, you need defenders capable of shifting across the back line to form the back 3. Ben white is the only one who can do this (from the right side) at the moment as timber is injured.

Partey is the emergency solution. With zinchenko returning, I'm pretty sure partey as a RB will end.

The question is, what does he do with the midfield? Havertz just ruins our flow.

Also, let's bear in mind, if we play that lineup against Fulham, we win that game 9 times out of 10. Fulham played well, but they were also pretty lucky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to see our best midfielders playing in the midfield 3. Partey DM #6, Rice Box-to-Box #8, Odegaard AM #10.

Control the midfield and we will dominate the game, so far we have not dominated any of the three games, not on the eye test nor the scorelines.

I'm not buying this BS about us needing Havertz in there so we are attacking enough when he's offering next to nothing going forward and he is not strong defensively either.

4 out and out attacking players on the pitch in terms of Martinelli, Jesus/Nketiah/Trossard, Saka & Odegaard plus the support of Rice, Partey at times and the fullbacks is enough.

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 34 seconds ago
This is the thing with arsenal fans, one bad result and we start panicking. I get what arteta is doing seems unusual, but I believe he's trying to make us more tactically versatile. This will help us later in the season and in the champions League. Timbers injury is just hugely unfortunate.

I pray to God havertz comes good though, because I think signing him was a big mistake. Surely there's somebody better out there at that price for fooks sake.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I agree it will probably pay off later, but I don't think it's a risk we need to take. I think we have players that could have slotted in and played to a decent level, without upsetting the balance. Instead it feels like we're hampering the ability of a few players

I hugely disagree arteta wants to build the team around havertz, but I do fear arteta is going to force him into the xi to the detriment of the team. Simply to justify his price range.

I think we have players that could have slotted in and played to a decent level

===

Who?

comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 2 minutes ago
White hasn't been playing RB because arteta wants an inverting full back.

To have an inverting full back, you need defenders capable of shifting across the back line to form the back 3. Ben white is the only one who can do this (from the right side) at the moment as timber is injured.

Partey is the emergency solution. With zinchenko returning, I'm pretty sure partey as a RB will end.

The question is, what does he do with the midfield? Havertz just ruins our flow.

Also, let's bear in mind, if we play that lineup against Fulham, we win that game 9 times out of 10. Fulham played well, but they were also pretty lucky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to see our best midfielders playing in the midfield 3. Partey DM #6, Rice Box-to-Box #8, Odegaard AM #10.

Control the midfield and we will dominate the game, so far we have not dominated any of the three games, not on the eye test nor the scorelines.

I'm not buying this BS about us needing Havertz in there so we are attacking enough when he's offering next to nothing going forward and he is not strong defensively either.

4 out and out attacking players on the pitch in terms of Martinelli, Jesus/Nketiah/Trossard, Saka & Odegaard plus the support of Rice, Partey at times and the fullbacks is enough.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We've dominated all 3 games. We literally played palace with ten men for half an hour and still had more possession than them. We just haven't been clinical in the final third.

I didnt say we need havertz. In fact I think he's one of the big reasons we look crap in the final third.

Having of course watched all three games in full I simply can't agree that we dominated them. Domination means solid at the back, controlling the majority of the game and winning comfortably, 2 or 3 neil. The first 3 games have been anything but comfortable. We haven't looked at all fluent in my opinion either.

I wasn't referring to you when I said: "this BS about us needing Havertz", it was a general point based on what some have been claiming.

*nil

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 21 minutes ago
I hugely disagree arteta wants to build the team around havertz, but I do fear arteta is going to force him into the xi to the detriment of the team. Simply to justify his price range.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arteta is clueless and his body language during the game was indicative of this!

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 24 minutes ago
I think we have players that could have slotted in and played to a decent level

===

Who?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bring in Gabriel, put White at RB and then have Rice in midfield

Failing that I think ESR or Trossard would have done better there

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 2 minutes ago
White hasn't been playing RB because arteta wants an inverting full back.

To have an inverting full back, you need defenders capable of shifting across the back line to form the back 3. Ben white is the only one who can do this (from the right side) at the moment as timber is injured.

Partey is the emergency solution. With zinchenko returning, I'm pretty sure partey as a RB will end.

The question is, what does he do with the midfield? Havertz just ruins our flow.

Also, let's bear in mind, if we play that lineup against Fulham, we win that game 9 times out of 10. Fulham played well, but they were also pretty lucky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to see our best midfielders playing in the midfield 3. Partey DM #6, Rice Box-to-Box #8, Odegaard AM #10.

Control the midfield and we will dominate the game, so far we have not dominated any of the three games, not on the eye test nor the scorelines.

I'm not buying this BS about us needing Havertz in there so we are attacking enough when he's offering next to nothing going forward and he is not strong defensively either.

4 out and out attacking players on the pitch in terms of Martinelli, Jesus/Nketiah/Trossard, Saka & Odegaard plus the support of Rice, Partey at times and the fullbacks is enough.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We've dominated all 3 games. We literally played palace with ten men for half an hour and still had more possession than them. We just haven't been clinical in the final third.

I didnt say we need havertz. In fact I think he's one of the big reasons we look crap in the final third.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We haven't been clinical enough but we also haven't been creating enough. Martinelli doesn't look at his best and on the other side without White Saka doesnt get as much room either, so we're more restricted in what we can do.

I'm wondering if Martinelli not being great so far has anything to do with Havertz being poor on that side and no relationship there. Plus his fullback keeps changing all the time.

He also seems to like playing with Jesus.

"We haven't been clinical enough but we also haven't been creating enough."

Exactly, not creating enough clear cut chances makes it difficult to be clinical.

I simply do not agree with your definition of dominating a game tbh mate You can dominate a game without winning it.

We've controlled the majority of all 3 games.

Forest had 2 good chances, one of them being fairly fortuitous.

Palace had...0 good chances I think? Playing against ten men for half an hour.

Fulham had 2 good chances - 1 a howler mistake coughed up from 0 pressure, and 1 counter attack after Fulham fortuitously got themselves back in the game.

I make that 4 decent chances given up across 3 games, 1 of which was completely our own fault, nothing to do with the opposition.

We do need to convert that domination into better chances though.

comment by T-SaliBAG (U11806)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 24 minutes ago
I think we have players that could have slotted in and played to a decent level

===

Who?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bring in Gabriel, put White at RB and then have Rice in midfield

Failing that I think ESR or Trossard would have done better there
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Then who would have inverted from full back?

Martinelli looks more dangerous when Jesus plays because the 2 rotate positions a lot. Martinelli gets into more central areas, and has better quality shots. Nketiah doesnt really go out to the left a lot, so martinelli is often trapped out wide when Eddie plays.

Havertz and Martinelli don't really work well together because they're both runner type of players. I've proposed switching him and Odegaard as I think havertz would work better on Saka's side, but arteta clearly doesnt agree

Look at City though, they pummel teams to the point that they can afford that margin for error, plus they have the best goalscorer in the world playing for them. In comparison we seem pretty blunt and then those few chances we give up get highlighted more.

I think if we wanted to invert them Kiwior or Tomi could done an alright job of it at LB

comment by Tu Meke (U3732)
posted 2 minutes ago
I simply do not agree with your definition of dominating a game tbh mate You can dominate a game without winning it.

We've controlled the majority of all 3 games.

Forest had 2 good chances, one of them being fairly fortuitous.

Palace had...0 good chances I think? Playing against ten men for half an hour.

Fulham had 2 good chances - 1 a howler mistake coughed up from 0 pressure, and 1 counter attack after Fulham fortuitously got themselves back in the game.

I make that 4 decent chances given up across 3 games, 1 of which was completely our own fault, nothing to do with the opposition.

We do need to convert that domination into better chances though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No problem if we see it differently

I'm basing it on the eye test, scorelines and how I felt watching the games.

Against Forest they were clean through on goal with a simple ball in a 1v1 in the first half and we should have been 1 down. I felt we were ok in the first half but not really dominating as we didn't create that much and didn't move the ball that well, When Timber got injured we totally fell apart in the second half and I remember being very nervous as we were hanging on.

Palace again, we didn't play that well, I simply can't agree that we are dominating when we aren't even playing particularly well. There was again a lack of fluidity and we didn't fashion enough good chances. I'm not going to include the bit towards the end where they put us under more pressure as that was largely down to the ridiculous sending off. Palace did look dangerous and have some chances in that game before the sending off though if I'm not mistaken. Didn't they hit the bar? If not that may have been in the Forest game.

I don't think it's worth mentioning Fulham, we were pretty woeful, what I witnessed was not even close to what I consider domination and we didn't even take three points.

Point is, if we were really dominating against these midtable/relegation battling teams we cruise them and the seas have been very choppy in all three.

comment by T-SaliBAG (U11806)
posted 5 minutes ago

I think if we wanted to invert them Kiwior or Tomi could done an alright job of it at LB
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree mate, they're LB -> CB types like Ben white