Yes.

Yes? YES? After I put some TLC into this article, all you say is......YES?!

....

Okay cool

From various sources I have read and heard there is (roughly) around £50 million for the manager to spend on both transfers and wages. It's there if he wishes to use it which I sincerely hope he does.

He's done fantastic to keep us in the Champion's League season after season especially considering the financial handcuffs that have been placed on the club with the move to the Emirates.

Now things are starting to change and we should benefit from our enforced frugality by flexing some financial muscle. It's why we moved in the first place.

Park won't be a massive commercial success if he never plays, i doubt Wenger would sanction a signing for that reason. it is weird that he hasn't played, hopefully he's just adapting and isn't actually rubbish!

Still though, that's the problem playing 1 striker, you won't get a world class player to be back up, so we're always hoping on RvP's fitness.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

As requested... I hereby reiterate everything that the OP said in his article

Now - I know that Chamakh has some quality and he proved it until December last year. But he is a confidence player. After all, he has his strengths; like his aerial ability, his hold-up play, his movement. But also, what people also fail to realise is the minor things he does which can make the bigger difference and I don't even know if Chamakh himself realises this, but when he drops deeper, he can create space for our forwards and wingers to move into.
==========
firstly, i guess you could say that ALL players are confidence players. you'll rarely (if ever) find a player who plays well if he's not confident.

i've said this before about chamakh - he needs starting berths. last season he started the first 18 league games - he scored 7 and provided 6. not a bad return for a player who was just starting out in english football.

but then van persie returned, and chamakh wasn't given a single league start after that - and his goals subsequently dried up. the reason for this is that chamakh isn't pacy or dynamic - he won't come on and change the complexion of the attack, because he's essentially a battering ram. he's useful if you want to pump the ball into the box, but arsenal never play that way - even when they have chamakh on the pitch and even when they desperately need a goal.

if he played for chelsea or stoke, chamakh could be brought on in the last ten minutes of each game and still score 15-18 goals a season - because they would know how to use such a player. the reason chamakh doesn't make an impact as a sub at arsenal is because the team are conditioned to playing one way at all costs.

but when he starts, he's given time to grow into the game and impose himself on defenders - but he needs to get a run of games just to get his confidence back.

I've got a feeling Wenger might be going in for Gourcuff come January, be it a loan (with a view to buy) or a straight cash deal.

I've just read this same guff on another forum

but he needs to get a run of games just to get his confidence back.
---

With van Persie in form, I very much doubt that Chamakh will be a starter for us. Unless we play a 4-4-2 with them both up front, or a 4-4-1-1, with van Persie in the hole behind Chamakh (that sounds dirty I know ), then Chamakh will have to accept that he is a second choice striker. Our players are so fragile mentally, it's not even funny.
---

''I've got a feeling Wenger might be going in for Gourcuff come January, be it a loan (with a view to buy) or a straight cash deal.''
===

Good lord, I hope not. Gourcuff has been awful at Lyon.
---

''I've just read this same guff on another forum''
===

No you haven't

Yes i have
I didn't think it was worthy of comment on the other forum either.I would have commented if i wasn't banned

Cym, is that you?

He's the one who got me banned.Him and his Pikey mate

I recognise your writing. It's similar to Cym's. If you're not him, then who could you be....?