Has Tony Adams lost his mind?

Clearly he was under the influence of powerful fruit smoothies with Echinacia extract when he was quoted Seriously though, he's said similar things before about our domestic away approach after we blew the title in 2003. I guess now that we are unbeaten since then, all the "experts" can't complain about how AW manages the team domestically, so they have to latch on something. Steady with that juice, Tone.

 

I guess he's had a reporter stuff a mic in his face, and he remembers how an inferior (player for player) Arsenal side used to do alright in Europe under GG. He'd love Arsenal to go and win the CL, and he's trying to be helpful He defended at the highest levels as a captain for club and country so he's entitled to his opinion...
Personally I dont think it's down to the mix of attackers/defenders it's just some bloody mental block thing that the players get as soon as they cross the english channel.

 

Oh no! Someone has an opinion contrary to AW's! He must be mad!!!


I don't think TA is resting the authority of his argument on his less-than-vast management experience so I don't see what the fuss is. The guy captained the team from central defence so I think he probably has a valid opinion concerning Arsenal's defensive strategies in European games. He did play in a few, you know.

When we ridicule him for making shockingly bland statements like "You have to give other teams respect. You've got to be more resilient to win the Champions League because you've got better quality opposition than you have domestically" I have to wonder why we complain when the press and trolls do the same to AW's pontifications.

Maybe I'm wrong, but this mountian looks suspiciously like a molehill to me.

 

I agree. Arsene hasn't won so many trophies that you can't put your 2 cents in also.

 

But Coach, he's not saying that at all. He's simply stating something obvious to any fan of football, and certainly obvious to one of the best defenders it's ever had. The Champions League is *not* the place for an offensive show. At its very worst, in fact, the Champions League is a catenaccio snoozefest--take a trip down memory lane for the final two years ago, or 1996, or 1991. While true that Feyenoord once destroyed KR Reykjavik 12-2 in the Champions Cup, this is obviously an anomaly. The CL is notoriously low-scoring after the group stages.

I'm a Gooner through and through, believe me, and I love Le Boss, but he clearly does not grasp that every other league in Europe plays *defense* in the Champions League. Particularly with the proliferation of teams from weaker leagues, whose only chance for a point is to hold their stronger opponents, this is perfectly sensible. The 5-1 destruction at the San Siro was, while no fluke, not attainable in every game, no matter what awesome offense Arsenal might have. In this sense, George Graham's proto-Chelski Arsenal sides had a certain advantage. And while true that a Graham Arsenal side thrashed Standard Liege 7-0 in Belgium, this was equally rare. Graham understood something about playing in Europe that Wenger clearly does not. Graham at least won us the Cup Winner's Cup, which we should have won the year after, if not for David Seaman staring like a deer into headlights on that Nayim lob. What have we won internationally with Wenger?

Wenger's Arsenal haven't figured out the CL yet. A good portion of this, I think, is the lack of God in Continental matches, and so much of the linking between the wings and the overlapping defense goes through Him. A weakened offense, therefore, against the airtight defenses of European teams determined to play holding football tends to lose out over time.

Furthermore, taking TA6's comments in context, look at last year's CL run. Clearly it was our defense that completely let us down. Ignoring Celta Vigo, Arsenal's defense sucked at just the wrong moments. 3-0 vs Inter at Highbury. A fluke Gudjohnsen goal doesn't count, but the lazy tracking on Claude Makelele's goal sure did. Our defense is simply not certain. They've already let in 8 goals this year.

I'm sure TA6 meant only the best. If Arsenal had, for instance, Chelski's defense and our current attack, we would unquestionably overrun every team in the world. But we don't. Our defense is suspect, and at just the wrong times. We could certainly use two more solid defenders who aren't Pascal Cygan. Clichy is shaping up, but he's still young. That's the mathematics TA6 is talking about. I don't think he's slamming Le Boss at all.

 

Why do we get this "mental block" when we cross the English Channel?
Most of the players are from that side of the water anyway!!!??? (LOL).

 

Tony Adams had a mind to begin with? *zing* I thought all the drinking had taken care of them annoying brain cells..............

As I said on our boards, take our CL form and your domestic form, and that team would be unstoppable..........

EDIT: Tmaker, that was one of the better posts on these boards I've read in a while. Rep for you!

 

Oh no, I'm getting a positive rep? How'd that happen? I'd better compensate for it by hanging out in the MLS forum

 

So I guess I'm cheating by waiting until after we've blown 2 leads to draw against an inferior team before I respond, but oh well.

IMO his responses were about the most respectful criticisms you'll ever see in sports. TA6 clearly admires le boss and has taken pains to avoid inflamatory language while discussing a (so far) fatal flaw in AW's strategy. It would be one thing if his point could be easily dismissed, but yesterday's match proves otherwise. And, although I haven't spoken to Tone on the matter, I don't think he was reffering to Panathanaikos when he said that the fantastic clubs of Europe "find them out."

It's been clear for a while that we have defensive problems in Europe, and if an Arsenal legend with first-hand experience of those problems gets asked about them, well I for one would like to hear what he thinks. He could've been far more bombastic in his statements, but he doesn't seem to be looking for attention or venting bitterness. He's just talking about the club he loves and hoping they can do better than they have been.

 

Well done tmaker. Have some rep.

It's about time we had an Arsenal fan being truthful and admitting to what everyone else finds patently obvious. Congratulations. Hopefully we will see some more of these sensible and unbiased postings from other fans in the various Henry related threads.

 

I'm with Coach on this one. Tony Adams is a bore, and a humourless one at that. Maybe - maybe - one day he'll turn into a decent manager. Still not sure about that. I give him credit for doing the work to get his coaching license, and for being willing to get his hands dirty at a smaller club. But he has a long way to go.

Look, his criticism is that we don't have enough defenders in the team? What the hell does he want? Two starters for England (two of England's best players, in fact), last season's *true* Young Player of the Year, and Lauren, who isn't nearly as bad as some people make out. What does he want? Internationals backing up other internationals? And in the midfield, we always start 2 defensive midfielders for all intents and purposes.

(By the way, TA also said we wouldn't miss Vieira, and we obviously did. He also said Rooney shouldn't have started at Euro 2004 - and then stuck to that opinion after the tournament. )

And, honestly, I think the opening salvo in tmaker's response was more than a little bit insulting. When you say that Adams is "stating something obvious to any fan of football," that smacks of hindsight and the I-know-much-more-than-the-manager attitude that's so prevalent (and so annoying) here on BS. Sure, criticism has its place. But I guarantee you that Wenger has thought about absolutely everything that we all have - times 100. It's his job, for God's sake, and he's one of the best in the world. And if SAW *does* have this blindspot about playing D in the CL, then what the hell's Pat Rice doing? You'd think between the two of them, with so many years at the club, with so many years in football, that they'd have considered every possible angle - don't you agree?

The point being that MUCH GREATER FOOTBALL MINDS than yours and mine (and Tony Adams's) have thought about this OVER AND OVER. And then thought about it some more. To suggest (as Adams did) that the solution to our supposed CL woes is so simple is just plain ludicrous.

 

To be honest that article reads more like one mans opinion that him nesisarily saying wenger is wrong. I wouldnt trust any reporter not to quote someone out of context this side of the second comming.

And while he may have only managed 2nd division club Tony Adams has forgotten more about football than you or I will ever know. I for one think we have huge problems defensiively and Tony Adams is right in what he says. Look at the problems we had with Eindhoven. Look how many soft goals we have let in against the likes of Villa, Boro and Bolton.

But I digress, this is all supposition.

I suspect Tony is just trying to point out, in the friendliest possible way, that this back four isnt as good as his back 4

 

When did we sell you John Terry???

 

Oops, sorry. For some reason I thought it was Scott "Splinters" Parker. (There goes what little cred I might have had.)

Is it too late to edit my original message and make you look like a crazy person?

 

my 2 cents: Adams is not a footballing genius, and is more likely a buffoon in comparison to Wenger. HWR, saying we get found out in europe isn't far from the truth. What's the truth? Well, Wenger (And Rice obviously, as someone noted) has looooong been saying that he HATES boring football, and that he will play flowing football before anything else - - so he is well aware that he's not playing defensive-minded football. So he's not being "found out" as Adams would put it. However, that doesn't mean that Wenger is being naive and stubborn. He knows teams seek to play defenseive first and counter second, but he reckons that if they let us attack we have the weapons to score, which will lead to a more open game, which we should win.

On the defensive front, a look at our defense shows a very good back five who play well together and are unbeaten in the PL. In the middle we have one of the world's best defensive midfielders (whom the team is built around as much as it is built around Henry also). Beyond that, Wenger uses the two wingers and a CM to join the forwards in the attack. That is where Wenger refuses to change much- because of the strategy mentioned above. However, to his credit, he orders the forwards and wingers to defend up top and help the defense before the ball crosses the half way line.

When we look at the CL games thus far, we have created more chances than some of us recall. The fact that we haven't converted them is not evidence that we play too offensive, or not defensive enough - -it just means we need to put the ball into the net! In the end, it looks like we get "found out" in the games where we do not score our chances, because the game gets tight, our players get impatient and the flow gets hurried. That being said, I'm glad Adams is not our manager and that Wenger is. Although Wenger may appear to be stubbornly insisting on his attacking philosophy, I reckon he has the weapons to make it work, and he has enough defense in the rest of the squad. If we can take our chances and score those goals, lot's of people, including Adams, will start to call Wenger a genius in europe. wait and see.

 

I think its worth noting too that most European players in the premiership comment on how much faster the game here is. It seems that the strategy of choice in Europe is very much defense minded. Get a goal and sit on it.

I think if we get dragged into that kind of game, even against average european opposition, we will get beaten by experience.Its true we used to play to 1-0 ourselves, but club history is not quite the same as team history.

And you know I like it. As retarded as this may sound, with ticket prices as they are these days, not to mention the scarcity of them, Id much rather turn up to a 4-3 loss than a 1-0 win. But thats just me. I watch Arsenal to be entertained, winning is secondary to that.

 

I was kidding - I no more think Parker deserved the YPOTY award than you do. You're not crazy. Well, not because of this, anyway.



Oh, you wanted a smiley to show I'm kidding? About that.........

 

I'll bite on this one, Dan.

It couldn't hurt, could it? We have a good back four. But we need a good back six. Suppose Sol goes down for a month. We'd probably let in four or five extremely soft goals. Wait...we already have. Mathematics, as TA6 says. It's about squad depth, and defensive depth we ain't got.

Yeah, but one of them is usually Gilberto Silva.

Actually, no, I don't agree. From history, let me pull three examples in paraphrase:

"If the earth was round, someone would have proven it by now."--circa 1150

"If the earth isn't the center of the universe, then why does the sun revolve around us?"--circa 1500

"The earth has to be surrounded with luminiferous ether, otherwise what would transmit the rays of the sun?"--circa 1800

Now, each of these ideas is patently absurd--but only in hindsight, because of course when we look back on history, ALL THERE IS IS HINDSIGHT. It is hardly an "attitude" that we "know more" than the people of the past. The obvious truths of today were obvious lies of yesterday, and the self-evident truths of yesterday are now long discarded notions from a quaint past.

Now you'd think with scientists as brilliant as Galen, William of Occam, Isaac Newton, Kepler, Pascal, Descartes, Lavoisier and Robert Boyle none of them would have believed any of the above paraphrased rubbish. After all, Dan, to have so many of the brightest minds that ever lived working on such problems, they must have considered every possible angle.

But they didn't.

This isn't a commoner looking back and saying, "Boy, weren't Isaac Newton and Aristotle sooooo stupid?" It's simply saying that because of Newton and Aristotle's contributions, and other people questioning the irreproachability of those contributions, we have found out, in fact, that the world isn't quite so obvious after all. Our current notions of science will seem ultra-quaint in three hundred years, too. And certainly our footballing science, if science it be, will be equally quaint. No one is claiming they "know more" or are "smarter" than Le Boss. One simply claims that he is not without his short-sightedness and prejudices, just as is Pat Rice, yes. Just as were the scientists and historians of the past. From there we can hope to ADD something to his discoveries and make our own, or even refine his.

I am detecting in the Arsenal camp a sacred cow, and I'd like to put that cow up for sacrifice right now, and get on with the business of living.

Much greater football minds than mine thought that England's W-M formation was invincible in 1952, when the Hungarians came to town. Much greater football minds than mine and yours and whomever else's you care to name still believe a lot of rubbish.

I'd like to think that the future is a step forward from the present, but we will never get there by thinking the present is as far as we can go. This line of thinking is far too typical of too many Arsenal fans, and is far less defensible than one of Arsenal's most supreme players simply suggesting that a little Champions League defense might help our team.

And who are you, exactly, to say that there are no footballing minds on Big Soccer or anywhere else who might actually be greater than Le Boss's? The truth is that you will never know this. There is absolutely no formula in the world that prohibits the possible existence of complete and utterly obscure football geniuses looming on message boards or simply watching TV and knowing (or not knowing!) they could do better, if they weren't poor, or weren't paraplegic and therefore prejudiced against, or weren't from the Americas and therefore prejudiced against. Don't be so sure that all people in the world with the natural gift to be geniuses wind up being well-known internationally, or even beyond a small radius. Big Soccer may very well harbor some of them, some as posters, some as mere lurkers.

I mean, look at ZANI...

 

Why write so much when you can say it with just five words?



Joking aside you do raise a couple of valid points which I'm both too tired and drunk to elaborate on. I just like your final argument.

KJ

 

Arsenal do play great football, but there are different ways to make a team sucessful, look at Porto last year, look at Italian teams.

TA has most definitely done enuff to have an opinion on defending, and how Arsenal defend esp. when you look at the goals that Arsenal concede. Do you think that Wenger reads TAs comments in the paper and thinks "********** off, what does he know" ? Course he doesn't.

And as for calling TA a bore, and a mindless buffoon, personally I'd love to listen to TA telling me about football. The guy should be an inspiration to you all!