Didn't get to watch the match; did Bellerin mark Hazard out of the game like the last time we played Chelsea, or did Hazard just play bad?
Wenger said afterwards he was happy with both Theo and Giroud today, begin with need , then bring in a physical presence. I suspect who plays striker will continue to be situational. I really hope he rotates more often generally and keeps everybody needs fresh . We have the depth, why not use it?
He played bad and often played in the middle or on the right. Should have scored when the defense fell asleep but totally skied it. Decent recovery by Kos on the play.
Wenger dislikes Mourinho because he's a bully and a whiner. Mourinho dislikes Wenger because he's the only manager who doesn't thank him for the privilege of being bullied.
On a different note and back to the game, I thought that Kos had a stellar game. He has 16 clearances today and was a rock at the back. i also truly enjoyed Nacho's performance as well, he seems to have bulked up lately and used that to his adavantage. Cahill and Ivanovic can surely attest!
What I meant, and what Prince and Charlie got, was that the Chelsea Ladies won the FA Cup yesterday at Wembley, and Mourinho played 90 minutes for them. It's not funny if you have to explain it. Sigh.
They were. Good performance today, especially by Cazorla, Koscielny, Mertesacker, Monreal, and Coquelin. Things I didn't like: 1. The really poor passing at times in the first half. Maybe it's just preseason, but I've never seen an Arsenal team misplace that many passes. 2. Cheap giveaways in the midfield. Ramsey, Coquelin, Bellerin, and the Ox were all guilty of it. We've come to expect from the Ox, but Ramsey and Bellerin should do better than that. 3. Theo playing central. It has a limited shelf life, because the hold up play, assist aside, isn't very good.
The problem is there is money, but the top guys are all tied down and there is really no rational to grab a nominally "better" Giroud for assinine type money. If only the Suarez transfer could've went through, Alexis, Suarez up front with Wellbeck would've been murder. Theo just isn't very good at a lot of the things top strikers are good at. He does score goals so that outweighs any of the negatives.. I suppose. If Giroud had half his speed he'd be GOAT material. Also thought the buildup from the back was wack
Giroud came on and his 2nd involvement was winning a header and knocking the ball down wide for a teammate...took him about 30 secs after coming on...his positives are clear...Walcott could never do that
The thing that also kills Giroud is that he's a hold-up striker. Teams play a high line against him and he can't take advantage of that with well-timed or well-positioned runs because his back is always to the defense. RVP wasn't the fleetest of foot either, but was one of the best in the world at making good timed or positioned runs to make up for his less than amazing pace.
That's what bothers me as well. Teams can take advantage and play a high line without fear, narrowing the field. Wenger said he started Theo today because he wanted someone who can scare the other side and get behind the lines. It bodes well with his stated intention of playing with movement, fluidity, and speed. It's true if you want to emphasize "Fat Sam" "get wide and cross" style tactics and have a big target man who heads down long balls and hoofed punts, Theo is definitely absolutely not your guy. Wenger said as much when highlighting his strengths as a striker. It's clear he hopes he can bring a bit of TH14 flair, style and movement. Which means we have to devise a quicker, more fluid ball movement and passing.
I was driving all day and annoyed that I was going to have to miss this. But then I remembered XM has a football channel - 94. Listened to the entire match. This made the time pass. It was great to hear and is a great win for Arsenal. One win down, 38 more to go. It will be great to have the Premier League back next week. I am really looking forward to Arsenal vs. ManU on 0ctober 4th.
The real sad thing is that if Wenger had a crystal ball that would tell him that Welbeck, Giroud or Walcott would score 20 league goals if they were our main striker, I think Welbeck would be the guy. It's so sad that the guy has all the tools to be elite, but couldn't score if he had a Lamborghini and a pocket full of spanish fly.
Ya, but afaik chelsea rarely play a high line and theo can pretty much do the same from the flank as he can from the middle in terms of changing a back line tactics. As I've thought about it more, I'm wondering if the theo at CF round two is not simply part of the deal for him signing a new contract. Iirc his last negotiations included a couple of stints at CF, which quickly faded. Maybe AW has committed to giving him a few games at CF as part of the deal. I think theo is a decent option there, but I like Giroud better and theo out wide for us. If theo can't break through at CF and Ox has a good seaosn on the right, then I can see us shopping theo in the next couple of windows....with a fresh contract we should be able to get a nice sum for him to put towards a benzemaesque signing.
Article from the Guardian assessing Theo http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2015/aug/02/theo-walcott-arsenal-chelsea-community-shield "With Olivier Giroud providing 25 minutes of stylish, orthodox, limited centre-forward play it was oddly enough Walcott – who did very little overall and completed just two passes in the first half – who made the most compelling case of the four as a starting Premier League centre-forward." "The village fete atmosphere was compounded by the sight of José Mourinho on the touchline dressed like a man on his way out to the all-night garage for a Snickers and some cat food;" "The only significant selection on either side was confirmation that the decision to start with Walcott up front in the Cup final in May was more than just a one-off tactical whim. Afterwards Arsène Wenger again dismissed talk that Karim Benzema might be about to arrive. It really does look like this is the way Arsenal are likely to go more often than not in early season. And Walcott was bright in the early minutes, using his speed to pull Chelsea’s defenders into awkward positions. He had what would be his only effort on goal with 22 minutes gone, heading powerfully straight at Thibaut Courtois from a free-kick on the left. Moments later he was bustling through the inside-left channel, then dropping into a deep central position to play in Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain for the game’s only goal. It was a nice moment for both players, Walcott’s well-timed pass allowing Oxlade-Chamberlain to take the ball in his stride, cut inside and ping a fine left-footed shot into the top corner, due reward for the most urgent, composed player on show. Walcott had made his only meaningful contribution to the afternoon, although he did still make ripples while on the face of it doing very little. When Chelsea were attacking Gary Cahill stood off him a full 20 yards, an opposition defence rejigged a little simply by the threat of speed. There were some nice diagonal runs too, although clearly Walcott will need to do more to convince his many doubters. Michael Owen, who knows a bit about goalscoring, could be heard on TV commentary suggesting Walcott is some way short of top class, which is, let’s face it, a fairly easy position to take. And yet, why not? Walcott is a more creative, less linear player than, say, Owen ever was, just as centre-forward is a more mutable, less precisely defined position these days. He remains a lovely mover, can finish and represents one of the less funky positional rejigs of a period that has seen players such as Cesc Fàbregas, Thomas Müller, Raheem Sterling, André Schürrle and many others all get a go as post-modern No9s. Why not a player who scored 21 goals in his last full, injury-free season two years ago?"
Did you get the three fingered salute these two were giving each other? Some said it was a European-Germanic Scandonavian thing. Clearly means something different and opposite than the middle finger salute. Or the British V