Jump to content
IGNORED

Arsenal


cubeadvance
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, we (Middlesbrough) have taken Chambers on loan. Karanka likes players who can play a few positions, so he'll provide cover at CDM, CB and RB, but where "should" he play? I haven't seen him as much as you guys, but I seem to think a few of you ( @The Fox ?) think he's decent but hasn't been given enough of a chance. 

 

I am not quite sure where he's going to fit in barring injury. Personally, I'd rather our CB pairing from the Championship stayed first choice, and we signed Barragan at RB who has been fantastic playing across the back four (twice at CB, once at LB) in our opening 3 games and he deserves to keep his place in my opinion. Our first choice CDMs will almost certainly be De Roon (once he's back from injury) and Clayton, and I don't see Chambers displacing either of them without injury. It seems like he'll provide good cover for us, but I'm not sure he'll play that much in the first team, especially now we're already out of the League Cup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would have thought he'll compete with Gibson and Ayala for a place at CB. Didn't you try to sign Subotic in the summer? So clearly there was a need for another CB.

 

He's a good player and I don't think he needs to be daunted by the prospect of trying to get in the side over those lads. And I think Karanka's style will suit him more than any other English club he could have gone to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Subotic is a cut above (or would have been if he was fit) and was an opportunity we couldn't pass up. Even then I'd have felt bad for Gibson who would have been the most likely to drop out. Karanka runs a meritocracy for the most part, so if Chambers impresses he'll get his chance I'm sure, but I wouldn't have thought he was a such a massive upgrade on Gibson or Ayala that he would be guaranteed first team football and surely that's what he needs?

 

You're right about Karanka though - he's a great defensive coach so even if Chambers doesn't play week-in week-out, I'm sure he'll learn loads and return to you guys a better defender. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He came on for 20 mins against Watford.

 

It probably makes sense, he's way down the pecking order in CM and is behind a fair few for a spot out wide too, but he badly needs games. Although obviously all our other midfielders will die as soon as he goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Fox said:

He came on for 20 mins against Watford.

 

It probably makes sense, he's way down the pecking order in CM and is behind a fair few for a spot out wide too, but he badly needs games. Although obviously all our other midfielders will die as soon as he goes.

 

Even if everyone does die, I think it's still the right choice. Being away from Arsenal where things just haven't gone right for a long time is a real chance for him. Mind you, it's also rapidly nudging towards his last chance.

 

 

Both Manchester clubs and Chelsea are looking really good considering how early it is for all three. Hopefully a fractious derby will take a bit of wind out of one or both teams, but it really feels very much like Fourth Is A Trophy right now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And apparently we might be selling Gnabry. I get that we're in a tricky situation with him, as he only has a year left on his contract so it's out of our hands to an extent. I do wonder if this means we'll see one more arrival though, otherwise it's hard to make sense of letting both guys go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just when our squad looks like we have a tiny bit of depth with the two new players signing, three players appear to be going out on loan (or in Campbell's case, already on loan), FFS!  Flamini left and no replacement was signed.  He was a player who was able to do a job as a utility player and I naturally assumed that Chambers would step into this role as he can (to a degree) cover RB, CB, DM etc.  To send him to Middlesbrough is just ridiculous.  There's no reason to do that at all.

 

Joel Campbell's exit was a bizarre one.  Most of the squad could learn a thing or two from him when it came to effort and determination plus he chipped in with a few important goals.  (Ian Wright has his say, http://www.thesportreview.com/tsr/2016/08/ian-wright-delivers-blunt-verdict-on-arsenals-decision-to-loan-out-joel-campbell/) Clearly some fucking idiot with a calculator has made a decision to to let a few go out on loan to cover the wages of the new players.  There is no footballing reason to send players out on loan, especially given our horrific injury record over the last decade.  All three saw action last season (when fit), so why let them go?

 

Of course we could have a flood of new players come through the door over the next two days which explains why a footballing decision was made to let them go and I'll accept that.  If not, then it's further incompetence from the idiots running our club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, The Fox said:

And apparently we might be selling Gnabry. I get that we're in a tricky situation with him, as he only has a year left on his contract so it's out of our hands to an extent. I do wonder if this means we'll see one more arrival though, otherwise it's hard to make sense of letting both guys go.

 

It was in our hands when he still had 2-3 years left on his contract.  Surely the people at the club could see his potential so it would have made sense to secure him on a longer deal.  Instead they do nothing.  He then has a great tournament in the Olympics which would have alerted dozens of clubs and scouts.  Clubs must think it's Christmas when they find out he'll soon be a free agent.  Incompetence.  Not as incompetent if/when Ozil & Sanchez walk away as free agents, mind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gnabry has always been a decent prospect and I was always impressed with the limited first team chances he had a few years ago.  If he goes for nothing or a nominal fee then that's just typical of the mismanagement of the club.  If it's not with us, he'll go on to be a good player for someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diaby was a better prospect than Gnabry. Both got serious injuries and took a long time to recover. We offered a contract to Diaby while recuperating and look how that turned out. We didn't with Gnabry, evidently choosing to exercise caution (especially as there were apparently issues with his weight/attitude during his recovery and loan at WBA). You win some, you lose some. No one can predict the future and make the right call every time.

 

Besides, if he does leave for Bayern we won't know for a while whether or not we made the right decision. He could go on to fulfill his promise, or he could amount to fuck all. And did anyone give a shit until he had a good Olympics? No club was interested in him and no one would have been arsed if we'd sold him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/08/2016 at 21:10, Silent Runner said:

I loved Santi stepping up to take a corner with his right foot then changing his mind, going to the other side of the corner flag and swinging it in with his left. 

 

Not enough is made of this. Cazorla should be used as an example to young players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gnabry is reasonably unavoidable, although if I was sent on loan to Tony Pulis I'd leave too. Personally I'm in favour of gambling on fitness whilst someone is still 21 and would have given him a new contract last year.

 

We really need to be making a signing though as we're suddenly very thin again. Unless this has completely taken us by surprise and we were intending Gnabry to take Campbell's place in the squad we have to have something in the pipeline, surely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Fox said:

Diaby was a better prospect than Gnabry. Both got serious injuries and took a long time to recover. We offered a contract to Diaby while recuperating and look how that turned out. We didn't with Gnabry, evidently choosing to exercise caution (especially as there were apparently issues with his weight/attitude during his recovery and loan at WBA). You win some, you lose some. No one can predict the future and make the right call every time.

 

Besides, if he does leave for Bayern we won't know for a while whether or not we made the right decision. He could go on to fulfill his promise, or he could amount to fuck all. And did anyone give a shit until he had a good Olympics? No club was interested in him and no one would have been arsed if we'd sold him.

 

Some idiot gave Diaby a massive contract before he was proven (£60k a week, which was a fortune back then) and then decided to renew the deal on the same terms during his injury nightmare.  He then had a rolling 1 year deal I believe on astronomical wages where he averaged a handful of games a season.  That was the same era contracts for £60k a week where being dished out to rubbish like Denilson and it took years to get rid of him as no one else wanted to offer him those kinds of wages.

 

I'm not saying Gnabry should be on the same terms of those deals, but you don't allow a decent prospect to run down his contract.  It's just bad management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Earlier reports suggested Bayern were going to sign Gnabry then loan him to Werder Bremen. However it seems we're trying to sell him to Werder directly, presumably with some sort of buy back clause. That would obviously be a better deal for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, The Fox said:

Earlier reports suggested Bayern were going to sign Gnabry then loan him to Werder Bremen. However it seems we're trying to sell him to Werder directly, presumably with some sort of buy back clause. That would obviously be a better deal for us.

 

There seem to be at least 3 clubs involved in this deal that couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, rather than just Arsenal alone in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wilshere wants and needs a) a lengthy run of games to build up sharpness and form, and b) to prove to himself and others that he's physically capable of doing so. Barring a huge injury crisis he's not going to get that here. He's been benched for the last two with Xhaka/Cazorla apparently not at full fitness, and without Ramsey even being in the squad.

 

I'd imagine if we're letting him go on loan it'll be on the condition that he signs a new deal. That way if he kills it we won't be in the same situation we are with Gnabry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.