It will be hard to banish the memory of last season's troubles, but some of the men who played a starring role in the collapse look to be on the way out.
Eboue will leave us with the memory of that foul, Bendtner with the memory of that miss. Almunia will leave us with a scrapbook of calamitous moments.
But Bendtner's apparent status as dead wood seems a little unfair. His constant self-promotion does invite ridicule, because he is often clumsy and wasteful and does not deserve the lavish praise he gives himself.
But more than anyone else in the last couple of seasons, he has given Arsenal a different dimension in attack. He has also- and this cannot be said of many Arsenal players- never hidden, and did a lot to give Arsenal a chance in 09/10, scoring some important goals.
Chamakh started exceptionally, but as it stands now, who would you back to score an important goal for Arsenal in a big game? Chamakh is an amazingly shot-shy striker- a practical parody of the perception that Arsenal "always try to walk it in". He may be a better team player and is as strong in the air as Bendtner but he is less of a goal threat overall and has not as yet looked comfortable in an Arsenal shirt.
The great contrast between Bendtner and Chamakh is that one has a cocksure arrogance and the other looks to be full of self-doubt. Neither of them are world class strikers but when the chips are down you'd rather have a man who believes in his own greatness than one who is all-too-aware of his own limitations.
Bendtner has been scapegoated for many things- his inadvertent block of Fabregas's shot against Liverpool in that Champions League tie will live long in the memory- but at the end of the day, it's not his fault that Arsenal are chokers. In fact, he's less a choker than many of the other more lauded members of the squad.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
More Summertime Ramblings
Arsenal are being heavily linked with a couple of pricey moves- for Everton's Phil Jagielka and Valencia's Juan Mata.
The news suggests that a Fabregas move is only a matter of time. There is no way Wenger would spend 15 million on Jagielka and 20 on Mata, on top of the 10 on Gervinho, if there was not a substantial amount coming in.
If I may speculate, the plan is probably this: push through those two moves and, if Barcelona offer around 40 million, send Cesc home.
It's hard to see Fabregas staying any longer even if Arsenal have to compromise and accept a bit less. Wenger wants to get what the player is worth, but he has never been a man to hold onto an unhappy player and Fabregas clearly doesn't want to hang around anymore.
It's a strange situation. He's by far Arsenal's best and most important player, and he would walk into any team in the world- except Barcelona. Barcelona are being asked to spend 40 million on player who would in all likelihood warm the bench for much of the next season or two. You can understand their reluctance to pay big bucks, but they have engineered this situation. They could have waited a year or two to make their move, and then Xavi would be at an age where he would probably welcome some bench time himself. Instead, they have waged a relentless campaign to unsettle a player they want but don't really need. Fabregas's desire to go home and win some medals is palpable, but I'd love it if he realised that Barcelona are being disrespectful to both him and Arsenal, and decided to hang about for one last tilt at the title with the Gunners. I'd certainly rather Fabregas stay one more year and leave for 40 million than Nasri stay one more year and leave for nothing. Sadly, it seems the latter is much more likely.
Jagielka- a good player. He has Premiership experience and that, more than anything, is what Arsenal need at the back. Again, it seems Wenger has decided against bringing in a more physically imposing centre back. Samba and Cahill may be bigger men but Jagielka is a better player and his name alongside those of Vermaelen, Djourou and Koscielny makes up, on paper at least, a very strong quartet of central defenders.
But don't be surprised if both of these mooted deals fall through. This is Arsene's Arsenal after all.
The news suggests that a Fabregas move is only a matter of time. There is no way Wenger would spend 15 million on Jagielka and 20 on Mata, on top of the 10 on Gervinho, if there was not a substantial amount coming in.
If I may speculate, the plan is probably this: push through those two moves and, if Barcelona offer around 40 million, send Cesc home.
It's hard to see Fabregas staying any longer even if Arsenal have to compromise and accept a bit less. Wenger wants to get what the player is worth, but he has never been a man to hold onto an unhappy player and Fabregas clearly doesn't want to hang around anymore.
It's a strange situation. He's by far Arsenal's best and most important player, and he would walk into any team in the world- except Barcelona. Barcelona are being asked to spend 40 million on player who would in all likelihood warm the bench for much of the next season or two. You can understand their reluctance to pay big bucks, but they have engineered this situation. They could have waited a year or two to make their move, and then Xavi would be at an age where he would probably welcome some bench time himself. Instead, they have waged a relentless campaign to unsettle a player they want but don't really need. Fabregas's desire to go home and win some medals is palpable, but I'd love it if he realised that Barcelona are being disrespectful to both him and Arsenal, and decided to hang about for one last tilt at the title with the Gunners. I'd certainly rather Fabregas stay one more year and leave for 40 million than Nasri stay one more year and leave for nothing. Sadly, it seems the latter is much more likely.
Jagielka- a good player. He has Premiership experience and that, more than anything, is what Arsenal need at the back. Again, it seems Wenger has decided against bringing in a more physically imposing centre back. Samba and Cahill may be bigger men but Jagielka is a better player and his name alongside those of Vermaelen, Djourou and Koscielny makes up, on paper at least, a very strong quartet of central defenders.
But don't be surprised if both of these mooted deals fall through. This is Arsene's Arsenal after all.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Modric: The Missing Piece in Chelsea's Champions League Jigsaw?
For an expereince Chelsea side with an inexperienced manager at the helm, the Champions League remains top priority. In the Premiership, Drogba, Terry, Lampard and co have tasted success. But their hunger for European glory grows as their careers wind down. Terry in particular must surely be haunted by his penalty miss in the 2008 final's shootout against Manchester United.
There is a real sense now that it will be difficult for any club to challenge Barcelona's European dominance, but we should not forget that in 2009, Chelsea were seconds from beating them. If their power has always troubled Barca, it has been a lack of guile that has left them short against Inter in 2010, United in 2011, even as far back as Liverpool in 2005 and 2007.
Since the days of Mourinho, Chelsea have never operated with a central orchestrator- someone like Deco in Mourinho's Porto, or Sneijder in his Inter Milan. Lampard has played for years in a similar position, but in a very different style. While his consistent performances and impressive goalscoring feats have proven invaluable to Chelsea over the years, he has never looked like conjuring a creative piece of magic in a tight European game. And his central role in the team has left no room for a playmaker to flourish.
Lampard is now 33 and ought to be moving towards the end of a fine career. He showed signs of decline last season and these facts suggest that Chelsea's pursuit of Luka Modric is very much warranted. With Lampard on the way out, Chelsea have the opportunity to build their midfield around a different kind of player, one who will not score half as many goals but who could potentially revolutionise their often insipid style and, vitally, make chances for Torres.
If Torres recaptures his best form, and nudges Drogba aside, and Modric arrives and does the same to Lampard, it should freshen up Chelsea's style. And it could also make them a real threat in Europe.
There is a real sense now that it will be difficult for any club to challenge Barcelona's European dominance, but we should not forget that in 2009, Chelsea were seconds from beating them. If their power has always troubled Barca, it has been a lack of guile that has left them short against Inter in 2010, United in 2011, even as far back as Liverpool in 2005 and 2007.
Since the days of Mourinho, Chelsea have never operated with a central orchestrator- someone like Deco in Mourinho's Porto, or Sneijder in his Inter Milan. Lampard has played for years in a similar position, but in a very different style. While his consistent performances and impressive goalscoring feats have proven invaluable to Chelsea over the years, he has never looked like conjuring a creative piece of magic in a tight European game. And his central role in the team has left no room for a playmaker to flourish.
Lampard is now 33 and ought to be moving towards the end of a fine career. He showed signs of decline last season and these facts suggest that Chelsea's pursuit of Luka Modric is very much warranted. With Lampard on the way out, Chelsea have the opportunity to build their midfield around a different kind of player, one who will not score half as many goals but who could potentially revolutionise their often insipid style and, vitally, make chances for Torres.
If Torres recaptures his best form, and nudges Drogba aside, and Modric arrives and does the same to Lampard, it should freshen up Chelsea's style. And it could also make them a real threat in Europe.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Liverpool clearly miss Alonso...
...because they've just bought Charlie Adam for 7 million!!
Kenny Dalglish's policy of filling his squad with overpriced English talent continues- he's also pursuing Stewart Downing, for whom Aston Villa want a whopping 19 million.
Xabi Alonso has been a huge loss for Liverpool. Their midfield has never since shown anything like his expansive passing range, and Steven Gerrard in particular has faded badly since he lost the partner that really made the team tick.
Liverpool went from challenging for the title in 08/09, with Alonso setting the tempo, to struggling throughout the following two seasons with the Spaniard in Madrid.
Now, it seems, Dalglish is looking to replicate Alonso's impact with the signing of Adam. Adam does share the Spain player's ablity to ping inch-perfect passes over long distances, and his set piece deliveries are excellent.
But his weaknesses may attract more notice in a high profile team like Liverpool. His plodding pace is another attribute he shares with Alonso, but he does not have the Spaniard's ability to shield the ball, and is too often caught in possession- sometimes in dangerous areas in front of his defence.
His constant reversion to long, raking passes can become repetitive, and his accuracy is not totally consistent. Liverpool already have one midfielder who habitually pings over-ambitious Hollywood balls to cede possession; two may be too many.
But at 7 million, it's hardly the riskiest deal we've seen Liverpool seal recently.
Kenny Dalglish's policy of filling his squad with overpriced English talent continues- he's also pursuing Stewart Downing, for whom Aston Villa want a whopping 19 million.
Xabi Alonso has been a huge loss for Liverpool. Their midfield has never since shown anything like his expansive passing range, and Steven Gerrard in particular has faded badly since he lost the partner that really made the team tick.
Liverpool went from challenging for the title in 08/09, with Alonso setting the tempo, to struggling throughout the following two seasons with the Spaniard in Madrid.
Now, it seems, Dalglish is looking to replicate Alonso's impact with the signing of Adam. Adam does share the Spain player's ablity to ping inch-perfect passes over long distances, and his set piece deliveries are excellent.
But his weaknesses may attract more notice in a high profile team like Liverpool. His plodding pace is another attribute he shares with Alonso, but he does not have the Spaniard's ability to shield the ball, and is too often caught in possession- sometimes in dangerous areas in front of his defence.
His constant reversion to long, raking passes can become repetitive, and his accuracy is not totally consistent. Liverpool already have one midfielder who habitually pings over-ambitious Hollywood balls to cede possession; two may be too many.
But at 7 million, it's hardly the riskiest deal we've seen Liverpool seal recently.
Nasri: Dangerous Game
Word is that Arsenal have already rejected a bid of almost 20 million for the wantaway Frenchman, from Manchester United, and told them to come back with 5 million more.
It's a daring ploy, because 20 million is already a hell of a lot of money for a player entering the final year of his contract. Even if he is wonderfully talented. United may draw the line there.
But perhaps the point is to lure Manchester City, who would of course be more obviously willing to part with a substantial sum.
For Nasri personally, United would be the more obvious fit. Alex Ferguson would grant him far more attacking freedom than would Roberto Mancini.
Money may talk on City's behalf, but if playing style and prestige are a concern, then United ought to be Nasri's first choice.
Either way, his likely departure is an ominous sign for Arsenal. All of the clubs linked with his signature- United, Chelsea, and City- finished above Arsenal last season, and all are looking to strengthen while for the Gunners, there is only a struggle to stand still. Genuine, lasting progress on the pitch has been elusive for some time, and as long as the squad is in flux, with some of its better players so often leaving for new pastures, it would be unrealistic to expect trophies or glory.
As it stands, this is the summer that Arsenal's true standing in the game really hit home. There were hopes that the Emirates Stadium would help elevate Arsenal to a higher plane, and that may still be so, but so far it is a slow, laborious process. The lack of any injection of cash from a member of the board, the lack of megabucks sponsorship deals, and the lack, until this summer, of clever commercial initiatives to open up new markets, has ensured that Arsenal's progress as a club has been minimal, in terms of their financial power. As Myles Palmer says, at Highbury, they were the world's biggest small club, and at the Emirates, they are the world's smallest big club.
So, sadly, although his own behaviour has been despicable, especially when contrasted with that of Fabregas and Clichy in similar situations, there remains an element of truth to Nasri's claims that his desire to leave stems from a sense of ambition. There seems, for the next few years at least, a concrete limit to what Arsenal can achieve. United and City both won trophies last year and have the potential to win many more. And if money is a factor, so what? Only in football are people condemned for wanting to move to a job with better money.
We may debate Nasri's class and his character, and whether he has really earned the right to demand astronomical wages, but the fact that he has attracted the interest of three better teams speaks for itself. He has great quality and the basis for his desire to leave is fairly sound. The way he has conducted himself, however, leaves a bitter taste.
But that's the way of Arsenal in recent years. One season's hero is that summer's wantaway villain. Wenger's frugal policy has not bred success, and that perhaps is forgivable. But nor has it bred loyalty in his best players. So he will spend more on potential, develop that potential into another star, the star will decide he's too bright for the Emirates, and the cycle will continue.
It's a daring ploy, because 20 million is already a hell of a lot of money for a player entering the final year of his contract. Even if he is wonderfully talented. United may draw the line there.
But perhaps the point is to lure Manchester City, who would of course be more obviously willing to part with a substantial sum.
For Nasri personally, United would be the more obvious fit. Alex Ferguson would grant him far more attacking freedom than would Roberto Mancini.
Money may talk on City's behalf, but if playing style and prestige are a concern, then United ought to be Nasri's first choice.
Either way, his likely departure is an ominous sign for Arsenal. All of the clubs linked with his signature- United, Chelsea, and City- finished above Arsenal last season, and all are looking to strengthen while for the Gunners, there is only a struggle to stand still. Genuine, lasting progress on the pitch has been elusive for some time, and as long as the squad is in flux, with some of its better players so often leaving for new pastures, it would be unrealistic to expect trophies or glory.
As it stands, this is the summer that Arsenal's true standing in the game really hit home. There were hopes that the Emirates Stadium would help elevate Arsenal to a higher plane, and that may still be so, but so far it is a slow, laborious process. The lack of any injection of cash from a member of the board, the lack of megabucks sponsorship deals, and the lack, until this summer, of clever commercial initiatives to open up new markets, has ensured that Arsenal's progress as a club has been minimal, in terms of their financial power. As Myles Palmer says, at Highbury, they were the world's biggest small club, and at the Emirates, they are the world's smallest big club.
So, sadly, although his own behaviour has been despicable, especially when contrasted with that of Fabregas and Clichy in similar situations, there remains an element of truth to Nasri's claims that his desire to leave stems from a sense of ambition. There seems, for the next few years at least, a concrete limit to what Arsenal can achieve. United and City both won trophies last year and have the potential to win many more. And if money is a factor, so what? Only in football are people condemned for wanting to move to a job with better money.
We may debate Nasri's class and his character, and whether he has really earned the right to demand astronomical wages, but the fact that he has attracted the interest of three better teams speaks for itself. He has great quality and the basis for his desire to leave is fairly sound. The way he has conducted himself, however, leaves a bitter taste.
But that's the way of Arsenal in recent years. One season's hero is that summer's wantaway villain. Wenger's frugal policy has not bred success, and that perhaps is forgivable. But nor has it bred loyalty in his best players. So he will spend more on potential, develop that potential into another star, the star will decide he's too bright for the Emirates, and the cycle will continue.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Cesc: Liberation Theory
[CLUTCHING AT STRAWS]
It looks like the captain is set to finally get his move. His feelings are clear, and few would have any ill will towards him.
Barcelona stil refuse to pay the money they should. Arsenal apparently want 40 million, and in fairness, considering some of the prices we have seen paid in the last few years, and indeed this summer, for lesser players, 40 million should be a minimum asking price.
He is probably the best midfielder in the world outside of the Barcelona team. The irony being, he is going to the one place where he will not be guaranteed a starting place.
Of course, the last time Arsenal lost their "captain and best player" was with the departure of Thierry Henry in 2007, also to Barcelona. Despite the apparent enormity of this loss, and the lack of a marquee replacement (Eduardo da Silva was brought in), Arsenal were much better in 07/08 than in 06/07. They led the league table for much of the season, only to suffer the now-familiar implosion in the run-in. Throughout the season, there was a sense that players who had been happy playing second fiddle to the "star" of the team were now taking on more responsibility, and thriving.
Numerous individuals, and the team as a whole, showed massive improvement on the previous season.
So does this memory offer cause for cautious optimism in the face of Fabregas's impending flight?
It is certainly likely that some players have looked to Fabregas to win games for Arsenal, and been happy with their own smaller share of the responsibility. Fabregas is a ceaselessly creative player and the onus was always on him to make the chances, despite the fact that Arsenal have plenty more players who would call themselves "creative midfielders".
In the space Henry left up front in 2007, Adebayor came into his own, transforming himself from an often frustrating, clumsy forward into a strong, pacey goal machine a la Drogba. Could one of Arsenal's remaining midfielders step up in similar fashion after Fabregas leaves? There will certainly be high hopes for Wilshere and Ramsey, and this may make Wenger reluctant to splash cash on an obvious, direct replacement for the Spaniard.
But overall, the expectation has to be that Arsenal will struggle without their skipper. The nucleus of players at the Emirates now is not as strong as it was in 2007. And let's not forget that Fabregas himself was already an outstanding player despite his youth. He made huge strides at the time, adding goals to his trademark vision. He was helped by the fact that Mathieu Flamini made amazing progress, from a squad player to a midfield lynchpin. Much will depend now on whether one of our current "squad players" can show the kind of desire to improve that Flamini did. Diaby? Denilson? I don't think so. Perhaps Alex Song will continue his steady progress, but the suspicion is that Arsenal need an injection of true grit in the centre of the pitch.
Fundamental to this debate is the difference in personality between Henry and Fabregas. Neither could be called natural leaders, but Henry was often an unpleasant, overbearing character and this certainly affected team mates at times. Just ask Jose Reyes.
Fabregas is just as talismanic a figure as Henry was, but he does not have the rampaging ego, and was never seen berating or staring down team mates. You could say that oftentimes, the team played for Henry, but Fabregas always played for the team. His vision and passing ability invite comparison to Dennis Bergkamp- they share a status as the kind of players who make lesser team mates look better.
In other words, while some players may have been secretly pleased with Henry's departure, it is hard to imagine anyone waving good riddance to Cesc Fabregas. Will they choose to wallow, as they so often do, or will be the catalyst for a revival in some stagnating careers? Over to you, Arshavin, Diaby, Denilson etc.
It looks like the captain is set to finally get his move. His feelings are clear, and few would have any ill will towards him.
Barcelona stil refuse to pay the money they should. Arsenal apparently want 40 million, and in fairness, considering some of the prices we have seen paid in the last few years, and indeed this summer, for lesser players, 40 million should be a minimum asking price.
He is probably the best midfielder in the world outside of the Barcelona team. The irony being, he is going to the one place where he will not be guaranteed a starting place.
Of course, the last time Arsenal lost their "captain and best player" was with the departure of Thierry Henry in 2007, also to Barcelona. Despite the apparent enormity of this loss, and the lack of a marquee replacement (Eduardo da Silva was brought in), Arsenal were much better in 07/08 than in 06/07. They led the league table for much of the season, only to suffer the now-familiar implosion in the run-in. Throughout the season, there was a sense that players who had been happy playing second fiddle to the "star" of the team were now taking on more responsibility, and thriving.
Numerous individuals, and the team as a whole, showed massive improvement on the previous season.
So does this memory offer cause for cautious optimism in the face of Fabregas's impending flight?
It is certainly likely that some players have looked to Fabregas to win games for Arsenal, and been happy with their own smaller share of the responsibility. Fabregas is a ceaselessly creative player and the onus was always on him to make the chances, despite the fact that Arsenal have plenty more players who would call themselves "creative midfielders".
In the space Henry left up front in 2007, Adebayor came into his own, transforming himself from an often frustrating, clumsy forward into a strong, pacey goal machine a la Drogba. Could one of Arsenal's remaining midfielders step up in similar fashion after Fabregas leaves? There will certainly be high hopes for Wilshere and Ramsey, and this may make Wenger reluctant to splash cash on an obvious, direct replacement for the Spaniard.
But overall, the expectation has to be that Arsenal will struggle without their skipper. The nucleus of players at the Emirates now is not as strong as it was in 2007. And let's not forget that Fabregas himself was already an outstanding player despite his youth. He made huge strides at the time, adding goals to his trademark vision. He was helped by the fact that Mathieu Flamini made amazing progress, from a squad player to a midfield lynchpin. Much will depend now on whether one of our current "squad players" can show the kind of desire to improve that Flamini did. Diaby? Denilson? I don't think so. Perhaps Alex Song will continue his steady progress, but the suspicion is that Arsenal need an injection of true grit in the centre of the pitch.
Fundamental to this debate is the difference in personality between Henry and Fabregas. Neither could be called natural leaders, but Henry was often an unpleasant, overbearing character and this certainly affected team mates at times. Just ask Jose Reyes.
Fabregas is just as talismanic a figure as Henry was, but he does not have the rampaging ego, and was never seen berating or staring down team mates. You could say that oftentimes, the team played for Henry, but Fabregas always played for the team. His vision and passing ability invite comparison to Dennis Bergkamp- they share a status as the kind of players who make lesser team mates look better.
In other words, while some players may have been secretly pleased with Henry's departure, it is hard to imagine anyone waving good riddance to Cesc Fabregas. Will they choose to wallow, as they so often do, or will be the catalyst for a revival in some stagnating careers? Over to you, Arshavin, Diaby, Denilson etc.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Goodbye Gael Clichy
The left back has left Arsenal, joining Man City for 7 million.
Because he only had a year remaining on his contract, and because most observers now routinely question both his defensive and attacking prowess, that's decent money.
Whether it's a good deal overall depends on a couple of other factors.
If Wenger is not going to sign a direct replacement, but rather depend on Kieran Gibbs, it's worrying. Gibbs has looked a good player in spells but those spells have come sporadically. He's had more injuries than impressive performances.
We also know that Thomas Vermaelen can play at full back as well as in the centre, and that Arsenal are chasing a centre back, so perhaps a positional shift could be on the cards for the Belgian. That would be a pity considering his impressive first season, but he would surely provide more solidity on the left of Arsenal's defence than Clichy ever did.
Of course, after his almost season-long absence through 10/11, there is uncertainty now over Vermaelen's fitness aswell.
It would not say much for Arsenal's immediate ambitions if Wenger does not spend on another left back. If he wanted Clichy to stay, then he did not want Gibbs to take over. Allowing a young understudy a first team chance is what Wenger usually does though, so I won't hold my breath for a new signing in this area.
Clichy's Arsenal career has had, at least in the last four years or so, a gradually declining trajectory. When Arsenal had experienced players, Clichy slotted in and although a raw talent, looked like he could develop into a fantastic player.
He has roaring pace and endless stamina, but the mental side of the game has always presented problems for him. His most common defensive contribution of note was to win the ball with interceptions high up the pitch and set up counter attacks. But he was often led a merry dance by tricky wingers, his positional sense is shown up regularly, and as the more experienced pros flooded out of Arsenal, more and more mistakes crept into Clichy's game.
Many now see him as a liability. And the attacking threat suggested by his pace was never really much of a threat, because his final ball is horrendous. He has hardly produced ten decent crosses in his eight years at the club.
And he, more so than William Gallas, proved the catalyst for Arsenal's 2008 implosion. Gallas's meltdown was a response to Clichy's utter stupidity.
Because he only had a year remaining on his contract, and because most observers now routinely question both his defensive and attacking prowess, that's decent money.
Whether it's a good deal overall depends on a couple of other factors.
If Wenger is not going to sign a direct replacement, but rather depend on Kieran Gibbs, it's worrying. Gibbs has looked a good player in spells but those spells have come sporadically. He's had more injuries than impressive performances.
We also know that Thomas Vermaelen can play at full back as well as in the centre, and that Arsenal are chasing a centre back, so perhaps a positional shift could be on the cards for the Belgian. That would be a pity considering his impressive first season, but he would surely provide more solidity on the left of Arsenal's defence than Clichy ever did.
Of course, after his almost season-long absence through 10/11, there is uncertainty now over Vermaelen's fitness aswell.
It would not say much for Arsenal's immediate ambitions if Wenger does not spend on another left back. If he wanted Clichy to stay, then he did not want Gibbs to take over. Allowing a young understudy a first team chance is what Wenger usually does though, so I won't hold my breath for a new signing in this area.
Clichy's Arsenal career has had, at least in the last four years or so, a gradually declining trajectory. When Arsenal had experienced players, Clichy slotted in and although a raw talent, looked like he could develop into a fantastic player.
He has roaring pace and endless stamina, but the mental side of the game has always presented problems for him. His most common defensive contribution of note was to win the ball with interceptions high up the pitch and set up counter attacks. But he was often led a merry dance by tricky wingers, his positional sense is shown up regularly, and as the more experienced pros flooded out of Arsenal, more and more mistakes crept into Clichy's game.
Many now see him as a liability. And the attacking threat suggested by his pace was never really much of a threat, because his final ball is horrendous. He has hardly produced ten decent crosses in his eight years at the club.
And he, more so than William Gallas, proved the catalyst for Arsenal's 2008 implosion. Gallas's meltdown was a response to Clichy's utter stupidity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)