The weight of expectation on Chamberlain is bewildering
Considering I often complain about the crowd getting on players' backs, this might seem perverse, but the cheering for Chamberlain is ridiculous and unhelpful to the other players.
While the game was still going on with Arsenal on the attack, Chamberlain went over to the bench to get ready to come on. As he took his jacket off, there was a massive cheer from one side of the stadium. Apart from probably putting the players on the pitch off, it's hardly the sort of thing which inspires the players who are already out there. By all means cheer him onto the pitch, but don't treat him like the messiah.
I remember something similar when Theo first started having an impact in the autumn of 2007. And whatever you think about Walcott now, it's impossible to argue that he progressed as quickly as people hoped. Let's learn from this.
Gervinho is a peculiar footballer
For a guy who's in his first season in England, Gervinho's done okay. Not amazingly, but enough to hint at things to come.
But what's very odd about him is that the more he touches the ball, the less he actually seems to do. In his first few games, when he would drive for the byline and cut the ball back he had a real impact. Now he seems to do lots of stepovers, dribble in circles but be very undecisive about his final ball. It's a strange one.
Referees need to do more about timewasting
Fair play to Wigan, they completely deserved their win. But why the referee did nothing about the timewasting till the third minute of stoppage time is beyond me. Booking the player in the 93rd minutes is more offensive than just completely ignoring it. It wastes even more time, and you're still not going to show them a second yellow card.
Ramsey's understanding with Walcott is poor
I think a lot of the criticism of Ramsey is a bit like the criticism of Arshavin - you need the players around you to understand how you play. There were three or four occasions last night when we lost the ball, because Walcott didn't understand where Ramsey would run or play the ball to.
It's a bit of an odd one. Theo clearly lacks a brilliant football brain but he has an amazing understanding with RVP. Perhaps it's because RVP has worked out how Walcott plays, but Walcott shouldn't expect that of his team-mates. At times last night, his play was appalling, and yet it's Ramsey who will take the blame. Which is ridiculously unfair.
Why the need for a scapegoat?
However well or badly we're doing, many of the fans seem to love to have a boo boy. It was Eboue, then Almunia, then Denilson, then Arshavin, then Walcott, then Arshavin again and now Ramsey. I know the support has been good lately, but there's no need to criticise the team when they're playing, and it really doesn't help.
And it's then even more embarrassing when our fans criticise other teams' support.
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
Saturday, 14 April 2012
Who would play up front if Van Persie was injured?
Watching Arsenal play Wolves on Wednesday night was the clearest indication yet that Robin van Persie is the only striker Arsene Wenger trusts. 3-0 up away from home against ten men, with Van Persie the victim of one or two bad tackles, Wenger still didn't introduce Park Chu-Young.
Apart from the home game against Stoke in October - where we huffed and puffed before Van Persie was introduced - the Dutchman has started every Premier League game this season.
And when Van Persie stayed on despite the tough tackling at Molineux, I had to question when Wenger would trust his back-up strikers? This also led to a more interesting question: who would play up front if RVP was injured before the end of the season?
It's a topic which few Gooners want to discuss for obvious reasons, but having played almost every game for months, there must be a chance Robin will break down.
I find it hard to believe it would be Park who would come in. Although he was given the nod against Marseille at the beginning of November, by my reckoning his only appearances since then have (oddly) been cameos against Man United and Milan.
That Wenger has so obviously put Chamakh up for sale is one thing, but I'm led to question the purpose of Park. Considering how he can never get a game, it seems a reasonable conclusion that he's pretty shit. But according to some, Wenger wants to keep him this summer.
Okay, that may not be true, but the whole story seems bizarre. If he's going to be sold, why bring him in originally? And if he isn't, presumably he's showing something in training, in which case why can't he get a game? That he's played against United and Milan - massive, massive games - only adds to the confusion. The only plausible solution is that he played in those games because of the massive TV audience but he really isn't very good.
The case of Chamakh is a different one. It's a little like Eduardo, insofar as there's probably a good player in there, but it's going to come through at another club.
It's worth noting how even when we're chasing a game and Wenger has Chamakh or Park on the bench, he'll often bring on a player like Gervinho or Ramsey instead. This is a tactical shift from when he always used to bring strikers on (often several) and reflects how Wenger seemingly doesn't trust either of his back-up strikers.
Were Robin to be injured before the end of the season, particularly considering our relatively comfortable League position, I would have thought Theo might finally get a chance up top, but judging by this interview he gave to the Evening Standard, Walcott acknowledges he would need a big man alongside him, in a 4-4-2. And that wouldn't happen at this stage of the season.
If nothing else, it's an interesting question. It seems unlikely Nicklas Bendtner will come back to us this summer. If Park and Chamakh are also sold, even if Poldi comes in, I'd expect another striker to come in. Because at the moment it's the area of the squad in which we are thinnest on the ground.
Come in Carlos Vela, all is forgiven?
Apart from the home game against Stoke in October - where we huffed and puffed before Van Persie was introduced - the Dutchman has started every Premier League game this season.
And when Van Persie stayed on despite the tough tackling at Molineux, I had to question when Wenger would trust his back-up strikers? This also led to a more interesting question: who would play up front if RVP was injured before the end of the season?
It's a topic which few Gooners want to discuss for obvious reasons, but having played almost every game for months, there must be a chance Robin will break down.
I find it hard to believe it would be Park who would come in. Although he was given the nod against Marseille at the beginning of November, by my reckoning his only appearances since then have (oddly) been cameos against Man United and Milan.
That Wenger has so obviously put Chamakh up for sale is one thing, but I'm led to question the purpose of Park. Considering how he can never get a game, it seems a reasonable conclusion that he's pretty shit. But according to some, Wenger wants to keep him this summer.
Okay, that may not be true, but the whole story seems bizarre. If he's going to be sold, why bring him in originally? And if he isn't, presumably he's showing something in training, in which case why can't he get a game? That he's played against United and Milan - massive, massive games - only adds to the confusion. The only plausible solution is that he played in those games because of the massive TV audience but he really isn't very good.
The case of Chamakh is a different one. It's a little like Eduardo, insofar as there's probably a good player in there, but it's going to come through at another club.
It's worth noting how even when we're chasing a game and Wenger has Chamakh or Park on the bench, he'll often bring on a player like Gervinho or Ramsey instead. This is a tactical shift from when he always used to bring strikers on (often several) and reflects how Wenger seemingly doesn't trust either of his back-up strikers.
Were Robin to be injured before the end of the season, particularly considering our relatively comfortable League position, I would have thought Theo might finally get a chance up top, but judging by this interview he gave to the Evening Standard, Walcott acknowledges he would need a big man alongside him, in a 4-4-2. And that wouldn't happen at this stage of the season.
If nothing else, it's an interesting question. It seems unlikely Nicklas Bendtner will come back to us this summer. If Park and Chamakh are also sold, even if Poldi comes in, I'd expect another striker to come in. Because at the moment it's the area of the squad in which we are thinnest on the ground.
Come in Carlos Vela, all is forgiven?
Sunday, 19 February 2012
Drastic improvement needed. Thoughts on Milan and Sunderland.
People tended to mock me in previous seasons for complaining about poor refereeing, but I moaned because I felt the decisions had a decisive impact.
It's one of the reasons the 'seven seasons without a trophy' line doesn't bother me. Go back to the 2008 season: with some better decisions we could easily have won the League and the Champions League. C'est la vie.
Although we won nothing, until Cesc left, it was enjoyable watching Arsenal - there were some great moments and they played beautiful football. They dominated games, and the problem (if there was one) was mental, rather than technical.
Now, I can't moan about poor refereeing. For what it's worth, I thought we were denied a clear penalty yesterday - but when you create so little, it's difficult to moan. If Webb had pointed to the spot, I'm still unconvinced we would have won the game.
Year-on-year, it's very hard to know what to think. Last season's boo boys were Almunia, Squillaci, Denilson, Eboue and Bendtner - and with the exception of the Frenchman, none have worn the red shirt this season. And yet, we're now a lot, lot worse. A team which was challenging for the League and could without a ridiculous red card have beaten Barca over two legs is now a shadow of its former self and you've got to ask why? At least some of the blame has to go on the manager.
Yes, the previous week he had made good changes at the Stadium of Light, but yesterday his substitutions made no sense and who was really surprised to see Theo flop up top?
When Cesc left we started playing the ball wide a lot more in our attacking play - which is fine providing full-backs offer an overlap. When your winger gets doubled up on every time, it gets a little repetitive and very pointless. At least when Arshavin plays he can beat those men - I've seen nothing to suggest Theo or Gervinho can.
Ultimately, the lack of full-backs bombing forward is Arsene's fault - he should be telling them to do so.
It's a symptom of a wider malaise where the players aren't performing as they can. I love Arsene Wenger and I would love him to lead us to fourth place. But with the way the team has been performing for the last three months, we need to see a drastic improvement. I really hope he can achieve this - next week's North London Derby now has unparalleled importance.
Keep the faith.
It's one of the reasons the 'seven seasons without a trophy' line doesn't bother me. Go back to the 2008 season: with some better decisions we could easily have won the League and the Champions League. C'est la vie.
Although we won nothing, until Cesc left, it was enjoyable watching Arsenal - there were some great moments and they played beautiful football. They dominated games, and the problem (if there was one) was mental, rather than technical.
Now, I can't moan about poor refereeing. For what it's worth, I thought we were denied a clear penalty yesterday - but when you create so little, it's difficult to moan. If Webb had pointed to the spot, I'm still unconvinced we would have won the game.
Year-on-year, it's very hard to know what to think. Last season's boo boys were Almunia, Squillaci, Denilson, Eboue and Bendtner - and with the exception of the Frenchman, none have worn the red shirt this season. And yet, we're now a lot, lot worse. A team which was challenging for the League and could without a ridiculous red card have beaten Barca over two legs is now a shadow of its former self and you've got to ask why? At least some of the blame has to go on the manager.
Yes, the previous week he had made good changes at the Stadium of Light, but yesterday his substitutions made no sense and who was really surprised to see Theo flop up top?
When Cesc left we started playing the ball wide a lot more in our attacking play - which is fine providing full-backs offer an overlap. When your winger gets doubled up on every time, it gets a little repetitive and very pointless. At least when Arshavin plays he can beat those men - I've seen nothing to suggest Theo or Gervinho can.
Ultimately, the lack of full-backs bombing forward is Arsene's fault - he should be telling them to do so.
It's a symptom of a wider malaise where the players aren't performing as they can. I love Arsene Wenger and I would love him to lead us to fourth place. But with the way the team has been performing for the last three months, we need to see a drastic improvement. I really hope he can achieve this - next week's North London Derby now has unparalleled importance.
Keep the faith.
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Open disunity shames the club. Thoughts on United and the last few weeks.
It's undoubtedly been a bad few weeks for the club. Speaking to a friend before the United match I suggested that the previous five weeks had been the worst I'd seen us consistently play as a team in the 15 years I've been going to Arsenal. And after the match, we remain pointless in 2012.
But I do think people have suffered from raised expectations. The run of form from late October to early December coincided with a wonderful run of form for Robin van Persie, who along with a couple of others, carried the team up the table.
I look at this team and it's not the fourth best in the Premier League. It will be a lot closer with Sagna, Santos and Wilshere, but the expectancy that your first-choice team will and should be able to play the whole time is naive. When has it ever happened in the last five seasons? Incredibly rarely.
For what it's worth I think Abou Diaby is one of the most talented players at the club, and if fit, could provide drive and attacking vigour from midfield. But he's not fit and he's hardly ever fit so it's irrelevant.
And it's why I think the injuries are a poor excuse. We've definitely missed having any full-backs, but having seen the performances against Fulham and Swansea, I'm unconvinced they'd have helped that much.
I really like Mikel Arteta but he doesn't create enough chances. Neither do Aaron Ramsey, Gervinho or Walcott. One man who can create chances is Van Persie, but because he's starved of service, he now tries to find a way to shoot almost every time.
The sheer ineptitude of our attacking play in the last six weeks - I'd go back as far as Everton - has been the main problem. Which is why I was so shocked by the booing on Sunday.
Andrey Arshavin is a good player but he's not a winger and it shows. Wenger made a great change in bringing Chamberlain in and it worked, as we actually showed some real attacking purpose for the first time in ages, Wolves aside.
As it happens, I think the substitution was wrong - I think Walcott should have made way, and the fallout will have an impact on the rest of our season. Theo has played dreadfully recently and will never have the quality of Shava.
But I cannot fathom why people booed. Did they think he was suddenly going to change his mind and leave the Ox on?
It left a bitter taste in my mouth. And most importantly, it lacked all the class that 'The Arsenal' are known for. Booing your own manager in the midst of one of the biggest games of the season when there's an important three points at stake? Unbelievable.
Considering we hear ad nauseam about how the Premier League is the most popular League worldwide, I'd worry about further ramifications: it was unlikely before Sunday that a player of Gotze or Hazard's caliber would come to play for Arsenal; if they've seen how the home crowd react in a match of this importance to what was a reasonable (if incorrect) substitution, why would they want to come here?
Defeat to United in of itself is not a terrible result. We were unlucky to lose the game and played loads better than in the previous few matches.
But the spiral of negative stories around the club which the crowd - and, to an extent, the Captain's reaction - has caused will have a much greater impact on our season.
There are some winnable matches ahead, and we could well defeat AC Milan in the Champions League, but to do that, the club needs to stick together.
It's bad enough the referees hate us; fans should quit hating, and start supporting the team.
Keep the faith.
But I do think people have suffered from raised expectations. The run of form from late October to early December coincided with a wonderful run of form for Robin van Persie, who along with a couple of others, carried the team up the table.
I look at this team and it's not the fourth best in the Premier League. It will be a lot closer with Sagna, Santos and Wilshere, but the expectancy that your first-choice team will and should be able to play the whole time is naive. When has it ever happened in the last five seasons? Incredibly rarely.
For what it's worth I think Abou Diaby is one of the most talented players at the club, and if fit, could provide drive and attacking vigour from midfield. But he's not fit and he's hardly ever fit so it's irrelevant.
And it's why I think the injuries are a poor excuse. We've definitely missed having any full-backs, but having seen the performances against Fulham and Swansea, I'm unconvinced they'd have helped that much.
I really like Mikel Arteta but he doesn't create enough chances. Neither do Aaron Ramsey, Gervinho or Walcott. One man who can create chances is Van Persie, but because he's starved of service, he now tries to find a way to shoot almost every time.
The sheer ineptitude of our attacking play in the last six weeks - I'd go back as far as Everton - has been the main problem. Which is why I was so shocked by the booing on Sunday.
Andrey Arshavin is a good player but he's not a winger and it shows. Wenger made a great change in bringing Chamberlain in and it worked, as we actually showed some real attacking purpose for the first time in ages, Wolves aside.
As it happens, I think the substitution was wrong - I think Walcott should have made way, and the fallout will have an impact on the rest of our season. Theo has played dreadfully recently and will never have the quality of Shava.
But I cannot fathom why people booed. Did they think he was suddenly going to change his mind and leave the Ox on?
It left a bitter taste in my mouth. And most importantly, it lacked all the class that 'The Arsenal' are known for. Booing your own manager in the midst of one of the biggest games of the season when there's an important three points at stake? Unbelievable.
Considering we hear ad nauseam about how the Premier League is the most popular League worldwide, I'd worry about further ramifications: it was unlikely before Sunday that a player of Gotze or Hazard's caliber would come to play for Arsenal; if they've seen how the home crowd react in a match of this importance to what was a reasonable (if incorrect) substitution, why would they want to come here?
Defeat to United in of itself is not a terrible result. We were unlucky to lose the game and played loads better than in the previous few matches.
But the spiral of negative stories around the club which the crowd - and, to an extent, the Captain's reaction - has caused will have a much greater impact on our season.
There are some winnable matches ahead, and we could well defeat AC Milan in the Champions League, but to do that, the club needs to stick together.
It's bad enough the referees hate us; fans should quit hating, and start supporting the team.
Keep the faith.
Friday, 28 October 2011
Arsenal's recent form is what you should expect - sort of
The thing which everybody forgot was that it was hardly a great Arsenal side which challenged so strongly until March last season.
Tears were spilt on deadline day 2010 over a refusal to buy a veteran keeper; the centre half whom everyone insisted we signed turned out to be not much cop; the side as a whole was very dependent on Marouane Chamakh and Samir Nasri in the first half of the season, Robin van Persie in the New Year. On top of this, the captain and best player Cesc Fabregas was injured for half of the season.
And yet, this was a team which arguably should have won the League.
What was easy to forget in the midst of that wretched run of form from March until September, was that there was a reason that Arsenal were challenging for all the trophies. Partly, it was good performances - beating Chelsea 3-0 particularly springs to mind; but a lot of it was about other teams not playing very well.
This came in two ways: first, the opposition were poor. Although there were some great individual performances from Arsenal players, the poverty of teams like Wolves, West Ham and Birmingham was striking to behold. In fact, what was so frustrating about our results at the end of the season was that the teams didn't even play particularly well.
The 3-2 defeat to West Brom last September at least saw some excellent attacking play from the Baggies; defeats to Stoke and Villa were largely self-inflicted, clear by-products of our poor defending and inexplicable lack of inspiration in midfield, rather than the result of the opposition playing particularly well.
The second reason we were doing so well was that the other big teams had clear deficiencies, some of which remain: Man United had a lightweight central midfield which led to them being over-run on occasion; Chelsea's experienced squad at times looked very old, and ended up in a terrible run of form mid-season; and Man City, the great success story of the season thus far, couldn't play as a team.
To be sure, our three rivals of last season have improved. United strengthened their team (although their improvement has been greatly exaggerated), Chelsea have changed their tactics under AVB and look more competitive, and City have gelled as a team; it's this which will preclude us from winning the League this season.
But the poor teams in the Premier League remain. Sure West Ham and Birmingham went down, but Blackburn and QPR are equally bad.
And this is a good Arsenal team. Not a great Arsenal team, but a good Arsenal team. Heck, keep Szczesny, Vermaelen, Wilshere and RVP fit at the same time (unlikely, I know) and they could challenge for a League title.
Which is why when the fixture list gives us a kind run like this, we should win seven out of eight matches. We should expect it - we just shouldn't expect to win away at Chelsea.
With no Drogba and Arsenal coming into the match with momentum, I certainly give us hope; but I have realistic expectations for this season. And providing you accept that our ambition should be to finish in the top four, I think you'll actually have an enjoyable season.
Keep the faith.
Tears were spilt on deadline day 2010 over a refusal to buy a veteran keeper; the centre half whom everyone insisted we signed turned out to be not much cop; the side as a whole was very dependent on Marouane Chamakh and Samir Nasri in the first half of the season, Robin van Persie in the New Year. On top of this, the captain and best player Cesc Fabregas was injured for half of the season.
And yet, this was a team which arguably should have won the League.
What was easy to forget in the midst of that wretched run of form from March until September, was that there was a reason that Arsenal were challenging for all the trophies. Partly, it was good performances - beating Chelsea 3-0 particularly springs to mind; but a lot of it was about other teams not playing very well.
This came in two ways: first, the opposition were poor. Although there were some great individual performances from Arsenal players, the poverty of teams like Wolves, West Ham and Birmingham was striking to behold. In fact, what was so frustrating about our results at the end of the season was that the teams didn't even play particularly well.
The 3-2 defeat to West Brom last September at least saw some excellent attacking play from the Baggies; defeats to Stoke and Villa were largely self-inflicted, clear by-products of our poor defending and inexplicable lack of inspiration in midfield, rather than the result of the opposition playing particularly well.
The second reason we were doing so well was that the other big teams had clear deficiencies, some of which remain: Man United had a lightweight central midfield which led to them being over-run on occasion; Chelsea's experienced squad at times looked very old, and ended up in a terrible run of form mid-season; and Man City, the great success story of the season thus far, couldn't play as a team.
To be sure, our three rivals of last season have improved. United strengthened their team (although their improvement has been greatly exaggerated), Chelsea have changed their tactics under AVB and look more competitive, and City have gelled as a team; it's this which will preclude us from winning the League this season.
But the poor teams in the Premier League remain. Sure West Ham and Birmingham went down, but Blackburn and QPR are equally bad.
And this is a good Arsenal team. Not a great Arsenal team, but a good Arsenal team. Heck, keep Szczesny, Vermaelen, Wilshere and RVP fit at the same time (unlikely, I know) and they could challenge for a League title.
Which is why when the fixture list gives us a kind run like this, we should win seven out of eight matches. We should expect it - we just shouldn't expect to win away at Chelsea.
With no Drogba and Arsenal coming into the match with momentum, I certainly give us hope; but I have realistic expectations for this season. And providing you accept that our ambition should be to finish in the top four, I think you'll actually have an enjoyable season.
Keep the faith.
Sunday, 18 September 2011
Blogging about Arsenal is painful at the moment. Post-Blackburn thoughts.
Blackburn Rovers 4 Arsenal 3
For all I said that it was time pressures which precluded me from blogging as much as I used to, it's also that I don't really see the point of writing the same thing over and over again, especially when other people are also writing the same thing.
What am I supposed to say? Blackburn are truly abysmal and Steve Kean is one of the worst managers in Premier League history.
If there was any team we should be able to beat, it's them: they're in even worse form than us (probably), and trailed twice. And yet we lost the game.
How many teams could have 43 shots on goal over two away games, score five goals, and still lose both games? It is beyond a joke.
I have never seen a team flood the opposition with confidence like this Arsenal team, and it sure doesn't feel seven months ago that we beat Barcelona at home.
For what it's worth, I'm not sure we've ever got over the Van Persie red card in the Nou Camp.
We don't need a defensive coach, so much as a sports psychologist who can sort these guys out mentally.
It's all very depressing. If you want to find out what happened during the match, the Guardian has a match report here.
Monday, 29 August 2011
The nadir. Man United 8 Arsenal 2. Eyewitness report.
Man United 8 Arsenal 2
A terrible, terrible performance brought a terrible, terrible result. Make no mistake, this was the nadir of Arsene Wenger's time in charge.
For an hour we were outclassed but somehow were in the game at 3-1 down. Then we removed our holding midfielder and put an attacking player on to try and get a result, and conceded five goals in half an hour.
That's not meant to be an excuse. You know something has gone seriously tits up when Henri Lansbury is subbed on for Theo Walcott to play right back. It was tactically negligent. Maybe if we'd scored the fifth goal it would have been a different game, but when you're introducing a 17 year old debutant to try and change the game, something's not quite right.
I don't feel there's any point going into the match in any depth - none of the team covered themselves in glory (Coquelin, possibly, excepted) - but who expected them to.
There have been bad defeats in the Wenger era before - 5-1 to Spurs, and 5-0 to Chelsea - but those were in the Carling Cup with weakened teams.
The most depressing thing about yesterday is that it was the best team we had available.
And despite all that, amidst all the media hype, things aren't nearly as bad as the media would like you to think they are.
Real Madrid lost 5-0 away to Barca last year with none of their players being red-carded until the 93rd minute and won the Spanish Cup, reached the Champions League semi-final.
Strip away the hyperbole, and you have a manager who every player who leaves ends up praising, and a coaching set-up which consistently brings through young players who are talented.
Sure the United team was marginally younger, but would Rosicky start under ideal circumstances? Both teams had three players who had come through the academy in their teams. The difference was that United were able to spend big money on Anderson and Rooney, when we dealt in the bargain basement, signing players like Song and Bendtner.
And when they bought 20 million pound players, we bought ten million pound players? I'd rather have Theo Walcott than Ashley Young (though I'm probably in a minority there), Samir Nasri instead of Nani, and Fabregas instead of Carrick.
The issue at Arsenal is two-fold for me. Firstly, it's a question of personnel. I felt we were very close last year, and if Chesney had been keeper all season things might have turned out differently; but we were still without decent back-up at centre back, and now we've missed out on Phil Jones to boot.
And yet, since last season, we've lost a top-quality Premiership left-back, still failed to strengthen at centre back, and lost the best midfielder in the Premier League. I'm prepared to accept that Gervinho is a good replacement for Nasri, but that still leaves the other three positions.
Aside from United pressing better yesterday, they used possession a lot more effectively; where was our playmaker for the front three? Judging by yesterday's performance, Aaron Ramsey isn't up to it at present.
The other issue was at full-back: Carl Jenkinson has merits insofar as he's not Eboue but he lacks experience; Armand Traore lacks everything a good footballer should have.
I don't advocate the 'spend spend spend' philosophy of other clubs, but I think when you lose your best player, as well your first choice left back, and then you don't replace them, it's unsurprising the team looks weak.
But it's not easy when you're missing Vermaelen, Sagna, Gibbs, Diaby, Wilshere and Nicky Bendtner, along with the suspended trio - the squad players are playing, so the consequence is the bench looks weak.
I don't think we're as weak as all that. I think with three decent signings before the window closes (a left back, a centre back, and a marquee midfield player), we could really turn things around.
It's easy to trot out stats about it being a terrible start to the League season, but we're one point down on the corresponding three matches last season.
The bigger test will be not dropping cheap points at home against the lesser teams.
I think with those signings, we could do pretty well this year - and by that I mean finish 3rd.
But to do that, the other thing which needs to improve is the morale around the club. I was in Manchester yesterday and the away support really was excellent, but we need to see that at home.
There's a malaise surrounding the club, which is affecting the players. In short, they lack confidence on the pitch, mainly because of this dreadful run of form which stretches back six months.
Now, more than ever, we need to get behind the team and the manager. There's a reason all ex-players speak so highly of Arsene.
Keep the faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)