re: Arsenal 2013/2014 Season Long Thread

Rooney is a damn good comparison, that's for sure.

Chelsea just dropped 2 points at The Hawthorns. Time to go back top tomorrow! COYG!

quote:

---

if we win tomorrow lets just pretend Saturday never happened and never speak of it again

---

I can get on board with that

Speaking of Douchenozzle, what's this nonsense I saw on ESPN FC today. Or is the fact that it was on ESPN FC probably my answer?

yeah, that's probably our best lineup. especially in big matches, bc Rosicky really helps us there.

i'm not opposed to Jack at RW in big matches, though. just a fact of life that Rosicky can't start every match. gnabry should get some PT too.

quote:

---

Really hits the nail on the head IMO. i really want to believe that his talent will win out, but he plays like he hasn't learned anything over the past few years.

---

O ye little faith. I think this piece misses the point about Jack, in a massive, massive, massive way. I'm about to destroy this piece because I'm tired of idiot bloggers who are too myopic to see what amounts to reality, that Jack is a fantastic 22 year old, that he isn't a complete midfielder yet, he is still learning, and he is pretty excellent at what he is. Not only that, this game comes off one of the best runs of his career, where he had five superb performances, and one very terrible one against a team that destroyed us in every facet. Between the Man City and Liverpool games, admittedly against weak opposition, Wilshere had 1 goal and 3 assists, and a man of the match performance against Aston Villa, and played well enough to be considered for man of the man against Newcastle. This is the definition of knee-jerk. Making reactions based on one game, where Wilshere was partnered with Arteta, who he hasn't often partnered with this season, is silly. He's only played with Arteta one other time this season, in the Tottenham game in the FA Cup.

Anyway let's start. This might as well be a novel so crack open a beer if you actually read this.

First the writer says,

quote:

---

There is a truth near-wholly acknowledged among football watchers that players below a certain age, or a certain number of first team appearances (the exact numbers remain vague) are allowed a certain level of leeway with regard to the shortcomings in their game. It’s only fair. The underlying idea behind this is that being young, inexperienced, or both, they will eventually grow out of their flaws and learn from their past mistakes. It’s often a slow, but worthwhile, and most crucially visible process. It rarely happens particularly quickly but in observing many young players over time, it’s easy to see them steadily ironing out some of the more negative and inhibiting facets of their play.

---

This is seemingly true enough, although I absolutely disagree that this process is visible. It's crucial for the blogger in this instance because in his myopia, he relies on sight, and has no ability to project. The fan, the pundit, the critic, does not see the players except on the pitch. When the thing you need most to succeed is the correct mentality, as we've seen with young player after young player. How is that a visible process? Was it visible for Ramsey? Was that degradation visible for Bendnter? Was it visible for Vela, Denilson, Song, Fabregas? All of them were supremely talented, came to us as youngsters, but they developed differently in terms of their mentality, so much so that their on-field play was affected, which is what we, the fans, saw.

For example, Denilson came to us as a AM, a superb technician on the ball who had an eye for the pass. We converted him to a ball-playing DM who tried to make interceptions and read the game like Gilberto Silva. The 2008-09 season, he played reasonably well, though he got a lot of stick. He looked like he could be an option in our midfield for years to come. When we played with him we could execute a midfield rotation with Fabregas and Song, which made the 4-3-3 we employed in 2009 absolutely awesome. Injury problems, and associated dips in confidence perhaps caused by the amazing amount of stick he got from opposing fans. When Denilson was asked to play a more high-energy role as part of a midfield two in 2010, he failed to adapt, because his natural instinct was to move forward to support the attack as a pivot, but his defensive responsibilities necessitated the tracking of opposition runners, a task which he never really lived up to. Not only that, he was replaced as the wonderkid by Wilshere, who similiarly was an AM in the youth leagues, and moved back to DM to accommodate Fabregas. Can you imagine the feeling Denilson had? He broke through as an 18 year-old, and was lauded as a Brazilian national team member. Yet here he was, sidelined by a younger player who was arguably less technically skilled. His mentality came apart, he talked shite about Fabregas to the Brazilian media, and he left the next year.

Was his progress visible? Well, yes, but his mental state wasn't. But his mental state affected his play more than his natural skill level.
Players are in the 1% of egos. All their life they are the best, always the best, and the positive reinforcement they get from being the best doesn't prepare them for failure. And that's what the best players have, the ability to realize their skill, and take failure into account. This is important later.

quote:

---

On Saturday, it was the exact same issues as last season. Wilshere sat and pushed far too high, Arteta struggled to make up the ground, the opposition had vast gaps to exploit and an exposed defence to attack. The fullbacks struggled, just as they did through a lot of last season, as they had no passing option on account of Arteta’s having to cover the position of two players 10 yards away from where he would ideally be, because who knows where Wilshere was. From there, it was easier for Liverpool to double up on both fullbacks and draw the two centre backs out of position.

---

Again silly. Pool was pressing from about ten yards before the half-way line so as to coax Szczesny to play the ball out the back. Coutinho was tightly marking Wilshere, and there was little space to be had. Both Wilshere and Arteta did their best to move the ball, but 'Pool's defensive positioning was spot on.

quote:

---

Arteta came in for more criticism than Wilshere immediately following the game – mostly jibes about his mobility and struggles against Liverpool’s pace. Arteta isn’t perfect: he is slow and lacking the engine of the ‘top level’ defensive midfielders, and he has been known to play a little over-cautiously on the ball. He is a player who needs protecting and a bit of help, but with it he provides a valuable service which no other in the squad can do as well. Ramsey gives that help. Wilshere does not.

---

While true that Arteta needs a certain type of partner, Wilshere can't be discounted because of one game. That's a ridiculous assertion.

quote:

---

With Wilshere partnered by Mathieu Flamini, Arsenal lose a lot of their edge on the ball in midfield because they have one who is fairly average with the ball at his feet and another who, although far less limited, does not do enough practical and useful with it. In many games, that will not be the biggest of issues because even though they lose something without the first choice pair, most teams do not have enough to counterbalance that. But Bayern certainly do.

---

Again this is madness. In the last five games before Liverpool, he had 13 key passes, 1 goal and 3 assists. And he had the most telling moment of our first half against Liverpool with the lovely throughball to Monreal. All from central positions..

quote:

---

It is the case in so many areas. His lack of regard for defending is, of course, the standout. Beyond that, he still is not particularly adept at making himself available to receive the ball. He still holds onto the ball far too long in attacking areas. He still keeps dribbling until he gets fouled, tackled or forced into a move-killing sideways ball rather than play the earlier passes. His end product has shown improvement but it isn’t worth playing him in a central position where he damages the team’s setup for maybe 5-10 extra goals and assists each season.

---

He does hold onto the ball too long, just like Ramsey once did. And he isn't first choice at any central position, but his long term future is centrally, and when he gets the chance to play at AM he plays extremely well, a la Cardiff where he had an assist and five key passes. Before Ramsey's injury, he only played the full 90 10 times out of 28 games.

He's playing there because he has to.

quote:

---

Given the comparison with current Ramsey has been so pronounced, it makes sense to compare him to Ramsey in the time following his injury, given that is the stage Wilshere is in now. It took a while for Ramsey to recover his best self, but what was habitually visible was his constant work for the team and movement in front of goal and to receive the ball in midfield, which is not the case with Wilshere. The England International’s issues mainly emanate from a seeming unwillingness to actually use his brain. Slow progress is to be expected and understood, but that there has been so very little is deeply concerning.

Ramsey had similar problems with being slow to release the ball and often losing it, but he has always had an altruism and intelligence on the pitch that Wilshere never has. Wilshere, at the moment, is an individual around whom the team has to mould itself. The problem for Wilshere at this point is that Arsenal have better players to build around and he simply does not yet give nearly enough to warrant being the centre of all things.

---

Finally the author says something I agree can actually agree with. Ramsey was rewarded for running around and committing himself to the cause, but let's not pretend they are similar players. Wilshere is like the rest of the no 10s on this team, seeking to face the game head on with the ball at his feet. Ramsey is our only midfielder who actually makes runs without the ball, which accounts for the difference in their production. They are different players, and need to be treated differently.

To Wilshere's credit, he has been willing to play wherever he is required. He just wants to play. He has been almost as versatile as Ramsey was last season, when we had less cover. Wilshere is a player who you build a team around, but I think he understands that he isn't good enough yet, since he hasn't bitched and moaned about Ramsey's rise, which has placed him on the bench as a utility player.

quote:

---

For now, that leaves Wilshere in a purgatorial state. Either he becomes the team’s man or… who knows? Time is on Wilshere’s side. There are no questions about his ability. My hope at the start of this season was that he would shed the ‘Star Player Syndrome’ with the signing of Özil and Ramsey’s rise, but the signs have not been particularly encouraging. Wilshere is his own main obstacle, but we are at the point now where it is fair to worry whether or not it is an obstacle he will overcome.

---

The only thing he has right is that Wilshere is his own obstacle, but I don't think Wilshere has played any worse than Ramsey did before Ramsey finally blossomed last year. In terms of Wilshere learning, Ramsey seemed obtuse at times, trying back heel after failed back heel, dribbling into pressure, missing opportunities for key passes by holding onto the ball for too long. And then suddenly he got it. Wilshere will too, as the evidence points to his ultimate adaptability.

The fact that Wilshere bounced back from major failures and has adapted to his role in the team points to his eventual coming good, just like Ramsey. He just needs to continue to play, and build confidence from each performance.

quote:

---

crazy4lsu

---

Crazy good analysis. One game means nothing in the grand scheme of a season or for a further plan.

I'll read it in class tomorrow... only way itll keep my attention is if I'm trying to distract myself from a lecture