Jul 282009
 

In a match against the unpronounceable Szombathelyi Haladas in Hungary last night, our strikers proved that there is life after Adebayor, a Van Persie penalty adding to braces from Eduardo and Bendtner in a 5-0 cruise.

With many debating exactly where, if anywhere, Wenger should spend his now found cash, it was perfect timing, especially coming in the wake of a stunning second half performance by Carlos Vela in the Gold Cup final, as he inspired Mexico to a 5-0 drubbing of USA. I defy anyone who saw it not to be excited.

All this leaves Wenger with an array of attacking options. If the pre-season friendlies are anything to go by, it seems likely we’ll be playing three forwards, two roving behind a spearhead, and with options spreading beyond the four already mentioned to Arshavin, Nasri, Walcott and Rosicky. Honestly, I’m not convinced we need anyone else up there.

However, the formation does emphasise how much we still need another central midfielder. With two of the three forwards coming in from the flanks, the remaining three midfielders are quite narrow, effectively all playing in the centre. And whereas three forwards from the list above is a tantalising prospect, three from Cesc, Song, Diaby, Denilson, and Ramsey is less frightening for the opposition.

And heading even further back , the squad is dangerously close to complete overhaul. The rumours of Toure moving to City are getting stronger, with Wenger even intimating that a deal is close. Assuming Senderos is also on his way out, as the boss suggested last week, and that Silvestre isn’t going to fare any better with his legs another year older, and we’re left with Gallas, Vermaelen and Djourou. Meanwhile, if Eboue adds to the departing African contingent, then Sagna is increasingly without cover at right back.

If all of these exits happen (and I’m yet to be convinced, especially with Eboue), then not only will we be short of numbers at the back, but there will be a great pressure on Wenger to spend – with City signing Ade and Toure for a combined fee of around £40m, everyone will know we have cash available.

But we shouldn’t panic. Wenger often leaves his signings until deadline day, and I could very easily see him relying on the group of Gallas, Vermaelen, Clichy, Sagna and Djourou before picking up a bargain at the last minute. Will it frustrate fans to see it happen that way? Of course. Would it end up with us getting value for money? Probably.

One thing is for sure – it will be an interesting month or so. Wenger’s no fool – he knows he failed to replace our central midfield last summer, he isn’t about to repeat the mistake with our backline.

Have faith.

  18 Responses to “Forwards in fine fettle, defenders disappearing”

  1. yeah he knows he didn’t replace flamini but still hasn’t done anything about it. all the money will go to the board and stay there.

  2. Sam – Your comment reflects your ignorance of the facts. The board have not issued dividends for many years. They do not pocket any cash left over from transfers and operations. The money is either available for Wenger to spend, or it has already been earmarked for or spent on boosting existing contracts or servicing debt.

    At any rate, the desire to be conservative with cash is not based on the board’s greed as many would like to believe.

  3. Hangeland,Cattermole,and Huntelaar.
    And we’re sorted!

  4. Cattermole? Surely you jest, Gra! I do like a fan with a sense of humour.

  5. to be frank this arsenal club does not know what they are doing. feeder club nasty club and wierd club. keep this transfer policy and win nothing. ARSENAL ARE SMALL CLUB FACT.

  6. sam – Wait until the end of the summer to judge. As for ‘money going to the board’, chengiskhan has it spot on.

    Gra, none of those three are coming. Hangeland is too slow and is just the media’s favourite link to us (with Yaya Toure), Huntelaar is 26 and isn’t what we need up front – we have plenty of established players so the only thing I can see is a youngster coming in. And as for Cattermole, he just isn’t very good.

    dennis, you are clearly a troll, as no fan refers to his club as a ‘nasty club’. And generally, whenever anyone finishes their outlandish statement with ‘FACT’, what precedes it is anything but.

  7. If Sendeross goes then I think Bassong more to Arsene’s style than Hangeland.Central midfield is critical. It isn’t that Denilson and co are useless, Infact they are quite good, but thats not good enough to win things as we saw last season. I dont understand why we didn’t go hard for Melo who really is top drawer.
    A striker would depend on whether Wenger sees Bendtner as coming of the bench or actually leading the attack. Personally I dont think he’s quite the finished aricle even tho’ I do believe he’ll be there in a year or two, Which suggests Huntelaar short term

  8. pete. if yoy are not a SMALL CLUB THEN WIN SOMTHING AND LETS CALL YOU A BIG CLUB LIKE UNITED BARCELONA AND MILAN.EVERTON MANC ASTON VILLA AND HULL ARE ALL SAMLL CULB BCOS THEY ARE NOT WINNING ANYTHING. MAYBE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SMALL CLUB YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND PAL.BIG CLUBS ARE UNITED MILAN BARCELONA CHELSEA ALL BCOS OF WHAT THEY HAVE ARCHIEVE IN PAST FEW YEARS FACT
    TRY TO UNDERSTAND. ARSENAL ARE SAMLL CLUB.

  9. Ah, therein lies the naivety, shown by you, Peter Kenyon and Garry Cook.

    Being a big club is not defined by trophies over a small period, but over a very long period. It is the reason Liverpool are still a big club despite not winning their own league in twenty years.

    It is also the reason Real Madrid can attract the world’s biggest stars despite the fact that they’ve gone out in the last 16 of the Champions League for the last four years, and clearly aren’t the best side in Spain.

    By your definition, Barcelona are the biggest club in Spain, and that is why your definition, in my opinion, is wrong.

    And you contradict yourself by mentioning Milan as a big club, despite their non-appearance in last season’s CL.

  10. Dennis, thank you for your well put together, thoughtful, legible…..

    Ah, forget it.

  11. pete. i know you do not know what football is all about. football is all about HISTORY.players play football to win things so that they can remember what they have than when they actually retire. if you do not have HISTORY in your career as a football player then you are not one of the biggest players in the wolrd.the likes of ronaldo, zidane, messi, kaka, chalton, cantona and maldini all spring to mind. all these players have won major trophys in thier club and that why they are call the best players.
    NOWADAYS FOOTBALL IS ALL ABOUT TROPHYS AND HISTORY. TROPHYS BRINGS MONEY TO CLUB. AND BASE ON YOUR LOGIC AC MILAN IS HISTORY WITH 7 CL. REAL IS HISTROY AND THAT WHY THEY ARE ATTRACTING BIG PLAYERS. THE LIKES OF KAKA AND RONALDO ARE ALL GOING TO MADRID BCOS THEY KNOW THE CLUB HAVE HISTORY AND ARE THE BIGGEST CLUB IN THE WORLD WITH 9CL. ANOTHER LOGIC IS CHELSEA WHO WERE NO WHERE TO BE CALLED BIGGEST CLUB BUT GUESS WHAT, THEY HAVE WON TROPHYS WITH PAST FEW YEARS AND THEY ARE NOW CALLED ONE OF THE BIGGEST CLUB IN THE WOLRD. AND IF YOU KNOW THIS MANCITY OFFERED 100MIL FOR KAKA AND HE REJECTED IS BCOS THEY HAVE NO HISTORY AND TROPHYS. THEN WHY DID HE CHOOSE TO PLAY FOR REAL INSTEAD OF MANCITY. ANSWER ME PETE.

  12. Dennis,

    Realise you are totally contradicting yourself. You started off saying that you are only a big club if you are winning things. Pete correctly told you that you were wrong, saying by your definition Real Madrid and AC Milan weren’t big clubs. You’ve gone back and told him that he doesn’t know football, they are big clubs because they have history. Which is the entire point that Pete was making, but a point you did not make in your first post.

    You really should have added Henry to your list of players.

  13. Alan, thank you for setting Dennis straight more succinctly than I ever could! With Dennis explaining that Milan and Real Madrid are big clubs despite recent struggles, he has effectively admitted that Arsenal are too, since Wenger has brought more trophies to the club than any other manager in our history.

    Also Dennis, if you could refrain from over-capitalisation, that would be great. Shouting doesn’t make your point (whatever it actually is) come across any better, quite the opposite.

  14. alan the first post of pete comment he said being a big club does not define trophys . IN THAT STATEMENT WHAT DEON THAT MEAN PLS ANSWER ME.

  15. pete how many yeras did it take chelsea to win trophys when abromivich came. you are saying, it does not define trophys in short period so how many years did it take chelsea to do that.

  16. Dennis, you are (perhaps deliberately) misquoting me. I did not say being a big club is not defined by trophies, I said that being a big club is defined by those trophies over a MUCH larger timescale than five years.

    Chelsea are not as big a club as Liverpool, for example, despite their recent successes. And anyone who has seen how players consider Real Madrid the best club you can join would see that they are the ‘biggest’ club in Spain, despite Barca’s dominance last season.

    My point is this – you can cease to be a big club, but not in a few years, unless you do a Leeds and fall through the league. Examples of clubs that have fallen would be Forest and Derby, who are no longer big clubs despite their illustrious history.

    But your point about Chelsea is exactly the point I’m trying to get over to you – it takes more than a billionaire coming in, making your team his plaything, and bringing short term success, to make Chelsea a big club. They are currently a successful club, but one of the biggest five in the world (brand-wise, as Peter Kenyon would put it)? Absolutely not. They do not have the tradition, the history. They can’t even balance the books in a single season, and if their benefactor left, they’d be right back where they were before he arrived – in the mire, and trophyless.

    I think your idea of a long time in football is a lot less than mine. For example, before the conception of the Premiership, United hadn’t won the league since 1967. Did they stop being a big club in the intervening 25 years? According to you, yes, as you consider Arsenal to be a small club just FIVE years after we became the first club in 100 years to win the league unbeaten.

    I see it differently – United never stopped being a big club, neither have Liverpool now. And as the second most successful club of the Premiership era, I can’t see how Arsenal have either.

  17. thanks pete no i understand thank you

  18. i said now not no

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.