Team v Arsenal - North London Derby

[Bobbins]

Wenger backtracking. He is such a dick

Wenger on Sanchez: "He feels he can defy the medical people because he is so keen to play. I don't know if he can. I will see today." #AFC

He does it every year, with whatever player happens to be on form for them most. Ramsey, Giroud, Walcott, Wilshere, Carzorla, doesn't matter. He invents an injury or makes an existing one out to be much worse, then there's always a miraculous recovery on matchday.

Don't know why he fucking bothers, it's not like Poch will pick his team based on Wenger's line-up, the smirking paedo bell-end cock-nosed knobjockey Professor ****.

 

[thinktank]

He does it every year, with whatever player happens to be on form for them most. Ramsey, Giroud, Walcott, Wilshere, Carzorla, doesn't matter. He invents an injury or makes an existing one out to be much worse, then there's always a miraculous recovery on matchday.

Don't know why he fucking bothers, it's not like Poch will pick his team based on Wenger's line-up, the smirking paedo bell-end cock-nosed knobjockey Professor ****.

"The smirking pedo" fucking

Now there's a pub name for ya.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

chadli playing means eriksen has to revert to a position in which he's totally ineffective. unless chadders fancies a go on the right.

That is not factually correct, and I have done a lot of research this week into Eriksen's productivity and at some point, if I can get my head round it I'm going to try and post something coherent on the subject.

What I will say is, following the research, I am now very much leaning with you that Eriksen is probably marginally better from the left. But there's really not much in it, as the truth is, he has a knack of scoring wherever he plays. This season he has scored more from the centre (and even when playing left his goals have often come from central positions) but has scored a higher percentage of goals in ratio to starting left, than right. But last season it was the opposite.

What really decides it, is if Dembele can start producing goals/assists, because at the moment Chadli provides more and he needs to play left to be productive. Meaning the better compromise productively is Chadli left, Eriksen centre and Lamela right. But I like Dembele in that central role, it gives us a better spine, someone who is a tenacious presser and tackler, who can hold the ball up and take players on and who drops back and gets involved in midfield when it's required.

If Dembele can start chipping in productively, it would allow Erksen to play left, Lamela right and with Kane up top we have a bloody good talented but diverse set of 4, all hard working (all of which have their foibles too accepted) footballers.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Thats your opinion.....i happen to rate Walker, infact i love Walker and don't really care if you don't....more importantly Poch is trying to sell ChirIches NOT Walker, so we all know who he rates more..Poch works closely with both , not you, so i would trust his judgement over yours all day..

Love is blind.

 

[Blake Griffin]

That is not factually correct, and I have done a lot of research this week into Eriksen's productivity and at some point, if I can get my head round it I'm going to try and post something coherent on the subject.

What I will say is, following the research, I am now very much leaning with you that Eriksen is probably marginally better from the left. But there's really not much in it, as the truth is, he has a knack of scoring wherever he plays. This season he has scored more from the centre (and even when playing left his goals have often come from central positions) but has scored a higher percentage of goals in ratio to starting left, than right. But last season it was the opposite.

What really decides it, is if Dembele can start producing goals/assists, because at the moment Chadli provides more and he needs to play left to be productive. Meaning the better compromise productively is Chadli left, Eriksen centre and Lamela right. But I like Dembele in that central role, it gives us a better spine, someone who is a tenacious presser and tackler, who can hold the ball up and take players on and who drops back and gets involved in midfield when it's required.

If Dembele can start chipping in productively, it would allow Erksen to play left, Lamela right and with Kane up top we have a bloody good talented but diverse set of 4, all hard working (all of which have their foibles too accepted) footballers.

i'm interested to see how you're going to skew these stats to show he's equally productive from either position because the two aren't even close. i haven't once debated that the majority of his goals come from a central area but he gets those goals by arriving from his position of the left, when he starts at 10 he rarely gets anything. it's not even just the tangible output, it's the eye-test and my eyes says that when he plays at 10 he's too far ahead of the play, he's rarely found and he ends up being a complete non-event.

 

[Blake Griffin]

anyway, i think this'll be the team -

lloris
walker fazio vertonghen rose
mason bentaleb
lamela dembele eriksen
kane

subs: vorm, dier, davies, stambouli, townsend, chadli, soldado​

 

[DaSpurs]

I'm just gonna jog your memory, but Dembele played most of the game against Chelsea. He came on for Mason quite early on.

Indeed, and he played well in that one. But his role in that match was one which would be entirely different from the one being suggested by many here for this match.

In that game he gave us a pivot in deep midfield. He was a foundation who upon receiving the ball, Chelsea's diminutive attacking midfielders and Fabregas stupidly collapsed on him (it would have taken four more of them to take the ball of him), he we would easily shield the ball and play it back out into space. That is all that he did, and he did it well. But he did not provide us with creativity or forward influence (created zero chances and made zero key passes in a match in which we scored five goals, and also failed the one "take on" he attempted), and he didn't help defensively at all as he failed in all five tackles he attempted (against Chelsea's diminutive attackers, something which Arsenal has loads of all over the pitch).

So no, I don't all believe in the simple overarching statement that just because one player did well in one game that they'll do well in all other games; nor do I think he is the solution to creativity people are asking for in this game, nor do I think his physicality is useful in defense as he doesn't even manage to attempt to slow down ball-carriers as he's too slow to catch them, and I think the latter there would be entirely exacerbated by how extremely rapid this Arsenal team is.

 

[DaSpurs]

chadli playing means eriksen has to revert to a position in which he's totally ineffective. unless chadders fancies a go on the right.

Except that very setup is exactly how we scored on Arsenal last time?

Eriksen would be perfect for the No 10 spot in this match, as his ability to disrupt passing from deep central midfield to force the ball out to the flanks and allow our press to sit higher is essential (and therefore not even remotely ineffective). This is particularly important now that Arsenal managed to have found an influential defensive mid, and we need to choke off his supply forward to Ozil and Cazorla and force them out to the flanks where we can have a better chance of pressing higher in numbers, and of course also forcing their pacey wingers to sit a bit deeper.

 

[Sandros Shiny Head]

I have more faith that if Walker messes things up that he can recover. When Chiriches makes a bad pass he is usually done for pace.

Against Arsenal we need speed in the team to handle their fast players like Ox, Walcott, etc...

So yeah, Walker for me.

I agree, but this is the infuriating thing for me, too often Walker can easily catch the guy but for some reason decides to grab him and get booked instead

 

[dondo]

i'm interested to see how you're going to skew these stats to show he's equally productive from either position because the two aren't even close. i haven't once debated that the majority of his goals come from a central area but he gets those goals by arriving from his position of the left, when he starts at 10 he rarely gets anything. it's not even just the tangible output, it's the eye-test and my eyes says that when he plays at 10 he's too far ahead of the play, he's rarely found and he ends up being a complete non-event.

It's not a big issue for me where eriksen plays he has a free role if he is on the left or in the middle

 

[Bus-Conductor]

i'm interested to see how you're going to skew these stats to show he's equally productive from either position because the two aren't even close. i haven't once debated that the majority of his goals come from a central area but he gets those goals by arriving from his position of the left, when he starts at 10 he rarely gets anything. it's not even just the tangible output, it's the eye-test and my eyes says that when he plays at 10 he's too far ahead of the play, he's rarely found and he ends up being a complete non-event.

He has 5 goals from 14 "starts" from a central position this season. Three from a left "starting" position, but at least one of those was a free kick (west Brom), which makes the starting position irrelevant. Against Hull he started left, got moved into a deeper CM2R position then ended the game (and scored) from the ACM/10 position. Which means effectively, he has scored 1 goal from a true left default position (Everton).

So your theory that he is ineffective from a central position is plain wrong. Last year you could make a good case for him being more effective from the left.

What really matters now is that third attacking midfield choice between Chadli and Dembele, because that influences where Eriksen plays IMO, as I believe he is equally effective starting left or centrally.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I have more faith that if Walker messes things up that he can recover. When Chiriches makes a bad pass he is usually done for pace.

Against Arsenal we need speed in the team to handle their fast players like Ox, Walcott, etc...

So yeah, Walker for me.

The thing is though, Chiriches isn't slow either and on a few occasions has also recovered his own mistakes. And positionally, and it terms of reading the game defensively he's better than Walker. In terms of football, Walker has a reading age of about 8.

 

[DaSpurs]

It's not a big issue for me where eriksen plays he has a free role if he is on the left or in the middle

It does to me in this game, as an Eriksen free role with Theo Walcott on the same flank is the textbook definition of "mismatch." This would leave our left back entirely too exposed, and I do not like that scenario at all.

 

[Blake Griffin]

Except that very setup is exactly how we scored on Arsenal last time?

my recollection of that game was us pretty much sitting in a 442 with chadli right up alongside adebayor. that game was totally diferent to any other we've played this season anyway, imo it was the only game poch has adapted his way of playing in light of the opposition.

 

[DaSpurs]

my recollection of that game was us pretty much sitting in a 442 with chadli right up alongside adebayor. that game was totally diferent to any other we've played this season anyway, imo it was the only game poch has adapted his way of playing in light of the opposition.

That is true, Chadli did sit very high and the intent was the same to shuttle the passing out wide.

But Eriksen isn't even remotely "ineffective" from the No 10, and especially not in this match. There is overwhelming evidence that his presence there affects the passing from deep midfield even against the big sides with talented defensive mids, and that he forces the ball to the flank. He also keeps us moving from CAM better than any other option, and of course he has managed to score from there. Goals and assists are not the only criteria for "effectiveness," even if you do have an argument for him being "more productive" from the left.

Even so, I cannot believe anyone would want Eriksen playing a wide left free role with Theo Walcott on that flank therefore allowed to run unchecked at our left back. I'll certainly give you that you make a fair argument for Eriksen playing on the left in general, but in this match with that scenario that just sounds like a terrible, terrible idea.

 

[Mr Pink]

He has 5 goals from 14 "starts" from a central position this season. Three from a left "starting" position, but at least one of those was a free kick (west Brom), which makes the starting position irrelevant. Against Hull he started left, got moved into a deeper CM2R position then ended the game (and scored) from the ACM/10 position. Which means effectively, he has scored 1 goal from a true left default position (Everton).

So your theory that he is ineffective from a central position is plain wrong. Last year you could make a good case for him being more effective from the left.

What really matters now is that third attacking midfield choice between Chadli and Dembele, because that influences where Eriksen plays IMO, as I believe he is equally effective starting left or centrally.

I know we beat Chelsea, pretty impressively, without Dembele playing the advanced central role but I just like the look of our balance more with him in that position. Actually he played most of the game in the 'two' as Mason went off injured relatively early on.

I also don't think it matters too much were Eriksen is 'supposed' to be playing because he floats all over the place. His default position was on the left of the three against West Brom but you wouldn't of thought it looking at his touch map - he was everywhere.

I'd definitely persist with Dembele in the ten role and its a toss up between Chadli and Lamela depending on how that affects our fluidity and balance. Could Eriksen play nominally from the right? If he's interchanging and floating etc, I suppose it negates Chadli's influence if he plays from the right and obviously Lamela is better suited to that role.

All will become clearer over the next few weeks but I thought we look a stronger side with Dembele in the ten, like you say our spine looks stronger and if he could improve his end product we'd be on to a winner. We just don't look as flaky IMO.

 

[DaSpurs]

I know we beat Chelsea, pretty impressively, without Dembele playing the advanced central role but I just like the look of our balance more with him in that position. Actually he played most of the game in the 'two' as Mason went off injured relatively early on.

I also don't think it matters too much were Eriksen is 'supposed' to be playing because he floats all over the place. His default position was on the left of the three against West Brom but you wouldn't of thought it looking at his touch map - he was everywhere.

I'd definitely persist with Dembele in the ten role and its a toss up between Chadli and Lamela depending on how that affects our fluidity and balance. Could Eriksen play nominally from the right? If he's interchanging and floating etc, I suppose it negates Chadli's influence if he plays from the right and obviously Lamela is better suited to that role.

All will become clearer over the next few weeks but I thought we look a stronger side with Dembele in the ten, like you say our spine looks stronger and if he could improve his end product we'd be on to a winner. We just don't look as flaky IMO.

You have to take into account though that those two matches came against a League One side and a poorly performing West Brom. We don't have anything to suggest he would fare well there against stronger sides, which Eriksen has and most importantly we have overwhelming evidence that he has directly affected the passing of these sides from deep, and it led to two good results for us recently in our draw against Man U and our win against Chelsea.

And again, I'm not sure why we would want Dembele there who could not catch Coquelin to affect his supply to the middle, and of course thereby putting Eriksen on the flank against Walcott. This not only affords Arsenal more channels through which to walk, but Walcott is therefore receiving the ball higher up the pitch and in behind Eriksen playing a wide free role, thereby directly exposing the left back to Walcott. I just cannot understand why anyone is advocating this, as it sounds like suicide to me.

 

[Mr Pink]

You have to take into account though that those two matches came against a League One side and a poorly performing West Brom. We don't have anything to suggest he would fare well there against stronger sides, which Eriksen has and most importantly we have overwhelming evidence that he has directly affected the passing of these sides from deep, and it led to two good results for us recently in our draw against Man U and our win against Chelsea.

And again, I'm not sure why we would want Dembele there who could not catch Coquelin to affect his supply to the middle, and of course thereby putting Eriksen on the flank against Walcott. This not only affords Arsenal more channels through which to walk, but Walcott is therefore receiving the ball higher up the pitch and in behind Eriksen playing a wide free role, thereby directly exposing the left back to Walcott. I just cannot understand why anyone is advocating this, as it sounds like suicide to me.

Mate I think you're on to a loser with this, just because you don't rate the player. He's been very effective in the role and we've noticeably improved with him in there. We're winning the ball back higher up the pitch better as a result, and more often. Its made a pretty considerable difference in truth as sometimes Eriksen is a bit powder puff off the ball in those central areas and we lose that determination with the high press.

Its most definitely bringing a better balance and how anyone can't see that is absolutely beyond me. And of course he can get in Coquelin;s zone and affect him.

Dembele has shown over the years he's more than capable of playing against the best sides, and he's done similar for Fulham playing against United in the same advanced position - destroyed them at OT just before we signed him. So there is evidence as well mate.

 

[ClintEastwould]

Then there's the classic... Erection -tion -tion - tion Autocorrect.... Which could possibly happen. Maybe.

Yes, after 88 mins. With the goons crying in the away stand.

 

[dondo]

It does to me in this game, as an Eriksen free role with Theo Walcott on the same flank is the textbook definition of "mismatch." This would leave our left back entirely too exposed, and I do not like that scenario at all.

Works both ways doubt Walcott fancies tracking eriksen back either it not like chadli, lamela, or Townsend are any better defensively