Mails: Arsenal fans are pretty happy this summer…

If you have anything to add, you know what to do – mail us at theeditor@football365.com

 

Arsenal’s summer going pretty well, thanks
Interesting to read Yash’s thoughts on Arsenal’s transfer business so far.

1) Completely agree, although upgrading from ‘Good’ to ‘Great’ addition. Lacazette offers us a mobile goalscoring striker. What he allows us is a Plan B where Sanchez isn’t moved into a forward role, meaning we can get the best of both worlds

2) In midfield we currently have Xhaka/Ramsey as the starting two. I would argue that Elneny is as good as the Manchesters’ back-ups for example (Fellani, Carrick, Fernandinho, Fernando, Delph). And Coquelin is okay, his numbers are good he just doesn’t understand positioning. I think only Tottenham really have more strength in depth in the middle of the park. Plus we have Ainsley Maitland-Niles (newly promoted to first team) who looks pretty good, Jeff-Reine who has played well when brought in and Bielek who has played mostly in midfield.

While I would welcome a £45m addition in this area, the reality is that we don’t want to spend £45m for a third player when our new formation allows for two. You can’t just keep buying players in case of injury.

3) The following players can play CB in a three: Kosc, Per, Holding, Chambers (hopefully), Monreal, Gabriel, Sead, Bielek.

That’s plenty for me. If we lose Chambers (CB/RB) then I’ll start thinking about worrying.

However, on the goalkeeper issue, completely agree. Selling Sir Szczesny is a bad bit of business. I can only hope that Arsene has a big plan for Cech’s replacement at the end of the season as Cech slowly declined over last season. He is in no way a bad goalkeeper, but not elite.

So far, so good for our summer business. Provided we don’t lose Ozil/Chambers/Sanchez/Giroud I am relatively comfortable with what we’ve got so far. For the Europa League, we have some very good youth players, shout out to Reiss Nelson in particular, at the moment I expect to help make up the numbers.

I am not pretending everything is perfect. But for us, this summer has been a breath of fresh air.
Rob A (Wenger getting bullish over Sanchez makes a nice change) AFC

 

Arsenal reasons to be cheerful
With all the talk of Sanchez leaving and the dozen other typical Arsenal rumour mills going around, I had a moment of clarity and realised – this is perhaps the first season where I am mildly content with where we are at this point of summer. With this in mind, I decided to write four (obviously) reasons for an Arsenal fan to be positive for the upcoming season:

1) Injuries. Currently we only have Cazorla as a major long-term injury issue. At his age and with his record, however sad it is, and however wonderful he may be, he simply cannot be relied on and needs replacing as a priority in this window (Rabiot as part of the Sanchez-PSG deal?). Everyone always goes on about our injury record and it has been poor, usually resulting in our capitulation just after Christmas. With no Champions League, and all our main rivals for the League playing, I suspect (hope) that we could reap the benefits more so of a healthier, fuller squad to fight for the league. We are, after all, the only club who has had to balance the Champions League every season for the past 15 years. I never wish injury on any player, but hopefully it will slow the teams around us down- especially Spurs- because they do look scary and I don’t like talking about it.

2) Early business. Usually now is the time when everyone is nervous about a Fabregas or Van Persie leaving. It drags on all summer until the season begins and then they go. With Sanchez, we have already got ourselves a top-quality replacement with plenty of time for further acquisitions during the window. Lacazette can play with or without Sanchez, and with or without Giroud – who will have a big role to play should he decide to stay. Kolasnic is a solid buy, although I did not think Monreal’s season was as bad as many say, he is getting older and a replacement on a free was good business. Sanchez can stay or go (aslong as it is abroad) if we can get good money and have time to reinforce further. Lemar from what I saw was great last season, but the £40-50m previously discussed was about right in this market, not the silly £60m+ being discussed now. If he was a priority, why have we left it until half Monaco’s first team have already been sold to enter talks? We are in a good position that we have addressed our most pressing issue of a goalscorer (three seasons late), however, with or without Sanchez, we are still a long way behind City (potentially), Chelsea, and dare I say it United. If we are to really (and I mean really) compete for the title, we need more quality across the first team. Koscielny cant play every game anymore, and Holding can hardly be expected (Callum Chambers syndrome). Manolas (eternally), Sokratis, and Vin Dijk have been mentioned and would be fantastic playing in either a central two or three. As mentioned early, CM is an issue for me. I rate Ramsey highly, and Xhaka improved a lot, but they are not Santi’s quality and are both form players with injuries and a mistake in them. Add that with a top RW to sweeten Theo and potentially Ox (I hope he stays) leaving, we would be on par with the best in England. A bit more youth wouldn’t hurt (what happened there), Dembele (Ousmanne or Moussa) would be lovely.

3) Getting rid of the deadwood. I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Sczeczny, Gibbs, Walcott, and especially Wilshere, but the time is up. We need to be more ruthless and demand more from our fringe players, City and Chelsea would have gotten rid a long time ago. That being said, I still fear Wilshere will get a good move and become a world beater – call me romantic. We can get fair money for these players before they regress any further and replace the positions with players who will really push for a first team place. These types of actions are exactly what I hoped finishing out of the top four would catalyse in Arsene and the board, and they seem to be finally acting.

4) Settled squad. Other than Sanchez, all of our core first-teamers for the first time in recent memory seem settled and content. Perhaps a mixture of not having as many world-class players as we used to, and the silly money of this window has helped. Lack of interest in Ozil (strange) and poor second-half season form for Bellerin have averted those possible crises. A lot of clubs around us are going through a transformation phase, City, Chelsea and United are all entering year two of their manager’s tenure and were all in need of a reboot when they arrived. Personally, I think we have a better first team and squad than Liverpool, and you never know what way summer will go for Spurs. With Arsene having signed (good news, he is a) my hero b) a club legend and c) who was available that you were planning on replacing him) and that whole debarcle having very swiftly quietened down, we have a solid platform on which we can build and all get behind. He is doing and saying all the right things in terms of transfers to appease the fans, so hopefully this will help turn the Library back into Highbury. As a Gold member who can only get tickets for mid table games, it was embarassing to be a part of a times last year, and surely affects the players and manager.

What do you think?
Oli, AFC, Bermondsey

 

Wenger right on Sanchez
I really enjoyed the article on Alexis Sanchez this morning and the diminishing fear of the Bosman free transfer. I’d actually take it one step further and suggest that Arsenal should actually be looking forward to the free transfer. Now, I say this not to suggest that Sanchez is anything other than a wonderful player, rather, if you look at the facts, it is likely to be an arrangement that suits every party.

Sanchez was bought out of his contract for £35m in 2014 to a four-year contract. He was 25 when he signed and be 29 when it expires. Arsenal paid him £170k p/w for the duration of his contract which ran pretty much during his peak years as a player. Were he to fulfil that contract, they will not merely lose an asset, they will also free up a salary commitment of £8.82m per year, which is significant. However, the real benefit of not renewing the contract is that he is supposedly demanding £300k per week. Assuming this is true, Arsenal are actually avoiding a £15.5m salary hit per year – as this this what it would cost to extend his contract. They are effectively saving that money to do with as they see fit. They are also not spending it on a player with very little resale value and who is likely to decline (or at best maintain) his level of performance. It makes both football and financial sense. The also maintain one of their star performers for another season and avoid selling him to a rival (i.e. weakening themselves and strengthening a competitor). All in all, having him see out his contract makes a lot of sense to me.

In terms of the other parties – well, Sanchez himself gets to pick where he wants to go, the team that he goes to does not have to pay a fee and, because of the lack of fee, the club will likely be able to afford his doubling in wages. Both he and the club he signs for benefit from this position. Given this scenario, why would any club pay upwards of £60m to buy a guy who will be 29 in December out of a contract that has one year to run? It would be crazy to do this.

Considering all this, I just think that the free transfer next summer works well for all parties, and wish the media would stop obsessing over the transfer. Then again, ‘man fulfils contract’ does not grab any headlines. Wenger has got this one right for me – there should be no problems at all in letting a player fulfil his contract and walk away for free.
Lee

 

Man United have got it exactly right
In response to Posova (pessimistic) Andrew, I would argue that instead of ‘focusing blindly on one player’ United are actually doing the right thing in the transfer market by going after players the manager has identified who he felt would improve the squad. And if you believed the media coverage, United seemed to be focused solely on Morata and then Lukaku turns up.

Instead of just signing players for the sake of it, Mourinho has identified what the team needs and has instructed Woodward to get and get those players. Why didn’t United go after James or Silva? Maybe because Mourinho didn’t want those players. He needed a wide man who was willing to track back – as talented as James is, he doesn’t strike me as the kind of chap who is going to do this.

Maybe, just maybe, after years of blindly flailing about in the transfer market, there is a plan. Instead of chasing BS targets like Neymar and Bale, we just get what the manager wants and go from there!
Conrad Wiacek, MUFC

 

…I actually think the opposite to Posova’s mailbox post this morning with regards to United’s transfer strategy, because it’s actually refreshing for Jose/Ed to A) have a transfer strategy at all (versus the LVG/Moyes scatter-gun) and B) be willing to deviate from it by having multiple options for each area of reinforcement.

Everyone knows Griezamnn was United’s No1 target and had it not been for Atletico’s transfer ban he’d probably be working on an over-elaborate handshake with Pogba as we speak. But Grizi made his intentions clear and United immediate flipped attention to Morata. Then when Real became impossible to deal with, the Lukaku deal was done in days. If that’s not an example of having multiple targets I don’t know what is?

The Lindelof deal had been in the pipeline for a while undoubtedly, but again United had been widely reported in exploring options for Will Keane and a rather unlikely push for Varane. At CDM our clear priority is Eric Dier, (I don’t agree with it, but it’s a fact) but we’ve also been credited with interest in Fabinho, Bakayoko and more heavily Namanja Matic.

Perisic is perhaps the outlier in this debate, as a back-up option hasn’t really been reported on, but given how awkward Inter are being, it really wouldn’t surprise me if we wrapped up a deal for someone else just as quickly as we did with Lukaku.

So actually, for every base Jose wanted to cover this summer (striker, winger, CDM, centre back) we’ve probably explored deals for 3-4 names in each of those positions. Which is exactly the right thing to do given how difficult clubs both domestic and abroad can be when ‘big’ English clubs come knocking. Question the names listed and player archetypes Jose wants by all means, but the strategy is as far from ‘focussing blindly on one player’ as you could get.
Dave (watch us cave to Inter’s demands now) MUFC

 

Lucas? What did I miss?
Have I missed something or did Lucas only ever have one good game in every 20?? To me he was the guy that would always be sent on with four minutes to go and Liverpool needing to hang on for a draw or a win. He’d then proceed to give the ball or a foul away at every available opportunity and doing the exact opposite to what he was bought on for. I’m a Villa fan and he really should be playing for us he’s that bad.
Duck

 

You missed a lot, fella…
Ferg, Cork writing about Lucas writes like a man who doesn’t seem to understand that professional football is somewhat different to a gang of kids all chasing a ball in the park. Every time you receive the ball is not suddenly an opportunity to make a 40-yard assist or dribble past three players.

Makelele only scored two goals for Chelsea. He must have been s**t.
Dave, Amsterdam

 

The worst few seconds of football I have ever seen…
Re Bob, Dublin, and the worst few seconds of football witnessed.

I’ve got three to rival Lucas’ ineptitude:

1) Simon Grayson at Old Trafford. Playing for Leicester in about 97, the future Sunderland manager attempted to return a long kick from Schmeichel back where it came from. Completely misjudging it, Grayson ended up missing the header which left him bent over about 40 yards from his own goal. The ball hit the ground in front of him, came up and smacked him in the face – taking all the pace off it and leaving a clear run on goal for Giggs or some other Manc to finish it off.

2) Steven Naismith at White Hart Lane. This was a couple of seasons ago, live on a Sunday afternoon. Naismith received the ball on the left wing for Everton, and ran down the line with it…but not quite in a line, instead running the ball out of play on the left touchline as if he’d never played before, to the enjoyment of the home fans in front of him.

3) Antonio Nunez at Goodison Park. Benitez’s first season. Derby. 1-0 to Everton with about half an hour, maybe 20 minutes left. Nunez comes on to the pitch in his favoured right wing position and receives the ball. His second touch is to knock it out of his feet and chase after it to the byline and get a cross in…instead he kicks it 40 yards straight out of play – the ball had hit the advertising boards before he’d even started running after it…

Honourable mention for Paul McShane, who could easily fill a top 10 on his own, but nothing quite as bad as those three comes to mind.
Rick (video evidence may not bear out some of these memories, but I prefer them this way)

 

What hope for the English?
I read the gossip column this morning and saw Arsenal were planning to offload some players. You can understand why they’d offload those players tho. But one curious thing is that the majority of the names mentioned are English. Of the players in danger of losing their place at Man Utd most are English, Chelsea have sold most of their English youngsters, Milner and Henderson are the only English players who look like they might have a future at Liverpool. Tottenham are the only exception to this trend. Man city barely have guaranteed English starters. Would’ve thrown this out to the mailbox as a question but it;s been talked about a bit too much. It;s a topic that’s been touched on severally. But I can’t think of any other country where the local talent is in danger like it is in England. Despite the effort of the youngsters can they really make it in this current climate?
Adetayo Kujebe

 

Mixed football is a necessity…for now
While I think that Lewis, Busby Way, is attempting to find an appropriate solution on the comparison of male and female football, I think it could be misconstrued. Why handicap female footballers because of this perceived (I haven’t been able to research and verify anything on the topic of men vs women in terms of a biological comparison of strength, stamina etc.) difference?

Men and women who are physically handicapped in para-athletics are not restricted in the distances that they must cover (although I’m open to be proven otherwise). If you applied this, imagine the psychological impact it could have? “Oh course we want you to play the sport, but we don’t think you’re capable of playing to the established standards of it.”

I totally agree with you, though, Lewis. Whoever is playing sport is fantastic and that’s what we should be promoting. Making comparisons between a well-established infrastructure of the male game and a recent update to the women’s game can create great difficulties. It’ll take time. We may not be alive to see it reach its peak, but we should all give our support to the development of the game for a collective gain.
Phil, London

 

…In response to Name withheld from this mornings mailbox – this is simply the way of society currently. It is socially unacceptable to have boys only clubs or teams. Our county ran many sport courses recently to get kids to either try sports or a new sport, all groups were either mixed or girls only. Similar situation with cubs and scouts being mixed but brownies and guides being girls only.

As blokes I think we have to accept this in the short term as a backlash from the many years of limited opportunities for girls but going forward as you say it must be equal opportunities for all. Rather than running football courses solely for girls to allow them opportunity to catch up in future they should have mixed courses for lower skilled/late-comers to the sport. Judging when that transition should happen is a thorny issue.
Spence Gooner

 

…I know F365 doesn’t always like to keep things rumbling in the mailbox but gender equality is a huge issue so I think I’m going to continue. And hey – you started it.

It’s great to hear from someone with so much experience of the game and positive that the FA are allowing girls to take part in male leagues. Interesting though that he sees this as an “erosion” of the boys game with no boys only leagues left (I haven’t been able to verify this statement. Well, I haven’t tried yet)

The problem we have is that for a very long time in this country football was a male sport. Not male dominated, just male. Boys have never struggled to find a football team to play in and I doubt they ever will. Girls on the other hand have had to fight for the right to even play football and now are trying to find a level ground with boys which – if they can compete – no one should care about. But we are currently only talking about 68 teams made up of ‘elite’ players joining the boys leagues at U10 and U12 (as per the Guardian). So if you take away girls only leagues and girls can’t get into those 68 teams then where do the girls play? And we’re still only talking about youth football and girls teams participating against boys teams, not proper mixed football. It would be nice to not need girls only leagues but at the moment they’re a necessity.

Women’s football is on the up but the fact is that opportunities in football for the average boy are far greater than for the average girl. And the older you get and the higher in the game you go the worse it gets. How many women on boards of top footballs clubs?How many women commentators?

Gender equality may be a two way street but football’s men are currently parked across it.
Ashley (and don’t get me started on United’s lack of a women’s team) Metcalfe

 

…So the Chairman of one of the largest youth leagues in the county, a former referee and club Chairman has to ask why boys can’t play in girls only leagues, and states that gender equality is a two-way street.

Really? Which part of girls only football don’t you get?

Yes, gender equality is a two-way street. But let’s actually have some gender equality before using it as stick with which to beat girls only football.

Look at it this way. Every other league has up until recently been, essentially, a boys only league.

The reason there are girls only leagues is because gender equality has not yet been achieved, and there was a definite need for girls only leagues. Why should boys play in girls only leagues when there are mixed leagues to play in? And as the Chairman of the one of the largest youth leagues in the country, how about putting more of your efforts into doing away with mixed leagues, girls only leagues, and just have leagues! When we can simply talk about football and football players, rather than men’s or women’s football, or girls or boys football then we may actually achieve gender equality.
Paul Watson, exiled Shrimper living in Surrey (and hope!)