Arsenal

[Chicog]

Probably anger because we end up lower than Spuds

Now you're just being silly.

Here's the problem in a nutshell:

[rijit]

Yeah but it was the unopposed 5 /6 yards run up that caused the problem.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Chicog]

This is grim reading:

In the 11 seasons researched from 2003-04 to 2013-14, Arsenal sustained 312 separate injuries, 100 more than Chelsea. Arsenal's total number of injuries was above the Premier League average in 10 out of the 11 campaigns, including each of the last seven completed seasons.
The trend is continuing, perhaps even accelerating, this year. With 25 injuries, Arsenal have had more than any other Premier League club since August.

Even more revealing, however, is the total number of days lost to significant injury. In the decade since 2004-05, Arsenal players have lost 13,161 days to injury. Only Newcastle have lost more at 13,344.
Yet the statistics become even starker when compared to Arsenal's main rivals, especially Chelsea. In that same period, Chelsea have lost first-team players for almost half the number of days of Arsenal at 7,217.

There are also significant differences with Liverpool at 9,287 days, Manchester City (10,053) and Everton (10,530). Once again, Tottenham and Manchester United are relatively high on this table at respectively 12,050 and 11,833 days, albeit still behind Arsenal.

This season, the trend is again set to continue. In terms of significant injuries (when a player is out for 10 days or more), Arsenal are behind only Newcastle and Manchester United of the 20 Premier League clubs. Yet add in every injury and they have already lost players this season for 874 days - more than any other Premier League club. Leaders Chelsea, by comparison, have so far lost players for only 256 days.

Arsenal had the highest number of days lost to significant injuries last season, in 2009-10 and 2007-08, as well as the second highest in 2011-12 and 2010-11.

Yet to me the answer is obvious:

According to Opta, Arsenal have been the most tackled team in the Premier League this season

Pass the &*$#ing ball quicker!

http://www.newindianexpress.com/sport/The-Truth-Behind-Arsenals-Injury-Record/2014/12/23/article2585012.ece?

[wilai]

^ Looks like they're taking your advice mate...... Most frequent passing combination on Sunday?......Szczesny to Giroud..... Hoofball at it's very best!

[Chicog]

^ Looks like they're taking your advice mate...... Most frequent passing combination on Sunday?......Szczesny to Giroud..... Hoofball at it's very best!

Awww not still smarting are you?

[wilai]

Injury time equaliser? Why would I be "smarting"? Result hasn't "ruined my bloody Xmas"....How about you Claude? 555555.

Edited December 24, 2014 by wilai

[Chicog]

Injury time equaliser? Why would I be "smarting"? Result hasn't "ruined my bloody Xmas"....How about you Claude? 555555.

That guy seems to be a perpetual moaner, can you imagine what it's like in his local?

"Oh <deleted> Claude, Shut the **** up!".

[wilai]

^ Doubt you'd get a word in with him TBH

[Chicog]

I bet his missus absolutely loves it when he goes to the football.

Gets the window cleaner round, etc.

[alfieconn]

Injury time equaliser? Why would I be "smarting"? Result hasn't "ruined my bloody Xmas"....How about you Claude? 555555.

That guy seems to be a perpetual moaner, can you imagine what it's like in his local?

"Oh <deleted> Claude, Shut the **** up!".

Give him his due, he seems to be at all the away games and imagine how much quieter it would be without him at the Emirates

[Chicog]

Give him his due, he seems to be at all the away games and imagine how much quieter it would be without him at the Emirates

Oh dear Alfie, you haven't heard the news.....

Hahahahahaha

[Chicog]

Anyway, you can all f--- off I'm going on holiday now, see you in January.

Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year!

[jellydog]

Giroud must not be scoring any strange these days.

[SantiSuk]

How to write yourself off as a fan favourite in one easy headbut.

What's the French for w&nker, Giroud. 3 games out at a crucial time. Hope you enjoy the loss of earnings and adulation.

[SantiSuk]

Lucky not to lose Gibbs (poor reffing) in the last 10 minutes, plus 2 points.

We looked poor defending a lead even with 9 or 10 behind the ball. Returnees or new signings needed desperately. Largely a one trick pony team at the moment (with apologies to Cazorla and noting an excellent return by Rosicky).

Chance now for Wellbeck to reclaim his striker role and hopefully some form - he's been a spare proverbial at a party playing second striker (same as at Man U).

[jellydog]

[SantiSuk]

Scruffy old first half at the Boelyn. Arsenal took off (not) in the same poor vein they had played most of the match at Anfield, but still looking potentially dangerous on the all too occasional break. Midfield largely being bullied out of possession again and West Ham's big boys looking highly likely to muscle their way through our still timid defence led by the currently feckless BFG and supported by two defenders who are Championship quality at best.

Five minutes to go and a lucky but correctly awarded penalty and a flash of brilliance by Ox and we are curiously two up at half time. Given the &lt;deleted&gt; ups from two goal leads in defence this season anything can happen second half. If Walcott is fit I would bring him on with 30 minutes to go and drop Ox back to mid. Coquelain looks unconvincing to me and Flamini is hopeless for a second match in a row (having praised him in a few matches prior to that). Gibbs should come back on for the perennially cr@p Monreal straight away. As usual for Wenger, expect no substitutions until the 70th minute or later - unless they pull level which is not beyond the realms of doubt!

[SantiSuk]

Ere we go ere we go ere we go. Masters of the can't-hold-a-lead-for-longer-than-the-blink-of-an-eye?

[SantiSuk]

Ere we go ere we go ere we go. Masters of the can't-hold-a-lead-for-longer-than-the-blink-of-an-eye?

Phew - hung on grimly at the back and surprising we couldn't bury one of those excellent breakaway runs in which Cazorla, Ox and Sanchez were outstanding up to the point of shooting. Good job Cazorla is in such brilliant form these days. Coquelain and Flamini were hopeless also-ran MFs, continually by-passed by West Ham's attack and even shunned by Cazorla, single-handedly bringing the ball out of defence.

Can anyone explain the enigma of Wenger putting Walcott on the bench for 3 games now and not calling him on for even the last 5 minutes. Even in injury-comeback mode Theo would have had the legs enough to slot a couple home against a fading West Ham defence. His substitution philosophy seems extraordinarily poor to me and seems to revolve around letting the starting 11 get on with it come what may until its panic mode time. Anyone think he is a master of the tactical substitution?

So we end up on equal points with 4th placed Southampton going into the New Year. How did that happen? Much better than I would have predicted one month and two months ago. Koscielny back from injury is a big plus and here's hoping that a couple of the three missing midfielders can get back soon. Oh yes and Ozil due back soon. I'm perking up even more.

[SantiSuk]

Much debate about whether Song's early tremendous strike from distance, that went through the legs of Sakho, standing in an offside position should have stood (it was flagged by the linesman and disallowed by the ref).

"West Ham boss Sam Allardyce .... disagreed strongly with the decision to disallow Song's goal, claiming Sakho was not in the eyeline of the goalkeeper when he was adjudged to be offside" [beeb]

That's Sakho at No 15, who apparently is not in Szesny's eyeline

Yes it's true these are often given - as in the laws of the game are often interpreted rather favourably toward the attacking team and Wenger's postmatch comment that he was surprised that the goal was not given is consistent with that.

Actually this eyeline stuff is not in the rules of the game, but I don't know whether that is the benchmark that is given to refs on "intefering with play" or just another TV punditry invention that has gained legs.

[Chicog]

Ere we go ere we go ere we go. Masters of the can't-hold-a-lead-for-longer-than-the-blink-of-an-eye?

Phew - hung on grimly at the back and surprising we couldn't bury one of those excellent breakaway runs in which Cazorla, Ox and Sanchez were outstanding up to the point of shooting. Good job Cazorla is in such brilliant form these days. Coquelain and Flamini were hopeless also-ran MFs, continually by-passed by West Ham's attack and even shunned by Cazorla, single-handedly bringing the ball out of defence.

Can anyone explain the enigma of Wenger putting Walcott on the bench for 3 games now and not calling him on for even the last 5 minutes. Even in injury-comeback mode Theo would have had the legs enough to slot a couple home against a fading West Ham defence. His substitution philosophy seems extraordinarily poor to me and seems to revolve around letting the starting 11 get on with it come what may until its panic mode time. Anyone think he is a master of the tactical substitution?

So we end up on equal points with 4th placed Southampton going into the New Year. How did that happen? Much better than I would have predicted one month and two months ago. Koscielny back from injury is a big plus and here's hoping that a couple of the three missing midfielders can get back soon. Oh yes and Ozil due back soon. I'm perking up even more.

What game did you watch? Coquelin had a great game, which is why all of Wet Shams dangerous attacks came from the flanks.

Won most of his tackles and good interceptions too, plus was good in the air.

Stop moaning for the sake of it, overall it was a spirited performance and a great win against a form team

[tw25rw]

Much debate about whether Song's early tremendous strike from distance, that went through the legs of Sakho, standing in an offside position should have stood (it was flagged by the linesman and disallowed by the ref).

"West Ham boss Sam Allardyce .... disagreed strongly with the decision to disallow Song's goal, claiming Sakho was not in the eyeline of the goalkeeper when he was adjudged to be offside" [beeb]

That's Sakho at No 15, who apparently is not in Szesny's eyeline

Yes it's true these are often given - as in the laws of the game are often interpreted rather favourably toward the attacking team and Wenger's postmatch comment that he was surprised that the goal was not given is consistent with that.

Actually this eyeline stuff is not in the rules of the game, but I don't know whether that is the benchmark that is given to refs on "intefering with play" or just another TV punditry invention that has gained legs.

Sakho wasn't between Song and the keeper, but Carroll was. It would be clearer if Song was visible in the photo. Personally, I think that avoiding being hit is still participating as the keeper isn't to know if that player is onside or not and can't react quickly. Not interfering should mean well away and not waiting for defenders to play them on.

[JacknDanny]

Much debate about whether Song's early tremendous strike from distance, that went through the legs of Sakho, standing in an offside position should have stood (it was flagged by the linesman and disallowed by the ref).

"West Ham boss Sam Allardyce .... disagreed strongly with the decision to disallow Song's goal, claiming Sakho was not in the eyeline of the goalkeeper when he was adjudged to be offside" [beeb]

That's Sakho at No 15, who apparently is not in Szesny's eyeline

Yes it's true these are often given - as in the laws of the game are often interpreted rather favourably toward the attacking team and Wenger's postmatch comment that he was surprised that the goal was not given is consistent with that.

Actually this eyeline stuff is not in the rules of the game, but I don't know whether that is the benchmark that is given to refs on "intefering with play" or just another TV punditry invention that has gained legs.

Sakho wasn't between Song and the keeper, but Carroll was. It would be clearer if Song was visible in the photo. Personally, I think that avoiding being hit is still participating as the keeper isn't to know if that player is onside or not and can't react quickly. Not interfering should mean well away and not waiting for defenders to play them on.

Should have been a goal. The photo above is rather misleading. Here is a better angle..........................

[jellydog]

Arsenal fan tailgating outside Emirates Stadium.

[Chicog]

Ummmmm. You ok?

[Chicog]

Much debate about whether Song's early tremendous strike from distance, that went through the legs of Sakho, standing in an offside position should have stood (it was flagged by the linesman and disallowed by the ref).

"West Ham boss Sam Allardyce .... disagreed strongly with the decision to disallow Song's goal, claiming Sakho was not in the eyeline of the goalkeeper when he was adjudged to be offside" [beeb]

That's Sakho at No 15, who apparently is not in Szesny's eyeline

Yes it's true these are often given - as in the laws of the game are often interpreted rather favourably toward the attacking team and Wenger's postmatch comment that he was surprised that the goal was not given is consistent with that.

Actually this eyeline stuff is not in the rules of the game, but I don't know whether that is the benchmark that is given to refs on "intefering with play" or just another TV punditry invention that has gained legs.

Sakho wasn't between Song and the keeper, but Carroll was. It would be clearer if Song was visible in the photo. Personally, I think that avoiding being hit is still participating as the keeper isn't to know if that player is onside or not and can't react quickly. Not interfering should mean well away and not waiting for defenders to play them on.

Should have been a goal. The photo above is rather misleading. Here is a better angle..........................

Of course they're interfering, Chezza was probably expecting a touch. Offside so tough titties.

[JacknDanny]

Much debate about whether Song's early tremendous strike from distance, that went through the legs of Sakho, standing in an offside position should have stood (it was flagged by the linesman and disallowed by the ref).

"West Ham boss Sam Allardyce .... disagreed strongly with the decision to disallow Song's goal, claiming Sakho was not in the eyeline of the goalkeeper when he was adjudged to be offside" [beeb]

That's Sakho at No 15, who apparently is not in Szesny's eyeline

Yes it's true these are often given - as in the laws of the game are often interpreted rather favourably toward the attacking team and Wenger's postmatch comment that he was surprised that the goal was not given is consistent with that.

Actually this eyeline stuff is not in the rules of the game, but I don't know whether that is the benchmark that is given to refs on "intefering with play" or just another TV punditry invention that has gained legs.

Sakho wasn't between Song and the keeper, but Carroll was. It would be clearer if Song was visible in the photo. Personally, I think that avoiding being hit is still participating as the keeper isn't to know if that player is onside or not and can't react quickly. Not interfering should mean well away and not waiting for defenders to play them on.

Should have been a goal. The photo above is rather misleading. Here is a better angle..........................

Of course they're interfering, Chezza was probably expecting a touch. Offside so tough titties.

Not offside as per the referees directives at the beginning of the season. NOT in direct line of vision and NO touch on the ball, theref0ore the goal should have stood.

[Chicog]

Dream on.

[SantiSuk]

What tosh, J&D. What does it take for a player to be directly in line of vision? The objective surely should be to rule out anyone who is not directly in front of goal but standing in a potentially offside position. A goalkeeper is bound to be conscious of someone standing between the striking player and his goal. If you are saying that we should assume that directly means that goalkeepers have tunnel vision and you can only assume that if they are looking at the striking player the other off-side players are not in their direct line of vision and therefore cannot be interfering with play then that is a nonsense.

If we were to adopt your thesis that this was a fair goal, then for free kicks in future you must accept that it is fair that say a couple players of the attacking team stand on the goal line (or just in front) at the edges of a goal and away from the direct tunnel vision of the goalkeeper. Striker then bangs the ball towards one of them who straddles the ball and lets it through his leg. GOAL, not

[carmine]

Dream on.

Nah, looks like the refs doing you lot favours again.

btw, wheres Arsenes sleeping bag?