Apologies from me, too. I think my tone was more aggressive than I intended.Fair enough, I actually think I've misunderstood the point of this thread and your points, so apologies, mea culpa!
Creativity is about more than goals and assists (particularly when a large proportion of those goals are penalties). Bruno put up big numbers because United funnelled all of their final third play through him. Your team as a whole didn’t create enough chances to challenge for major honours.There's something incorrect in every sentence you wrote. Watch more of both players, and think about what I wrote about them. Probably best to watch older games of Bruno when he actually played in something that resembles a football team, though. And hopefully you'll see what I meant. Unless creativity means something else to you.
Think it was Dennis Irwin? Anyway, Cantona was a steal at the time, whatever the price.
What a player he was, different eras and all that, but even now if he was around, if you had to choose between him and Bruno.
You'd take Cantona every day, physically he was on another level to Bruno, technically probably not much in it, but I'd say Cantona just shades it. Mentally, Cantona had a short fuse, like Bruno, but he was less petulant and when times were tough he let his football do the talking. His awareness and game intelligence were also much better than Bruno's.
Hahaha this is a decent point. Certainly not at United, that much is for sure!Apologies from me, too. I think my tone was more aggressive than I intended.
And to be fair to you, it is a weird (but interesting) thread. The OP said the title is a bit misleading and he was more wondering if his memories of Cantona are rose-tinted, but I think it does touch upon something I’ve been wondering about recently.
Cantona had such an aura that the fan of a rival club is moved to object to comparisons between him and Bruno three decades later. Where are those players today?
Creativity is about more than goals and assists (particularly when a large proportion of those goals are penalties). Bruno put up big numbers because United funnelled all of their final third play through him. Your team as a whole didn’t create enough chances to challenge for major honours.
Whereas Odegaard actually makes Arsenal a more dominant team. Not only does he have direct involvement in a large number of our goals, but his indirect influence in retaining possession, creating momentum and knitting together our play is blindingly obvious to see.
We’ve definitely missed him, we’ve just adapted to his absence. While we beat both Southampton and Leicester by two goals margins, those gaps were only opened up on the 87th and 98th minutes. Lately we haven’t been putting teams to the sword like we have been during the calendar year.It seems like Arsenal hasn't really missed such a quality player in their League games so far.
Against SOuthampton, you guys had 28 shots to theirs 8. And against Leicester, you guys had 35 shots to theirs 5. I don't know how you can't say "haven't been putting teams to the sword". Both games you had majority of possessions.We’ve definitely missed him, we’ve just adapted to his absence. While we beat both Southampton and Leicester by two goals margins, those gaps were only opened up on the 87th and 98th minutes. Lately we haven’t been putting teams to the sword like we have been during the calendar year.
Odegaard also leads our press, so our defensive structure has dropped a lot deeper and become more passive without him.
Cantona had the respect of every single member of the team. Odegaard, in a very different way, commands the respect of his teammates. I’m not sure Bruno’s often rash and petulant nature always inspires the same feelings in the current United squad.
I'm well aware of how both matches went, I watched them live. Of course we're able to have more shots and the majority of possession against Southampton and Leicester with Odegaard missing - who is arguing otherwise?Against SOuthampton, you guys had 28 shots to theirs 8. And against Leicester, you guys had 35 shots to theirs 5. I don't know how you can't say "haven't been putting teams to the sword". Both games you had majority of possessions.
Nope. Also, I'd say we were the dominant team in both matches - just that Odegaard tends to make us more so when he plays. Not something I thought I'd ever have a back and forth about as it seems pretty evident to me and many others, but there you go.Are you expecting 50 shots and 80% ball possession to call it "dominant"?
Strange tone you've adopted, there. I agree that "Arsenal can cope well without Odegaard". Hence me saying that we've "adapted to his absence". I disagree that "his performance this season isn't that good", as there's not been much of a sample size to judge. He's only played three games and one of them was an energy-sapping slog when Rice got sent off.Just call it as it is. Arsenal can cope well without Odegaard, and his performance this season isn't that good anyway. In a long season, yes you do need a squad with good players.
These posts are hilarious. Hopefully that’s how they’re intendedBruno under Fergie would've been an all time great.
What is incorrect about it? You've got Arsenal fans saying the same I did, and then you still disagree. If anything then Ødegaard is more creative. Creativity isn't just getting most key passes in a game, it could be the pre-pass to the assist or getting out of a tight situation with body feints or a dribble. These days, Ødegaard is also played deeper rather than an attacking midfielder and his job is to dictate the tempo of the game, not just create chances. He is able to do both to an extremely high level, something Bruno can't do. He is their most important - or at worst second most - player for their football and is the reason they control games the way they do.There's something incorrect in every sentence you wrote. Watch more of both players, and think about what I wrote about them. Probably best to watch older games of Bruno when he actually played in something that resembles a football team, though. And hopefully you'll see what I meant. Unless creativity means something else to you.
