Danny Welbeck | Arsenal player

Status
Not open for further replies.
@golden_blunder Good post. I've just got one thing to add. The likes of RVP and Falcao are mercenaries. They'd leave when they see a better opportunity elsewhere, especially so when the club isn't doing very well. Players like Welbeck and Wilshere are the ones a club shouldn't let go of. Having come through the academy and been at the club for a long time means a lot.

My problem with the Welbeck transfer is that he was never really given a chance to shine at United. If I was a United supporter, I would be upset at that more than anything else. I saw him play last night and I genuinely wonder why LVG let him go. He works so hard in every game and has pretty decent finishing boots too. Why on earth would United let such a player go is a mystery to me. If you could accuse Wenger of thinking too much about the long-term future of the club, you could just as easily accuse LVG of completely ignoring it and obsessing with short-term success instead.
 
Cina said:
It's not plausible, it's blatantly obvious. Welbeck and Rooney both played the first leg, Rooney was dropped, Nani came in, ergo it's far more likely Rooney was dropped for Nani.

If Welbeck was already playing in the team then how on earth is it possible that Rooney was dropped for him? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

When a player can do a better job in 'said' player role, it is possible that that 'said' player to be either shifted out wide or dropped.
 
m1y2 said:
n

ot htat he will but he has so far
Click to expand...

Fair play to you if you think Welbeck will outscore Rooney, Falcao and Van Persie combined. But Rooney has 3 goals so far, with Van Persie 2. I would suggest that Welbeck's 4 goals doesn't mean he has outscored them so far just yet.
 
Krovv said:
@golden_blunder Good post. I've just got one thing to add. The likes of RVP and Falcao are mercenaries. They'd leave when they see a better opportunity elsewhere, especially so when the club isn't doing very well. Players like Welbeck and Wilshere are the ones a club shouldn't let go of. Having come through the academy and been at the club for a long time means a lot.
Click to expand...

Not like Welbeck at all, then.
 
Amadaeus said:
When a player can do a better job in 'said' player role, it is possible that that 'said' player to be either shifted out wide or dropped.
Click to expand...
For Nani. SAF may have decided Welbeck was the better choice on the left but ultimately if Rooney was dropped it was in order to bring Nani into the team. It's not really debatable.
 
Cina said:
For Nani. SAF may have decided Welbeck was the better choice on the left but ultimately if Rooney was dropped it was in order to bring Nani into the team. It's not really debatable.
Click to expand...

You're being incredibly pedantic tbf. Welbeck was picked. Rooney - a player who plays the same position - was not. Welbeck was picked ahead of Rooney, which is the main thing. Exactly who Rooney was "dropped" for is neither here nor there.

Of course, making any far-reaching conclusions about a single game of football is demented.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
You're being incredibly pedantic tbf. Welbeck was picked. Rooney - a player who plays the same position - was not. Welbeck was picked ahead of Rooney, which is the main thing. Exactly who Rooney was "dropped" for is neither here nor there.

Of course, making any far-reaching conclusions about a single game of football is demented.
Click to expand...
I really don't see how I'm being pedantic here. If both players played in the previous game then how was Rooney dropped for him? It doesn't make sense. Surely being 'dropped' for another player means the player has not played the previous game and has displaced the player who was 'dropped' for them, no? Like how Mata was dropped in favour of Falcao. Or are we saying he was actually dropped in favour of Rooney because that's the position he then took up?
 
Cina said:
I really don't see how I'm being pedantic here. If both players played in the previous game then how was Rooney dropped for him? It doesn't make sense. Surely being 'dropped' for another player means the player has not played the previous game and has displaced the player who was 'dropped' for them, no? Like how Mata was dropped in favour of Falcao. Or are we saying he was actually dropped in favour of Rooney because that's the position he then took up?
Click to expand...

I always assume "dropped" means that a player who might usually expect to start finds themself a substitute instead i.e. "dropped to the bench"

Exactly who he has been dropped for would be whoever plays in his position instead of him.

Pointless hair-splitting though. In the grand scheme of things, that one game means feck all.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I always assume "dropped" means that a player who might usually expect to start finds themself a substitute instead i.e. "dropped to the bench"

Exactly who he has been dropped for would be whoever plays in his position instead of him.

Pointless hair-splitting though. In the grand scheme of things, that one game means feck all.
Click to expand...
Basically all comes down to differing opinions of the word then.

Agreed on the last part though, as I said earlier on, I'm not sure why people use that one game as a basis all the time, especially as he was actually far better in the first leg, which they both played in.
 
Krovv said:
@golden_blunder Good post. I've just got one thing to add. The likes of RVP and Falcao are mercenaries. They'd leave when they see a better opportunity elsewhere, especially so when the club isn't doing very well. Players like Welbeck and Wilshere are the ones a club shouldn't let go of. Having come through the academy and been at the club for a long time means a lot.

My problem with the Welbeck transfer is that he was never really given a chance to shine at United. If I was a United supporter, I would be upset at that more than anything else. I saw him play last night and I genuinely wonder why LVG let him go. He works so hard in every game and has pretty decent finishing boots too. Why on earth would United let such a player go is a mystery to me. If you could accuse Wenger of thinking too much about the long-term future of the club, you could just as easily accuse LVG of completely ignoring it and obsessing with short-term success instead.
Click to expand...
First. RVP (and Falcao) is not mercenarie and he stayed with us even when we didn't do well. He just wanted to win the league and thought that he will not win it at Arsenal so he decided to go to us. And it looks he was right, he won it with us and it doesn't looks likely that Arsenal will win it anytime soon. On the other hand Welbeck wanted to go since last May. He didn't want to go on loan and fight for the first team, he wanted to move and to rival club on top of that.

Second. He was given a lot of chances. He played a lot of games for us. I think if he wouldn't be a academy player he wouldn't get so much chances. But at United there are standard for a striker which are much higher than Arsenal standards lately. In the time when Welbeck was coming to first team we had strikers like Berbatov, Rooney, Hernandez, RVP. All were better than Welbeck at the time they played in striker position. Many strikers, even Rooney who was bought for a lot of money, had to play on the wing to prove themselves. Some taken the chance, others didn't, Welbeck is something in between.

Third. LVG didn't let him go. He told him he will not be playing as much as he need so we wanted to send him on loan. He refused and wanted a move. Every manager in this world would rather have Falcao then Welbeck. I think SAF would do exactly the same.
 
Jerch said:
First. RVP (and Falcao) is not mercenarie and he stayed with us even when we didn't do well. He just wanted to win the league and thought that he will not win it at Arsenal so he decided to go to us. And it looks he was right, he won it with us and it doesn't looks likely that Arsenal will win it anytime soon. On the other hand Welbeck wanted to go since last May. He didn't want to go on loan and fight for the first team, he wanted to move and to rival club on top of that.

Second. He was given a lot of chances. He played a lot of games for us. I think if he wouldn't be a academy player he wouldn't get so much chances. But at United there are standard for a striker which are much higher than Arsenal standards lately. In the time when Welbeck was coming to first team we had strikers like Berbatov, Rooney, Hernandez, RVP. All were better than Welbeck at the time they played in striker position. Many strikers, even Rooney who was bought for a lot of money, had to play on the wing to prove themselves. Some taken the chance, others didn't, Welbeck is something in between.

Third. LVG didn't let him go. He told him he will not be playing as much as he need so we wanted to send him on loan. He refused and wanted a move. Every manager in this world would rather have Falcao then Welbeck. I think SAF would do exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Sorry but Falcao is one of the biggest mercenaries going. I dont always say this as a slur, lots of top players have been mercenaries, but to claim otherwise is deluded.

Im not sure SAF would have, at least not at this stage, depends what you want, Falcao is perfect for United right now as you need a short term fix to get back into the top four and avoid a prolonged slide, but hes certainly not going to be around for long.
 
ItsEssexRob said:
Sorry but Falcao is one of the biggest mercenaries going. I dont always say this as a slur, lots of top players have been mercenaries, but to claim otherwise is deluded.
Click to expand...
Based on what? Going to Monaco? Guess you haven't read the details on that subject, if so.
 
Sam said:
Arsenal fans still calling RVP a mercenary :lol:
Click to expand...
Mercenary doesn't just mean after the money (though he was), it's also used figuratively to refer to disloyal caarnts who leave to go pot hunting too.
 
ItsEssexRob said:
Sorry but Falcao is one of the biggest mercenaries going. I dont always say this as a slur, lots of top players have been mercenaries, but to claim otherwise is deluded.

Im not sure SAF would have, at least not at this stage, depends what you want, Falcao is perfect for United right now as you need a short term fix to get back into the top four and avoid a prolonged slide, but hes certainly not going to be around for long.
Click to expand...
Well this is just your opinion.

My opinion is that most of people think that Falcao is a mercenarie because he went to Monaco. But if you read the story why he went to Monaco you realise that he didn't have a lot say in that. And it looks like he is very happy that he get a move away from Monaco. And he choose us. In the one of interviews he even said himself he had one other offer (didn't wanted to say which) but he choose us. He could leave very soon, it is only a loan deal tbf, but it looks like that he want to stay at United and that he will stay for a long time if we will choose to buy him at the end of the season. At least he is saying that he want to stay and became clubs legend.

And Fergie rated Falcao and he loved the best strikers. He would used the same old line that he is just too good to miss and he would buy him in a heartbeat.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
A very convenient get-out clause which can be used for every single poor signing made by any manager ever.
It's also completely undermined by players who looked better at clubs other than Arsenal before/after playing under Wenger. Gervinho being the most obvious recent example.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to write a very, very long list of players who improved under Wenger and then fell away once they left. Gervinho despite being good for Roma simply doesn't have the mentality to succeed in the PL (as I think City watchers in the CL thread confirmed)..
 
Jerch said:
Well this is just your opinion.

My opinion is that most of people think that Falcao is a mercenarie because he went to Monaco. But if you read the story why he went to Monaco you realise that he didn't have a lot say in that. And it looks like he is very happy that he get a move away from Monaco. And he choose us. In the one of interviews he even said himself he had one other offer (didn't wanted to say which) but he choose us. He could leave very soon, it is only a loan deal tbf, but it looks like that he want to stay at United and that he will stay for a long time if we will choose to buy him at the end of the season. At least he is saying that he want to stay and became clubs legend.

And Fergie rated Falcao and he loved the best strikers. He would used the same old line that he is just too good to miss and he would buy him in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

His avoidance of champions league football just seems very odd to me. As a one off season I could understand it so had he gone straight from Atletico to United who are building something it would have made more sense.

Did he really have absolutely no say whatsoever in moving to Monaco. What would have happened if he had refused?

I dont disagree SAF would have loved Falcao, but im not sure at this time in his career and after the injury.
 
ItsEssexRob said:
His avoidance of champions league football just seems very odd to me. As a one off season I could understand it so had he gone straight from Atletico to United who are building something it would have made more sense.

Did he really have absolutely no say whatsoever in moving to Monaco. What would have happened if he had refused?

I dont disagree SAF would have loved Falcao, but im not sure at this time in his career and after the injury.
Click to expand...
There was widespread speculation in the past few weeks about Radamel Falcao being linked to some of the big names in the Premier League, including Chelsea and Manchester United and even Spanish giants Real Madrid.

However, all the rumours seem to have been put to rest as reports have come in that the 27-year-old Colombian is destined for Monaco. This has certainly raised some questions as to why the Atletico Madrid star would end up moving to Monaco.

The answer to this question is the confusing and complex third-party ownership involved with the Colombian international. It is believed that even Hulk was involved in such a kind of partnership when he moved to Zenit. Same was the case with Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano when both Argentine players joined West Ham United, and West Ham ended up paying a compensation of £18M to Sheffield United, and it also led the FA to ban the third party ownership.

However, third party ownership is still believed to be alive outside England. The investment companies own the player of a particular club, pay him a larger salary in addition to his club salary, move the player to bigger clubs, and sell him to the highest bidders to get the investment back.

Falcao’s 55% transfer rights were bought by a third-party ownership group as part of his transfer to Porto. The company paid his salary at Porto, moved him to Atletico Madrid for better exposure, and eventually started working on the biggest possible moves for the player which would see them cash in.

With all the above factors in mind, it turns out that Falcao has no say in where he would want to play, due to a deal to which he agreed a few years ago. Out of all the clubs interested in Falcao, there is only one club who appear to be eager to pay €60M to the investors – AS Monaco FC.
One of the article which say why Falcao moved to Monaco. He didn't have much say in that.

And he don't avoid CL. Why he would? It's a myth. He went from Porto (he played in CL there) to Atletico because Atletico made a deal with group who owned him. And they then made a move to Monaco because owners wanted a money.

And now he is at United, who are one of the biggest clubs even if we are not in CL. He will not be long without it with us.
 
golden_blunder said:
agree with that

my concern/disappointment with letting Welbeck go, was never really about the goals. He hasnt scored a lot of goals for United (we can debate the reasons all day long), though he has shown the side to his game for England. My disappointment was based along the lines of the fact that his style and qualities were much different from what the other guys bring to the table. Danny's pace and movement would be an asset to any team, but particularly ours as we had become a bit static. He's also great at playing 1 touch stuff, flicks etc, he could have dovetailed with DiMaria and Herrera lovely. Instead we have to watch it at Arsenal :(

RVP is paceless and a bit static, great finisher on his day. You could say that Falcao has the same attributes, though his passing is probably better than RVP, and slightly quicker. Rooney, brilliant on his day but after that, what? Mata?
Welbeck would have been something different. I can somewhat understand the decision if Danny was just insistant that he wanted to leave, but he's a Manc, a red one at that. I'm sure with the right words he could have been convinced to stay, show him the vision for the future. But LVG gave him the 'meh' response. I honestly would have thought that Welbeck would have been a player that LVG would have enjoyed working with and would have improved his game. Im surprised he let him go (ok i know we brought Falcao in, but different type of player)
Click to expand...


I can't see LVG being patient enough with Welbeck to offer him a proper run in the team this season. He's under a lot of pressure by the club and fans to do well and especially after so much money has been spent. He could care less if Welbeck was at Utd since he was 9 to achieve what he needs to.
 
Delighted for Welbeck, although comparisons to Henry I've seen flying around (not necessarily on here) are way off. Henry was about Danny's age when he pulled off that incredible turn and volley-lob over Barthez in 2000 and Danny has never shown anything close to that level of ability, as much as I like him.

He's always been a player who can occasionally bag a couple of goals, although he's a level below all our current strikers in that respect, despite early season form. He's still got questions marks over him as to whether he can score consistently but I'm backing him to become a good striker at PL/UCL level without ever pushing into that bracket above.
 
Cina said:
I ignored that possibility because it's probably never going to happen.
Click to expand...
Before Henry came to Arsenal he was a good player, but he became sensational at Highbury.

Much the same for Dennis Bergkamp. Poor in Italy. Sensational at Highbury.

We'll see about Welbeck. He just wasn't given the right coaching / chance at United to be fair, because of the pecking order upfront.
 
Essaux said:
Before Henry came to Arsenal he was a good player, but he became sensational at Highbury.

Much the same for Dennis Bergkamp. Poor in Italy. Sensational at Highbury.

We'll see about Welbeck. He just wasn't given the right coaching / chance at United to be fair, because of the pecking order upfront.
Click to expand...

Henry was a world cup winner and had already had a huge transfer (Monaco to Juve) before Arsenal signed him.

Bergkamp was sensational at Ajax. I actually watched a documentary on him last night and all the old Ajax players were talking about how good he was. He stuttered in Italy for sure.

Both benefited from working under Wenger (Henry more than Bergkamp IMO) but let's not pretend they were not already huge talents.
 
ItsEssexRob said:
Sorry but Falcao is one of the biggest mercenaries going. I dont always say this as a slur, lots of top players have been mercenaries, but to claim otherwise is deluded.

Im not sure SAF would have, at least not at this stage, depends what you want, Falcao is perfect for United right now as you need a short term fix to get back into the top four and avoid a prolonged slide, but hes certainly not going to be around for long.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Not saying Falcao wasn't forced into moves due to issues with third-party ownership, but to say he's not a mercenary is turning a blind eye to his transfer history. This is the same player who spent all summer trying to get a move to Real Madrid and finally came to United because he basically had no other choice. Monaco wanted to sell and United were desperate for a top-drawer striker, if I'm not mistaken.

@Jerch Going by posts on the Caf, I can tell that he was never given a consistent run at centre-forward. Your post kind of highlights why Arsenal is a good place for youngsters to build their game. Wenger would never buy Falcao if he had Welbeck, Rooney and RVP at his disposal. That's a great forward line and with Di Maria in the squad, there's no need for another super expensive striker at the cost of a talented young player.

Not sure Fergie would have bought Falcao to replace Welbeck. That's fan fiction territory, so let's leave it at that.

I don't buy that argument about Welbeck wanting the move even though Van Gaal wanted him to stay. All he had to do was convince him that he'd be given enough games in his preferred position. You can't really blame a 24-year-old player seeking a move for game time. It's easy to say that he should have gone on a loan instead of demanding a permanent move. But why should a player go through all that uncertainty if the manager and the club don't have faith in his ability?
 
duffer said:
Henry was a world cup winner and had already had a huge transfer (Monaco to Juve) before Arsenal signed him.
Click to expand...
Wenger did transform Henry into a striker. The player himself didn't believe he could be a striker when Wenger first played him there. I'm not saying a player of Henry's quality wouldn't have succeeded under other managers, but I'm not sure which other manager would have turned his career around so swiftly. I'm not sure how much of a role Henry played in the 1998 World Cup though. I thought several other experienced players were far more crucial to that trophy.
 
Krovv said:
Wenger did transform Henry into a striker. The player himself didn't believe he could be a striker when Wenger first played him there. I'm not saying a player of Henry's quality wouldn't have succeeded under other managers, but I'm not sure which other manager would have turned his career around so swiftly. I'm not sure how much of a role Henry played in the 1998 World Cup though. I thought several other experienced players were far more crucial to that trophy.
Click to expand...

He might not have been France's best player but he was their top scorer and certainly played his part.

I certinaly agree that Wenger had a massive impact on Henry's career. He might have just been a really good winger rather than a great striker.
 
SmashedHombre said:
So every top player at every top club then?
Click to expand...
No, disloyal twats who happily disregard 8 years of nursing you through a series of major injuries to mould you into a worldclass player, who you then piss on from a great height by not only dumping but running down your contract so they get a derisory fee.
 
duffer said:
He might not have been France's best player but he was their top scorer and certainly played his part.

I certinaly agree that Wenger had a massive impact on Henry's career. He might have just been a really good winger rather than a great striker.
Click to expand...
I didn't know that he was the top scorer at that World Cup. Thanks for letting me know. I'll be watching highlights of that tournament soon. :)
 
peterstorey said:
No, disloyal twats who happily disregard 8 years of nursing you through a series of major injuries to mould you into a worldclass player, who you then piss on from a great height by not only dumping but running down your contract so they get a derisory fee.
Click to expand...
Haven't you sold like, ten players who meet that criteria in the last 5-6 years?

Either your people policy is shit or there are just better places to go than Arsenal.
 
10685401_643810195764516_3491923961039015309_n.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.