Who scored said that? Well say no more.
Danny Welbeck | Arsenal player
- Thread starter KiD MoYeS
- Start date
- Status
His rating was calculated by his statistical contribution in that game. Am I missing something? Surely if he was poor or the reason they didn't win, he would have been rated much lower.
Nah, let's place the observation of some random bloke on the internet over a statistical comparison done by an unbiased source.
Yeah let's not form our own opinion and use an invariable statistical analysis. Or let's also ignore the fact this 'random bloke' didn't even give an opinion on Welbecks performance and question the intolerable suggestion he made that you can't judge a players performance based purely on a statistical website! Everyone knows managers just use Whoscored and football manager to make all major selection and transfer decisions, who needs to watch a game to form a balanced opinion on a players performance when you've got whoscored who can do it for you?
Whoscored is a terrible way to rate players. The statistics themselves are nice (for the most part), but not their rating. For example, they rated Evra very highly the past couple of seasons.
This. You pretty much need a great goalscorer to win leagues.
Who scored are awful at rating players. Di Maria doesn't make their team of the month, whereas Herrera does.
You're probably just trying to take some joy out of another frustrating result in whatever way you can, but I'll reply anyway. It wasn't Welbeck's fault because there were very few players that actually played well. Gibbs and Sánchez and that's about it probably. Oxlade-Chamberlain was awful but Wilshere's brainless lunge and inevitable injury unfortunately forced Wenger to keep him on the pitch. I just felt it was worth pointing out that this whole "Welbeck saved the day for Arsenal" narrative isn't entirely true, and I don't think it's unfair to suggest if a top class striker was there instead they would've done a bit more with the (somewhat limited) service.
Jack Wilshire is an annoying, long bodied, short legged thickhead with a semi Jedward haircut, unfortunately a number of the Arsenal players have this same cut and it makes them look like as much of a footballing threat as melting icecream.
Danny W did well against Hull in such a mediocre team that had little rhythm and allowed Hull to break up their attacks in clumsy yet effective fashon. The man scored a goal, what does he need to do to escape the usual naysaying criticism?
He scored so fair play to him. He's still a very average player and had a very shit game. His best quality is probably first time flicks, which look nice but most of the time don't do anything. Everything else he's a bit meh at. Obviously since he's a striker playing as a lone striker for a top 4 team, he's going to get goals, but he won't be the difference between us finishing 4th or not. We're comfortably the 3rd best team in the league squad wise and we'll get there no problem in the end imo. Welbeck doesn't take Arsenal up to another level like a top striker would, he's not going to consistently get them points, or results. He'll have one great game now and then like his hat trick, have 3 or 4 shit games where he costs you points becuause of his misses and then score a goal today.
Also he sure as hell won't win them the title. The reason they got anything out of the game yesterday was sanchez. He's by far their best player and the only player who has looked any good this season for them. Welbeck i thought would be better suited to arsenal and probably still think he will then giroud, but there isn't much between them when looking at how arsenal plays. It's like for like, average player for average player. If you are a top 4 team you will always want a better striker up front and Welbeck will be a squad player, as he was for us. He's just not decisive enough and doesn't have enough impact on games to be anything else.
Also he sure as hell won't win them the title. The reason they got anything out of the game yesterday was sanchez. He's by far their best player and the only player who has looked any good this season for them. Welbeck i thought would be better suited to arsenal and probably still think he will then giroud, but there isn't much between them when looking at how arsenal plays. It's like for like, average player for average player. If you are a top 4 team you will always want a better striker up front and Welbeck will be a squad player, as he was for us. He's just not decisive enough and doesn't have enough impact on games to be anything else.
I agree with many things you say but your predictions are based on the expectation that Welbeck is not capable of significantly improving his game. He is still young though, so you might be quite wrong about that.
I think it's fair to say that if Welbeck improves his game significantly he'll be a totally different proposition.
You could say that about a lot of players though. Players tend to improve earlier in their career rather than later and I don't see why Welbeck is any more likely to kick on than other players.
That being said, regular games up front will help him. The question is whether they keep picking him there when Giroud cones back. Welbeck's adaptability might be his worst enemy and he could end up shunted out wide again.
Did Wenger say that? It'll be interesting to see what happens when Giroud and Walcott are back then. You'd assume Giroud will start up top (if that is what Wenger suggested) with Walcott and Alexis on the flanks and Ozil in behind (when he's back) where does that leave Welbeck? I'll be annoyed if he ends up a squad player there. He's showing that he can score at a decent rate when consistently played up top, which is what a lot of us on here recognised, we just knew that he wasn't going to get a lot of minuted as a centre forward here unfortunately. Anyway glad to see he's doing well.so Wenger plans to play him out wide once Giroud comes back
The biggest problem for him will come if and when Wenger finally spends big on a forward.
Fact is Welbeck will get better because he has the correct attitude and a lot of talent. The fact that he is scoring goals (regardless of opponents etc) just means he will continue to do so later on when he is fully developed. How the people looking to criticise him after every game cannot see that is beyond me. Regardless of the amount of times something might not come off for him he has the confidence and commitment to keep trying for his team. The fact that he even chose left United in the first place says a lot.
Good for him, he is doing just enough but not enough yet to win matches for arsenal on his own.
Right, so when he was at United he held the ball up well, could carry the ball large distances, had great pace and movement, decent link up play, pretty skilful and fantastic workrate but undoubtedly struggled with his finishing. Now he's scored a few goals for us the argument has counter reversed and despite him scoring some goals he's now a very average player? So those qualities he showed at United are now just forgotten I'm taking?
Also your second point about United now comfortably getting third just shows how short termist fans are nowadays. I know you said it's just your opinion but I'm pretty sure your basing that off winning 2 home games in a row and slow starts to the season for us and Liverpool. We're u saying that a month ago after you just threw away a 2 goal lead at Leicester. Just think that surely that sort of chat should be left atleast until Christmas, similar to the way people have already said Chelsea are champions.
yes wenger said something like when Giroud comes back theres the possibility of playing one of them out wide.
As much as he can hold up the ball and link up, when you look at his type of hold up/link up play - you have to wonder whether it's the right fit for Arsenal.
His hold up play is usually flicking it, or taking one touch and laying it off quickly.
But the minute anyone gets really near to him, he looks like he might fall over or just get shrugged off the ball. He's similar to Lewandowski in the way he looks to link up, but Lewandowski has that presence and ability to go shoulder to shoulder.
Arsenal need a presence up there, who can get into that congested area, put his back against the defenders and keep the ball when he gets it, as well as being able to pass and play.
They have enough movement, so having someone like Welbeck who drifts everywhere to avoid proper contact and being closed down just makes things worse.
On here, it's believed that Giroud isn't as good as Welbeck, but his style is so much more suited to Arsenal.
Scoring goals is one thing, but actually fitting the team is another.
Obviously it's early days, but Welbeck has never struck me as a lone striker. I'll be shocked if Welbeck has a long term future as a lone striker at Arsenal.
As for his ability to carry the ball over large distances - that's a bonus, but not something he'll need to use that often as a lone striker.
Never disagreed with a post more than this one. Arsenal have been begging out for a forward like Welbeck to fit their style of play for years and their supporters will be the first to admit that. They have lacked pace and movement up top, qualities Welbeck offers in abundance. His one touch link up play is exactly what players like Ozil, Sanchez, Cazorla and Wilshere thrive on.
I dont agree with that. His hold up and build up play are very good. The problem with welbeck though is that he doesn't think quick enough at times during the build up or he flat out avoid making a pass that might get intercepted. His other problem is that he gets muscled out of position way too easily. With that said, i still think he's a better option than Giroud or Sanogo.
I used to think he was terrible at crossing the ball when he used to be played out wide because he rarely crossed the ball. But when absolutely left no choice but to do so, he has delivered some accurate crosses which makes me think that his lack of crossing had more to do with him being too careful.
I didn't say they didn't need movement up top.
But Welbeck's movement often takes him into areas that actually don't hurt the opposition. Plus he's still too easily shrugged off the ball.
Lewandowski, for example, is the perfect fit for Arsenal. Great link up and movement, proper hold up (which I don't think Welbeck does) as well as the muscle to go with his back to a defender.
Basically they need a well rounded striker, and I think Welbeck is all movement, no muscle. it's great that he moves about, but he's so flimsy and easily pushed to the side as a lone striker.
That's basically my point.
His hold up play isn't all that. His one-touch link-up is good. But he's too easy to shrug off.
The fact is - you can't really give him the ball deep in the final third, and expect him to be strong and hold it. Often he loses it, gets pushed over or slips over.
A first time flick isn't always appropriate. And when you have Wilshere, Ozil, Cazorla... you need someone up top who can show strength. Otherwise you get days when they just pass it without giving defences much to think about.
Prime Adebayor, for example. May not be quite as quick with his feet. but his movement is good enough, and you could play the ball into him, and expect it to stick.
If Welbeck's a better option than Giroud, there's very little in it.
I personally think Giroud (despite not being good enough either) is closer to what they need.
Last edited:
I think they should play Giroud & Welbeck as a pair and try and bring some better defensive balance to the MF,which will also help the defence.
They have Theo to come back as well. But he's not much cop at Centre half from what I remember.
Wellbz has done well enough so far considering we all justified his departure by saying ''can't finish,not enough goals'' didn't we? Apart from them on the other side of this Kagawa-esque debate obv.
They have Theo to come back as well. But he's not much cop at Centre half from what I remember.
Wellbz has done well enough so far considering we all justified his departure by saying ''can't finish,not enough goals'' didn't we? Apart from them on the other side of this Kagawa-esque debate obv.
Wenger will never play 2 strikers upfront unless he's chasing a game.
That would suit both. And I could see Welbeck scoring loads in a partnership like that with the creativity behind him.
Both have that ability to play quick, one-touch stuff, but both are missing parts of a top quality lone striker's weaponry. Together they'd have a bit of everything.
Will never happen though, and I don't see either being the lone striker they need.
No, I agree with both of you. Wenger seems really opposed to it doesn't he? Rather have the support coming from all those attacking mids.
I agree that he isn't the strongest, but he has a big frame and surely that's an area of his game that he can improve over time. The more he gets into these goalscoring positions, or just in and around the box, the better he will be at shielding and holding onto the ball.
The guy is shredded if you've ever seen the photos of him topless - that reads terribly, I know! - so I think he's a work in progress in many aspects. And that's the excitement many get from Welbeck; just to what extent can he improve with regular games as a centre forward. It's irritating he scored yesterday mind, I'll say that.
I think it's pretty obvious why Wenger chose to buy Welbeck. With no top strikers available this summer (Falcao has a big asterisk next to his name. We couldn't afford his wages, or to pay £40m for a 28 year old coming off the back of that kind of injury) or in the foreseeable future the next best option is to buy a young striker and try and mould him into what you need. Welbeck has a good skillset for a striker of his age and a lot of potential imo.
The problem for Wenger is that there aren't a lot of complete strikers available right now that would offer everything he's looking for. And if they are, i doubt he's willing to pay the wages it'd require.
There is no evidence whatsoever that your opinion will be more credible. I rather view a player stats then listen to the opinion of a person on an internet who is rarely noted in formulating a good opinion about a player.
Heck, stats showed that Van Persie, Fletcher and Evans is our worst players, while Di Maria, Blind and Herrera are our best. I am sure the majority will agree with that assumption. The same majority who would agree that Welbeck is improving Arsenal as a team and not a hindarance to arsenal performance like Van persie is to manchester united or balotelli is to liverpool(based of the latter opening few matches). I understand stats are not everything as that is what I have said before, but when stats is back by an opinion of a credible poster like myself and few others, I tend to agree with it.
feck me you know how to make a dick of yourself don't you? Seeing as though you seem incapable of actually reading my post whilst give yourself a blowjob I'm afraid I'll have to repeat myself again, I have given NO opinion on Welbecks performance, im not sure what part of that very simple sentence you seem unable to comprehend. What I rather do is WATCH THE GAME myself as opposed to forming my entire opinion of a players performance based on some numbers - this isn't Football Manager you know.I supposes statistically I have more likes from far less posts so on your basis that would make me the more credible poster right?
Last edited:
Glad you notice that I rate my football acumen highly. Nevertheless, I pointed out how a credible opinion on a player can be formed through different variables. The poster who said he was shit or was the reason they did not win, was the reason I had to use factual evidence to prove them wrong. I only quoted your post because you discreted the use of a credible stat rating website as a factor to use to determine how a player perform. Factors like key passes made, pass percentage, ball retention percentage, etc.,can help a person formulate an opinion on a player performance. That website helps out with this argument of using mutiple factors and tends to be more credible then the opinion of a poster who is not widly recognize to give out accurate assessment. P.s., that poster is not you since you did not give out an opinion. I already explained why i quoted you to re-address my point.
No, I just been in these type of scenarios for awhile to know that my knowledge in football is vast and reliable.Do we have another Professor of Football?
Someone's head is far up their ass...
Not really have you? You've referenced my opinion several times, you're trying to argue against something that doesn't exist whilst simultaneously making yourself out to be the next @Kevin. I haven't offered my opinion on the game because I didn't watch it, simple. Its moronic to form an entire opinion of a player based on what a website says.
You're arguing against a point that no-one made so you've got a little ahead of yourself there, Professor.
stats are good to use to support your argument but you have to actually watch the game too. Stats don't tell you things like: not making the right runs, not picking up a pass quick enough or taking a shot instead of passing. Other things areal duels is recorded but a player not even making an effort to contest the ball is not recorded.
Stats are great to dispute statement like: "X player is not clinical" , "X midfielder is always passing backwards or sideways", or "X Goalkeeper makes too many mistakes"...etc.
Actually I most of the time said the same ts tuff about Welbeck when he was here. I always doubted he would amount to anything more then 'good'. He has very good link up play, it's probably his best asset. He is fast and strong but far too often he failed to learn how to use it properly. His movement also isn't that great, if it was he'd get into far more goalscoring opportunities. He also can't really go past players despite being decent on the ball at times (and looking awful on it at other times) and having great pace.
He's a weird player, has some qualities that you'd think would make him a very good player but then really lacks in other qualities and just doesn't have that killer instinct about him, and I don't think that's something that you learn. It's why I always said he'd have to settle for a career of being back up at United or get sold somewhere.
As for the top 4 thing, I was saying it before the season started, at least that liverpool wouldn't challenge. They have a very average team right now. Didn't expect arsenal to do so poorly but you're right, you'll almost definitely improve and end up fighting for 3rd/4th. Both United and arsenal will be far away from 5th place though. And the chelsea talk is hardly knee jerk, I said they'd wn the title if they brought in a good striker last season so it's no surprise that it looks like they are walking to it.
Last edited:
What the feck?? Am I in the noob section?? Or is it a misunderstanding?
Verbatum. While the other thing I noted was as clear as I presented.
I referenced the opinion of individuals who said he was shit or the reason Arsenal was losing. I referenced your post because you discredited the importance of statistical analysis. Are we on different wavelength? I can not be more clearer than this unless I break up every morphemic meaning in each lexical item :/.
Stats supported my argument very well in this case. I watched the game and the only criticism I found was he was too selfless and did not do enough to take the game by hus own hand like what Sanchez did. He was composed with the ball, made good runs and picked good passes with several layoff which could have been buried away by the players he passed it to.
- Status