Danny Welbeck | Arsenal player

[JSMHE]

Your first paragraph:

You are the one who assumed record meant 'stats of goals', I merely pointed out he did not state this and so to him record could mean anything. Somehow you then twisted it to make it sound as though I said it's from the science department, well read it again:



The sports science department bit is me merely telling you they would have analysed his performances, if you disagree with this then Louis van Gaal disagrees with you because he has stated several times video analysis is very important.

In that statistic you did, how many minutes did RVP play and Welbeck too? If you want to use statistics to try and back up a point then do it properly, state the goals per minute ratios but also how many of those games each player started and how many he came on as a sub. Even when you do this there will be flaws to the statistic so if you want somebody to take it seriously get as much data as possible, controlling for as many variables as possible.

As of now those stats mean nothing because RVP could have played a lot of games but as a sub (not saying he did just pointing out your useless stat), he was 23 in 2006, Henry for instance did not join Barcelona in 2007 and also that season Adebayor played 44 games.

Statistics are useless when used how you have, taking one stat and trying to prove a point, without any respect for context. You must delve into much deeper than you have, right now there are several variables you have not controlled for.

Perhaps Louis van Gaal has a different opinion to yourself because his sports science have actually gone into depth with their analysis whereas you have merely taken simple stats out of context, is this possible?

Your second paragraph:

I said this in the previous post but I suppose I must repeat myself. You said RVP is unfit, Louis van Gaal said RVP is fitter than ever he believes. If you expect me to take your opinion over Louis van Gaal's, do you not think this is an unreasonable expectation?

As of now your statement RVP is unfit is contradicted by Louis van Gaal.

Clearly Louis thought RVP was fit enough to perform. And also would be more effective than Welbeck, there is no way Louis van Gaal would have selected RVP if he was unfit and to suggest as such is an insult to the manager.

Your third paragraph:

Again, Louis van Gaal would simply say 'that's your opinion, not mine'. We do not know what he is looking for nor whether Welbeck performed this to a higher standard.

We do know Louis van Gaal was not impressed (enough) by Welbeck so he probably was not (in Louis' opinion) as effective as you imply.

Your fourth paragraph:

You miss the point in its entirety. I can explain it in more depth so it's clear:

David Moyes spent the season evaluating players but in hindsight that was not a good decision. Louis van Gaal in a shorter time frame has concluded who meets his standard and who does not, he now has assembled a better squad by being decisive.

The point is that why on earth should Louis van Gaal say no to Falcao and give Welbeck more time as a striker on the rare chance he might be better than Falcao? I mean where is the logic and how do you expect the man to get top four doing this...

I disagree completely with this point and I think others would back me on this.

BTW - next time do not change the point you are replying to but reply directly to the point I made.

Your fifth paragraph:

He is even fitter now because he has played a few games but that does not mean he was unfit when selected previously, simply less fit than he is now but still fit enough to be selected back then.

Your sixth paragraph:

Yes but he rated him below Rooney and RVP for striker position just like Moyes and now also Louis van Gaal rates him lower than RVP, Rooney, Falcao and Wilson.

1) Before tell someone else to read, try to understand that we both are assuming different things. You made assumption then I have the right things to make my own assumption. LVG clearly commented on why he sold Welbeck because of his goal scoring record, not because of how he plays. When you are talking about "goals record" it means it will be summary in a statistic.

It's not my own stats, it someone else posted it. Welbeck at 23, scored 10 goals in 36 games. RvP at 23, up front, scored 13 goals in 31 games. Those 36 games are mix with the games where he came on from the bench for 5 and 10 mins.

Do you want mine? No worries I still remember the matches where he was a starter or played about 20 or more mins in league and Champion league and his goals last season. Since LVG only talked about the goals scoring record then I will put the goals without assists or key passes and etc. I will try to keep it simple as possible because it's not like I have a lot of time to talk or making a more detail stats for you.

League:
Swansea (2)
Chelsea (0)
Liverpool (0)
Spurs (0)
Everton (0)
Aston Villa (2)
West Ham (1)
Norwich (1) (45 mins)
Hull (0)
Spurs (1)
Swansea (1)
Chelsea (0)
WBA (1) (about 20-25 mins)
City (0)
Norwich (0)
Southampton (0)

He spent most of his games as a ST in the league. Scored 9 goals with 14 starters only. And two games played 20 mins or above. Very good goal scoring record there when he spent his time as a striker.

Champion League:
Shak (1)
OLY (0)
Bayern (0)
Bayern (0)

Played as a winger against Hull and Olympiakos. Played as a striker against Bayern (Home). Switch his position as winger and striker against Bayern (Away). We can assume about 60-70% played as a winger in his 4 starters in Champion League. Not his best position to make goals anyway.

Statistics are useless but LVG commented about goals scoring record then it's about goals and number of mins play. Indeed there is no number of mins play time for RVP. Even if in that 31 games RVP didn't play in any FA and capital one cup and if Welbeck 36 games have Capital one cup and FA, we can reduce it into around 30 games.
About 25 league games Welbeck played as a starter 14 games only + 2 games 20 mins or above and scored 9. I think LVG is very harsh on this one.
About 5 Champion League games Welbeck played 4 as a starter with 1 about 15-10 mins and scored 1 but played 60% as a winger.

LVG seems to count the whole career goals without looking at how many times Welbeck spent his career 2 seasons ago. Or even with your assumption that his sport science or whatever who does the job. Then I can assume that they took the whole career as well without looking at the position where Welbeck played. Last season he got a very good goal scoring record. Massive improvement. And he is still 23 years old.

2) I already said this as well, and I suppose I must repeat this again. LVG said RVP is fit than ever in his last press conference a few days ago. While I'm talking about RVP was unfit against Burnely and Sunderland. And they were a few weeks ago not a few days ago press conference.

3) Again, if LVG thought RVP played better than Welbeck against Burnley and Sunderland then he won't sub him off for Welbeck. Unfortunately LVG knew that RVP had poor games and that's why he brought in Welbeck for RVP and as a result we indeed look way more dangerous when Welbeck came on.

4) So I missed your point or whatever? Alright then.. But you are actually the one who missing my point because I never talk about Moyes and Falcao from the start. Try to stick on the line of the discussion. We haven't finish the one with above, make sure don't start a new one and make it worse.

5) I skip this, you are making things worse when clearly it is the same thing with #2

6) For a "striker". But SAF rated him as a player. My point was never be SAF rated Welbeck better than Rooney as a striker or a player. I said when Rooney played bad, he is dropped. Welbeck and Chicharito got their chances when it happened. Nothing more. So stop making it worse. I don't remember I said SAF rated him as a better striker than Rooney.

Now I realise,
No wonder we got so many things to argue, when clearly half from 6 of them are just a new argument you made. Let's stick with 1, 2 and 3 first. 1, 2 and 3 are after all from the very beginning we had been discussed.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Ah come on. I thought this thread might be left alone after today. Guess if we had good ouel 'Welbz', we would have won at least 8 nil today. The new Henry and all that. I'm actually starting to dislike him now because of the obsession around him. It's a shame because I always liked him.

 

[Rado_N]

Ah come on. I thought this thread might be left alone after today. Guess if we had good ouel 'Welbz', we would have won at least 8 nil today. The new Henry and all that. I'm actually starting to dislike him now because of the obsession around him. It's a shame because I always liked him.

That's pretty daft.

 

[Robbie Boy]

That's pretty daft.

Not really daft at all. It's getting tedious beyond belief the obsession around him.

 

[Mogget]

Welbeck showed with his chip that he just isn't clinical enough. A world class forward like Falcao, for example, would definitely have scored that chance. No doubt about it. You'd never see Falcao missing a chance from there.

 

[Nighteyes]

Welbeck showed with his chip that he just isn't clinical enough. A world class forward like Falcao, for example, would definitely have scored that chance. No doubt about it. You'd never see Falcao missing a chance from there.

Well, Falcao did miss a similar chance today.

 

[kouroux]

Not that similar, one of them had all the time in the world and way more space to place the ball.

 

[Walters_19_MuFc]

Well, Falcao did miss a similar chance today.

Falcao should have chipped his.

 

[Lynk]

Well, Falcao did miss a similar chance today.

What? Welbeck had way more time and didn't have a keeper charging at him.

 

[Robbie Boy]

The Falcao chance and the Welbeck chance weren't even remotely similar. The ball came to Falcao and he had no time whereas Welbeck had the time to pick his spot. Welbeck should have scored, he wasn't unlucky, he just lacks that clinical edge.

 

[.Rossi]

Shame he wasn't there today....We would have won 2-0 if he was

 

[OneUnited24]

Well, Falcao did miss a similar chance today.

How was remotely similar? For one it was a tighter angle and the keeper stood tall, I know hes a good striker but i doubt even he could chip the ball so close to keeper. In fact the only way he probably would have scored was by keeping it low... keeper just made a good save

 

[Empire]

1) Before tell someone else to read, try to understand that we both are assuming different things. You made assumption then I have the right things to make my own assumption. LVG clearly commented on why he sold Welbeck because of his goal scoring record, not because of how he plays. When you are talking about "goals record" it means it will be summary in a statistic.

It's not my own stats, it someone else posted it. Welbeck at 23, scored 10 goals in 36 games. RvP at 23, up front, scored 13 goals in 31 games. Those 36 games are mix with the games where he came on from the bench for 5 and 10 mins.

Do you want mine? No worries I still remember the matches where he was a starter or played about 20 or more mins in league and Champion league and his goals last season. Since LVG only talked about the goals scoring record then I will put the goals without assists or key passes and etc. I will try to keep it simple as possible because it's not like I have a lot of time to talk or making a more detail stats for you.

League:
Swansea (2)
Chelsea (0)
Liverpool (0)
Spurs (0)
Everton (0)
Aston Villa (2)
West Ham (1)
Norwich (1) (45 mins)
Hull (0)
Spurs (1)
Swansea (1)
Chelsea (0)
WBA (1) (about 20-25 mins)
City (0)
Norwich (0)
Southampton (0)

He spent most of his games as a ST in the league. Scored 9 goals with 14 starters only. And two games played 20 mins or above. Very good goal scoring record there when he spent his time as a striker.

Champion League:
Shak (1)
OLY (0)
Bayern (0)
Bayern (0)

Played as a winger against Hull and Olympiakos. Played as a striker against Bayern (Home). Switch his position as winger and striker against Bayern (Away). We can assume about 60-70% played as a winger in his 4 starters in Champion League. Not his best position to make goals anyway.

Statistics are useless but LVG commented about goals scoring record then it's about goals and number of mins play. Indeed there is no number of mins play time for RVP. Even if in that 31 games RVP didn't play in any FA and capital one cup and if Welbeck 36 games have Capital one cup and FA, we can reduce it into around 30 games.
About 25 league games Welbeck played as a starter 14 games only + 2 games 20 mins or above and scored 9. I think LVG is very harsh on this one.
About 5 Champion League games Welbeck played 4 as a starter with 1 about 15-10 mins and scored 1 but played 60% as a winger.

LVG seems to count the whole career goals without looking at how many times Welbeck spent his career 2 seasons ago. Or even with your assumption that his sport science or whatever who does the job. Then I can assume that they took the whole career as well without looking at the position where Welbeck played. Last season he got a very good goal scoring record. Massive improvement. And he is still 23 years old.

2) I already said this as well, and I suppose I must repeat this again. LVG said RVP is fit than ever in his last press conference a few days ago. While I'm talking about RVP was unfit against Burnely and Sunderland. And they were a few weeks ago not a few days ago press conference.

3) Again, if LVG thought RVP played better than Welbeck against Burnley and Sunderland then he won't sub him off for Welbeck. Unfortunately LVG knew that RVP had poor games and that's why he brought in Welbeck for RVP and as a result we indeed look way more dangerous when Welbeck came on.

4) So I missed your point or whatever? Alright then.. But you are actually the one who missing my point because I never talk about Moyes and Falcao from the start. Try to stick on the line of the discussion. We haven't finish the one with above, make sure don't start a new one and make it worse.

5) I skip this, you are making things worse when clearly it is the same thing with #2

6) For a "striker". But SAF rated him as a player. My point was never be SAF rated Welbeck better than Rooney as a striker or a player. I said when Rooney played bad, he is dropped. Welbeck and Chicharito got their chances when it happened. Nothing more. So stop making it worse. I don't remember I said SAF rated him as a better striker than Rooney.

Now I realise,
No wonder we got so many things to argue, when clearly half from 6 of them are just a new argument you made. Let's stick with 1, 2 and 3 first. 1, 2 and 3 are after all from the very beginning we had been discussed.

I did not make any assumptions, I even posted what I stated where I said the term 'record' could mean anything to Louis van Gaal and he is yet to state it equates to 'stats of goals', you are the only one making assumptions here.

----

I have asked if you are going to use statistics to prove a point then find me more relevant statistics so we can better understand the numbers. You have now replied with 'it was a mix of games'.

I will repeat this point, perhaps Louis van Gaal's sports scientists have gone into much more depth with their analysis, you have not even controlled for several variables, it seems your use of statistics was the wrong way to approach the argument.

You also need to provide sources, how do I know you haven't just made those stats up?

----

Also, why do you not include Key Passes or Assists?

I think you are wrong if you assume Louis van Gaal does not value a striker that provides both. Somebody on here posted Danny Welbeck has been very poor with his assists, perhaps you will not include them because they will prove Welbeck to be not to the standard required.

----

Watch more of Louis van Gaal's interviews, you will learn he has a profile that must be met for each position. This profile goes more into depth than 'a striker that can score goals'. And it seems Danny Welbeck was deemed inferior to Rooney, RVP, Falcao and Wilson.

----

You have not provided statistics to show RVP's season in more depth, there are simply too many variables you will not control for therefore the methods you have applied for the Welbeck comparison is severely flawed.

I think you should move away from using statistics to try and prove what already appears to be a poor point.

----

'LVG seems to count the whole career goals without looking at how many times Welbeck spent his career 2 seasons ago.'

You do not know this therefore stop trying to make things up. Louis van Gaal himself has stated he does in depth analysis on each player, stop insulting his sports science department.

It is more likely from his data he concluded Welbeck to be a inferior option to Rooney, RVP, Wilson and Falcao, is that so difficult to understand?

----

RVP was fit enough to be selected against Burnley. Louis van Gaal did not select Shaw today because he was not fit enough, RVP was selected because he was fit enough.

You are of the opinion RVP was not fit enough to be selected against Burnley however evidently LvG disagrees.

----

He subbed off RVP because there were only so many minutes he wanted to play him for. Today he also subbed off Rafael, he deemed him fit enough to start but not complete 90 minutes.

This is the normal process when a player returns to football.

----

Even when I clearly explain the point you still refuse to acknowledge it. David Moyes took a long time to assess the players and that proved to be the wrong choice, Louis van Gaal was more decisive.

A decisive manager is superior to a hesitant manager.

Giving Welbeck a season to prove himself is ok for a mid-table club but if you expect Louis van Gaal to get top four then he needs to be decisive and ensure he has a squad that can also do this.

He has until the transfer window closes, he felt he needed to offload Welbeck and bring in Falcao.

Danny Welbeck simply did not do enough to justify keeping.
----

I have also stated Louis van Gaal will drop players if they do not perform. SAF is not the only manager who does this....

----

I'm replying to each point you have made, I'm not making any new points.

What is the point in you telling me not to reply to some of your post 'just stick with 1,2 and 3', if they are flawed points then I will respond.

 

[MUFCpiffgawd]

Welbeck showed with his chip that he just isn't clinical enough. A world class forward like Falcao, for example, would definitely have scored that chance. No doubt about it. You'd never see Falcao missing a chance from there.

 

[Earthquake]

How was remotely similar? For one it was a tighter angle and the keeper stood tall, I know hes a good striker but i doubt even he could chip the ball so close to keeper. In fact the only way he probably would have scored was by keeping it low... keeper just made a good save

Had he managed to chip it across goal like Welbeck, there was a defender on the left that would have handily cleared it anyway. Had to go direct and low from where he was.

 

[JSMHE]

I did not make any assumptions, I even posted what I stated where I said the term 'record' could mean anything to Louis van Gaal and he is yet to state it equates to 'stats of goals', you are the only one making assumptions here.

I will repeat this point, perhaps Louis van Gaal's sports scientists have gone into much more depth with their analysis, you have not even controlled for several variables, it seems your use of statistics was the wrong way to approach the argument.

I hope you know what is assumption mean.

----

I have asked if you are going to use statistics to prove a point then find me more relevant statistics so we can better understand the numbers. You have now replied with 'it was a mix of games'.

Oh God!! I typed a lot and you only read the last part. Jeezzz.. Read it the whole thing again, that stats is more than enough to show that LVG comment on his goal scoring record is harsh. We are not talking about how he shoot or how he score goals or how he missed and etc. We are talking about a goal scoring record which LVG mentioned only. The stats I posted showed his goals record, his games time and minutes ratio. I already make it easy for you to understand and you just still don't get it.
Mixing games was just assumption of the previous statement "36 games and 31 games" I used. It has nothing to do the new one I just made. The fact is I already told you 14 games as a starter in the league, with only 2 games above 20 mins and he scored 9 goals.

You also need to provide sources, how do I know you haven't just made those stats up?

It's not made up. I already told you that I still remember the number games he played as a starter and non starter and also his goals and how he scored last season. If you disagree, then try find source and prove that my 14 starter games in 9 goals with only 2 games above 20 mins is wrong. including my 4 starters CL and half or more played as a winger.
Which I doubt both of them are wrong.

Also, why do you not include Key Passes or Assists?

I think you are wrong if you assume Louis van Gaal does not value a striker that provides both. Somebody on here posted Danny Welbeck has been very poor with his assists, perhaps you will not include them because they will prove Welbeck to be not to the standard required.

Another assumption from you.
And there we go another argument. This is why this discussion will take too long since you just keep making a new one. He is indeed very poor in assists but Welbeck involves in many our chances which lead goals last season.

League:

Swansea:
2 goals

Chelsea (0)
Liverpool (0)

Spurs:
He won the penalty

Everton (0)

Aston Villa:
2 goals

West Ham:
1 goal
1 assist

Norwich (45 mins):
1 goal

Hull:
He was the one who pass the ball to Young which became an own goal

Spurs:
1 goal

Swansea:
1 goal

Chelsea:
Good link up play with Valencia and pass it to Jones. Jones shot lead a goal for Hernandez

WBA (about 20-25 mins):
1 goal

City (0)

Norwich:
He won us a penalty

Southampton:
He won us a free kick which lead a Mata goal

Champion League:
Shak:
1 goal

OLY:
won us a free kick which lead to RVP victory goal

Bayern (0) (Though he scored a great goal), unlucky for being called as a high foot. I don't think it's a high foot anyway)
Bayern (0)

Watch more of Louis van Gaal's interviews, you will learn he has a profile that must be met for each position. This profile goes more into depth than 'a striker that can score goals'. And it seems Danny Welbeck was deemed inferior to Rooney, RVP, Falcao and Wilson.

He said "When you asked Danny Welbeck, Danny Welbeck has already here from his nine. And he played after Sunderland 3 seasons. But he doesn't have the record of RVP "or or" Rooney. And that's the standard." If he compared him with Rooney only then it could be more into depth than a striker that can score goals. But he mentioned RVP named first. And RVP famous record is his goals as a striker not his assists.

You have not provided statistics to show RVP's season in more depth, there are simply too many variables you will not control for therefore the methods you have applied for the Welbeck comparison is severely flawed.

I think you should move away from using statistics to try and prove what already appears to be a poor point.

You missed it again. How many times I already told you The RVP 31 games was not mine.
I made my own already and there was no RVP. And I already showed you the stats that Welbeck scored 9 goals in 14 league starter and only 2 games he came on from the bench above 20 mins. That record is very good. So harsh comment from LVG.

'LVG seems to count the whole career goals without looking at how many times Welbeck spent his career 2 seasons ago.'

You do not know this therefore stop trying to make things up. Louis van Gaal himself has stated he does in depth analysis on each player, stop insulting his sports science department.

It is more likely from his data he concluded Welbeck to be a inferior option to Rooney, RVP, Wilson and Falcao, is that so difficult to understand?

It's that really hard to understand my point here.
LVG sold Welbeck based on his goals scoring record in the past. He hasn't got his fair chances to show that he is good enough to play for Manchester United under LVG even after a massive improvement and good goal scoring record last season.

RVP was fit enough to be selected against Burnley. Louis van Gaal did not select Shaw today because he was not fit enough, RVP was selected because he was fit enough.

You are of the opinion RVP was not fit enough to be selected against Burnley however evidently LvG disagrees.

He subbed off RVP because there were only so many minutes he wanted to play him for. Today he also subbed off Rafael, he deemed him fit enough to start but not complete 90 minutes.

In other word he's not fit enough to play for 90 mins. A professional fit player should be called fit if he is fit to play 90 mins. If he can't then he shouldn't start. The same thing is applied to RVP. and shouldn't start the game. But Rafael played well so I won't have a problem if he's not fit enough to start and still played as a starter.

Even when I clearly explain the point you still refuse to acknowledge it. David Moyes took a long time to assess the players and that proved to be the wrong choice, Louis van Gaal was more decisive.

A decisive manager is superior to a hesitant manager.

Not in a link of our discussion.

Giving Welbeck a season to prove himself is ok for a mid-table club but if you expect Louis van Gaal to get top four then he needs to be decisive and ensure he has a squad that can also do this.

Welbeck doesn't need to prove himself for mid table club. He has the quality of big club who wants to get top 4.

Danny Welbeck simply did not do enough to justify keeping.

He hasn't play as a starter in the league yet. He only came on from the bench a few mins.

I have also stated Louis van Gaal will drop players if they do not perform. SAF is not the only manager who does this....

Not sure when I said LVG won't

 

[adexkola]

@JSMHE and @Empire...

What the feck?

 

[JSMHE]

@JSMHE and @Empire...

What the feck?

I know man it's crazy.

When we want to move on from Welbeck, someone just came on and replied your simple post and start a new argument. It's probably my last post on him no matter what he said next. Him and me is like oil and water. It will take forever to argue with someone who loves to start an argument.

 

[432JuanMata]

Rated him when here loved his workrate, pace, energy and his link up play but as much as people are trying to bend the stats the chap couldn't hit water if he fell off a boat. I think it is something that can be improved but if Van Gaal thinks he is not good enough then I agree with him. The way people are going on it's like he was our best striker and with Falcao coming in he would have to fight for a place with 3 world class strikers and while he is young he will never become a world class striker. The butthurt on here is unbelievable

 

[bosnian_red]

@JSMHE and @Empire...

What the feck?

Seriously though. The size of those posts
They just keep getting longer and longer too

 

[cesc's_mullet]

at how the Caf has changed it's tune on Welbeck.

RAWK-esque stuff in here after reading through some posts. Brilliant.

 

[dirkey]

I love how @JSMHE uses a stat to make Welbeck look prolific with 9 goals in 14 starts .. yet, his 9 goals consists of games he both started and came on in. Please, if you're going to talk about x goals in y starts, then that x should only be those goals he scored when he actually started.

Pathetic. It's like the 6 in 7 you trot out, neglecting to mention the 3 cup games in that run he started where he failed to score.

Making up stats to serve a point.

 

[JSMHE]

I love how @JSMHE uses a stat to make Welbeck look prolific with 9 goals in 14 starts .. yet, his 9 goals consists of games he both started and came on in. Please, if you're going to talk about x goals in y starts, then that x should only be those goals he scored when he actually started.

Pathetic. It's like the 6 in 7 you trot out, neglecting to mention the 3 cup games in that run he started where he failed to score.

Making up stats to serve a point.

It's even worse than pathetic since you are missing something here. I said he scored 9 goals in 14 starts + 2 games came on from the bench above 20 mins which was the ones against WBA and Norwich and he scored goals in that games. All his 7 goals are from 14 starters. While 2 goals were from the two games I mentioned which was the only games he played above 20 mins from the bench. The rest of his games were just around 10 mins less or less than 20 mins. If you think I making it up, then prove me if I'm wrong.

I remember a few weeks ago when I was talking to someone about Welbeck who scored 12 goals in 2011/2012, they said to exclude the cups (which is City game) because what we want is the consistency stats of goals every week which is league games.

 

[dirkey]

It's even worse than pathetic since you are missing something here. I said he scored 9 goals in 14 starts + 2 games came on from the bench above 20 mins which was the ones against WBA and Norwich and he scored goals in that games. All his 7 goals are from 14 starters. While 2 goals were from the two games I mentioned which was the only games he played above 20 mins from the bench. The rest of his games were just around 10 mins less or less than 20 mins. If you think I making it up, then prove me if I'm wrong.

I remember a few weeks ago when I was talking to someone about Welbeck who scored 12 goals in 2011/2012, they said to exclude the cups (which is City game) because what we want is the consistency stats of goals every week which is league games.

If you're excluding cup games because one person mentions to do so, you should state 6 goals in 7 league games. One extra word, means a lot.

Gotcha. 7 goals in 14 starts. Perfect. I don't doubt that this is a correct stat.

 

[JSMHE]

If you're excluding cup games because one person mentions to do so, you should state 6 goals in 7 league games. One extra word, means a lot.

People complained when I mentioned cup goals. When I exclude the cup games you complain.
They got the point actually. Cup games is not a fair competition to use stats since it's not competition where you played every weeks.

Gotcha. 7 goals in 14 starts. Perfect. I don't doubt that this is a correct stat.

There won't be any misunderstood if you read my post carefully.

 

[dirkey]

People complained when I mentioned cup goals. When I exclude the cup games you complain.
They got the point actually. Cup games is not a fair competition to use stats since it's not competition where you played every weeks.



There won't be any misunderstood if you read my post carefully.

This is priceless! Cup games is not a fair competition to record stats, because it's not a competition you play every week? So, a start up front for United doesn't count, because the actual competition isn't one you play every week? Or, if you start up front against a side 2 divisions below, and do nothing despite the inferiority of the opposition, it doesn't matter because you don't play that competition every week? Brilliant.

I read your post perfectly. You did mention that he score 2 of them from substitute appearances. My point is that the way you wrote it was deliberately to make it look like he scored 9 in 14, with the bit about sub appearances as an afterthought.

 

[JSMHE]

This is priceless! Cup games is not a fair competition to record stats, because it's not a competition you play every week? So, a start up front for United doesn't count, because the actual competition isn't one you play every week? Or, if you start up front against a side 2 divisions below, and do nothing despite the inferiority of the opposition, it doesn't matter because you don't play that competition every week? Brilliant.

I read your post perfectly. You did mention that he score 2 of them from substitute appearances. My point is that the way you wrote it was deliberately to make it look like he scored 9 in 14, with the bit about sub appearances as an afterthought.

So you want to include his 3 cup games.
Alright, calm down.
Danny Welbeck, cup games:
0 goal
1 assist

Done! No more argument about it.

Well, that's why I told you to read it carefully until the sentence is finished.

 

[dirkey]

So you want to include his 3 cup games.
Alright, calm down.
Danny Welbeck, cup games:
0 goal
1 assist

Done! No more argument about it.

Well, that's why I told you to read it carefully until the sentence is finished.

Yup, I do want to include cup games. Thus, Danny's stats read 7 goals in 14 games, and a career best run (that I can remember anyway, I'm open to being proven wrong) of 6 goals in 10 games.

Gah, I can't believe I've contributed to bumping this thread again myself, after a lovely 4-0 win today. Hopefully it will all die down soon, once people realise LVG was 100% correct.

 

[Robbie Boy]

at how the Caf has changed it's tune on Welbeck.

RAWK-esque stuff in here after reading through some posts. Brilliant.

They have? Not to me, they haven't. Welbeck has always been an extremely divisive player on here. He had two extreme camps; the overraters and the underraters. That's still the case.

 

[JSMHE]

Yup, I do want to include cup games. Thus, Danny's stats read 7 goals in 14 games, and a career best run (that I can remember anyway, I'm open to being proven wrong) of 6 goals in 10 games.

Gah, I can't believe I've contributed to bumping this thread again myself, after a lovely 4-0 win today. Hopefully it will all die down soon, once people realise LVG was 100% correct.

0 goal in 3 cup games. And 6 goals in 7 games.
In other word. Danny has a bad one in capital one cup and great one in the league games.

Then don't come. And don't post anything.
I do think van Gaal is correct and I also think Welbeck could prove him wrong. But the point what I think is not who is correct but it is unfair to sell players like Welbeck without giving a single fair chance starter in the league when the other players had worse games than him.

 

[fishfingers15]

at how the Caf has changed it's tune on Welbeck.

RAWK-esque stuff in here after reading through some posts. Brilliant.

Don't be fooled by the most vocal in the thread. It's a miracle that you are keeping up with this at the rate at which Empire is striking back at JSMHE. Most of us think he's a great little footballer, who can dribble well, press high up the pitch and has overall all round play, but needs to score more goals. He's been always treated kindly here because he's home grown than others. There are a few who questioned his goal scoring abilities even when he was with us, but always thought that'll come around with more matches. It hasn't happened for him and RvP signing meant that he had to play out wide. We'll always wish him well and while we aren't exactly happy that he ended up at Arsenal, we'll always wish him well. He may not be your out and out goal scorer if you were looking for one (He could well turn it around and make us look like mugs, but it's a bit difficult to foresee right now)

There are a few posters who are convinced that this is a big mistake and they're vocal about it, this will lead to others arguing against it and downplaying his contribution, but that's how forums work.

 

[JSMHE]

Don't be fooled by the most vocal in the thread. It's a miracle that you are keeping up with this at the rate at which Empire is striking back at JSMHE. Most of us think he's a great little footballer, who can dribble well, press high up the pitch and has overall all round play, but needs to score more goals. He's been always treated kindly here because he's home grown than others. There are a few who questioned his goal scoring abilities even when he was with us, but always thought that'll come around with more matches. It hasn't happened for him and RvP signing meant that he had to play out wide. We'll always wish him well and while we aren't exactly happy that he ended up at Arsenal, we'll always wish him well. He may not be your out and out goal scorer if you were looking for one (He could well turn it around and make us look like mugs, but it's a bit difficult to foresee right now)

There are a few posters who are convinced that this is a big mistake and they're vocal about it, this will lead to others arguing against it and downplaying his contribution, but that's how forums work.

LOL. I'm trying to get away from him because I hate arguing something pointless and takes forever. But it seems he already put a glue on my back and want to keep going

 

[dirkey]

They have? Not to me, they haven't. Welbeck has always been an extremely divisive player on here. He had two extreme camps; the overraters and the underraters. That's still the case.

I believe there's a third camp, of which I'm a part. The ones who thought he was a fine, in fact, pretty good squad player, but not deserving of a first choice spot in the team. Along with that I, and maybe others from the camp, feel getting rid of him wasn't that big a deal, and in fact was a great deal when looking at who was brought in to replace him.

 

[Robbie Boy]

I believe there's a third camp, of which I'm a part. The ones who thought he was a fine, in fact, pretty good squad player, but not deserving of a first choice spot in the team. Along with that I, and maybe others from the camp, feel getting rid of him wasn't that big a deal, and in fact was a great deal when looking at who was brought in to replace him.

Yes, I said that there are two 'extreme' camps and both of those will skew stats to make him look better / worse. Everyone in between has a fairly balanced opinion on him. I would agree with your sentiments regarding him / his sale.

 

[dirkey]

Yes, I said that there are two 'extreme' camps and both of those will skew stats to make him look better / worse. Everyone in between has a fairly balanced opinion on him. I would agree with your sentiments regarding him / his sale.

Ah, I get ya. Yeah. I think deal will benefit all parties to be honest. Good luck to him. Just not against us.

 

[itso 7]

Don't be fooled by the most vocal in the thread. It's a miracle that you are keeping up with this at the rate at which Empire is striking back at JSMHE. Most of us think he's a great little footballer, who can dribble well, press high up the pitch and has overall all round play, but needs to score more goals. He's been always treated kindly here because he's home grown than others. There are a few who questioned his goal scoring abilities even when he was with us, but always thought that'll come around with more matches. It hasn't happened for him and RvP signing meant that he had to play out wide. We'll always wish him well and while we aren't exactly happy that he ended up at Arsenal, we'll always wish him well. He may not be your out and out goal scorer if you were looking for one (He could well turn it around and make us look like mugs, but it's a bit difficult to foresee right now)

There are a few posters who are convinced that this is a big mistake and they're vocal about it, this will lead to others arguing against it and downplaying his contribution, but that's how forums work.

I will always think that he'd would have been a perfect strike partner for any of our three strikers with his excellent link up play. But for that to happen it would require LVG to make a very big decision, a decision he changed formation to avoid making and one that Woodward and the board wouldn't agree with, he is a nutter but that is a step too far even for him.
Welbeck didn't have the time to wait anymore because he'd have stagnated so we rightfully let him go and offered his place to one who could.

 

[walkinhop]

Feel like its the same case with Rooney. The English supporters will overrate them and the foreigners underrate. The truth is in between. Fact is though he hasnt scored enough and for those who say he links well - better get a proper AM then, no?

 

[2mufc0]

His performance on Saturday pretty much summed up what type of player Welbeck is, great link up, pace and work rate but can't do the main thing a striker should be doing: taking the chance you get. His miss made the difference between Arse drawing 2-2 or winning 3-2.

He's the type of striker who will probably score 1 in 3 chances, in big games like Saturday your striker will probably only get that one good chance. Taking that chance is what separates the good strikers from the greats.

Maybe he can improve this aspect of this game, but we have been saying that since he was 18. Simply not good enough to be a first choice striker for a top 4 side, was the right decision to let him go.

 

[Donaldo]

Typical Welbz.

 

[Mogget]

His performance on Saturday pretty much summed up what type of player Welbeck is, great link up, pace and work rate but can't do the main thing a striker should be doing: taking the chance you get. His miss made the difference between Arse drawing 2-2 or winning 3-2.

No, it didn't at all. His miss came so early in the game there's no way you can say it would have panned out the same if he'd scored. Regardless of his miss, we were 2-1 up with 10 minutes to go. It's not Welbeck's fault we dropped points.