Klaus wrote:

ultimate_warrior wrote:

Not at Arsenal he won't. 

Sure he will.

What skills make AOC a central player? I can't think of one talent that stands him out as a CM.

How unfortunate for you.

Klaus wrote:

Chamberlain will be a terrifying central player. Becomes clearer by each day.

Not today it didn't.

Have to say I don't see him ever being a great central player. He has the potential to be an explosive player but for a top European side I think he lacks too much on the ball in terms of composure, vision and ability to slow things to be a top central player.

Klaus wrote:

How unfortunate for you.

Not really, as you can't even point out one point other than maybe a feeling that he would be good there.

I could, but it strikes me as pointless because I assume you've watched Arsenal for the last few years. You either think he could play centrally or you don't; there's no need for me to explain to you what type of player he is or what his skills are.

To be fair you can see it in glimpses, but this season none of our players (the ones who've been here over 2 years) have shown the level of quality we expect from them at this stage in their development on a consistent basis.

His age for me is no excuse. If he isn't good or mature enough yet, then he shouldn't be playing.

Who would he play ahead of, though, in a central position? As far as I can tell, you rate Ozil and Wilshere, so unless you have another central position in mind?

flobaba wrote:

To be fair you can see it in glimpses, but this season none of our players (the ones who've been here over 2 years) have shown the level of quality we expect from them at this stage in their development on a consistent basis.

His age for me is no excuse. If he isn't good or mature enough yet, then he shouldn't be playing.

His age is an excuse, but yeah, he should still be at Southampton playing every week, and we should have only considered buying him when he turns 23.

He wouldn't play ahead of either one right now. I didn't say he would.

Klaus wrote:

I could, but it strikes me as pointless because I assume you've watched Arsenal for the last few years. You either think he could play centrally or you don't; there's no need for me to explain to you what type of player he is or what his skills are.

You could, but won't because you think it is pointless. Pretty pointless even saying that you think he can play centrally then. I've said why I think he can't play there and would be honestly interested to find out why someone would think his future is in the centre of the pitch.

I think he'd be an awesome second striker playing off of a big front man. Can't see him in any deeper central roles though.

He doesn't score or assist a whole load though to be the 2nd striker. He's not an Ozil or Fabregas type who can find a killer ball in a packed defence. I really think he'll be best from wide. He can beat a full back and he's great near the by line. I think he works best with that bit of space to burst into.

Convert him to RB

Paid 16 million for him at the age of 19, and he's played almost 100 games for us. As it stands, we've wasted our time developing him, when we could have had someone who can consistently perform today. Question isn't of talent. The guy is going to become a top player, but clearly he's far from it right now, and we are paying for it. He should still be at Southampton. 1 goal and 0 assists this season.

Well that's some serious hyperbole right there. Can't even begin to pick the holes in that one.

You don't think we could have used the money on someone who can perform in the short term? Ox is clearly a long term signing, but it's costed us in terms of developing him, as he is so inconsistent.

He's a long way off 100 games and at no point in his Arsenal career have we relied on him, he's been consistently a squad player and with every passing season he seems to fall further down the pecking order.

Chambo has 90 appearances for Arsenal in all competitions (61 in the league).

And we didn't pay 16m for him. BBC says 12m + add ons rising to 15m, Telegraph says 5m + add ons rising to 12m.

ultimate_warrior wrote:

You don't think we could have used the money on someone who can perform in the short term? Ox is clearly a long term signing, but it's costed us in terms of developing him, as he is so inconsistent.

Gervinho was supposed to be that guy.