Olly giroud ooh la laaa: Page 31 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Olly giroud ooh la laaa

jones

Chili Palmer wrote:
jones wrote:
Was a class finish, lucky goal is taking the piss. Giroud had a dogshit performance in the first game, today he was far from awful.

Lucky in the sense that it all started with him missing a chance, and assisting the goal with his face. The finish was great, yeah.

It was the same as the first game imo, except this time he scored one of his many chances.

It was hardly a clear cut chance, Subasic came out very quickly. He did very well to keep his composure and score into the roof of the net with his weaker foot, can't see much of a comparison to the first leg.

Ricky1985

Giroud is a real fighter and I like that about him. He's a good player that does a lot of good things and I'm going to try and appreciate him more. He still drives me mad with some of his stupid play, but he's a proper player.

ChiliPalmer

qs! wrote:
Chili Palmer wrote:
Lucky in the sense that it all started with him missing a chance, and assisting the goal with his face. The finish was great, yeah.

It was the same as the first game imo, except this time he scored one of his many chances.

Lucky in the sense that he missed a chance? You are clutching at straws to rationalise your anti-Giroud agenda.

Yes, he was lucky that it came back to him after missing a chance...

Anti-Giroud agenda... 😆 he's been great for us this season, and as I've said before he's the best we can do atm considering the dry market for strikers, so I'm happy enough with him.

ChiliPalmer

jones wrote:
Chili Palmer wrote:
Lucky in the sense that it all started with him missing a chance, and assisting the goal with his face. The finish was great, yeah.

It was the same as the first game imo, except this time he scored one of his many chances.

It was hardly a clear cut chance, Subasic came out very quickly. He did very well to keep his composure and score into the roof of the net with his weaker foot, can't see much of a comparison to the first leg.

It wasn't no, but it was still a missed chance, and as I said the sequence before the finish was lucky.

He was mainly in the box in both matches, and missed many chances. The ones in the first leg were bigger, but aside from that he didn't do anything better tonight than in the first leg imo.

Qwiss

All he did wrong in the first leg was miss chances. His overall game was at a consistent level. People just react differently to a normal Giroud performance if he scores or if he misses a few. Which is fair enough if he isn't scoring enough. Its just a bit weird to complain when he scored tonight for his 5ht goal in 5 games.

evoh

Giroud has stepped up with he classic target striker progression.

Keep this going from now on and we will do alright.

spacemanspiff

He's kept it going for a while now.

Never thought I'd say this, but despite his obvious weaknesses he kinda sorta has been playing like that "World class" centre forward a lot of have been clamouring for - only in his style.

Anzac

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/904253/LiveStatistics/Europe-UEFA-Champions-League-2014-2015-Monaco-Arsenal

7 attempts, 4 on target, scored 1.
passing % of only 54% because his 'link' play is all about 1 touch flick ons = a high risk & low % play.

Anzac

These are his 'strengths'

http://www.football365.com/mailbox/9763341/The-Reasons-Why-Giroud-Isn-t-It-...

ludovicvanzis

spaceman spiff wrote:
Never thought I'd say this, but despite his obvious weaknesses he kinda sorta has been playing like that "World class" centre forward a lot of have been clamouring for - only in his style.

No he hasn't. His finishing has finally improved. Same player otherwise.

Biggus

Ricky1985 wrote:
Giroud is a real fighter and I like that about him. He's a good player that does a lot of good things and I'm going to try and appreciate him more. He still drives me mad with some of his stupid play, but he's a proper player.

I agree with you Ricky he is a real fighter his goal resulted from him not giving up.
And yes he is a "proper" player.

Clrnc

ludovic van zis wrote:
spaceman spiff wrote:
Never thought I'd say this, but despite his obvious weaknesses he kinda sorta has been playing like that "World class" centre forward a lot of have been clamouring for - only in his style.

No he hasn't. His finishing has finally improved. Same player otherwise.

His all round game has improved slightly too, but improving his finishing in front of goal is HUGE for any striker. It upgrades him to another level.

Of course there are still big deficits in his game that can render him ineffective in tight games, but it's up to us to play to his strengths.

Lukazan

Still wouldn't trust him to finish when he's got time to think about it though.

Rex

Took his goal really well.

Anzac

He's yet another instinctive/intuitive type player that AW prefers - give him time/the need to think rather than just react, and he get's it wrong as often as he gets it right.

Burnwinter

Anzac wrote:
We've never played that way prior to Giroud as CF.
Greedy was good with the ball on his chest but we've never looked to play a typical Target Man type with the ball in the air as an outball option.

Actually, I'd say Wenger's liked to set up with a player with those attributes since the Ade era, though we rely on it more now. Always seemed like he signed Chamakh because he knew we'd be less effective without an aerially dominant (or otherwise good at holdup play) point man when Van Persie inevitably got injured.

Anzac

Burnwinter™ wrote:
Anzac wrote:
We've never played that way prior to Giroud as CF.
Greedy was good with the ball on his chest but we've never looked to play a typical Target Man type with the ball in the air as an outball option.

Actually, I'd say Wenger's liked to set up with a player with those attributes since the Ade era, though we rely on it more now. Always seemed like he signed Chamakh because he knew we'd be less effective without an aerially dominant (or otherwise good at holdup play) point man when Van Persie inevitably got injured.

I don't think Chamakh was aerially dominant or a hold up player in the sense of a traditional target man CF like a Crouch or Carroll, but he was a deep linking CF who linked to the ball players by coming deep like RVP used to do, whereas Giroud is more likely to remain higher because he lacks pace to recover and get back into the area to get on the end of the movement.
Likewise Chamakh was similar to Giroud in that neither are essentially primary goal scorer types in a possession passing system.
I also think that Giroud's play atm is no better than Chamakh's when he was dropped when RVP returned post WC2010, and we should be aiming for the same sort of upgrade on Giroud in the summer.

Burnwinter

Anzac wrote:
I also think that Giroud's play atm is no better than Chamakh's when he was dropped when RVP returned post WC2010, and we should be aiming for the same sort of upgrade on Giroud in the summer.

Don't think anyone disagrees Giroud would ideally be upgraded. But Giroud's form since his foot injury is considerably better than anything Chamakh ever managed for us.

Biggus

Burnwinter™ wrote:
Anzac wrote:
We've never played that way prior to Giroud as CF.
Greedy was good with the ball on his chest but we've never looked to play a typical Target Man type with the ball in the air as an outball option.

Actually, I'd say Wenger's liked to set up with a player with those attributes since the Ade era, though we rely on it more now. Always seemed like he signed Chamakh because he knew we'd be less effective without an aerially dominant (or otherwise good at holdup play) point man when Van Persie inevitably got injured.

Well even Wenger knows that some kind of aerial threat is needed in the PL.
He knows more than those who call for us to go full Barca midget.

est

Giroud looks much better these days, because he actually knows how to run.

It's almost incredible. Massive credit to the coaching team.

« Previous Page Next Page »