Patters wrote:
Loylz wrote:

Whilst I agree with your overall point Walcott is well worth his fee in what he's contributed for the club. Walcott has been a consistent performer and produced more for the club than Ramsey ever has up until his injury last season.

PS: I'm not talking about any one single game by the way before anyone tries "reminding" me of Ramsey's FA Cup final goal.

Edit: This way for Patters

Agree - Walcott been here for 9 years and done a lot of good. But I thought this 'British core' idea was around about the time they were all lining up with that picture, signing new contracts which was supposed to signal that they were ready to kick on and become important players.  I think Walcott signed a few months after, but that big injury has meant current (£80k/100k a week?) deal hasn't been good value for us so far. That's what I meant by only Ramsey has been able to play a big part. 

Time frame is important. Overall the British players have done a good job considering what they were bought for. Last 2 years has been difficult for them. 

OK, I understand. I've gone over your original post again and it does seem you meant since the contract renewals. I agree completely in that sense. Since then Walcott, Wilshere, and AOC have missed big chunks through injury. Gibbs has also suffered with this and Ramsey's had a while where he kept getting niggles and was struggling for form.

I agree considering all the injuries they've all done pretty well. In fact given that Ramsey's gotten over his injury, many niggles and poor form, I'd say given some time the rest may come good as well. Wilsh and AOC are great talents and being free from injury could see them cement their status in the team. Gibbs is a pretty decent backup LB when he isn't getting injured (which to be fair to him hasn't been for a while). And Walcott, if he stays fit and isn't constantly overlooked, will produce on the pitch. Whether his style is pleasing on some people's eyes is a different story.

With the exception of Ramsey, they are a bunch of decent squad players. Nothing more. Which is not too bad I guess.

Walcott, Wilsh, Rambo, Ox and Gibbs. Failure? I don't think so.

banduan wrote:

Walcott, Wilsh, Rambo, Ox and Gibbs. Failure? I don't think so.

Depends on the context.
Rambo is the closest to a starter despite how many games they've been given to develop & we've yet to win either the PL or CL
IMO the development project is only a success in terms of not costing us a bundle in transfers and wages during the financially lean years, but other than that it has done little
That said IMO many of the development players could have done better under a different development system that perhaps gave a better structure / framework regarding roles.

Could it have been a better success? Yes.
Is it a failure? No.

Anzac wrote:
banduan wrote:

Walcott, Wilsh, Rambo, Ox and Gibbs. Failure? I don't think so.

Depends on the context.
Rambo is the closest to a starter despite how many games they've been given to develop & we've yet to win either the PL or CL
IMO the development project is only a success in terms of not costing us a bundle in transfers and wages during the financially lean years, but other than that it has done little
That said IMO many of the development players could have done better under a different development system that perhaps gave a better structure / framework regarding roles.

Ramsey is only closest to being a starter in that he's the closest to being fit for quite some time. Before their long injury layoffs Wilshere, Walcott and Gibbs were starters and AOC was getting minutes in every game and on his way to becoming a starter. Gibbs just got surpassed by the better player. The others are just suffering from injury problems or in Walcott's case, maybe something behind the scenes with contract talks (or his possible departure).

This group may not be the best players in the world but they're still young and developing and injuries permitting 2 (possibly 3) of the 7 will be regular starters if they remain here.

qs! wrote:

The lists looks like a pretty decent list of players to me. They aren't all starters but I'd rather have Gibbs and Jenkison than 2 foreign players of a similar standard. Thats the point really. There is no English player at Sanchez or Ozils level so you aren't going to have a first 11 littered with British talent.

Look at all our rivals and where their English stars are. Bar one or two exceptions its the weakest areas of their squad. This summer you'll see Chelsea try to upgrade at centre half, the only area they have English players. Harts probably only kept his place at City due to being English. Lampard and Milner are squaddies on the way out.

The fact that we have players like Gibbs, Jenkinson, Chamberlain, Chambers as squad options and Wishere as a would be starter if he could get fit goes to show we picked mostly the right British players.

What this man said. Ramsey and Oxlade will be important contributors for next several years. Others like Wilshere, Gibbs, Welbeck and Chambers can be too. Hope we see a few more. And the comparison with our rivals is key. Pool have Henderson and Sterling and little else. United have Smalling and Jones. We're ahead of these guys on this front and won't be dragged into the hyper-inflated player grabs that will happen the next 2 summers. Delph will be a 20m player this summer or next, for example 

You can't judge it at this stage really. Ramsey is a huge player for us. Jenkinson is not at this level and IMO it's time for the club to move on from Gibbs and Walcott. But Wilshere, Chamberlain, and Chambers could all easily be productive starters here and Welbeck is a physical talent that hopefully Wenger can get something out of. How the latter four develop over the next couple seasons is the test.

Diaby KungFu wrote:

Agree with all this except for Welbeck. He's had a good season, has ridiculous athletic potential and is coming into his prime as well.

He's scored 4 goals in the league. If that counts as a good season for a forward, then we're nailed on for fourth for next season. As for this talk of his coming into his 'prime', what signs are there that his prime is any sort of top level?

ramsey on the right is a failed experiment

Gazza M wrote:

ramsey on the right is a failed experiment

allegedly  :doh:

You don't think he is better in the middle then, that we lack width with Ramsey on the flank, or that we tend to congest the middle when Ramsey starts out there? For me, it is three times 'yes' there, and I'd much prefer to have Ramsey in the middle with a real wide player on the flank.

Burnwinter™ wrote:

I think the British core has been a coherent and successful policy in at least one sense—I think it's been a tangible contributor to the improved morale we've enjoyed over the last two or three seasons.

Indeed, and I've always said it is important to have an English contingent for the identity of the club.

We've played some of our best football with Ramsey on the right though, Liverpool, today, even the Napoli game last season. I'm not sure what exactly but he obviously adds something on the right too.

otfgoon wrote:

We've played some of our best football with Ramsey on the right though, Liverpool, today, even the Napoli game last season. I'm not sure what exactly but he obviously adds something on the right too.

Exactly. Ramsey likes to get on the end of attacks, that's what he adds from the right. His goal showed why it's not that bad an idea to play him on the right and Cazorla deep, I don't think Ramsey could have played Cazorla's pass and Cazorla most likely wouldn't have made the run either.

Ramsey's pass for Alexis' second goal was as good a pass as any, so he obviously has that too in his locker. Ramsey adds a lot out wide because he is a top class footballer, but that doesn't mean he isn't an even better player in the middle of the park. I also agree that Cazorla in a million years wouldn't have made the run Ramsey made for his goal, and that is why I would like a real wide player out wide. Walcott would have made that run for instance.

That is an absolute peach of a pass, to underline my point about Ramsey's ability to pick a pass and execute it. Credit to Ev for the gif.

i liked the hunger jack showed as well. i reckon he's going to fight for his shirt. unless he does hippy crack while taking a slash in wenger's loafers, i see no reason to sell a talent like him.

I actually quite like Ramsey out of those congested deeper central midfield areas. I think he struggles to navigate himself and the team in that part of the field quite often; too many touches, passive passing, slight lack of precision. Conversely, that navigating the team stuff is what on form Santi excels at.

I do think that despite his various flaws as a central midfielder Santi in there is giving the team a whole different dimension and teams are struggling to get to grips with him. At the moment I am happy to focus on the things he can do and not worry about the things he cant.

Rex wrote:

Ramsey's pass for Alexis' second goal was as good a pass as any, so he obviously has that too in his locker. Ramsey adds a lot out wide because he is a top class footballer, but that doesn't mean he isn't an even better player in the middle of the park. I also agree that Cazorla in a million years wouldn't have made the run Ramsey made for his goal, and that is why I would like a real wide player out wide. Walcott would have made that run for instance.

I didn't say Ramsey was a bad passer, his long passing however isn't on Cazorla's level, and by a good margin imo. He's also doesn't have the overall vision (or experience for lack of a better word) that Cazorla possesses imo in that he's unable to control the game's tempo, doesn't know when to slow it down etc.

Walcott might have made that run but we would have lost much more elsewhere if we had him and Ramsey instead of Cazorla and Ramsey on the pitch. Santi just can't win for some strange reason, everyone agrees he was top class yesterday, he even won MOTM and people still want him out of the first XI or even worse.