And those strengths weren't harnessed well at Arsenal. All players have their strengths, it's how clubs put them to use and make the player better. Henry came here having showed his talent at the world stage in France 1998. Does it mean that he didn't improve at the club? Do you agree with Clrnc that the Giroud that joined the club is the same as the Giroud we have now?

Yes, I do. Clarence is right.

Giroud suffered a lot of abuse when he came here. He's got roughly the same strengths and weaknesses now as he had then, though he's slowing down further.

The exceptional things he does now, when they come along, are very similar to the exceptional things he did five years ago. The only thing I'd identify as having changed much is that he gets totally shut out of matches a bit less often, but I'd put that down to overall tactical changes as much as changes he's made to his positioning.

People have had to acknowledge him over time due to his consistency at the second tier level, the match-winning impact he's frequently had, and his relative durability. Even when Welbeck was signed (and perhaps still now) there were lots of people saying Giroud would never be selected again, and he's refuted that.

Fair enough then. I disagree, think he improved a lot with ball at feet and his movement compared to when he came here first for instance.

He'd been at the club a year when he took those two touches in Wilshere's famous Norwich goal.

We didn't teach him how to do that and during his Arsenal career, I feel he's had a steady knack for the "sand wedge" school of assist—seeing the moves and making them happen. I don't think I'm distorting anything, that's just what I recall of his performances over the years.

I respect your opinion. I recall him differently. You think he stopped getting shut out for tactical reasons. I believe it's because he improved his movement here and the way he used his body. He was technically accomplished so I wasn't surprised by the Wilshere goal either, even before that he had some very good first time assists to Podolski. I wouldn't say his technique improved at Arsenal, he wasn't Walcott and he came here late but the use of it definitely did over time in my opinion.

Fair enough. I think we'd have to go deeper into the archives to take this further. I don't regard myself as an expert judge.

People have an awful memory if they think first season Giroud was the same as second season Giroud. There was a massive transformation. Since then, he's been more or less the same player.

As Qwiss said, maybe in another thread, that he's another player in his second seasons doesn't mean that he improved. If we ever get Xhaka to play like he did in Bundesliga, that doesn't mean that we have improved Xhaka.

That's the thing. He definitely improved as a player - he was struggling to physically impose himself the first year in duels as well. How much that is down to our coaching and how much to how every player improves with experience is another issue

What I mean is that I too think he was better in his second season, but I didn't watch him in Ligue 1 so for all I know maybe season 2-Giroud is the player he was before he joined as well.

Giroud has definitely improved massively during his stay here, and the key point is that he got the time to do it. I don't see what's so controversial about giving Wenger credit for that. I doubt many other managers at this level would have put so much effort into his development.

That's because other managers are actually under pressure to win.

Not saying it's right, but as always the truth is somewhere in the middle. Wenger has wasted more than a couple of seasons because he gambled too heavily on key players making individual improvements or refused to bring in competition that would have possibly taken away some of the playing time from said players. Clearly valuing developing his players more than winning trophies.

FEBravo wrote:

That's the thing. He definitely improved as a player - he was struggling to physically impose himself the first year in duels as well. 

Like most strikers when they move to the PL. I don't think Wenger gets any great credit for Giroud adapting to the league after a few months.

Was this guy only seen as quick by ligue 1 standards? He's looked only marginally quicker than giroud to me. Always getting reigned in by defenders too easily

He looked really slow against Chelsea.

He has shocking support around him but he really has shades of Joel Campbell about him except without those delicious reverse through balls.

Lacazette has surprised me by how good a technical footballer he is, after being told by all the hipsters that he was not a very good ‘footballer’, but his ability as a goal scorer has been underwhelming. Doesn’t make great runs in the box and his finishing is pretty hit and miss.

At the moment looks like he’s a bit fatigued. Premiership is relentless.

Tim-bob wrote:

Lacazette has surprised me by how good a technical footballer he is,

Despite a dodgy first touch?

I think he's adapted poorly, but it also doesn't help that he's often a different wavelength from the midfield.

The number 9 curse continues. Luckily it won't be placed on Aubameyang.