I can't understand your argument - IMO its crazy. Yes I'm saying that someone who scores goals and thus wins us games is better than not having that player. As without those goals and wins we would have finished 6th or 7th! Its as simple as that really
No but we have his goals this season, and this season they have blatantly made a difference. Last season we had Giroud and Ramsey's goals that were making a difference. And we saw how much of a difference they made when Ozil and Ramsey were injured and Giroud was knackered we suddenly dropped from 1st to 3rd/4th. I can believe your arguing that if we didn't score goals and win games then we'd still finish 4th, and that it doesn't matter if we have WC players (like RVP), that they don't make a single difference, because some other players in the squad aren't as good.
If they don't make a difference we may as well play Sanogo every game with maybe Podolski instead of Sanchez and stop spending money on new players...
Should just sell the lot of Sanchez, Rambo, Ozil, and co. while we're at it. After all they make no difference right?
But they have literally made no difference to Arsenal football club. It's all well and good giving very specific examples of their contribution in one game and saying we wouldn't have picked up those three points in that one game if we didn't have Welbeck or Van Persie. But in reality, if we didn't have them then we would have had someone else playing. And in the long run, when we replace someone we've got no better or worse. Sanogo could have played against Sunderland and we probably would still have got 3 points. Welbeck could have played against Palace and we might possibly have got 0 or 1 points. Over the last 10 years we have had top class players (Fabregas, Van Persie, Nasri etc) who've helped us do nothing but finish 4th. They've left and been replaced with slightly more inferior players (Arteta, Podolski, Giroud)... who've helped us do nothing but maintain the status quo and finish 4th. We then went out and bought a world class player in Summer 2013... who helped us do nothing but maintain the status quo and finish 4th. We then went out and bought a world class player in Summer 2014... who it looks like is going to do nothing but maintain the status quo and help us finish 4th. Ultimately, does the quality of Welbeck really matter that much if he helps us do nothing but maintain the status quo of finishing 4th?
It's not a viewpoint... It's a load of facts. We have finish 4th consistently, regardless of who we have sold and signed. Where an opinion and discussion comes in is whether you think Welbeck is the guy that will help us break status quo and push on and do better... I can't see it. Ergo, I can't see the excitement. If you guys can then good on you.
Its not a fact as people have pointed out loads of places where the players you've mentioned have made a difference. Even so far as to point out that we were well above 4th spot before some of these players 'who don't make a difference' where out injured, which resulted in us crashing down to 4th. A more valid viewpoint could be that without these players we'd do even worse than 4th. I think it's a bit soon to say one way or another if a 23 year old can or can't be a great striker for us (look at Sturridge) but to say goals and points won don't make a difference...
Disregarding the rest of this debate... let's just clear this one up... are you seriously suggesting we lost the title last year because some of our players got injured?? And not because City, Liverpool and Chelsea were just far better than us last year??! How would be play 'without' them? Play with no players on the pitch? Play just with our reserve team? Play with our under 21s? When we lose a player, we replace them and do equally as well (ie. finish 4th). There is no evidence to suggest that if we lost a particular player we would do worse than 4th... because, well, we haven't finished lower than 4th when we've lost players. To say that we only would have won those points and scored those goals if Welbeck was playing rather than a different striker... Anyway, I agree with your last sentence. It's far too soon to judge him (so given that, I don't know why you're only arguing with me rather than anyone who has said he looks great... surely it's too soon for them to be concluding that too?). Though my ultimate feeling on this is that the quality of our players is irrelevant in terms of our general success for the next 2-3 years. Yes, obviously if we sold our first XI we'd do worse. But whether Welbeck turns into a 7/10 striker or a 10/10 striker, it won't make much difference to us while Wenger in charge. We'll still finish 4th and not challenge for the title or champions league. I'd like nothing more than players like Ozil and Welbeck to fire us to glory... and I could see it happening... but just not with Wenger in charge. So there we go. That's why I'm not really fussed either way about whether Welbeck is good, great or world class. Because at the end of the day, his quality is not the deciding factor to Arsenal right now... Wenger is.
You seem to be suggesting that when Welbeck (or anyone else) scores goals and we then win a game (use the Gala game for example where he scored a hatrick and won us the game), it makes no difference. That is why I'm arguing with you. That's madness. You then seem to be suggesting that if Welbeck wasn't on the pitch against Gala then you'd know somebody else would be on the pitch and score a hatrick and win us the game - or that they'd have exactly the same effect as Welbeck. This is a very shaky assumption. Especially as our back up in this case is Sanogo. You then say that It doesn't matter who we have, that we'll always finish 4th, as if lose all our best players then we'd still finish 4th. I'd say that is madness, and a much more disputable claim than other people claiming that Welbeck is good because he's scored 5 goals since he's been here.
Correct. It is highly likely to make no difference to the overall success of Arsenal in the league of CL. Podolski? That guy who won the world cup and has scored a ton more goals than Welbeck has. Anyway, it's not about specific performances in specific games. You keep going back to talking about specific examples. I'm talking about the general success of Arsenal. I don't care about one particular game against Galatasaray. With or without Welbeck we'd likely finish 4th in the league and get knocked out in the CL as soon as we play a good team. Read again:
Hardly like Podolski is doing much better than Welbeck is it? I think you totally missed the point about the Gala game, I used it as an example of player scores, we win game, we get points. Which has happened lots of times, and I'm only using specific examples because I can't be bothered to list every single game that a goal or assist by RVP, Welbeck, Giroud, Ramsey, Ozil ect has made a difference and got us points. I said "You then say that It doesn't matter who we have, that we'll always finish 4th, as if lose all our best players then we'd still finish 4th. Because you stated having good players (or strong links in the chain) doesn't make a difference becuase of the weak players (weak links in the chain) - so my response was if we lost our best players, but had players all the standard of our weak players, then we'd really suffer.
I love it - if someone scores, wins a game and gets us points, it makes no difference. May well not have bothered signing Henry then, or Anelka, or Ramsey, or RVP, or Ozil, or Wright. I can see why you don't like Wenger, as he refuses to do the obvious and sensible thing or selling all our best players, and not signing any good ones...
I didn't say Podolski was doing better than Welbeck. I said that we had other players to play up front. Jesus this will go on all night. Welbeck seems quite good. Nothing more than that. We're not going to challenge regardless of the players at our disposal until Wenger leaves. So until we reach that point then Welbeck's quality is moot. He'll help us to 4th. But we'd get 4th with Giroud up top. We'd get 4th with Podolski up top. We'd probably get 4th with Bentdner, Park or Sanogo up top. 4th come forth, make us a forth to be reckoned with.
Jesus, we'll be here all night. You either just don't get the point I'm making or are refusing to acknowledge it just to argue. It is a fact that without Welbeck, we didn't challenge for the league or champions league. So let's just leave it as a simple prediction for you to make: Now that we do have Welbeck in our team, will we now challenge for the league or champions league? YES or NO? I assume your prediction will be a 'yes' given that you're arguing that he is making an observable and measurable difference to Arsenal's overall success.
Jesus - you don't get the point I'm making. I'm saying that your argument is being ridiculous simplified. My point is that he is making a measurable difference, this can be seen and proven. I've also never claimed that we'll win the Prem or the CL. That doesn't mean that none of our best players are making a difference, that's a nonsense argument. I do feel though that Welbeck is improving our team, and is better than our other options - Sanogo and Podolski (thank you for reminding me that we had him as an option), and as such is getting us closer to our goal.
