Difference is, this isn't the first time Giroud has gone through a dry patch, so let's not pretend this is something new. The fact is his dry patches are a simple indication of his quality, which is that he isn't a top quality striker that can consistently score goals for us. And the only thing he did today was lay the ball down for Podolski, other than that, he didn't do **** or link up any play, so no idea why people trying to spin his performance today into him doing great work without scoring, he didn't, plus Podolski's goal was more about his great finish, over Giroud's simple lay off to him, people here are totally trying to overexgarate Giroud's role in that goal to mask how **** he was.
Once again you restate my point incorrectly. Have you anything to write, other than lies and fabrications? In any case, you are so obsessed with this meaningless term "better" that trivializes the game. You and your fellow critics have this moronic simplicity in thinking that a player like Falcao is going to be better at absolutely everything than Giroud, and that he will instantly fit in with the way everyone at Arsenal plays, so that even the things he does do better, will start straight away. Do you honestly think it is that simple?
I wasn't pretending anything, that's you making assumptions. But overall I agree, we need somebody with better quality to lead the line and be consistent in front of goal. I suppose the main point I was making was that even when he's not scoring he's still contributing to the team, unlike some strikers who are only there to score goals. When their's dry up they are as good as a spare part in the team, but Giroud still offers something. In a nutshell though, yes we need a better striker, but that's something all of us already know and Wenger is trying to address.
He is still not the answer for our long term CF position. Come summer, i will be surprised if Wenger doesn't go in for another striker. At the moment he will do the trick against lesser opposition and the Pod/Walcott/and other attacking midfielder will compensate for him, I hope.
Yeah, what he offers is bad misses, and lot's of frustration to the fans. He couldn't have had better balls given to him to score. His main contribution to the team comes in the form of goals, and he's provided none for over a month now.
So, even if we win the league and he finishes with 20 goals and 20 assists, you would still change the team?
His main contribution should be to score goals, but the point I was making was that he also offers good hold up play, brings others into the game, feeds balls into dangerous areas for other players and pops up with a fair number of assists. I can't really be arsed to go round and round in circles arguing about Giroud because we all know we need a more consistent striker, but you'll be ****ed if you think you're going to convince me that he doesn't offer the team anything
Keep going I haven't restated anything incorrectly. You're turning yourself into not606 comedy gold like HIAG and Sandy Brown before him.
Considering we are half way through the season and in the Prem he is on 7 goals and 4 assists, I find that very unlikely. Unless his form drastically improves, he will get nowhere near that. Also, you have to bear in mind he is surrounded by an outstanding midfield, in an attacking Wenger system. He is doing ok but he is not anything special and rarely has he changed the game on his own for us.
So you're saying, "if Giroud was actually a productive player, would we change the team?" Couldn't we say the same about Bentdner and Park? What evidence is there that Giroud could get anywhere near 20 goals AND assists this season? That's 40 goal contributions. He's currently on 11 goal contributions after just under half the season. Simply by extrapolation he'll get about 15 goals and 8 assists.
From his logic it seems that we could actually replace Giroud with a striker from the 3rd division . Providing we still win then we will not have affected the team adversely in any way shape or form . he doesnt mention what happens when we lose though . I guess if we LOSE its everyones fault . if we win its because Giroud is effective at something ., something that is invisible to us all .
Breakdown of Giroud's Premier league performance: please log in to view this image Looking at his Prem breakdown, he had a good start but barring the brace in the Southampton game, he hasn't had a significant impact as a goal scoring/assisting CF since the 26 October. He also didn't make a contribution in any of our big matches vs Liverpool, Manchester U, Man City or Chelsea. The Liverpool and Chelsea both being home games which he played a full 90 minutes in. Unless he makes a major improvement in the second half of the season, Wenger needs to get another CF this summer.
Scored in 2 of his last 13 prem starts. But PISKIE was willing to bet he scored in more games than he didn't...? If we win anything this year it will be in spite of Giroud, not because of him. Just like Liverpool winning the CL in spite of Djimi Traore and not because of him. But just to be clear... I think Giroud is a solid squad player. We just a real top drawer striker worthy of our position as one of the top ten clubs on the planet.
Since Soton he's done naff all. Why do we keep starting him? Even ****ing Bendtner is making more of an impact at the moment.
Sorry was having issues with the image now its clearly visible. Agreed, as in my post, he has struggled in the second half of the first half of our season in the Prem. He also hasn't done much against the top 4 op. As for Bendy, i wouldn't be surprised if he pulled off similar stats as Giroud if he had all the starts and support he had from our midfield.
I could understand Giroud putting up crap numbers if his supply was Denilson, Gervinho and old Ramsey, but with Santi, Ozil, new Ramsey, Arteta etc. it's unacceptable.
