Welbeck was fourth choice for Man U when sold him to us and was decent as cover but not much more.
With his poor injury record he was almost the perfect signing for us and could keep all our other crocks company in the physio’s room.
Let’s face it, Watford were about the only club after him, when he on a free transfer, and even they don’t want him.
It’s unbelievable that he only played around ninety games for us and Man U, yet he played for England forty two times and scored eighteen goals.
you said it…
His “hard word” are basically from him defending.
Are we talking about a defensive left wing who was shit in the final third?
With the correct piece of setup and enough help, yeah, he could be decent and score some goals.
If you ask him to create the chance and dribble the ball upfront, he is exposed.
I would pick Bendtner over him anytime, even as a wing.
Yeah, well there can’t only be technical and creative players like Bendtner in a team…
It’s all about how you set up the team and who’s your opponent. I don’t think Welbeck was meant to play as much as he did. If Wenger had more creative and injury free players at his disposal (so he actually could have tampered with his tactics) then Welbeck would have played less. But your talking like every player who plays up front for us should be like RvP? That’s simply not realistic. Welbeck is the pure definition of a defensive forward, he was never a creative force before or after we bought him.
I said it, he was not even a one trick pony.
Also see my reply below
Gervinho, at least he is speedy and possessed decent (if you don’t want to say good) dribbling skill, you think he was inferior.
Poldi, a lethal shooter and had double double in his first season, a lazy shit.
As long as a player works hard enough, then he is not shit in your opinion, I get it this way.
In the end, if he was meant to be a “defensive forward”, that was really a shit move by Wenger and we stick with him for a bit too long. We needed goal scorers, chance creator, we could simply play a defensive midfield or another defender to defend. This defensive forward idea was crap. Just like when Giroud had his usual 10-game scoring drought we praised his “defensive header” but not saying he cost us a few points by missing sitters and not scoring enough.
Anyway, for me Gervhinho had the package as a wide player/wing, Welbeck looked like one but actually not.
Agree to disagree.
(@DavidHillier)
Yes, he dribbled to dead end a lot of times… that’s frustrated.
I just think you fail to see the tactical benefit of having a player like Welbeck, if injury free. But I guess your right and his managers we’re wrong.
Yes, I failed to see the reason behind.
Wenger played 4 defenseman for 99.99% of all time, we also had 2 DM/CM.
7 players (including keeper) that had defensive responsibility already, which left 4 outfielders to do the attacking job.
I am baffled if we needed to add another “defensive midfielder/wide player” in the equation.
This was wrong for me.
I got your point.
I won’t disagree that we need the whole (or most) team to defend, but do we have enough fire power upfront? Could our defensive/central midfield and defenseman help out the scoring burden in the final third?
Ramsey scored some goals here and there, but frequently when he bombed up, there was a hole in midfield and we got bombarded by counter attack.