The same Leicester who only played every weekend cause they didn’t have European football so didn’t have to change the team?
Cool 
1 Like
Well somehow I knew you would use that point. Yet, how far we get in Europe? 6-8 games and out in the second round? We play the youths or fringe players in the domestic cups with some senior players.
Somehow our main team still get burnt out or get plenty of injuries.
Lacazette should start because he has proved himself and we’ve looked better with him on the pitch, not because he cost £50m! The amount of money spent on players is irrelevant when it comes to team selection. The team should be picked on merit.
We don’t need to sell Laca just because he isn’t starting every match and cost a lot of money. That’s just silly. Him and Auba are both important and we should enjoy the fact that we have two capable strikers.
6 Likes
Yep. Sunk costs… manage squad to optimal results only.
Lacazette signing exemplifies the poor investment choices made by Wenger. It’s extremely frustrating.
In retrospect, at this point, I doubt anyone thinks he was a good investment.
2 Likes
I think he was, and will be a great investment…As do many others I’m sure…
I feel like Lacazette hasn’t been given a real chance.
Wenger would pull him at the 60th minute every game and then he got injured for like 3 months and now Emery refuses to start him with auba even though we play much better with him on the pitch.
Getting pretty fed up with this clubs habit of not giving deserving players a proper chance and then letting players like Xhaka and Mustafi stay in the team indefinitely
If we want to promote actual competition and rotation he should start at CF against Cardiff
1 Like
I think we should play a formation that best suits the best players we have and if that means sacrificing someone like Ramsey or Mkhi to play Laca up front with Auba so be it.
It’s stupid to bench Auba or Laca because one of them or both of them will just leave.
If we need striker depth, either promote Nketiah or Nelson or buy someone in January.
I think sticking to a 4-2-3-1 just because that’s what you’ve always done is silly. A manager needs to be flexible and adapt to the players and strengths in his team.
Its an interesting hypothetical… if we spent the 50m on someone like Bailey for example… we would have a depth issue at striker (Auba, Welbeck, Nketiah) - that is too close and too often to having Welbeck lead our line…
However, it would potentially massively improve our wing attack situation, which is a big problem right now - and to be honest one of the reasons we are seeing our wing backs so far forward and taking risks, leaving our defense even more exposed to counters.
I think right now, I am betting at some point we will need Laca to give us a lot of minutes and I wouldn’t feel confident if that was Welbeck instead.
If we played Lacazette for 90 minutes every game like we fucking should have done the day we bought him. He’d have so many more goals for us.
We have messed him about big time and it’s fucking shocking tbh
3 Likes
It would’ve made sense if we had one veteran and one promising talent. Like the Aguero-Jesus choice City have. Laca as an asset is too big imo for the bench.
1 Like
Jesus is not a promising talent. He’s a world class player who is chosen as much as Aguero is. Aguero has had to sit on the bench under peps rotation.
Laca will not sit on the bench - he will be used as I said in the post previously both domestically, in Europe and in the cups. In addition your previous point was that if we don’t play them both together - Laca should be sold
…leaving us with 1 (ONE) CF for a whole season which no sane person would consider… and @Phoebica and @Maverick79 added a sensible add-on to my point about playing time regarding Laca.
Midfield and defence are where the changes and permutations will be needed to be tinkered with by Emery our attacking options are fine save an AML and Iwobi is staking a claim there.
No, we had Giroud when we bought Laca, and Laca really doesn’t bring a whole hell of a lot more to the team than Giroud. So we shoulda spent that money on Bailey. Auba and Eddie as ur speedy strikers, Giroud as the tartget man and set piece specialist, and Welbeck in case of major emergency. Then we’d have a proper winger too. Although at the time we didn’t have Auba, still 50m on a guy like Laca is shitty business.
Yeah I thought about this after I posted… I know most can’t stand Giroud, and I definitely don’t love him as a main man, but have to say he is a totally respectable depth option… obviously it is all hard to say with hypotheticals and we will know better how Laca works out after this year (he will get lots of minutes I expect), but yeah, I can definitely see the rear-view mirror idea that a top winger would have been better buy, sticking with Ollie.
1 Like
you are really comparing giroud and laca 
I don’t think so… but I think it is fair to say would you rather have:
a) Auba, Laca and our wing options, OR
b) Auba, Ollie and a WC winger
It isn’t slam-dunk for me.
3 Likes
i meant a4tt
Yeah but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt that is what he meant (it is only reasonable way to look at it)… having said that… 
he is back onto his agenda driven crap again