World Football Thread XVI - The demise of one Ronaldo and the rise of another

[Drake Tungsten]

Rumours in the City that Arsenal FC are about to be taken over.

By who? Americans?

[ískallin]

HAHA!! Their first win in competitive European football.

Very niiice

[Krill]

There are a few words to describe England, and this is one of they: ****.

And I'm actually glad about this. I hope we fail to qualify for Euro 2008, because we might then get a decent frigging manager, and we might be able to kick the majority of these idiots called players into shape.

[Maquiladora]

Part of me hopes we don't qualify aswell. At least we won't be missing a World Cup.

I didn't see the game myself, but the Five Live commentators made it pretty clear Lampard and Rooney should've been subbed, instead of Lennon and Johnson. And subbing a right-back for a fresh one when we're dominating the game, and need more up front? Gutless.

The U21 squad and coach could've done a better job.

[Cort Haus]

McLaren is a 3rd rate plonker who wasn't any good at club level and only got the job because (a) he's not foreign and (b) he nicked Alex Ferguson's CV.

He played two players out of position (Gerrard and Lennon) just so he could play that useless lump of blubber Lampard in the centre (useless in an England shirt, that is. He's master of the deflection in a blue shirt).

Rooney looks crap without his mate Ronaldo to feed him into space.

To be fair to Israel, they got everyone behind the ball and didn't give England a chance to get behind them, where Rooney can be lethal on the one-on-one. Lennon couldn't get round them on the left because he had to cut inside all the time to get it on his right foot.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Rumours in the City that Arsenal FC are about to be taken over.

By who? Americans?

Yes. Could be worse, could be the Turkish criminal Asil Nadir who was rumoured to be interested the other year.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/leisure/article1561953.ece

From The Sunday TimesMarch 25, 2007

US tycoon’s Arsenal goalMatthew Goodman
THE American sports tycoon Stan Kroenke is in talks with ITV about buying the broadcaster’s £40m stake in Arsenal, the north London football club.

The revelation will fuel speculation that the billionaire owner of the Colorado Rapids soccer franchise could be preparing to launch a full bid. Shares in Arsenal have soared in recent months as speculation over a bid has refused to die down.

If a deal is put to the Arsenal board, it would be the last of the big four Premiership clubs to fall into the hands of overseas owners.

Kroenke already has a connection to the Gunners. Last month, the Rapids announced a marketing partnership with Arsenal. Both clubs insist that the arrangement is solely about closer cooperation on matters relating to cross-promotion and coaching. As well as the Rapids, Kroenke owns the Denver Nuggets basket-ball team and the Colorado Avalanche, an ice-hockey team.

ITV owns a 9.9% stake in Arsenal, a hangover from the late 1990s when the broadcaster snapped up stakes in a number of clubs, including Liverpool. It has been looking to sell for some time and is known to be locked in talks with a potential buyer. ITV declined to comment on whether Kroenke, who made the bulk of his fortune from shrewd property dealing, was the person with whom it was discussing a deal. “We never comment on speculation over discussions,” it said.

It is not clear what price Kroenke will have to pay for the stake, but ITV is said to want about £8,000 a share. It expects any buyer to pay a premium for what it regards as a strategic stake.

Shares in Arsenal closed on Friday at £6,500, valuing the club at £400m.

[duke o' york]

He can buy Newcastle!

[Drake Tungsten]

If a deal is put to the Arsenal board, it would be the last of the big four Premiership clubs to fall into the hands of overseas owners.

And third to fall to the Americans. I told you this would happen...

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Part of me hopes we don't qualify aswell. At least we won't be missing a World Cup.

I didn't see the game myself, but the Five Live commentators made it pretty clear Lampard and Rooney should've been subbed, instead of Lennon and Johnson. And subbing a right-back for a fresh one when we're dominating the game, and need more up front? Gutless.

The U21 squad and coach could've done a better job.

I did watch the game, Rooney didn't get much service but was poor. Johnson for Defoe was like for like in the formation. Rooney was playing just in behind. Our view in the pub was, it doesn't matter if Rooney's having a quiet game, he's the kind of player that can change a game. Defoe had an immediate impact and would have scored but for an absolutely brilliant save from the Israeli keeper.

To be fair, with a slightly worse keeper England would probably have won the game comfortably I think. He made a couple of saves, read Lampard's brilliant run perfectly and generally didn't do anything wrong all game.

Lennon and Gerrard on either wing was working quite well. Gerrard and Lampard linked up fairly well. One major problem was that the full backs were too slow to really overlap and make more space out wide. Richards possibly wasn't fit for 90 mins, but he was great when he came on. Very positive change. Football is about 11 players, if you aren't getting the ball to the strikers changing the strikers won't help you at all.

Don't get me wrong, I think Maclaren is a very average manager and the starting full backs were much too cautious, but we totally dominate the game, should have won and were unlucky not to do so. (A familiar story for Arsenal fans this season I guess). Bad result but I was much happier with the performance (coming from a very low base in the last two games).

There seems to be this ridiculous feeling from the media that you put Gerrard in the center and we'll win every game. Even Liverpool don't play Gerrard in the Center most of the time because they know that Alonso + Sissoko in the centre with Gerrard on the right wing is better than Gerrard + someone in the centre with anyone else they have on the right wing. In this case we had no fit left winger, and Lennon did a great job there. It was a good midfield selection with who was available.

[Maquiladora]

Rooney was playing just in behind. Our view in the pub was, it doesn't matter if Rooney's having a quiet game, he's the kind of player that can change a game.

I agree, but we shouldn't just sit and wait for something magical, if he isn't gonna be replaced, then lets look at the reason he's not performing. It's no coincidence Rooney was at his best playing alongside Owen, not behind. Owen is one of the best off the ball runners we've got. Rooney ate up that extra space up front to turn, run and burst in. He can't do much when he's being pressed in midfield, and the other striker is on his own in front of Rooney, which results in nothing passes. Rooney should stick up front with the other striker, muscle the defence and create space for each other. All this "dropping off to get the ball" nonsense isn't working for Rooney, or the striker in front of him.

From what I've read and heard on the night, Lennon was constantly having to stop and turn onto his right foot (he has a very average LF), slowing down any run he made there, and against a 10-man defence it makes things harder. He plays on the left sometimes for Spurs, but its at most a decoy before he switches wings. You're effectively picking a worse player if hes on the left. I suspect Gerrard could do what he does from any midfield position TBH.

[MikeH]

My view was that Lennon was the most dangerous looking attacking player England had, despite being on the left. The problem is, there's no left sided player... well there's Downing but he's incredibly slow and overrated by Maclaren. Gerrard's crossing isn't great left footed either. Gerrard didn't have a great game, and Rooney played a bit better when Defoe came on. As you said, it's good for him having someone running off the ball and Defoe did that but up 'till then Johnson had been holding the ball up well, linking play and being a bit of a nuisance, without anyone being able to put the ball through to him in a dangerous position.

[Maquiladora]

I can only go on the commentary I listened to (sadly). They were all basically saying Gerrard was the only one that turned up, and Lennon in spurts. It just seems a waste of Lennon's talents.

Terry Butcher wrote an article on the BBC website saying the same about Rooney. He has to come short for the ball all the time because he doesn't get the same service he gets at Man U. Then leaving one striker up front to do f'k all. Hard to believe Rooney's actually doing this himself, he seemed practically encouraged to do it under Sven, and now McClaren.

He also mentions leaving Lampard on the inside left (where he roughly plays for Chelsea), but IMO this works better when we've got Cashley Dole, who runs all along the left wing. With Lennon on the right and Gerrard in the centre. The only thing stopping this working is the players, who should be dropped/subbed if they don't do their bit. Thats where McClaren comes in... or not.

[Cort Haus]

It's Cashley Hole.

and yeah :

he doesn't get the same service he gets at Man U

Rooney looks crap without his mate Ronaldo

[MOBIUS]

I'm going to see Wales Vs San Marino tomorrow!!!

We might even win!

Well, it is on the way home from work...

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
It's Cashley Hole.

and yeah :

he doesn't get the same service he gets at Man U

Rooney looks crap without his mate Ronaldo

Like you wouldn't want Rooney playing for Arsehole? Oh that's right, he's English...