Arsenal vs Leeds United - Match Thread

[Cjay]

Farke gets slaughtered for not making subs early and slaughtered when he brings subs on. Perhaps the reality is that most of the times our subs are on the bench for a reason and our best XI are actually on the pitch.

He adores Aaronson and Wilson by his own admission (Farke) was 100% his pick.

Issue imo is neither of them work in the situation we bought them on for.

Okafor atleast offers a threat on the break with his pace, Wilson hasn't got any so we lost that.

Tanaka was immense in general and whilst Aaronson can do the harassing Tanaka does he's much worse on the ball which as the game opens up is an issue.

He's also far less intelligent with his off the ball work.

[Victor_OTT_17]

The equaliser changed the whole momentum. After the goal we were actually playing some good possesion football. Unfortunately the equaliser came out of nothing, rather than us being carved open. That gave Arsenal the impetus, the crowd woke up etc.

Weird how at 0-0 we were much the better team but at 1-1 we weren’t in it? Happens a lot. How many more times can we blame an equalizer for us capitulating? We were well in control at 0-0. Is our problem going in front? Preposterous but if we hadn’t, maybe we’d have got an easy point

[weasel]

Agree. Farke has virtually no quality to call on off the bench. Bahoya could be quality but we have not seen anything of him.

Yeah and Bahoya, like Dan James, is probably better as a sub when we are in front and the opposition are committing men forward so we can use the pace to hit them on the break.

[The Subhuman]

From what I saw it was our defensive line on the edge of the 6 yard box trying to keep them out and leaving the area of the 18 yard box free for their attackers.

Defence was excellent and well drilled today forcing a lot of offside decisions. Tarik was actually very quiet such was the impotence of the Arse forward line until they fortuitiously scored.

I'm not a Bijol fan as he's very static but he's tough to get past if he plays that deep sweeper role. I'd have been happier had he started and our set peices are more dangerous with him playing. Elvedi looks a poor man's Bornauw atm

[weasel]

Weird how at 0-0 we were much the better team but at 1-1 we weren’t in it? Happens a lot. How many more times can we blame an equalizer for us capitulating? We were well in control at 0-0. Is our problem going in front? Preposterous but if we hadn’t, maybe we’d have got an easy point

It's just momentum and it changed in an instant when they got the equaliser. You get the equaliser and you're all buzzing, all find an extra 10% of energy from nothing. The team conceding suffer the reverse, not intentionally but you just feel deflated, especially if it is a soft goal.

Also if you are in front, especially as the team not expected to win, you will find the opposition having to commit more players forward, having to attack more as they aren't just going to sit back and accept a defeat/ Likely also if it stayed at 0-0 you get to the point where Arteta makes his changes to try to win.

[The Subhuman]

That's two games for Bahoya, another 8 games and we trigger the buy. I wonder if we've made that decision anyway because we learn nothing from these 5 minute cameos but they count toward the conditions of the loan

[Victor_OTT_17]

It's just momentum and it changed in an instant when they got the equaliser. You get the equaliser and you're all buzzing, all find an extra 10% of energy from nothing. The team conceding suffer the reverse, not intentionally but you just feel deflated, especially if it is a soft goal.

Also if you are in front, especially as the team not expected to win, you will find the opposition having to commit more players forward, having to attack more as they aren't just going to sit back and accept a defeat/ Likely also if it stayed at 0-0 you get to the point where Arteta makes his changes to try to win.

You didn’t need to explain son: I’ve been watching football for 55 years…

[The Subhuman]

I have never been a sub for sub sake fan. You make them to make a difference when behind or going for a win, or timewasting but I'm not a fan of those either...

I still say we overpaid massively for Trafford, as good as he maybe, and that limited our spending the rest of the way.

[weasel]

You didn’t need to explain son: I’ve been watching football for 55 years…

Seemed necessary cos you seemed to be wondering why.

[1964white]

We were very good defensively for the most part. Still don't rate Elvedi much but hopefully Rodon back soon

I thought Elvedi was decent.

[1964white]

50/50 for me.
Should’ve kept it out but the shot was miss-hit and bounced as Trafford was falling/diving.
Had it been good contact, Trafford might have saved it.

The bounce was a crucial bit of luck. Also, Muharemovic was a whisker away from heading the cross to safety.

[1964white]

Weird how at 0-0 we were much the better team but at 1-1 we weren’t in it? Happens a lot. How many more times can we blame an equalizer for us capitulating? We were well in control at 0-0. Is our problem going in front? Preposterous but if we hadn’t, maybe we’d have got an easy point

Tiring legs!

[1964white]

We are so bad defensively and so far behind the top teams. Embarrassing how we throw away leads sometimes! How can we be so good until we score?

Conceded two goals at their place by a world class team.

Prior today we had conceded three goals in our first five games.

[SG90]

That's two games for Bahoya, another 8 games and we trigger the buy. I wonder if we've made that decision anyway because we learn nothing from these 5 minute cameos but they count toward the conditions of the loan

We need to give him six games as a starter. If he isn't good enough, fine, then we probably send him back in January or we keep him on the bench ala Harvey Elliott. If he's good, then great stuff and we play him twice more to ensure we sign him.

[SG90]

Farke gets slaughtered for not making subs early and slaughtered when he brings subs on. Perhaps the reality is that most of the times our subs are on the bench for a reason and our best XI are actually on the pitch.

It's not so much that the players on the bench are so much better, but more about making the right subs for the right game. Take Longstaff for example, his experience in the middle of the park would've helped once Arsenal gained momentum, or even someone like Gruev who is calm on the ball. Same with Bijol, he'd have been perfect for today and I'd have brought him on after we scored.

Also Okafor is the only player we have who can create something from nothing and we took him off while we needed a goal.

[John in Louisiana]

He adores Aaronson and Wilson by his own admission (Farke) was 100% his pick.

Issue imo is neither of them work in the situation we bought them on for.

Okafor atleast offers a threat on the break with his pace, Wilson hasn't got any so we lost that.

Tanaka was immense in general and whilst Aaronson can do the harassing Tanaka does he's much worse on the ball which as the game opens up is an issue.

He's also far less intelligent with his off the ball work.

Tanaka was absolutely immense in the first half, but sort of lost the beat in the second. Farke was right to sub him off, but Aaronson fresh wasn't an improvement on Tanaka gassed.

[SG90]

I have never been a sub for sub sake fan. You make them to make a difference when behind or going for a win, or timewasting but I'm not a fan of those either...

I still say we overpaid massively for Trafford, as good as he maybe, and that limited our spending the rest of the way.

You have to wonder what happened to the £25m we were willing to drop on Charles? Or why we chased Brandt and then gave up on anymore playmakers?

We've had two summers and not brought in any creativity, it eventually starts to bite.

[The Subhuman]

You have to wonder what happened to the £25m we were willing to drop on Charles? Or why we chased Brandt and then gave up on anymore playmakers?

We've had two summers and not brought in any creativity, it eventually starts to bite.

We spent it on Trafford. Charles, both the Charles would have been great signings

[weasel]

He adores Aaronson and Wilson by his own admission (Farke) was 100% his pick.

Issue imo is neither of them work in the situation we bought them on for.

Okafor atleast offers a threat on the break with his pace, Wilson hasn't got any so we lost that.

Tanaka was immense in general and whilst Aaronson can do the harassing Tanaka does he's much worse on the ball which as the game opens up is an issue.

He's also far less intelligent with his off the ball work.

Hopefully in time Wilson will come good. It took Okafor plenty of time to start producing. Wilso has the ability to score, or create, from nothing.

Pleased with Tanaka. Has taken him a while to really believe he is good enough at this level but his performance should get rid of any inner demons. Looked the equal of any Arsenal midfielder today.

I think we just have to accept that as we develop some players will step up and some will not be able to do so. Up to Aaronsen now to push himself on to a new level - wouldn't write him off just yet.

[weasel]

I thought Elvedi was decent.

Some forum posters seem to take a dislike to certain players and no matter what that player does, how well they play, nothing will change the poster's mind.

Likewise I thought Elvedi was decent. Don't get the huge love in for Bijol to start in place of him. Happy that we have the options defensively rather than sl*gging one player off and over-hyping another.