Mole_Toonfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Montpellier's owner has mentioned us & Giroud again.... seems a bit mental that guy (owner) Would be a fantastic signing like..if Ba goes of course. Dont agree if Giroud comes we will never see any type of football or passing again..... Wut Giroud is a 9 and Cisse is a 9 both have no business playing wide or dropping off..... If Giroud comes and Cisse stays forget any idea of 4-3-3 or passing football..... or ever getting the best of Cabaye or Ben Arfa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Montpellier's owner has mentioned us & Giroud again.... seems a bit mental that guy (owner) Would be a fantastic signing like..if Ba goes of course. Dont agree if Giroud comes we will never see any type of football or passing again..... Wut Giroud is a 9 and Cisse is a 9 both have no business playing wide or dropping off..... If Giroud comes and Cisse stays forget any idea of 4-3-3 or passing football..... or ever getting the best of Cabaye or Ben Arfa. I'd rate Giroud a 9, sure. Cisse is more of a 6 or a 5. Montpellier are 1 point away from winning the league. It's amazing how they've done that without passing the ball. Giroud is far more physical than Cisse and way better in the air. Hardly the same sort of player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidAK Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Montpellier's owner has mentioned us & Giroud again.... seems a bit mental that guy (owner) Would be a fantastic signing like..if Ba goes of course. Dont agree if Giroud comes we will never see any type of football or passing again..... Wut Giroud is a 9 and Cisse is a 9 both have no business playing wide or dropping off..... If Giroud comes and Cisse stays forget any idea of 4-3-3 or passing football..... or ever getting the best of Cabaye or Ben Arfa. I'd rate Giroud a 9, sure. Cisse is more of a 6 or a 5. Montpellier are 1 point away from winning the league. It's amazing how they've done that without passing the ball. Giroud is far more physical than Cisse and way better in the air. Hardly the same sort of player. I think what he's saying is that he could only occupy the role Cisse does in our current system, that we need someone more mobile on the left should Ba leave. To accommodate both Cisse and Giroud in the same starting XI we'd have to go back to 442, which I don't think anyone really wants. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Montpellier's owner has mentioned us & Giroud again.... seems a bit mental that guy (owner) Would be a fantastic signing like..if Ba goes of course. Dont agree if Giroud comes we will never see any type of football or passing again..... Wut Giroud is a 9 and Cisse is a 9 both have no business playing wide or dropping off..... If Giroud comes and Cisse stays forget any idea of 4-3-3 or passing football..... or ever getting the best of Cabaye or Ben Arfa. I'd rate Giroud a 9, sure. Cisse is more of a 6 or a 5. Montpellier are 1 point away from winning the league. It's amazing how they've done that without passing the ball. Giroud is far more physical than Cisse and way better in the air. Hardly the same sort of player. What a clusterfuck of a post. It was hardly a difficult point to understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. Not that we'll be in for Giroud so it's a moot point. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. No but our midfield doesn't necessarily fit 4-4-2 with two centre forwards. He has a point. I can see what could end up happening if Pardew got grubby mits on Giroud. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. No but our midfield doesn't necessarily fit 4-4-2 with two centre forwards. He has a point. I can see what could end up happening if Pardew got grubby mits on Giroud. It does on paper but not on the field. I see where he's coming from but there is no reason why it couldn't work. Not that it'll become an issue. No chance, unless Ba leaves we're signing a top level striker (and even then I'd be surprised if it wasn't a versatile forward). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. Not that we'll be in for Giroud so it's a moot point. Football has changed..... what we did under Keegan would not work now. Plus we would play hoofball, as we do everytime we play 4-4-2. Ben Arfa and Cabaye would be too deep to try and stop attacks and offer no creativity at all like they do when we play 4-4-2 and there will just be a massive gap between the midfield and attack so hoof ball will be the only option to stop our midfield being overrun. It would never work. If Ba leaves i want a mobile, versatile forward it just makes so much more sense when trying to fit a team together and make it function. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. No but our midfield doesn't necessarily fit 4-4-2 with two centre forwards. He has a point. I can see what could end up happening if Pardew got grubby mits on Giroud. It does on paper but not on the field. I see where he's coming from but there is no reason why it couldn't work. Not that it'll become an issue. No chance, unless Ba leaves we're signing a top level striker (and even then I'd be surprised if it wasn't a versatile forward). Not sure it does for Ben Arfa, Jonas or Cabaye even. Marveaux it could do. Versatile forward all the way. We've needed/craved players of that ilk for ages anywho. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 LOL thats because Giroud is the only one who is at the fulcrum of the attack for Montpellier hardly relevant...... Both Giroud and Cisse are centre forwards it will be 4-4-2 and hoofball all day long.... might as well forget Ben Arfa having an impact on the game and same goes for Cabaye in a creative sense... Or any over creative player we have..... Signing Giroud to replace Ba is just stupid unless of course you want us to play like Stoke? It's not about get as many quality players as possible its about building a team that functions and a team with Cisse and Giroud will not function. Giroud made sense before we signed Cisse but it doesnt now. Bollocks. Just because you play with two out and out strikers there is no reason to assume you'll play long ball. See Shearer/Sir Less for example. No but our midfield doesn't necessarily fit 4-4-2 with two centre forwards. He has a point. I can see what could end up happening if Pardew got grubby mits on Giroud. It does on paper but not on the field. I see where he's coming from but there is no reason why it couldn't work. Not that it'll become an issue. No chance, unless Ba leaves we're signing a top level striker (and even then I'd be surprised if it wasn't a versatile forward). Not sure it does for Ben Arfa, Jonas or Cabaye even. Marveaux it could do. Versatile forward all the way. We've needed/craved players of that ilk for ages anywho. Could do with, god forbid (and a lazy brain), someone like Sessegnon. A player that is versatile but can play across the front line everywhere to reasonable effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Would like to see a player like A. Ayew for our setup, good player even though his end product isn't always as good as the rest of his game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Would like to see a player like A. Ayew for our setup, good player even though his end product isn't always as good as the rest of his game. We supposedly are tracking him and have been for a while not sure we have the finance atm tho..... What we basically need is an Inside forward, Lavezzi type ( although thats impossible) If you want to get the best out of the creative players actually create a team that links the defence to the midfield and the attack well and not has massive gaps in between.... i dont think we can have what are basically two out and out strikers. It leaves too many gaps in midfield and makes the whole team alot more open and forces the more creative players backwards..... If Ba were to leave i would sign a striker that can fit the 4-3-3 which Giroud cannot but from the players we have been linked iam not sure who can..... I have heard people mention someone like a Young Bellamy on a few occasions which would be great but who is like him around that we can get? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Would like to see a player like A. Ayew for our setup, good player even though his end product isn't always as good as the rest of his game. We supposedly are tracking him and have been for a while not sure we have the finance atm tho..... What we basically need is an Inside forward, Lavezzi type ( although thats impossible) If you want to get the best out of the creative players actually create a team that links the defence to the midfield and the attack well and not has massive gaps in between.... i dont think we can have what are basically two out and out strikers. It leaves too many gaps in midfield and makes the whole team alot more open and forces the more creative players backwards..... If Ba were to leave i would sign a striker that can fit the 4-3-3 which Giroud cannot but from the players we have been linked iam not sure who can..... I have heard people mention someone like a Young Bellamy on a few occasions which would be great but who is like him around that we can get? Old Bellamy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThievingMagpie Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 It's totally possible to get two strikers AND play passing football but I don't think playing a narrow, possession oriented game like Milan does is what our players our suited for, I think the team as construed is a very dangerous counter attacking team who passes with precision and urgency. Having 3 in the middle with Ben Arfa linking up Cisse/Giroud would absolutely be awesome plus when you do hoof it there is always someone around for the knock down. Two strikers do open up the game but not in a totally bad way and it can really create a lot of space since there is more room in midfield it's just that now we don't have the players to accommodate it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Am I the only one who'd take Holt as 3rd choice? We've got other positions in greater need of strengthening where most of the money available should go imo, but I still think we need someone else in up front. I think we'd be his first choice and if him and his agent play hardball I think we'd get him for a decent price considering his age. It's not like Norwich play constant hoofball and that's all he can perform well in, too. This is assuming Ba stays and we don't need to replace him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 The good thing about Holt is he has shown he can perform coming off the bench. I reckon he will go for more than he is worth though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 rather than splash out on a new striker to cover the ACoN (unless they have a priority target / good deal) i'd hope they change obertangs into a striker...train him day in day out how to make runs off the defender and into space, he's got the pace and can finish but he's not a good winger, might as well try to utilise him as the loverkrands replacement and it might be useful to have his crazy pace on tap when we're under the cosh away from home Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Has Klasnic been mentioned/discussed? He's 32 but he's free and doesn't seem to mind sitting on the bench despite being better than that. Could be handy if we're selling Best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Wouldn't mind as backup but don't think they'll want a player with no resale value on the wage bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Would like us to go for Dempsey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiemag Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Would like us to go for Dempsey. hes too old for you bro Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MrSundlofer Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Has Klasnic been mentioned/discussed? He's 32 but he's free and doesn't seem to mind sitting on the bench despite being better than that. Could be handy if we're selling Best. There is absolutely no reason for us to sign him. If we are signing a striker to sit on the bench I rather see he's 22 and not 32. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Has Klasnic been mentioned/discussed? He's 32 but he's free and doesn't seem to mind sitting on the bench despite being better than that. Could be handy if we're selling Best. There is absolutely no reason for us to sign him. If we are signing a striker to sit on the bench I rather see he's 22 and not 32. See, i don't get this. Klasnic has proven he could come off the bench and score goals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted May 19, 2012 Share Posted May 19, 2012 Has Klasnic been mentioned/discussed? He's 32 but he's free and doesn't seem to mind sitting on the bench despite being better than that. Could be handy if we're selling Best. There is absolutely no reason for us to sign him. If we are signing a striker to sit on the bench I rather see he's 22 and not 32. See, i don't get this. Klasnic has proven he could come off the bench and score goals. Old players are shit remember. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now