02 Sep 2017 03:02:30
We're in good for going into the man city game after beating arsenal 4-0 last week.
Oxlade-chamberlain.

1.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 07:04:38
Trolling us already 😂😂

Serious question about Chamberlain, if he'd been playing for any other team would you be happy Wenger had signed him for £40 million?

2.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 07:20:13
Interesting question Stoner. Yes, Ithink I would have been happy if we signed him for £40m. He is still a young talented homegrown player. However, being in the last year of his deal £40m was a decent price as I don't think he is worth any more.

{Ed025's Note - in old money he probably isn,t RG but times have moved on, your average players are costing around the £30m mark now and the better ones really big dosh, i dont wish to harp on but arsenal need to get in this real world if they are to compete or they could well be left behind mate..

3.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 08:01:38
Yes, Ed, but is Oxlade considered to be much more than an average player and the main reason he was sought after by Chelsea and Liverpool is that he is one of the better homegrown players that PL clubs have to sign to bolster their squads. You only have to look at last night's England team to see the complete lack of top quality English players. This can be shown by the fact that Livermore, a very average player, was selected. If there wasnt a limit of 17 overseas players in the 25 man PL sqaud, how many homegrown players would be in PL squads? How many homegrown players would get into a PL top eleven selection? Finally, there was absolutely no interest in signing Oxlade from any top European clubs outside the PL, which speaks for itself. Hence I believe £4om was as much as we could have expected to recieve whether or not in was in the last year of his deal.

{Ed025's Note - the price was a little high for me RG but a player is worth whatever someone is prepared to pay i suppose, arsenal should have brought in a replacement though, as a sack of money will not do much in midfield.. :)

4.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 08:23:26
Yes, Ed you are probably correct, but the £40m fee was probably paid to secure a homegrown squad player and was considered the same fee whether or not he had a year to run as it secured the player.
As far as Arsenal are concerned Oxlade hasn't been a huge success at the club, often out injured and looking best at RWB or as an attacking wide player and yet wanting to play in a central attacking position where we already have the likes of Ozil, Ramsey, Iwobi and the emerging Nelson. I am certain that the sum received could be better used put toward signing a proper DM or CB.
As a final comment on Oxlade in 132 PL matches spread over his 6 years at the club amazingly he only scored 9 league goals and only 20 goals in 198 matches in all, an extremely poor return considering most of those matches were when he played in attacking roles.

5.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 09:10:50
Pass completion of 84%, shooting accuracy 25%, cross completion 20% with nothing of note defensively as well as being poor in the air.

I think most of the time he's flattered to deceive and good money coming in but shameful we didn't buy an upgrade.

I can't say I'd have been happy if we were the buying club but who knows what Klopp can do with him.

6.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 10:35:48
Stoner, like you I'd not be happy with that purchase. He's never been consistent and has very rarely shown any star quality. Maybe Klopp can get the best out of him, but I won't be placing any bets on that happening.

7.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 11:23:18
for me he has no end product, can't cross, can't score and jumps up and down like a child when things go wrong for him, so no I would not be happy if we bought the mini hulk.

8.) 02 Sep 2017
02 Sep 2017 13:04:53
Good posts Stoner

My Liverpool mate was going on about what a top signing AOC was. I pointed out his stats . he didn't realise how poor he was.

Of course a better manager might get much more out of him?