Any manager thats puts faith in this awful player gets sacked.
Hes a manager sacker.
Hes a manager sacker.
Donkai Havertz | Arsenal Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I hope so, so much he'll be a huge success for Arsenal just to read your posts in this thread alone
Just a nothing player. Looks like he should be a good player because of his initial technique and then you realise he's not really any good at anything. Also seems the sort of player that modern managers like - tall, fit, can keep the ball - but end up costing them due to not being good at the things that make a true difference.
His obsession with Havertz is quite strange.
One of those players where the current game isn't built for him. Same as Joao Felix, Dybala (who is still decent so harsh on him). Will end up back in Germany, probably Dortmund in the next 2 years
Morata is way better.
Don't think you can blame the modern game for him, if anything it suits him more than football 20 years ago. Just not good enough really.
Agreed
So many things I'm obsessed with, amazing
Feel sorry for him to be honest. Feels like managers play him in the oddest positions and highlight his weaknesses, rather than use his strengths. Monumental waste of money for Arsenal this summer, could have used the money far better and just kept Xhaka.
I know he’s not playing well but I think it’s a bit much for Wrighty to put out a hit on him. I don’t think Havertz deserves to die.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He cost so much money and is so so bad, it feels like he should be one of our signings
Think if you're going to go for a player struggling at another big club, then at least it has to be at the right price. Don't understand why Arsenal paid so much for him, made no sense.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This was the "highlight" for me... Genuinely looks like something a non-footballer would do.
So slow and pathetically weak on and off the ball. He shoots like he came on the pitch after 5 back to back wanks. Watching him play football is like watching an old man feck. Absolute limp dick of a player.
I’m still not sure what he’s good at.
How Chelsea managed to convince Arsenal to pay them 65m for him, I’ll never know.
How Chelsea managed to convince Arsenal to pay them 65m for him, I’ll never know.
The same way they convinced us to pay the bucks we did for Mount
I actually like Mount and wanted him at Liverpool at the time. But you’re right, he hasn’t turned out well so far.
At half the price he still would have been a risky gamble. At the price they paid he's a sword of Damocles for Arteta. £105m for a goalkeeper they didn't need and a massive downgrade of a player for the midfield/attack. What has Smith-Rowe done to deserve his coach starting this guy over him every week?
Sorry - but Mount hasn't even played enough matches to be judged. Just another one of the united fans going ott.
Fair enough. I haven’t followed closely tbh, so mostly basing my opinion on not having heard anything about him since the transfer.
If he gets back to his Chelsea form, you’ve got a good player imo.
He's barely played, the transfers are barely comparable. There's also some history to, you know, Mount actually being very good.
I just caught the highlights and the guy created the best two chances of the match (Nelson and Saka), both of which were missed, though you could say the Nelson chance was a great block by Konate. He was being played out of position after being quite good, player of the month in November for Arsenal, recently in midfield, give him a break.
He's being scapegoated for everything bad about Arsenal when there are others bring equally bad.
He's being scapegoated for everything bad about Arsenal when there are others bring equally bad.
Yeh Havertz has been disappointing overall so far but the likes of Martinelli, Jesus, Odegaard have not been as good this season.
Saka is probably the only attacker who has kept up to speed, though he looks to be buggered ATM. Bottom line is Odegaard and Martinelli in particular , who scored loads last season, haven’t been able to replicate that form. Jesus similarly, and he’s injured again now.
Still, Arteta has made a misstep with Havertz and trying to turn him into an LCM, especially for the price we paid.
Surely that makes it worse though? We spent £55m on a player who has barely played and who - if we had waited - would either cost a lot less right now, or be completely free in 6 months time.
I have to admit Havertz's role as a central midfielder is the strangest I've seen. I've never seen a central midfielder average less passes attempted per 90 than the goalkeeper (33.9 for Havertz vs 34.0 for Raya).
It was confusing to see him play there at the start because it was clear he was being ignored in the buildup of play, which made you think why he was there. It seems more clear now that he is playing primiarly as a second striker to add their threat up front, with Arteta playing the box midfield and Zinchenko coming into central midfield from LB. Zinchenko coming in means they aren't missing any control in midfield even if Havertz isn't involved in buildup.
It was working better recently, as mentioned with his player of the month award in November, but overall there has been a decline in the team, and he ofcourse is being made the scapegoat for it.
You should watch Scott McTominay play for Manchester United one day! Funnily enough, I’m fairly sure he also got our player of the month at one point, after a similar hot streak in front of goal. But, just like Havertz, he was a net negative for the team despite the goals because no team can carry a central midfielder who is that uninvolved in overall play.
Or he could have been offered a new contract after a great season at Chelsea, or be tearing it up at a different club. We obviously signed him in the hope he could stay fit. Which was a risk but it wasn’t a risk that was guaranteed to turn out badly. There’s a lot of hindsight in the notion that Mount would be available cheap or free by now.
The first thing I did after typing the post was look at McTom and lo and behold he did average less passes than Onana
I didn't change the post to mention this though as McTom's role has changed this season with the injuries we've had to Eriksen and Casemiro where he too is playing almost as a second striker/CAM and Bruno is dropping much deeper to fill that role of the playmaker deeper in the pitch. Therefore, similar to what Havertz is doing for Arsenal.
The difference between us and Arsenal though is that Arsenal use Zinchenko as a 'fourth' CM and therefore don't lose out in that area even if Havertz isn't involved. We don't use our wingbacks the same way because they don't have the same ability as Zinchenko, therefore we end up with a weaker midfield with McTom.
Chelsea were always going to sell - their whole model is based on selling their own players for pure FFP profit to fund their ridiculous expenditures.
And nobody else was going to spend £55m on Mason Mount... who I don't believe even has it in him to "tear it up" anywhere, but I guess the jury is still out on that.
What era would he excel at?
He takes forever to make a decision. His shot is weak. He's not very fast. His technique is decent, but not much else. He's tall, but not great in the air.
How on earth did anyone at Arsenal sanction this signing? He looks timid and apprehensive in everything he does. They even play him as a striker, which doesn't suit him at all.
I actually think ETH has similar expectations from his fullbacks. And, on a good day, they’re well capable of doing what Zinchenko does. Both Shaw and Dalot are excellent on the ball when the mood takes them. Malacia is also very comfortable playing inverted.The first thing I did after typing the post was look at McTom and lo and behold he did average less passes than Onana
I didn't change the post to mention this though as McTom's role has changed this season with the injuries we've had to Eriksen and Casemiro where he too is playing almost as a second striker/CAM and Bruno is dropping much deeper to fill that role of the playmaker deeper in the pitch. Therefore, similar to what Havertz is doing for Arsenal.
The difference between us and Arsenal though is that Arsenal use Zinchenko as a 'fourth' CM and therefore don't lose out in that area even if Havertz isn't involved. We don't use our wingbacks the same way because they don't have the same ability as Zinchenko, therefore we end up with a weaker midfield with McTom.
I also think he wanted Mount to have the Havertz/McT role. But injuries have created this nightmare situation where McT is our best option. An excuse you can’t make for Havertz at Arsenal.
Yep, that's what I thought when the signing was made because Mount/Bruno would be far too offensive a midfield, but as being discussed that's dependent on the skill of Dalot/Shaw to play the role Zinchenko does. I don't think it's as simple as them being good on the ball, there has to be the extra skill of playing under pressure and distributing the ball. Zinchenko has much more experience of playing as a CM, as he does for Ukraine, and therefore can slot in better than Shaw/Dalot can.
I can't tell if moving genuine dross like Havertz and Mount for upwards of a hundred million speaks more about Chelsea's business nous or Arsenal and Manchester United's lack of it.
1800s
I mean it's a hardly a genius move on Chelsea's part to look at Arsenal's £65m offer and say 'yes'.
Honestly I think he's a good player, and he actually had a decent game last night but essentially the thing I think made Arsenal pay £65m for Havertz is they probably thought the reason he hadn't lived up to his expectations at Chelsea is Chelsea's fault. So they probably thought 'if we could get him out of that mess of a club and we'll get credit for reviving him'. I've even seen an Arsenal poster on this forum say something along the lines 'it'll take Arteta a while to undo the damage done to him by Chelsea'.
I agree especially for a player who is so average.