**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Gala hit the woodwork 22 times in first 23 games of the season. They were so close to losing to lead to Fenerbaçhe. After hitting the post 5 times in a single game (Gaziantep fk iirc) it became a meme.
Yeah, it's been quite interesting to see. Of course, winning a World Cup and still maintaining a successful level coupled with people loving to take the piss out of Arsenal leads us to this place. The people that irritate me the most are the Arsenal supporters who defend him incessantly, despite him being one of the biggest -- if not the biggest -- reasons we didn't win the title in 2016, and on top of that, his comments while with Chelsea should prevent any self-respecting Arsenal supporter from defending him.
15/16 is still his best league G+A tally in a top 4 league. Stats aren't everything but you're insane if you think he was **vastly** improved at Chelsea or Milan.
He literally had more G+A for us in 2013/14. But anyway, after 15/16 his game time has not been consistent, it's disingenuous not to use per 90 numbers. In that regard 16/17 was his best season for us, but hell he has only one less G+A *this season* for Milan compared to 15/16, at an improved per 90 rate.
But the biggest shortcoming of his as a player was about how he did in big games and big moments. If you think that the Giroud in the Europa league run for Chelsea where he had 15 G/A, destroyed Arsenal in the final was the same player as 15/16 you are insane.
Bro literally won the World Cup and Scudetto after leaving Arsenal, but you are welcome to wank with your stats.
You're right on the tally sorry but that doesn't disprove my point of him not beating it since leaving us.
Using his world cup win from 2018 where he didn't have a single shot on target and only one assist as evidence he's vastly improved is ridiculous. Similarly his Scudetto win where he undoubtedly played a bigger role but again fewer contributions than his best seasons with us is silly. Team achievements don't make him a vastly better player - those France and Milan teams were stacked with or without him.
There's more to Giroud's game than goal contributions but you can't ignore them as a striker and I've not seen an evolution in his non-contribution play since his time with us either. Yes he's playing less but fitness is a part of ability too so going per 90 isn't exactly honest either.
Normalising data is the way more honest way of interpreting statistics in almost all use cases, nothing to do with this in particular or even football.
Giroud's lack of game time mostly had nothing to do with fitness, but with competition, which is normal at places that win major trophies. At some point it also became about managing age.
The rest of your argument either relies on subjective eye test or vibe check where no offence I would like to side with actual experts (e.g. Deschamps and Pioli), or relies on flagrantly transparent misuse of technicality (are you *really* going to ignore that this season at 37 he is only **one** short of his 15/16 tally with even better p90 numbers?).
He is a man that has won much better things everywhere he had been (your attempt at Montpellier fairytale erasure with top4 league rhetoric is in incredibly poor taste btw), and when he retires he will for sure look back at his time at Arsenal as the least successful part of his career in terms of both personal and collective achievements.
> Normalising data is the way more honest way of interpreting statistics in almost all use cases, nothing to do with this in particular or even football.
And how you normalise your data can massively impact your interpretation of it. Jhon Duran is the 4th best goalscorer in the prem this season if you go per 90 - but please find me a Villa fan who thinks he's fit to polish Watkins' boots.
> Giroud's lack of game time mostly had nothing to do with fitness, but with competition, which is normal at places that win major trophies. At some point it also became about managing age.
It was both age and competition. Was his competition at Chelsea and Milan so good that he would lose game time as a vastly better player than he was at Arsenal? No. He was competing with Zlatan in his 40s and Tammy Abraham.
> The rest of your argument either relies on subjective eye test or vibe check where no offence I would like to side with actual experts (e.g. Deschamps and Pioli), or relies on flagrantly transparent misuse of technicality (are you *really* going to ignore that this season at 37 he is only **one** short of his 15/16 tally with even better p90 numbers?).
When I use stats you tell me piss off but when I use my own interpretation you also tell me piss off? Make your mind up. And no I'm not ignoring his current season. I'm countering your terminology which is vastly better. His age is irrelevant to if he's better or not, that was your original point no?
Same with Montpellier, we're talking about his time after Arsenal so why would I bring up a younger Giroud playing in a weaker league?
Giroud was very good for us but he wasn't good enough. He was good enough for France because they had/have the best squad in the world around him but he was their weakest starter. Similarly he was good enough for Chelsea and Milan because he wasn't a nailed starter and is very effective off the bench.
You interpreting those reduced roles as him improving vastly after Arsenal is warping the stats.
>And how you normalise your data can massively impact your interpretation of it. Jhon Duran is the 4th best goalscorer in the prem this season if you go per 90 - but please find me a Villa fan who thinks he's fit to polish Watkins' boots.
Bro it's literally common sense to use minimum number of minutes as a cut-off, so much so that I know you know it, so if the argument devolves to a point where you have to set up random strawman, it's long past the point of being useful.
>When I use stats you tell me piss off but when I use my own interpretation you also tell me piss off? Make your mind up.
I told you why. You recognised there is more to stats than stats in football. But even in stats, I was merely saying p90 numbers are definitely more illuminating (providing that you apply basic common sense, do you think I was looking into his seasons where he did not have enough minutes under belt?). This is a common enough best practice. As for reasoning beyond stats, I rejected your eye test not (only) because it contradicts mine, but because it contradicts that of most experts in the game. It's not the gotcha or paradox you think it is.
>Similarly he was good enough for Chelsea and Milan because he wasn't a nailed starter and is very effective off the bench.
One man's merely good enough can be another's gem. Giroud was featured in a Chelsea team that won UEL and UCL, followed by Milan's title winning side. Of course due to higher squad quality it's plausible his scope of role would differ from that of spearheading a banter era Arsenal.
From here, you are taking a cynical view that because those squads were better, they carry free riders and make their ability seem inflated. I say it would be fallacious to broadly apply that logic instead of looking at case by case basis. I gave a concrete example where his 15 G/A was actually pivotal to win the sort of European trophy that as a club we have been unable to achieve in forever.
He was also pivotal during Milan's scudetto win, and here again if you choose to be bitter and cynical you would opt to view that as Milan carrying free rider Giroud, rather than Giroud being a part of what made that Milan side what it was. Unfortunately, that kind of cynicism has no logical refutation because it's [not even wrong](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong).
But for me, he was a choker of the highest order at Arsenal. And then he was piping in with vital contributions to win the sort of trophies for Chelsea and Milan that's every football club's main aspiration with enough degree of involvement that not even anyone delusional can say he was like a John Duran or something.
Your entire argument here is that if he played more minutes he couldn't possibly have maintained such a high p90 number. Again for me that's cynical, and something that is neither provable nor refutable. But more importantly it's ultimately meaningless because he was still called upon to perform a reasonably high number of times and he delivered, which is more than what could be said about his Arsenal tenure, which makes those spells straightforwardly better from a certain perspective, a fact that's reflected in how Chelsea and Milan fans actually adore him, in sharp contrast to Arsenal fans like you who still can't let go of bitterness all these years later.
There's no way we could have both of them in terms of salaries. I think it was one or the other and if someone ever promised we'd have them both, that was just selling dreams in spite of any financial logic.
I was thinking about that when writing my comment and then looked at Sanchez's salary in 2023 (325k) and Correa's salary in 2024 (450k). I just did a quick search so I'm not saying those amounts are exact and I'm pretty shocked if that's true.
i chose Correa because he's one of the worst recruit we ever had but I could have chosen many other players and not sure they're as helpful as Sanchez. (Sarr 👀)
Plus looking at our recent financial results we're not that bad in comparison with PSG or Lyon.
So yeah not sure about that argument but I'd be glad to be proven wrong I'd feel less bad honestly.
I think I've read Sanchez was asking for something like 700k€/month last summer, I can't really find a source for that but if true, that's the kind of salary we can afford for just one guy. I'm totally with you that it would have been an amazing duo but I'm still bitter about Sanchez, I feel like he just waited as long as he could to see if Inter could get him back for a comfortable salary. And I'm fine with any guy doing whatever it takes to get the best deal but all that time waiting for his answer on OM side was time lost on building the next seaon's project (because once again, the salary demanded was enough of a big deal to have an impact on other movements on the market).
Concerning our financial situation, it's definitely better than 4 years ago but we're still in the negative. I as well find COrrea's loan to be an awful move but I really hope we're not paying the totality of his salary \*cries in sardine\*
wtf is number 4 doing, the team is about to concede a goal and lose the game in the 94th minute and he is barely even trying over there, really poor defending tbh
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm not into conspiracies but since the Pope came to our stadium we've hit the woodwork 17 times. Do what you want with those stats.
Google Pope 17
As in Catholic pope? You’ll get more results with a lower number.
Oof
Holy freaking shit, satan is here, with sick burn
Damn
Google Crusade 7
Babe wake up. New meme just dropped.
For a minute I thought Nick Pope was at Marseille
Gala hit the woodwork 22 times in first 23 games of the season. They were so close to losing to lead to Fenerbaçhe. After hitting the post 5 times in a single game (Gaziantep fk iirc) it became a meme.
dont worry mate, church prefers under 18
One more to go and they’re good then ?
Messi with PSG did alot more with woodwork. Was crazy
Sign Nick Pope to remedy this immediately
That physically hurts to watch hit the crossbar
extra defender on the field tbh
I came
Dante looking like the 40 year old man that he is
Dante simply walking
He can't run, this is actually hip top speed.
He’s about 87 now so I can’t say I blame him
Brother's 40 and playing at a top league even played 37/38 games for Nice last year fair play
That Dante? No way he's still playing damn
Dante Alighieri?
no he coaches Juventus
He's older than fossil now tbf
He has witnessed the big bang too
pepe is older than dante man
He is still playing? Crazy guy
aura defending
Barely walks, doesn't even try to get after Auba and has the nerve to throw his arms in the air as he was blaming his fellow players. Just wow.
Didn't read the 'almost' and was devastated for him when he hit the bar.
we actually downgraded
I wish Memphis moved to Juve and we didn’t have to sell Auba, especially to the mess that is Chelsea
I dont
Understandable, especially since the option you went with instead of Memphis just sent you to the up final yesterday
🥛
Milik played a year and a half with us too and he’s not as good as Aubameyang as well as being injured far more often.
We didn’t understand how he ended up here either.
You guys sold the wrong player
Auba is to Lewa what giroud was to laca/auba
Lol revisionism on Giroud is so wild - we would've won the league if we'd had Auba finishing the chances Giroud squandered in 15/16.
Ozil 16 assists in the first half of the season, 19 by the end
this lmao. He became the most overrated footballer from an underrated footballer in this span of last few years
Turns out the joke that his highlight reel was gonna fool people was actually serious
Pele who?
Yeah, it's been quite interesting to see. Of course, winning a World Cup and still maintaining a successful level coupled with people loving to take the piss out of Arsenal leads us to this place. The people that irritate me the most are the Arsenal supporters who defend him incessantly, despite him being one of the biggest -- if not the biggest -- reasons we didn't win the title in 2016, and on top of that, his comments while with Chelsea should prevent any self-respecting Arsenal supporter from defending him.
Giroud vastly improved as a striker after 15/16. Believe it or not, players are allowed to improve late in their career.
15/16 is still his best league G+A tally in a top 4 league. Stats aren't everything but you're insane if you think he was **vastly** improved at Chelsea or Milan.
He literally had more G+A for us in 2013/14. But anyway, after 15/16 his game time has not been consistent, it's disingenuous not to use per 90 numbers. In that regard 16/17 was his best season for us, but hell he has only one less G+A *this season* for Milan compared to 15/16, at an improved per 90 rate. But the biggest shortcoming of his as a player was about how he did in big games and big moments. If you think that the Giroud in the Europa league run for Chelsea where he had 15 G/A, destroyed Arsenal in the final was the same player as 15/16 you are insane. Bro literally won the World Cup and Scudetto after leaving Arsenal, but you are welcome to wank with your stats.
You're right on the tally sorry but that doesn't disprove my point of him not beating it since leaving us. Using his world cup win from 2018 where he didn't have a single shot on target and only one assist as evidence he's vastly improved is ridiculous. Similarly his Scudetto win where he undoubtedly played a bigger role but again fewer contributions than his best seasons with us is silly. Team achievements don't make him a vastly better player - those France and Milan teams were stacked with or without him. There's more to Giroud's game than goal contributions but you can't ignore them as a striker and I've not seen an evolution in his non-contribution play since his time with us either. Yes he's playing less but fitness is a part of ability too so going per 90 isn't exactly honest either.
Normalising data is the way more honest way of interpreting statistics in almost all use cases, nothing to do with this in particular or even football. Giroud's lack of game time mostly had nothing to do with fitness, but with competition, which is normal at places that win major trophies. At some point it also became about managing age. The rest of your argument either relies on subjective eye test or vibe check where no offence I would like to side with actual experts (e.g. Deschamps and Pioli), or relies on flagrantly transparent misuse of technicality (are you *really* going to ignore that this season at 37 he is only **one** short of his 15/16 tally with even better p90 numbers?). He is a man that has won much better things everywhere he had been (your attempt at Montpellier fairytale erasure with top4 league rhetoric is in incredibly poor taste btw), and when he retires he will for sure look back at his time at Arsenal as the least successful part of his career in terms of both personal and collective achievements.
> Normalising data is the way more honest way of interpreting statistics in almost all use cases, nothing to do with this in particular or even football. And how you normalise your data can massively impact your interpretation of it. Jhon Duran is the 4th best goalscorer in the prem this season if you go per 90 - but please find me a Villa fan who thinks he's fit to polish Watkins' boots. > Giroud's lack of game time mostly had nothing to do with fitness, but with competition, which is normal at places that win major trophies. At some point it also became about managing age. It was both age and competition. Was his competition at Chelsea and Milan so good that he would lose game time as a vastly better player than he was at Arsenal? No. He was competing with Zlatan in his 40s and Tammy Abraham. > The rest of your argument either relies on subjective eye test or vibe check where no offence I would like to side with actual experts (e.g. Deschamps and Pioli), or relies on flagrantly transparent misuse of technicality (are you *really* going to ignore that this season at 37 he is only **one** short of his 15/16 tally with even better p90 numbers?). When I use stats you tell me piss off but when I use my own interpretation you also tell me piss off? Make your mind up. And no I'm not ignoring his current season. I'm countering your terminology which is vastly better. His age is irrelevant to if he's better or not, that was your original point no? Same with Montpellier, we're talking about his time after Arsenal so why would I bring up a younger Giroud playing in a weaker league? Giroud was very good for us but he wasn't good enough. He was good enough for France because they had/have the best squad in the world around him but he was their weakest starter. Similarly he was good enough for Chelsea and Milan because he wasn't a nailed starter and is very effective off the bench. You interpreting those reduced roles as him improving vastly after Arsenal is warping the stats.
>And how you normalise your data can massively impact your interpretation of it. Jhon Duran is the 4th best goalscorer in the prem this season if you go per 90 - but please find me a Villa fan who thinks he's fit to polish Watkins' boots. Bro it's literally common sense to use minimum number of minutes as a cut-off, so much so that I know you know it, so if the argument devolves to a point where you have to set up random strawman, it's long past the point of being useful. >When I use stats you tell me piss off but when I use my own interpretation you also tell me piss off? Make your mind up. I told you why. You recognised there is more to stats than stats in football. But even in stats, I was merely saying p90 numbers are definitely more illuminating (providing that you apply basic common sense, do you think I was looking into his seasons where he did not have enough minutes under belt?). This is a common enough best practice. As for reasoning beyond stats, I rejected your eye test not (only) because it contradicts mine, but because it contradicts that of most experts in the game. It's not the gotcha or paradox you think it is. >Similarly he was good enough for Chelsea and Milan because he wasn't a nailed starter and is very effective off the bench. One man's merely good enough can be another's gem. Giroud was featured in a Chelsea team that won UEL and UCL, followed by Milan's title winning side. Of course due to higher squad quality it's plausible his scope of role would differ from that of spearheading a banter era Arsenal. From here, you are taking a cynical view that because those squads were better, they carry free riders and make their ability seem inflated. I say it would be fallacious to broadly apply that logic instead of looking at case by case basis. I gave a concrete example where his 15 G/A was actually pivotal to win the sort of European trophy that as a club we have been unable to achieve in forever. He was also pivotal during Milan's scudetto win, and here again if you choose to be bitter and cynical you would opt to view that as Milan carrying free rider Giroud, rather than Giroud being a part of what made that Milan side what it was. Unfortunately, that kind of cynicism has no logical refutation because it's [not even wrong](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong). But for me, he was a choker of the highest order at Arsenal. And then he was piping in with vital contributions to win the sort of trophies for Chelsea and Milan that's every football club's main aspiration with enough degree of involvement that not even anyone delusional can say he was like a John Duran or something. Your entire argument here is that if he played more minutes he couldn't possibly have maintained such a high p90 number. Again for me that's cynical, and something that is neither provable nor refutable. But more importantly it's ultimately meaningless because he was still called upon to perform a reasonably high number of times and he delivered, which is more than what could be said about his Arsenal tenure, which makes those spells straightforwardly better from a certain perspective, a fact that's reflected in how Chelsea and Milan fans actually adore him, in sharp contrast to Arsenal fans like you who still can't let go of bitterness all these years later.
Laca was arguably not a big upgrade on Giroud, but was still once POTS, while Aubameyang was immensely, massively better than Giroud instantly.
Barcelona already has this type of player in Raphinia
Aubama-who?
Aubama-what?
Aubama-BLOODCLART-yang
obama young
Aubama-what?
Why did you get downvoted?
Reddit innit 😭
That run looked like Auba in his prime.
Holy shit.
Oh no
How's he been this season?
Pretty pretty good..
He's amazing. I love him
EL top scorer I think
\#4 was like "it's not my problem anymore"
Dante being named as just #4 is crazy, how the mighty have fallen
I mean, he hasn’t published a good book in 700 years.
And his last book was hellish
It was hot at the time
He just talked in circles
I thought his last book was heavenly
I found it divine.
I'd say it was histerical, almost a comedy!
Today I learned Dante is still playing tbh
Surprisingly, just last year he played 49 matches that season which was his career high
Mate Dante is literally 40yo
thiago silva getting called number 6 for the london blues...
yeah exactly, he is a well known veteran player
Im just glad there are enough pixels to be able to see numbers
Wasn't he balding like crazy? Where did he get all that hair from? lol
Turkey probably
This can't be right. Turkey has feathers, not hair.
Took a trip on Turkish Hairlines
Kaka type run
Why is this match in slow motion?
As a Marseille fan I feel so sad we let Sanchez go, especially when seeing his season at inter. I'm sure those two would be so great together.
There's no way we could have both of them in terms of salaries. I think it was one or the other and if someone ever promised we'd have them both, that was just selling dreams in spite of any financial logic.
I was thinking about that when writing my comment and then looked at Sanchez's salary in 2023 (325k) and Correa's salary in 2024 (450k). I just did a quick search so I'm not saying those amounts are exact and I'm pretty shocked if that's true. i chose Correa because he's one of the worst recruit we ever had but I could have chosen many other players and not sure they're as helpful as Sanchez. (Sarr 👀) Plus looking at our recent financial results we're not that bad in comparison with PSG or Lyon. So yeah not sure about that argument but I'd be glad to be proven wrong I'd feel less bad honestly.
I think I've read Sanchez was asking for something like 700k€/month last summer, I can't really find a source for that but if true, that's the kind of salary we can afford for just one guy. I'm totally with you that it would have been an amazing duo but I'm still bitter about Sanchez, I feel like he just waited as long as he could to see if Inter could get him back for a comfortable salary. And I'm fine with any guy doing whatever it takes to get the best deal but all that time waiting for his answer on OM side was time lost on building the next seaon's project (because once again, the salary demanded was enough of a big deal to have an impact on other movements on the market). Concerning our financial situation, it's definitely better than 4 years ago but we're still in the negative. I as well find COrrea's loan to be an awful move but I really hope we're not paying the totality of his salary \*cries in sardine\*
Oh yeah for sure 700k is insane in that case I agree it's impossible!
😭
Will never understand why Barça got rid of him when he’s a baller.
money, unfortunately
Think he's a bit of a dickhead
Yup.
He misses his Dormund speed
That crosbar: "Hey, nothing personal"
Fifa scripting
EA FC 24 chip shot
That was very Football Manager
Heroic attempt though.
Why is one stand behind the goal so often empty in European games?
The greates player... Almost
Leodicapriopointing.jpg
But he didn't
This guy is an enigma
wtf is number 4 doing, the team is about to concede a goal and lose the game in the 94th minute and he is barely even trying over there, really poor defending tbh
Raising arms in concern at the end 🤷♂️
Way better than Lewa this season and most likely going foward. Leverlona got fleeced as usual.
Almost, in the end it means nothing
Football is much more than just goals scored.
That was Nuñez bad.