Kick-off: 20:00

  • Patrick_Hattrick@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Unpopular opinion but, as good as he’s been, this “we should have signed Maddison over Havertz” thing is reductive. They’re two totally different types of players and we’ve already seen how having a totally different profile like Havertz can swing tight games where we need something different (likely a calculated signing by Arteta, considering we have adapted our game to sacrifice swashbuckling attacking in certain phases of games to shore up defensively).

    I’m not sure Maddison would have suited our system anyway, he’s a number 10 who drives forward and seeks to influence the final phase whenever possible. The 8 role in our system needs to contribute in the first and second buildup phases as well, something I’m not sure he’s as reliable at.

    • do0gla5@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He also plays super wide left which I think wouldn’t work well for us. But he’s a great player and quality is quality. If we could have him in rotation you do it all day.

      Havertz is definitely a slow burn signing. It’s only October. We need to just relax.

    • HerofromAliahan@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no Arsenal fan on this sub who would have chosen Havertz over Maddison if the latter was an option. Maddison would walk into our midfield.