Thursday, March 15, 2007

Finally, a slice of luck in a hard-earned win.

I didn't see the game last night so I can't comment in length. The only footage I've see thusfar was on the big screen in Waterloo station this morning and a 3 minute clip on YouTube.

The main points seem to be:

* Finally, a bit of luck. Whilst Diaby has been credited with the goal, it almost seems like a Lampard special: hit from outside the area, catching a nasty deflection and screwing in past the helpless keeper. It's nice to see us score a goal like that once in a while, rather than our normal 'walk the ball over the goal-line' style antics.

* However, Baptista's performance was otherwise poor. Was he really injured? It's the first time I've seen a manager tell a player he's injured; things are usually the other way around. Is this the beginning of his end?

* Aliadiere has returned to being the nearly man. Missing a point-blank header and a chance after being put through is, unfortunately, not good enough.

* Would a more clinical team have punished us? Villa certainly seemed to have the chances to win the game, and we can count ourselves lucky, perhaps, that they did not capitalise on them.

* Did the Denilson-Fabregas partnership work? Should Gilberto be playing centre-back? Do we still need a big tackling presence in midfield?

After all's been said, I'm happy with the three points. We only mustererd a dire 0-0 at Villa last year, and I think this season's Villa team is a stronger outfit than the ones we faced then. Arsene certainly seemed relieved - looking rather dapper in a tracksuit - and its important that we build on this victory with our tough trips to Merseyside forthcoming.

Finally, a word regarding ANR: I have to join the chorus of condemnation regarding Myles's last effort. To claim that Johann Djourou 'shamed his African ancestors' by taking two foul throw-ins, demonstrates a level of idiocy and callousness that I do not wish to be associated with Arsenal related websites. Moreover, if Aliadiere or Fabregas had taken a foul throw, would they have shamed their ancestors? Or can only black players do this? I also thought that his flippant comment that the Emirates was full of 'council-estate kids' last night was in poor taste.

I used to read Myles as his columns were, once upon a time, rather good, and if nothing else thought-provoking. Nowadays he comes across as an egotistical old fool. Unlike the real ANR of course. I urge you to read Mr Mendacious.

Anyway, enough cat-fighting. Here's hoping we can pick up another three points on Sunday, when we should have a few players back.

4 comments:

Puskas said...

Myles is a tit. His head has been rammed so far up his own ass for such a long time that he's obviously been overcome by the fumes and become delusional.

Anonymous said...

Who is Myles Palmer? Is he a journalist, a TV pundit, or just a pleb? I read his stuff once in a while, and it just seems like a plug for his book.
But in his defense, wouldn't you think a full international, World-Cup playing footballer would know how to take a throw-in?

Goonerboy said...

Maybe, but how exactly does it shame his African ancestors that he made the mistake?

Anonymous said...

I suppose Myles Palmer was referring to his "footballing" ancestors (e.g. George Weah, Roger Mila, Eusebio) who fought to gain acceptance and respect in the Euro leagues, and paved the way for a new generation of African players. Those guys proved that Africans had the technique, skill and vision to mix it with the best in the world. Djourou, as an inheritor of that legacy, shames them by not being able to take a throw-in. It diminishes the hard work that the aforemnetioned generation did to force Europe to regard African players as equals.

I know this arguement doesn't hold water since Djourou's Swiss, but still, it does explain a flippant remark that in other eyes would look remarkably racist.