Philosophy notes

Aristotle:

• Russell states 'it was two thousand years before the world produced any philosopher who could be regarded as approximately his (Artistotle) equal.'
• Credited with the earliest study of formal logic.

Rousseau:

• Had 5 children, but sent everyone to an orphanage. His reasoning being that children's strong bondage to their parents limit's their freedom, and vice versa (parents bondage to children).


• Is a 'romantic,' and because of this focuses more on individuals passions instead of delving into science, which the movement known as 'enlightenment' done before hand.


• Locke's 'Law of Nature theory' states that all of mankind is equal, and should defend, and persecute those who violate their rights. This is very different to the Aristotle school of though, which suggests that man is not equal, and people are born with a purpose. Some to be slaves, some to rule.


• Disagree's with Hobbes 'state of nature' theory, as he claims we were free before society and in a much better place. However he does concede that it would be impossible to get back to a world before society.


• Is famously quoted as saying 'man is free, yet everywhere he is in chains.' By this he is referring to the fact that people are born free, and then their life is shackled by the chains of society.


• Had a strong believe in the 'general will', which consisted of everyone feeling a sense of something, and being a part of a greater system.


• Was a religious man, and believes 'all power comes from God,' however he added 'so does all sickness, does that mean we are forbidden to call in the doctor?' This is the way Roussau put across his point that the general population should question those in power.


• Claims that those in control don't have a 'right' to be, and no one naturally has power over someone else.


• Believed strongly that taking away one's freedom was taking away what makes them human, and what differentiates humans from animals. He stated 'to remove man's will is to take away the morality from his acts.'


• One of the flaws in Rousseau's thinking is the fact he believes everyone should be forced to live with freedom, however anything forced upon people can not be seen as a form of freedom.

Machiavelli:

• Believed that in order to be a true leader, you must have the ability to decieve the greater population, and lie to them so they follow and support you. He also felt that it is right to be cruel, and harsh in order to be a great leader.
• Considered a 'typical renaissance man.'
• Believed a hereditary prince has an easier tast of ruling, whereas a a new prince has the more difficult task in ruling, since he must first stabilize his new-found power in order to build an enduring political structure.
• Book 'Prince' is a manual in mantaining political power.

Hobbes:

• Spoke of a 'state of nature', what the world was like before Government.
• Said that the world would be vile, and dangerous without a King.
• Believed people would elect a ruler. The elected ruler would then do whatever he wanted, which brought about a 'social contract'.
• Stated that once the people signed the 'social contract' the ruler be dominant in his rule, but that this was still better than the state of nature, where there would be continuous warfare.

Descartes:

• First ‘modern’ philosopher.
• Wanted to change the intellectual society of his time, to base things on evidence beyond any doubt.
• Doubted everything other than the fact he exists.
• Believed that if he was to stop thinking, he would cease to exist. This is how he reached the conclusion of 'I think therefore I am.’
• Questioned reality and all what we perceive to be real. With the example of God, he suggested that if God is superior and we are inferior, then why is it possible for something inferior to understand a superior being.
• Believed in innate ideas, that things are programmed into our minds before we are able to experience them for ourselves.

Locke:

• Valued experience rather than innate idea's, and believed everyone is born with a 'blank slate.'
• Believed the power to elect a leader should lie in the hands of the people, and not the 'divine right of kings' rule which stated that all kings have descended from Adam.
• Saw a different 'state of nature' to that of Hobbs, and believed God gave all of us the skill to decide what is right and what is wrong.
• Believed everyone should have their rights, and every individual to live with their own internal morals. He stated that government is needed when an argument between people who both believe they are correct, so the government would determine who is correct.
• Suggested that people have a right to a revolution of the leader had broken the natural law.

Premiership Team of the Decade

Recently, due to us soon departing from the first decade in the 21st century, and entering the second I have seen several articles in major newspapers depicting their "team of the decade." Now, for what its worth, and really for a bit of fun, Im going to add my my tuppence worth into the debate:

Goalkeeper: Brad Friedel

We have seen some top quality, highly consistent keepers over the last decade appear in the Premiership, most notably in my opinion Van Der Sar, Shay Given, and recently Pepe Reina. However in terms of pure consistency, and reliability Brad Friedel stands out as above the rest for me.

Right-back: Gary Neville

The right back position, unlike its counterpart the left back, is a position that for me at least, hasn't had many real stand out performers. Lee Dixon was a top class right back, but to include him in the best team of the decade would be wrong, as really he only featured in two full seasons during that time and when he was in decline. Another Arsenal Lauren was a solid performer, but the best? He falls just short of that I feel. Other than that, who else is there? Other top clubs such as Liverpool and Chelsea have failed to find a top quality RB in recent years, despite the money Chelsea have spent on the likes of Paulo Ferreira and Boswinga. Liverpool have just invested around £18mil on a RB in Glen Johnson, which is an indication of how hard it is to find a real top draw RB, and possibly how important it is. So for me, the crown simply has to fall to Manchester United's Gary Neville, who's steely determination, will to win, and general consistency put him at the top of the pile.

Centre-back: Sol Campbell

The other stand out players being the likes of Tony Adams, Rio Ferdinand, Nemanja Vidic, Jamie Carragher and Sami Hyypia. Tony Adams although my hero, it would be wrong to give him a place in the team for very similiar reasons to Lee Dixon, as he only really had two full seasons during the time frame we are looking at. Jamie Carragher and Sami Hyypia have been ever reliable, models of consistency at the back for Liverpool, however they both fall slightly short of being the best having never really sustained a dominant period in the Premiership Era. Vidic is world class, but there are in my opinion 3 better defenders overall in the Premiership over the last decade. So it was down to Rio, and Sol. I went for Sol on the grounds that Sol, at his best was simply an absolute rock. As quick as central defenders come, dominant in the air, great reader of the game, and as consistent as they come with very few, if any errors. Rio Ferdinand although a world class defender who has like fine wine matured with age, he still has it in his game to self implode by switching off and making costly errors. So based on this, and for sheer reliability and consistency, I simply have to go for big Sol, although he did go AWOL in later years.

Centre-back: John Terry (c)


I think for this one, there is no doubt. Although there is much to dislike about the man, most notably his treatment of officials during games, and his constant pay rises at Chelsea which get more and more ridiculous everytime. He is undoubtably a top draw performer, and would be the captain of this wonderful side which really is a testiment to the current England's captain's performances and leadership qualities in recent years.

Left-back: Ashley Cole

As much as it pains me to name this little terd as the best left back in the Premiership this last decade, I simply have no choice as quite frankly, he is. A defender who combines great pace, stamina, attacking thrust and great final ball, with frantastic defensive understanding and solidity. His only real contender Patrice Evra, who falls just short in my opinion.

Rightt-midfield: Christiano Ronaldo

For this one, there can be no debate. Arguably the most supernaturally talented footballer to ever grace this earth. He has everything, from pace, to power, the ability to score extraordinary goals, set-pieces, he can even head the ball with the best of them! For this spot in the team, he really has no contender.

Centre midfield: Patrick Vieira

Another place in the team where I feel there can be no complaints. Never has one single man been such a dynamic destroyer in the middle of the park in the Premiership era. The most complete box-to-box midfielder I have ever seen, combining an immense physical power, with great athletism, tackling ability, and driving force when attacking as well as defending. Paddy Vieira, really was the boss.

Centre midfield: Xabi Alonso

Now this choice is undoubtably the most contraversial of the lot. How can Xabi Alonso be put in ahead of the likes of Keane, Lampard, Gerrard, Essien, Makelele or Fabregas you may ask? Well for me it is quite simple, in this article I am aiming to put together the best team from the Premiership over the last decade. The best TEAM, not the best individual players. To build a team, you need to have the right balance. Balance between defense and attack, the playmakers and the hard workers, height, pace etc. If I was to list the best players, I could quite simply put together a list consisting of all attackers, as these are the best, most talented footballers no? Building a team is different, and the reason Xabi Alonso gets the nod over the others is because quite simply, he is Patrick Vieira's perfect partner. A player who can sit deeper, spread the play with a magnificent wide range of passing and allow Vieira the freedom to surge forward whenever he see's fit. Let's not forget, that Alonso is probably the greatest deep lying playmaker on the earth currently (in my view far superior ro Pirlo) and some of his football, and in particular his passing last season was some the finest I have ever seen on a consistent basis. Ask yourself this, would Keane and Vieira work? No, both too similiar, and neither good enough passes. Would Lampard and Vieira work? No, both too attack minded. This takes nothing away from Lampard who would make the team under different circumstances, as I personally see him as better than Gerrard and the next likely to come in if either Vieira or Alonso had not played in the Premiership. The reasons go on and on, but basically If i was building a team, Alonso and Vieira would be the perfect midfield partnership quite simply because they have everything.

Left midfield: Ryan Giggs

By some way the most decorated, consistent player of the Premiership era, never mind the last decade. A true legend, and a true role model for everyone. How can a player who has won 11 Premiership titles, 5 FA cups, 3 League cups, and 2 Champions Leagues, still have the drive to keep playing and at such a high level? I believe it's simply because he loves the game, which is very refreshing to see in an era where football is filled with pre-madonna's who don't know the meaning of the world loyalty. I take my hat off to you, Sir Ryan Joseph Giggs.

Centre forward: Dennis Bergkamp

The most complete playmaker the Premiership has ever seen. Not the greatest goalscorer in his later years where he sat a lot deeper due to his lack of pace, but never has a player stepped on to a Premiership pitch with so much class, and displaying that over such a lengthy period of time (1995-2006). He had the ability to pick a pass that very few would even see, let alone have the audacity to attempt it. And attempt it he did, quite often it coming off in such a way that it almost looked like the simplest thing in the world. Along with this vision and passing ability, he had by far the best first touch I have ever seen. Just watch his iconic goals against Argentina in world cup 98, his turn against Newcastle in 2002, as well as the 3rd goal in the best hattrick ever scored against Leciester in 97. An absolute legend, and a gentleman off the field to boot. Has there been a better player to have played in the Premiership? I can't think of any, expect for maybe, his strike partner...


Centre forward: Thierry Henry

Arguably the most complete footballer to ever grace the English game. Another who combined immense power, with electric pace, as well as a grace on the ball to rival any playmaker. However, the main thing for me that set's him apart from the rest, and why Henry at his best was simply better than anything we've seen from Ronaldo. His selflessness. Ronaldo, in his most productive Premiership campaign for Manchester United in 2007/08 amassed 31 goals, and 7 assists(http://soccernet.espn.go.com/players/stats?id=22774&cc=5739). Thierry Henry, in his most productive Premiership campaign for Arsenal in 2002/03 compiled 24 goals, and 23 assists(http://soccernet.espn.go.com/players/stats?id=8039&cc=5739). Spot the difference? Thierry Henry at his best was absolutely breathtaking, appearing superhuman at times. He was more than a striker, he did more than just score goals, he tore teams apart almost single handedly.

Having finished my team of the decade, I would just like to hit back in advance at my critics who accuse me of 'Arsenal biase.' My list consists of 4 Arsenal players, 3 Manchester United players, 2 Chelsea players, and a single player from Liverpool and Aston Villa. This is simply because Arsenal, when at their best where quite simply, the best... unbeatable. The other players in my list may well have been vital parts in teams that were dominant in the Premiership but no other side went a full season unbeaten, and that is something that cannot be overlooked.

South Africa 2010, Here We Come!

Never mind the Olympics, The Ashes, Wimbledon, the Football World cup is by far the greatest sporting show case on earth. It can make you as proud as punch one day, and as sick as a parrot the next. But that is the true beauty of it, there is no other thing on earth for a true football fan that means so much. Football, and in particular World Cups have the power to break down social barriers, in only the last World Cup in Germany 2006 we witnessed Germany being reinvigorated as a nation, and some final closure to what still was an East - West Germany divide.

National pride is at stake, cheering on your own country and in particular your own clubs players with more delight than the rest (although being an Arsenal fan, that is a very rare commodity these days to say the least) as well as giving a very reluctant cheer whenever a player you generally despise does something extraordinary (a fine example obviously being Mr. Cashley Cole). Then after a mistake, your fickle side comes out at its finest as you bleat something like "useless Chelsea mug" at the television.

The emotions us football fans go through over this month long tournament are unreal, and all a man during that month needs is a TV, a laptop, a lot of beer and some space(women take note). This "space" required far more after a bad result, or during a match in the all too common nerve clenching moments where everything seems to go in slow motion(once again women take note, DO NOT say "its just a game").

Having watched the World Cup draw today, several things were very clear to me. Firstly, Charlize Theron although a stunner, clearly went to the John Barnes school of TV presenting. Secondly the fact that you could almost feel her burning desire to get into our Beck's pants in the after show party (did you see the constant flirting? "are you sure you've got the right one?") Lastly, and most importantly for us, just how much of a great chance it would appear England now have in this World Cup, thanks to the wonderful draw we were given.

But for now, here is my summary, verdict, and predictions for the World Cup 2010:

Group A -

South Africa (hosts)

Mexico

Uruguay

France

I expect to see South Africa and France qualify out of this group. Why? South Africa being the host nation, and first African nation to host the World Cup are sure to be fired up and I expect them to qualify over nearest challanges Mexico, who always fail to produce on the big stage despite often holding a very impressive world ranking. I can see France coming in 2nd, as they are a very poorly managed team under Raymond Domenech (who I believe is only still in charge due to the French FA unable to afford his compensation fee's!), but in the end their class will show and they will escape the group and unto the knockout phase of the competition. I don't expect either team to challenge for the World Cup crown at the very end.

Group B -

Argentina

South Korea

Greece
Nigeria

Argentina and Nigeria to quality for me. South Korea will struggle big time, but the 2004 European Champions Greece will have a lot to say in the outcome of the top 2 qualification spaces. I do though expect Nigeria to see them off, their Premiership top level experience proving vital in big moments, with such players as Evertons Josepth Yobo, and Yakubu, former Newcastle striker Obafemi Martins, Portsmouth striker Kanu, and Chelsea's hard man Obi Mikel sure to be key players for them. Argentina, although again a very poor managed side under the hapless legend that is Diego Maradona, the utter class of players such as the latest Ballon D'or winner Leo Messi, Athletico Madrids young starlet Kun Aguero, and Real Madrid Front man Higuain coming good in when needed most.

Group C -

England

Slovenia

Algeria

USA

England surely comfortable favourites for this group due to their undoubted quality, fantastic recent form in qualifiers, and general strong performances in the group stages of World Cups. USA are the team tipped to be the biggest threat and qualify alongside England, but I'm inclined to disagree. America tend to get nowhere with their "soccer", as they lack the mental strength and I expect Slovenia to qualify with England. I see Slovenia as a typical Russian type team, hard working, well drilled, technically sound, the team in the group that has the potential to cause England some real problems. Let's not forget as well, this is a Slovenia team that knocke a very good Russia side out recently in the play-offs. Algeria are the only World Cup virgins, and I expect them to bring something new, and refreshing to this world cup. But I seriously can't see them being a real challenge as the defending of African teams, generally speaking is very poor and should cause little problems when the games died down about after the opening 20minutes against superior opposition. England to qualify as groud leaders without breaking a sweat (fingers crossed!).

Group D -
Germany

Australia

Serbia
Ghana

Hardly a "group of death", but certainly a highly competitive group. I expect to see Germay qualify comfortably (as they always do), with Serbia and Ghana fighting tooth and nail for the 2nd qualification place in the group. In the end however, I expect to see Serbia to triumph and qualify over of Africa's 2nd strongest representative. This largely due to the solid defense comprised of Manchester Uniteds rock Nemanja Vidic, Chelsea man Branislav Ivanovic, and Borussia Dortmunds giant defender Neven Subotic. All very old school style centre backs who will make it very difficult and physical for any opposition. This mixed in with the creativity of Inter's experienced playmaker Dejan Stankovic, CSKA's winger Milos Krasic who recently shined against Manchester United in the Champions League, as well as Manchester United youngster Zoran Tosic, and Stuttgarts Donnie Darko Kuzmanovic. I expect an Essien inspired Ghana to fight til the bitter end, but Serbia to come out ultimately on top. As for Australia, I personally don't see them putting up too much of a fight. Germany and Serbia to qualify.

Group E -

Holland

Denmark

Japan
Cameroon

Although I find it hard to see a Holland side without Arsenal's Inspirational forward Robin Van Persie being a real threat to the World Cup big boys, I none the less see them having the quality to comfortably quality from this group. Japan, without Hiddink and the inspiration of playing at home like they did in 2002 will struggle in the group and I can see them being seen as an easy 3 points by the other 3 sides. Once again, this group for me comes down to another Africa vs Europe battle for the final qualification spot out of the group, contested between Cameroon and Denmark. I foresee Cameroon having the edge in this one, with their key men being Arsenal's Alex Song who will shield the defence expertly, and ofcourse Inter Milan's hitman Samuel Eto'o who will look to provide the cutting edge in this powerful, hard working Cameroonian outfit. The Netherlands and Cameroon to qualify.

Group F -

Italy

Paraguay

New Zealand

Slovakia

Yet another group where I see one side qualifying comfortably, whilst one struggles, and two fight it out for the remaining qualifying birth. Italy being the team to finish comfortably, with their experience and steely determination coming to the fore when required. New Zealand being the groups "whipping boys" and Slovakia and Paraguay being the two fighting it out. My tip to qualify out of those two would be Paraguay, who look to me like a very good team having seen them during qualifying several times. Slovakia will undoubtably be led by reported Chelsea target Marek Hamsik, but I just see Paraguay having the edge on them overall. So thats Paraguay and Italy to qualify out of this group. I don't see Italy as being one of the front runner in this World Cup unlike in recent years however, with their old legs, and lack of a real spark of creativity in the final third being their undoing.

Group G -

Brazil

North Korea

Ivory Coast

Portugal

The only group out of the lot that can be classed as the "group of death." However, even with that I can't foresee too many problems for the all time World Cup's most successful country, Brazil. They are a top quality team, and I am sure, as always will have a major say in the final outcome of the World Cup. North Korea I can't see causing too many problems for the top 3 in this group. So again, it is yet another African vs European battle for qualification, and this time I may suprise some people by actually going for the African side, the Ivory Coast. This is because I see them as the better equipped team overall, with Chelsea's powerhouse striker leading the line and causing no end of problems for the oppositions defence, supported by Barcelona's midfield Anchorman Yaya Toure bossing the midfield. As for Portugal, they are a team with undoubted quality, with a squad comprising of last years Ballon D'or winner Christiano Ronaldo, Chelsea playmaker Deco, and Real Madrids Brazillian born defender Pepe being the key players. The problem I see with Portugal is that their squad is very unbalanced, and poorly managed in my opinion by Ex-Manchester United Assistant Manager Carlos Quieroz. By this I mean they have a lot of attacking creativity and flair (Christiano Ronaldo, Deco, Simao, Nani, Moutinho, Meireless), yet they lack a quality striker to lead the line, and I can see their defence really being exposed and struggle to cope with the likes of Drogba, and Luis Fabiano. Along with that, Quieroz is yet to work out a settled side. Expect to see more Christiano Ronaldo tears, even before we enter the knock out phase of the competition. Ivory Coast and Brazil to qualify.

Group H -

Spain

Chile

Honduras

Switzerland

For me, this is probably the hardest group to call, simply because I know pretty much nothing about two of the teams in this Group (Chile and Honduras). We can safely say European Champions Spain will qualify comfortably out of this group, as for the rest, who knows? Switzerland have Senderos at the back so they have no chance, and the only thing I know about Honduras is that Wilson Palacios plays for them.

Overall, throughout all the world class talent there is sure to be on show at this highly anticipated World Cup Finals, I ultimately only see 4 teams who have a real good chance of winning the competition. This "big 4", if you like consists of Brazil and Germany, too very different teams in style, but two teams that are always there, or thereabouts come crunch time. Then England, who under Capello look a real force and I can really see being challengers in the later stages of this competition (aslong as it doesn't go down to penalties). Lastly, and no suprise my tip to win the whole thing, Spain. They are quite simply, a classy outfit who have an outstanding ammount of world class talent, and I expect them to thrill everyone who watches them, and ultimately walk away with the grand prize, the World Cup.

Success Is A Fine Line

The margin between success and failure is often a very fine line. In football, this ‘fine line’ is generally made up of player’s split second decision making, and physical strength. Two areas in which Arsenal sadly, are very much short in. Practically every time we have come unstuck over the past 2 years has not been because we have been ‘outclassed’, or ‘outplayed’, but because of this ‘fine line.’ Our problems either being when our lack of height and overall physical power comes to haunt us in set piece situations, or breaking down stubborn defences. The other instance being costly individual errors, and poor split second decision making (Diaby own goal, Almunia rushing off line) ultimately culminating in an Arsenal ‘self implode.’ Against Chelsea this Sunday, both of these reasons are behind our defeat and why we are now effectively out of the title hunt. This is not me being pessimistic, but being realistic.

I believe that our overall performance against Chelsea, was actually, not that bad, and I for one do not buy into the hype in the media about this being yet another crisis at Arsenal Football Club. We’ve all seen this before, we will bounce back. It is however a shame that we do seem to have to seemingly ‘bounce back’ so often, and that our results can’t just go smoothly for once. I simply believe on the day, we were beaten by the better, more experience, clinical outfit, and that ‘fine line’ really haunted us once again. Our general play was okay, and our overall individual displays decent. Almunia was okay (dodgy for the 3rd goal, but we were already losing 2-0), the centre backs performed fairly well and were very unlucky to have to deal with some very difficult crosses which would destroy any defence in the world. I thought Traore was pretty much outstanding considering the circumstances, Song was solid, Fabregas done all he could, Nasri and Arshavin were okay in general play, but just lacked that cutting edge. You may have noticed, but I have left out 3 of the starters from the Chelsea game, and these are the players that I am now going to criticise in more depth, and I believe are the key reasons as to why Arsenal on the day were so ineffective, and comprehensively shoved aside by this Chelsea machine.

Firstly, and being the lesser of the 3 evils, it’s Denilson. He didn’t really do anything majorly wrong, the problem was he simply done nothing for 90mins! Now I am not a ‘Denilson basher’, in fact I think he is a good little player that has something to offer. He has good energy levels, good work rate, technical ability, and generally puts in a decent shift in the middle of the park by getting up and down the pitch, putting in interceptions and keeping the ball. However the problem with Denilson currently is that in big games he is simply anonymous, and the game goes by without you registering his presence. I think he is a good squad player, but like Diaby, should be nowhere near first choice when everyone is fit, but I do fear that he is.

Secondly, Bacary Sagna. A player who I believe, and still believe is a top quality full back. But for me, his defending has simply got worse with every season he has been at the club, which culminated in an absolute shocker against Chelsea. He switched off and in my opinion was solely responsible for letting both of Ashley Coles crosses in, which both led to goals. Andy Gray attempted to blame Nasri and Arshavin for these but I respectively disagree. Nasri and Arshavin are both attack minded players, who were asked against Chelsea to help out defensively perhaps more than usual. They were back doing a their job but like all attack minded players, do not see the full danger of a situation and ended up being drawn to the ball leaving Cole unmarked. Sagna however doesn’t have this excuse, he is a defender and it looks to me that he simply switched off on both occasions, doing practically nothing to stop the incoming crosses from Cole. A quality defender would have read the situation and seen the potential threat that the rest were blind to and dealt with it. Sagna simply didn’t. The other problem with Sagna’s performance the other night was his attacking display, for me his crossing just gets worse and worse, and whenever he gets the ball in the final third I know nothing will come of it. Generally speaking though, we let him off with this as we have enough attacking players and we acknowledge that he is a better defender than Eboue, even though Eboue has a far better final ball. The problem here is that, on recent form, I would say Eboue is the much more on form defender, and possibly Sagna has become a touch complacent. I would like to see Eboue giving a run of games in that position, to finally stake a claim and add serious competition for the place.

Last but not least, we have culprit number 3, Eduardo. Eduardo I believe is a player with plenty of ability, and is undoubtedly the most natural born goal scorer we have. But will he ever recover from that horrific injury we all know to well about? Or is he simply no longer cut out for the football, and mostly the formation Arsenal now play with? Having watched him closely against Chelsea, I feel my fears are very accurate and sadly, could come to haunt the next few months of our season. I haven’t for a very long time, seen such a woeful performance from an Arsenal striker. Every time he got the ball, he just gave it away without ever looking like a threat. His first touch made Bendtner look like Bergkamp, and his second touch on the odd occasion of him still having the ball was even worse. It never got further than that. On the one occasion that he did actually turn the defender and look to have an opening on goal in the very early stages of the 2nd half, he opted to take a second touch instead of taking on the shot, and the ball just ended up comfortably in the Cech’s gloves. Not only was his touch very much off, but he was simply bullied by the Chelsea centre backs, and made to look like a school boy. This I feel, is the main reason as to why we were so comprehensively beaten by Chelsea, and were so ineffective in attack. The big difference being that with Chelsea, they can play a ball into their front men in a variety of ways, in the air, on the ground, and even if it is not 100% accurate, you still know that with Anelka, and especially Drogba they will still make it difficult for you and cause you problems. You can not say that about our frontline, we have to play very precise passes along the ground to our front men, and even then they have no concept of holding the ball up.

See, the big problem is when you play a 4-3-3 formation, with one central striker, this player MUST be able to hold the ball up and bring others into play. Without this, the team has no outlet, no focal point, and ultimately gets nowhere because no one else can get forward to cause the opposition problems. Ibrahimovic does this so well for Barcelona, and Van Persie done this exceptionally for us up until now. Both have great feet, and good upper body strength to shield the ball against centre halves. Van Persie has been crucial in the majority of our goals this season, for the simple reason being that he holds the ball up, allows the others to get forward and then brings them into play. This is especially needed against physically strong teams, and at home against teams that’s first thought is to counter our attacking threat. If we had Van Persie playing, or even Bendtner I do believe the game could have been a different story. Unfortunately for us, Van Persie is out for the season, Bendtner is injured and still far from the finished article, with Eduardo and Vela simply being incapable of doing this. The problem we had offensively against Chelsea was that we passed, passed and passed without ever having anyone to hold the ball up, and bring others into play allowing them to get the other side of their defence and cause them real problems where it matters.

Personally, I feel that it if Arsenal really want to now move forward to the next step as a team in light of the Chelsea game, we have to do a number of things (which surprisingly, involves spending some money!). Firstly, and most importantly in the short term, is to sign a striker who is physically and technically able to fill Van Persie’s boots for the rest of the season. I would have loved to have seen Carlton Cole come in and lead the line for Arsenal, but with his latest injury, and his likely price tag, it is very unlikely to happen. Chamakh is obviously the most likely outcome, and from what I understand about him he seems pretty much the right type of player we need. Then we need to really look to bring in a strong, ball winning, box-to-box midfielder in the mould of an Essien, or a Fletcher to partner Song and Fabregas in the centre of midfield. This player would make us more solid physically and defensively, as well as offering a driving force from midfield in attack to support our smaller technical players. As for likely candidates for this, I am no expert, but I like the look of Gokhan Inler who we have been linked with in the past and I feel he could suit this role very well. After those two signings that I see as absolutely vital, I feel we still need some cover, and competition for places at centre back, and defensive midfield. There is a feeling that if we lose any of Song, Vermaelen, or Gallas then we have serious problems. In my opinion, this could be covered with one player, and I would recommend Vertonghen of Ajax for this role. He is very similar to Vermaelen, in that he is a ball playing defender, however he is taller at 6ft 2, slightly younger, and more capable of playing the ‘Song role’ in midfield. Finally, a position that is hotly discussed by many Arsenal fans and pundits alike, the goalkeeper. We could definitely do with a top quality stopper, as Almunia although good, falls slightly short of that standard. The only problem here is, who? There generally are no ‘world class’ keepers that everybody seems to insist we get who are available, we definitely missed out of Given but we cant get him now, so who? Only one I can think of is Russia’s Igor Akinfeev, who certainly has the potential to be a world class keeper. Problem is there’s that word again, ‘potential’, that we simply hear too often when a discussion on Arsenal arises. More problems with this is that inexperienced keepers have in the past often proved to be disastrous, and Igor would certainly not come cheap.

I would like now though to end on a more positive note. It is not all doom and gloom, we still have a very young squad who are learning with every game and every mistake they make. We just simply need some additions to take this team to the next level. Problem is I firmly believe that we need some success in the short term, to ultimately be successful in the long term with our undoubtedly talented young footballers.

In Wenger I Still Trust