Three and in – not just another football blog

Arsene Wenger is an intelligent, eloquent man who speaks a lot of sense on many of football’s important issues.  Occasionally, however, his views baffle.  In the build-up to last night’s game with Spurs, he said:

“I am personally convinced he is a world-class goalkeeper, potentially, and of course when you have that potential you want to transfer that into competitive games.

I have massive faith in him and I think I have shown this historically. I am convinced he will become a great goalkeeper.”

Surely this is Wenger in spin-doctor mode, attempting to cajole a performance from a player whose confidence has dropped with every mishandled cross.  Whatever it is, it’s a bewildering statement: if genuine, he’s wrong; if attempted man-management, it failed.

Fabianski was his usual nervy self at White Hart Lane, and conspired to let a tame Robbie Keane effort past him.  Despite getting both gloves to the ball, the molecular structure of his hands seemed to dissolve, and they parted for the ball to squeak embarrassingly by.  Arsenal blog Goodplaya makes the point that poor goalkeepers are often defended as being ‘good shot-stoppers’.  You can’t even say that for Fabianski now.

There is, Wenger has suggested, a limit to his patience:

“We live in a world where if you have an opportunity you have to take it. You will get a second one, but you will not get 10 – and that is part of our job.”

If we decide to be facetious and take the manager at his word, then Fabianski can’t be far away from last chance saloon.  This campaign alone, we’ve already witnessed a disastrous display in a pre-season friendly in Warsaw, as well as last night’s blunder.  Last season, there were memorable outings against Blackburn, Wigan, Stoke and Porto.  Wenger continues to insist Fabianski must take his chances, and then persists with him when he fails to do so.  It’s all carrot and no stick.

Supposedly, Wenger’s faith in Fabianski is what prevented him meeting Fulham’s demands over Mark Schwarzer.  He may have dodged a bullet there: the Australian has been in flappy form himself since returning to the Cottagers’ XI.  Perhaps his head’s not right, and his heart no longer in it.  Either way, Arsenal should be grateful for the relatively solid form of Manuel Almunia, who seems to be bringing some stability to the position.

Whilst Almunia is settled as number one, Arsenal should take the opportunity to dispense with Fabianski.  He’s had enough chances.  He’s become a target and a joke.  Perhaps even more crucially, if Arsenal continue to persist with a player so clearly unsuited to elite football, they may lose one of far greater potential. Wojciech Szczęsny, whose form on loan at Brentford last season suggested he has a far better chance of being an Arsenal #1 than Fabianski will ever have, is disgruntled about a lack of first-team opportunities.

The prospect of losing Szczęsny, as well as the errors Fabianski is almost guaranteed to make, make the gamble of playing him simply too costly.  Fabianski has had enough chances.  It’s time for him to go.

… but not really a surprise.

There’s no denying Stoke are a big, physical side and they use that to their advantage. When that physicality is used correctly I don’t think anyone can have any complaints.

Andy Wilkinson’s foul was not physicality used correctly though. It was late, dangerous and deserved a red card. He wasn’t even booked. Mark Hughes complained about how he expected better from a professional at that stage of game – there were just seconds left to play and Stoke had the game won.

I realise the Fulham manager was trying to highlight just how unnecessary the challenge was but we should expect better from a professional at any stage of the game. Whether it’s the first minute or the last that kind of tackle is not acceptable.

What makes it worse is the fact that Stoke’s assistant manager, Dave Kemp, admitted the tackle was unnecessary but then said:

There is no malice in his challenge – it is just over-enthusiasm.

However, a Stoke City fan speaking on a forum after the game, said:

I called this tackle 5 mins before it happened! Dembele made the mistake of squaring up to Wilko while getting up of the floor. I said to my mate, watch them pair, Wilko will have him.

And he did. So no malice then? Or is it just Stoke trying to make excuses for a player who goes out and does what he’s told. The culture of physicality at Stoke is fine, once it’s kept within the rules, but more than once we’ve seen them go over the line and the outcome is serious injury to their opponents.

I’m sure if Dembele is seriously injured – (update: turns out it’s two weeks, good news) – we’ll be treated to the most patronising, poisonous six words in English football as Stoke defend Wilkinson: He’s not that kind of player.