Arthur

[khaled_a_d]

Fair enough, I remebered Iniesta with far bigger injury issues (wrongly so apparantly). Doesnt change that Arthur can very well overcome his issues (or not and be a sidenote). 1-2 seasons is not an awful lot of time to give up on a quality player.

Messi was the one who struggled with injuries.
He adjusted his game worked his body etc to avoid those injuries and luckily he was successful at that.
Arthur could turn it around, many players did albeit still minority. Still he need great work ethic and discipline for that.
Until then, the club need to count him as "injury prone player" while planning our squad.

 

[Nazario1985]

Messi was the one who struggled with injuries.
He adjusted his game worked his body etc to avoid those injuries and luckily he was successful at that.
Arthur could turn it around, many players did albeit still minority. Still he need great work ethic and discipline for that.
Until then, the club need to count him as "injury prone player" while planning our squad.

Beside when your are as talented as Messi or Iniesta when your are on the pitch you bring so much value the club can say he is injury prone but so much value when ready. (not saying Messi & Iniesta are/were injurie prone like Arthur)

Arthur does not have that luxury.

 

[mc_lovin]

I am not disagreeing with that, but calling him a flop is just ridiculous. A more balanced view would be nice.

 

[serghei]

You forgot in your calculus the period he is in the club and SHOULD be profitable during it i.e bring something, but if he is not playing !!

Ex (not Arthur) : Buying a guy at 100M ==> no play/flop/too much injuries/ghost ==> selling him 3 years later at 110M IS NOT a profit !! it's like saying selling him at 100M is no harm done

Lol, had he played when he was available we'd probably be sitting on a treble currently. This is the first serious injury he has had. Last season he didn't play in the final part of the season because the manager is an idiot.

I am not disagreeing with that, but calling him a flop is just ridiculous. A more balanced view would be nice.

It's mostly the same users who have had an agenda against him from the start, so nothing surprising.

 

[Nazario1985]

Lol, had he played when he was available we'd probably be sitting on a treble currently..

Ok stop that BS non sense once for all he is not a XAVI or Iniesta by galaxies !!! he is not even a prime Busi !!

His stamina was like shit last season, call EV an idiot by Arthur couldn't finish a 90min game !!

This season will be no different.

And stop calling everyone who disagree with you "users with agenda"

If he continues like this he will end up a NOBODY

 

[serghei]

Ok stop that BS non sense once for all he is not a XAVI or Iniesta by galaxies !!! he is not even a prime Busi !!

His stamina was like shit last season, call EV an idiot by Arthur couldn't finish a 90min game !!

This season will be no different.

And stop calling everyone who disagree with you "users with agenda"

If he continues like this he will end up a NOBODY

You don't need to be a Xavi or an Iniesta to not give goals away, keep your calm, find the open man, and resist some pressure. One midfielder who does those things on regular basis, like Arthur does, and we almost certainly score on Anfield, making our chances to go through much bigger.

I don't call everyone who doesn't agree with me "users with agenda". Only some.

 

[serghei]

I don't get the comparison...

Iniesta:
Age 21: 46 matches for Barca
Age 22: 49 matches
Age 23: 56 matches
Age 24: 49 matches

Since 13th April of 2019, Arthur played only 348 minutes in 11 last matches of our 2018/19 season=348/990=35,1% of time on a field.
This season: 919 minutes in 24 matches=919/2160 minutes=42,5%.
Since reports say that he will miss the whole January when we will play 4 matches, that will go up to: 919 minutes played/out of 2520 minutes possible=36,5% of time played in this season.
Total from April 2019-end of January 2020: 1267 minutes played/3510 possible=36,1% of time

Also, in the last 35 matches of Barca (since 13th April 2019), Arthur managed to stay on a field for longer than 75 minutes: 6 times in 35 matches or 6 times over 10 Months, lol.

Lol. So you actually equate not playing to being injured? Did you ever hear of the term 'technical decisions'? Try again. Go search injury record and tell me the time he was sidelined from injury out of total time. %of time he was fit, and %of time he wasn't. That's the stat you need to look at.

 

[Nazario1985]

You don't need to be a Xavi or an Iniesta to not give goals away, keep your calm, find the open man, and resist some pressure. One midfielder who does those things on regular basis, like Arthur does, and we almost certainly score on Anfield, making our chances to go through much bigger.

I don't call everyone who doesn't agree with me "users with agenda". Only some.

Arthur making breakthrough passes ?

Sorry still convinced about his forward thinking, even according to himself ! can't remember the interview he threw in Brazil after some Rivaldo remarks when he said ' yes i need to work on that' .

My main issue with him is at the reliability to be able to replace Raki or Busi no matter how terrible you think they are.

 

[BBZ8800]

Fair enough, I remebered Iniesta with far bigger injury issues (wrongly so apparantly). Doesnt change that Arthur can very well overcome his issues (or not and be a sidenote). 1-2 seasons is not an awful lot of time to give up on a quality player.

I am not giving up on him.
I wouldn't even sell him (for now, of course).

I am just pointing to ideas of lots of members: Frenkie-Arthur are the future.
Frenkie has played 85,2% of available minutes this season.
By the end of a January, Arthur will drop to 36,5% of minutes played.
Frenkie played 233% more minutes than Arthur.

So, I am against ideas:
1. Frenkie-Arthur are the future, since Arthur has objective flaws in his game, and on top of it, he is rarely fit and has tons of off field problems
2. sell everyone ideas (Vidal, Raki). We would have only Frenkie-Busi then. I seriously can't count Puig as a realistic option, sorry.
3. and even when Arthur actually plays, he is usually dead tired after 60 minutes

So, the more realistic approach is:
1. Arthur will maybe turn into a player about whom our fans dream of, and maybe he won't.
2. if he won't reach that level, then we surely won't have Frenkie-Arthur duo
3. if he will reach this level in terms of his quality, we will still need to have at least 1 option who will always be ready to play, since Arthur will usually miss 50-60% of a season, and will never play for more than 75 minutes.

So, imo, people should slowly try to adopt those ideas while planning and writing about our future.

Lol. So you actually equate not playing to being injured? Did you ever hear of the term 'technical decisions'? Try again. Go search injury record and tell me the time he was sidelined from injury out of total time. %of time he was fit, and %of time he wasn't. That's the stat you need to look at.

See the post above.
Frenkie is almost never benched due to technical reasons.
This season, two kids:
Frenkie played 85% of ALL minutes available.
Arthur will be at 36% soon.

 

[serghei]

My main issue with him is at the reliability to be able to replace Raki or Busi no matter how terrible you think they are.

Based on this I now know you don't know what you are talking about. Rakitic is about as worst as it gets at playing under pressure. If you don't think Arthur is at least a good improvement, even if not great, sorry mate, you're a lost cause.

 

[serghei]

See the post above.
Frenkie is almost never benched due to technical reasons.
This season, two kids:
Frenkie played 85% of ALL minutes available.
Arthur will be at 36% soon.

Frenkie is much less benched due to technical reasons than Arthur is. Congratulations, you just proven with stats a thing everybody knows without even looking at the numbers.

 

[Ernesto GOATverde Tejedor]

Based on this I now know you don't know what you are talking about. Rakitic is about as worst as it gets at playing under pressure. If you don't think Arthur is at least a good improvement, even if not great, sorry mate, you're a lost cause.

It's truly remarkable how often anyone who disagrees with you ends up being labelled as not knowing what they are talking about or a lost cause or fucking clueless. As regular as clockwork Serghei my ol' chum.

 

[Nazario1985]

Based on this I now know you don't know what you are talking about. Rakitic is about as worst as it gets at playing under pressure. If you don't think Arthur is at least a good improvement, even if not great, sorry mate, you're a lost cause.

You can't fake it even between two posts don't you ?

you can't argue unless everyone agree with you on everything !! in this case no arguing is needed

 

[BBZ8800]

Frenkie is much less benched due to technical reasons than Arthur is. Congratulations, you just proven with stats a thing everybody knows without even looking at the numbers.

Arthur is benched due to technical reasons due to:
1. having injuries all the time (end of a last season and this season)
2. when he is fit, he is still rusty and not ready due to being injured all the time
3. when he is not injured all the time, he is dead tired after 3 matches in a row due to his off field party life and his natural stamina which is very poor
4. he is benched more often because he is meh and replaceable
And, a magical dreamland solution for everything:
5. Arthur is benched by EV because EV is retarded and doesn't understand football

The simplest answer is: Arthur is benched more than Frenkie because Frenkie is miles better player, never injured and is not as replaceable as Arthur.

 

[serghei]

It's truly remarkable how often anyone who disagrees with you ends up being labelled as not knowing what they are talking about or a lost cause or fucking clueless. As regular as clockwork Serghei my ol' chum.

I work with what I have mate. I would be delighted and excited to be able to debate about tactics with astute users... but it is what it is.

3 types of users:

1) The ones who think they are right and most others are wrong, who are documented and invest a lot of time to make sure this is true --> perceived as purists, arrogants, jerks by some. I am part of this group, with both the good and bad parts that come from it.

2) The ones who think they are right and most others are wrong but do very little to make sure that is backed by real knowledge and study (going on sofascore and opta and posting their numbers trying to pass off as informative and educated doesn't count as real knowledge in my book). A good part of those who I argue with are part of this group. Sadly. Which makes me somehow of an idiot for still arguing with them, but whatever.

3) Those who don't care that much about being perceived as right or wrong --> considered by most as good guys, polite and nice with both those that agree with them, and those who don't. And also not really interested in debating past a certain point. This is the group of users I both agree and don't agree with, depending on topic, but rarely get into insults or harsher arguments with, because they do not pretend to be right, as the users from group 2).

So, I get into arguments with guys from all this categories, because it is a forum, and I'm here to argue. The problem is the forum is skewed with too many users from 2) and 3) and too few from 1). JamDav was a guy from 1) and he left. Most top posters that left were from 1). Most of the newer guys that joined are from 2), which is a big issue.