The Lansbury Loan

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Is it not the case that Wenger only loans players on the guarantee they are played?

 

I hope that isn''t the case here because this lad is not living up to his billing so far.

[Cantiaci Canary 610]

This is a joke right?!

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Not a joke. I don''t care about reputation, I only go by what I see. One pass doesn''t make a season. Surman is a better player IMO.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Korey Smith is a better tackler and a better link up player. Lansbury obviously has talent but I don''t want to assume he is a shoe in.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

It''s a fair point Rudolph but listening to the radio he seemed to be more involved than any other player today. In my experience it''s the names you don''t hear much on the commentary who have poor games. It sounded like he was very influential today.

 

 

[Morisons Prozac 0]

One pass? Are you an idiot?

Other than you, I haven''t seen anyone refer to Lansbury on this board by that pass.

He links our play extremely well and creates many chances for others, weprobably wouldn''t have won if he didn''t play against Coventry.

You create a thread taking the mick about Canary Callers then you come up with this stupiid comment, just f*ck off already.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Well now Rudolph.. I bet you''re glad the thread wasn''t about Crofts[;)]

 

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

[quote user="Crofts'' Number 1 Fan"]

One pass? Are you an idiot?

Other than you, I haven''t seen anyone refer to Lansbury on this board by that pass.

He links our play extremely well and creates many chances for others, weprobably wouldn''t have won if he didn''t play against Coventry.

You create a thread taking the mick about Canary Callers then you come up with this stupiid comment, just f*ck off already.

I think your determination to throw a few insults has helped you miss the point.

[Cantiaci Canary 610]

I don''t care about reputation either.

I agree that Surman is currently a better player due to his experience.

BUT ... Lansbury has been excellent since he''s been here! His movement, passing and energy has been eye catching and effective. You''re the only supporter I''ve ever heard criticising him.

If he was failing to live up to his billing do you think PL would play him JUST to keep Wenger happy?

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

This came up when Kieran Gibbs was here. There was a rumour Wenger only loans players on account that they start games. No one should walk into the side.

 

As for Lansbury, he sees things early and passes and moves well. He has been injured though and struggled against QPR. Add to that Lamberts recent comments intended to take some weight of expectation off his shoulders.

 

Lansbury looked gutted when he came off against QPR and sets himself high standards it seems but we got where we are by being a team without stars and for me team selection comes first. PL always goes for a win, clearly that pays off but, we often give a goal away failing to build into games and pay a price for that.

 

I just hope Lansbury is picked by PL and not AW.

[Cantiaci Canary 610]

You speak a lot of sense RH but I genuinely believe that PL picks the team without any outside pressures. He''s not the soft sort!

It will be interesting to see what he does with a fit Surman, Lansbury, Hoolahan, Crofts, Fox, Korey, Lappin & Mac. No wonder OTD, Gill & Adeyemi are out on loan!

It begs the question ... do we really need to spend a precious million+ pounds on Bennett?

[87canary 0]

I don''t think he has to start.

When he first came here on loan I''m sure I read something like his loan would be extended if he got a good run of games.

Aside from that, he''s always looked class to me. People just looking for this weeks scapegoat IMO.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

There was a rumour at the time Gibbs was here. But I can''t see Lambert letting Wenger pick his team.

 

I just checked and was surprised to find Arsenal actually have 17 players out on loan. They obviously don''t all start but players like Lansbury may have different agreements.

 

http://www.arsenal.com/usa/the-players/arsenal-s-loanees

 

 

[When Saturday Comes 0]

Lansbury was poor today. Ineffective.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I hope Henri tears the place up when he gets fully fit but I cannot see how we can play him, Fox and Hoolahan in  starting eleven. We need another combative player instead.

[ca 1]

[quote user="When Saturday Comes"]Lansbury was poor today. Ineffective.[/quote]

 

Didnt sound like that on the radio but guess you were there and saw it first hand??

[When Saturday Comes 0]

Yeah - and like the chap above I will make my mind up on watching rather than reputation.

Felt he was lightweight and gave the ball away too much.

However, I think he''s a classy player, just some games and oppositions don''t suit him.

And I''m sure there will be plenty who were there today who thought he was good. That''s football!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

What I said was that in the commentary he seemed to be more involved than any other player today. In my experience it''s the names you don''t hear much on the commentary who have poor games. It sounded like he was very influential today.

 

I wasn''t there so take your word for it. Who did you think was more effective today?

 

 

[Gingerpele 0]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]Not a joke. I don''t care about reputation, I only go by what I see. One pass doesn''t make a season. Surman is a better player IMO.[/quote]

What the hell have you seen Surman do that makes him so much better than Lansbury?

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="cityangel"]

[quote user="When Saturday Comes"]Lansbury was poor today. Ineffective.[/quote]

 

Didnt sound like that on the radio but guess you were there and saw it first hand??

[/quote]

I was there and he did have a poor game IMO, but then a lot of the team were poor. 

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

What I said was that in the commentary he seemed to be more involved than any other player today. In my experience it''s the names you don''t hear much on the commentary who have poor games. It sounded like he was very influential today.

 

I wasn''t there so take your word for it. Who did you think was more effective today?

 

[/quote]

Ruddy and Hoolahan were the best IMO, Chris Martin was awful. Just my opinion though.

[Yellow Submarine 0]

I haven''t seen enough of Labsbury to start raving about him just yet, but I don''t doubt he has talent from his arsenal pedigree. Cardiff game he didn''t really make a positive impact and he was subsequently substituted early. Like the original poster said I hope it isn''t a case of we have to play him. Fear it may upset the apple cart!

[jammis 0]

I was at the game today and although Lansbury saw a lot of the ball he didn''t seem to be at the races. Whether that''s because he hasn''t played enough, was having an off day or just hasn''t developed enough yet who knows.

But as no one really played well today apart from Ruddy, it''s neither here nor there. I just hope we pick our performance up Millwall, it''s tight up at the top of the table and too many dropped points could mean a quick slip down the table.

We might have come a long way in 18 months, but we''re all hoping our good 2010/11 season continues.

[Boris 62]

I watch Lansbury last 2 games and on both of them he was inefective and far from level before injury.

At all today middf not work so good and fox and crofts have many wrong passes and ideas.

Only can say that im so much impressed by Leon Barnett realy amaizing player he is a pure gold.

Martin also was far from his best WIlbraham can do good job good addition imo.

all in all good point against historicly hard oponent who badly need pts.

Millwall task will be veen more hardder.

Come on yellows!

[ron obvious 1,711]

Saw him today & thought he has great potential, but isn''t quite on the same wavelength as his teammates. The only way he can do that is through game time, so I would persevere with him. If he & Hooly can get an understanding it will be awesome (what a fantastic little player Wes is, by the way). Barnett''s heading ability is unreal. I think he might have missed one header today? And I think he was fouled for that one. It would have been interesting to see him against Iversen.Watching Jacko, I think keeping Cody might have been the better option. I don''t think he''s a bad player, it''s just that we''re not the right team for him. He needs others around him to make things happen, whereas I suspect Cody would have made more of what little was on offer. He''s very good at harrying the opposition & foraging for the ball. Not a good day at the office. Too many mediocre performances I thought.

[ron obvious 1,711]

Oh, & I must mention the support. I was sat in the opposite corner & most of the time all I could hear was our lot. Fantastic!

[I am a Banana 0]

sorry but surman hasn''t shown anything so far. therefore RH your judging him from his rep!

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]
Saw him today & thought he has great potential, but isn''t quite on the same wavelength as his teammates. The only way he can do that is through game time, so I would persevere with him. If he & Hooly can get an understanding it will be awesome (what a fantastic little player Wes is, by the way).

Barnett''s heading ability is unreal. I think he might have missed one header today? And I think he was fouled for that one. It would have been interesting to see him against Iversen.

Watching Jacko, I think keeping Cody might have been the better option. I don''t think he''s a bad player, it''s just that we''re not the right team for him. He needs others around him to make things happen, whereas I suspect Cody would have made more of what little was on offer. He''s very good at harrying the opposition & foraging for the ball.

Not a good day at the office. Too many mediocre performances I thought.

[/quote]

Ron, your thoughts prompted a question....I notice on many occasions that some of the more average players in the Premiership games can make a better quality ( and creative ) player look poor by not anticipating as they should. Lansbury is obviously used to the quick passing motions of Arsenal in training and players constantly moving and anticipating. Regarding your comment that Lansbury isn''t quite on the same wavelength as his team mates, do you think the problem, at least in part, is that we don''t have enough quick movement from some of the other players and that contributes to Lansbury looking less effective as a result?  

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]
Saw him today & thought he has great potential, but isn''t quite on the same wavelength as his teammates. The only way he can do that is through game time, so I would persevere with him. If he & Hooly can get an understanding it will be awesome (what a fantastic little player Wes is, by the way).

Barnett''s heading ability is unreal. I think he might have missed one header today? And I think he was fouled for that one. It would have been interesting to see him against Iversen.

Watching Jacko, I think keeping Cody might have been the better option. I don''t think he''s a bad player, it''s just that we''re not the right team for him. He needs others around him to make things happen, whereas I suspect Cody would have made more of what little was on offer. He''s very good at harrying the opposition & foraging for the ball.

Not a good day at the office. Too many mediocre performances I thought.

[/quote]

Ron, your thoughts prompted a question....I notice on many occasions that some of the more average players in the Premiership games can make a better quality ( and creative ) player look poor by not anticipating as they should. Lansbury is obviously used to the quick passing motions of Arsenal in training and players constantly moving and anticipating. Regarding your comment that Lansbury isn''t quite on the same wavelength as his team mates, do you think the problem, at least in part, is that we don''t have enough quick movement from some of the other players and that contributes to Lansbury looking less effective as a result?  

[Largey 0]

I think Lansbury and Surman have shown their class in glimpses, however that doesn''t raise them above the likes of Crofts, K Smith and Lappin who always offer their 110%. Lansbury and Surman playing at their peak is a force for any team, but we haven''t seen their best abilities yet,and these will come through time and consistency,