Viewing Thread:
"Two of the best strikers in the world......"

...and we can't score a bloody goal.

And we go and lose the bloody scousers to make it worse.

And if you're going to get sent off at least put the scouser in hospital.

Excuse my bad mood :P

I think most clubs would.

At the moment I would take Henry and a "fox in the box" of the non Jeffers kind cos we lack that, Bergkamp and Henry have worked well for us through these years but we've never retained our title or progressed further into europe with them two.

The only other player to get in the box is Ljungberg but that is a disadvantage to our midfield cos we lack a winger if we play Pires who drifts infield alot and Ljungberg who makes runs into the box from the wing.

Yes, that is exactly what I was saying matttribute.

But Arsenal have Henry - he can do all the tap in stuff, then he's a great playmaker and can score free kicks as well. I defy anyone to choose van Nistelroooy over good old Terrence.

Well, I think he's saying he'd rather have a complete, well rounded player rather than one who simply finishes moves.

Blank wrote:
> Ruuud is good, but he's a tap-in meister like Robbie Keane. Only a lot
> lot better. I'd rather play someone who can actually pass it about a
> bit.

What do you mean by pass it about a bit? At the moment Arsenal lack a "tap-in meister" ever since Wrighty left. Even though we've won trophies after he left we've never found a succesor to him and in Europe that is partly what we're missing aswell as a proper Right winger.

We've also struggled to retain the league!

Yeah, Van Nistelrooy is good because he's at a top club. Couldn't see him doing as well at a team like Palace, for instance.

Henry and such, though, could dominate any team they played in.

Andy Johnson is good though

Ruuud is good, but he's a tap-in meister like Robbie Keane. Only a lot lot better. I'd rather play someone who can actually pass it about a bit.

Look at the amount of goals to thierry henry because Henry has scored 30