But as I've said already, football fans are not normally shy about putting forward hypothetical
theories about a manager's decisions. So why do they never mention training?
You are right, it is an assumption, but my suspicion is that it's because they overlook its importance.
Mate, you do not come off well in that thread at all, but I'm happy to overlook it
in exchange for focussing on just how clever it makes me look :-)
But people do mention training quite often which rather knocks your argument there
Simply making something up to suit you doesn't make it true :shrug:
Because he expressed some personal reservations on Giroud?
Well clearly Park's fantastic vibes in training weren't enough to influence Wenger's selection.
Well both of you have a point.
LA and others expressed an opinion at the time, nothing wrong with that. You should not be making yourself comfortable on your high horse simply because some 12-18 months later he is playing very well.
A players performance in training is simply that, training, a competitive arena of sorts but not in any way the same as a match. A player can be “flying in training†but **** in matches.
Similarly the history of football would throw up players who perhaps weren’t up for training but come match day the situation reversed.
Of course a manager will see training as an influential factor in team selection. Training is still a fundamental part of a footballers job and will form part of how their manager assesses them. Not for us to comment on all the same as I mentioned before it is a factor which not one of us has a single clue about.
Ultimately however, and this is completely beyond argument, it is what a footballer does in games that is of prime importance.
Really? Could you find me any examples from Awimb?
Posts by me don't count :-)
If it's any consolation, I still think we might need someone better to win a proper trophy
