CanadaSaint

Worst referee in the league by a country mile. I remember him shafting us at QPR.

True, but I'd be inclined to make the change for positive rather than negative reasons. I think Osvaldo's mobility, touch and speed are just what we need to throw at Arsenal's back four. With them almost certainly bringing Theo's pace on at some point, I think we'll need to score two to draw.

We've got enough to get back into this, but the inevitable introduction of Theo will test us - especially if Shaw's hammy is dodgy. Boruc was lucky to get away with that crap against Michu a few weeks back - I hope we never see it again.

Okay, so losing Lovren is a big shock we didn't need, but it also messes with Arsenal's game plan. So, it's not all bad.

It's certainly quite a step down from Boruc to Davis but it becomes less of an issue if we're tight and well-organized at the back, with help from Schneiderlin and Wanyama. If we lose Lovren or Shaw it doesn't just impair our defensive ability but also compromises our ability to play higher up. That's why I wouldn't put Boruc in my top three, even though Davis is a major downgrade. I certainly haven't given up hope of a result but - like most - I'm less optimistic than I was.

Sh*t. Given the alternatives, Lovren is #1 (tied with Shaw and Schneiderlin) on the list of players we can't afford to lose.

There's a ton of value in having both a left footer and a right footer in the equation to keep the defence guessing. The keeper doesn't have the option to "cheat" to one side. The other thing we could try is to drill the ball along the ground, because the wall players start to jump in anticipation pretty much every time these days.

The tactical difference was noticeable, with both Lallana and Rodriguez backing well-off when Chile looked to play out from the back. It left Rooney on his own to try to pressure Chile's back line, and - not surprisingly - it turned out to be an exercise in futility. If we'd thrown our (Saints) press at Chile, they wouldn't have looked anywhere near as good as England allowed them to look. It was almost as though Hodgson was "sort of trying" the Saints tactic but without really understanding what it is or really committing to it. No wonder Rodriguez looked - and was - very peripheral. So, I'd be inclined to say that I think Saints would have played much better against Chile than England did, and may well have got a very different result.

Right, and therein rests the key chess match. If we're brave enough to apply the full press early, wide opposing players who don't track back become our friends rather than our enemies; we could sneak a goal or maybe two. However, that leaves them free and lethal if Arsenal penetrate our press, in which case the goals could go the other way. Having said that, there are few FBs better equipped to get back fast than Shaw and (especially) Clyne. This is going to be a fascinating game if either or both of Walcott and Podolski are fit, and I think fortune will favour the brave. I hope that's us, but it needs large gonads to try to play Arsenal largely in their own defensive third when they have two pacy wide-men out there. I'm optimistic. I'd be more so if only one of the two is fit, and even more so if neither are.

There's a mention on the Arsenal fan site that both Walcott and Podolski will be fit to return by the time we play them. If so, that's not good news IMO because that wide duo is the only threat I really fear from Arsenal. It's not so much that they'll give Shaw and Clyne the runaround, but that their presence would limit the ability of our FBs to push forward as they must if our system is to work. I still think we can get a result up there but this certainly wouldn't help our chances. My hope and my hunch is that, while Walcott may return, they'll be much more cautious with Podolski; hamstring injuries are pigs for going again just when you think you're over them.

Seeing a number of our guys lugging around egos far beyond their skill levels makes me realize what a great job Saints are doing - not just developing top young players but also keeping them team-focused and well-grounded.

I can't get over the fact that I'm sitting here on my own, grinning like an idiot, rooting for teams to do us a favour by beating Arsenal, Man U, Man C, Chelsea, Liverpool and Spurs rather than Palace, Stoke, West Ham, Sunderland, Cardiff etc. It's still taking a bit of getting used-to, but I'll deal with it.

CL, for me it depends on what you mean by "quality players". There is a strong case that two out of the three (generally regarded as) "quality players" we signed have had some trouble fitting in. The third is prone to the occasional and often inexplicable passing error, although he contributes significantly for the most part. On the other hand we have one player who I would classify (without any intended insult) as an upper-level journeyman midfielder - Steven Davis. He has found a new level under Pochettino, and he fits himself very well into our style. We have others who arrived (or came up through our system) with decent credentials, and who have also found a new level under MP. I'm not convinced that we have to spend really big bucks in your hypothetical scenario. I think we have to buy decent quality players with high fitness levels who will fit into our set up - initially as depth players but with the potential to improve as others have done. I can see us going for Ever Banega because he seems to tick both the quality and fit criteria, but I wouldn't be surprised if our scouting system was looking for both kinds of "fit" rather than "big name" - and thus expensive - quality.

Lots of positives but perhaps the biggest one for me is the arrival of a goal-scoring midfield, which we've lacked. It's been our only real weakness thus far. Aaron Ramsey's goals have taken Arsenal to a new level, and if that happens consistently with our team, look out!

Fair comment, but from what I remember we paid Arsenal far too much respect last year; Adkins talked them up so much that we'd lost before we started. Moreover we had the borderline-catastrophic Hooiveld/Fonte partnership, with Fox at LB, and we're light years away from that now. As long as we involve Clyne and Shaw the way we have been, and play a smart press, last year's tables could be turned. I'd be worried if they threw Walcott and Podolski at us because that would take away our Clyne and Shaw forward support, but that's not going to happen. And Chelsea look to be in disarray right now. Mourinho doesn't seem to have much idea what his best side is, and there's no real chemistry developing. Based on all of that, I rather fancy this:

You're right to ask about the pace. He has never looked very fast in the past and suddenly he looks lightning quick. Hope it's just the double training sessions Seriously though, he's been absolutely superb this year and is getting better by the game. I don't think he's become that much faster, although the extra training has obviously helped. To me it's the difference between tentative and talented and really confident and talented. Before he was trying things hoping that they'd work; now he looks like he knows exactly what he wants to do and is confident that he can pull it off. As Whitey said, "an England call-up helps."

My hunch FWIW is that we don't play the "full press" against them the way we do against the leading teams, and that may well be because MP knows that it's unsustainable over a 38-game schedule (plus cups). We just don't have the depth-in-quality to do it (witness how we lost some steam when Ramirez came on), so we reserve it for the top sides and use it more selectively against the lower teams. I could rationalize that last year because MP was working with fitness levels inherited from NA, which were well below what his high-pressing style requires and almost impossible to change in mid-season. This year we've been better against the lower teams - should have beaten Sunderland (but we were still developing team chemistry), whacked West Ham around (but only drew because of Juskalainen), and demolished Fulham. We pressed more selectively again today because I think we were wary of their long ball tendency and ability to bypass the press. The good thing is that parking the press hasn't caused us to lose our passing game. I actually think we've made a lot of progress on this front, but - as I said earlier - I'd give my left nut to get some goals from our midfielders because that would make a huge difference to us.

Yep, they certainly would have to change a good line up to get Podolski and Walcott in, and I don't think Wenger would do it. But then I think that would give us a chance because our style would prove a much bigger handful for Arsenal than Liverpool's. What I wouldn't give to us getting some scoring from midfielders the way Arse do.

I think we can but my biggest fear is that Walcott and Podolski will be fit because they can take Clyne and Shaw out of our forward game, which would be vary damaging to us. If those two are still out I fancy us to get something up there.

I think they won the toss and picked ends.

And I think he'll play even less after that. MP's a smart cookie and I don't think it will be lost on him that his presence disrupted us far more than it helped us. I'm just shocked that he even dressed him for Stoke.

After watching Ashley Cole against Newcastle today, when he looked both physically and mentally slow, I don't think Chelsea will be waiting for it to get much worse. Meanwhile, Shaw looks good against virtually every kind of opponent and in pretty much every third of the pitch. So much so that his age is seldom mentioned any more. Unless they have their eyes on someone else, or the MP/Mourinho relationship helps us out, I'm expecting them to go full-bore for Shaw in January.

1. I'm pretty sure that Foy was the homer POS who gave the penalty against Fox at Newcastle last year for far less than that. 2. That game made it clear, not that it was in much doubt IMO, that Ramirez is talented but far too lightweight and uncommitted for the way we play. I'm amazed that MP put him on the bench for a game at Stoke and even more amazed that he brought him on.

I've always wondered what it felt like to be a gynecologist. Thanks for posting it.

In fairness I don't think Usain Bolt would stick around if Lawro beat him in the hundred meters.