Oliver Kay replies to the debate: is £20 million-rated Arshavin really what Arsenal need?

Oliver Kay

Oliver Kay questioned Arsene Wenger's transfer targets this January, wondering whether a playmaker, even such a talented one as Andrei Arshavin, should really be the Arsenal manager's top priority right now? You responded in your droves and now The Times Football Correspondent replies.

Whilst Arshavin wouldn't have necessarily been my No 1 target for this transfer window, I can definitely see Wenger’s logic. Provided we are not held to ransom over the fee and his wages, he is a very good addition indeed. We desperately need some creative input right now. Cesc is out for virtually the whole campaign, we lack the cutting edge that Walcott can provide from out wide, Rosicky has been missing for ages and we have been reduced to operating with central midfielders on the wings. If Arshavin comes in he can provide the experience and guile needed to create chances for our forwards and maybe grab a few goals himself. Arsenal suffer from a lot of lateral passing these days, which affects our ability to kill off the opposition. Due to his creative abilities and versatility – he can operate on the flanks, in central midfield, in the hole, two-footed as well – he could be the answer. Richie Woodcock

Yes. Arsenal need to bolster their defensive options, including midfield and goalkeeper. But if you have just lost Fabregas for most of the season, he will need replacing. What is the problem with buying a quality player? Paul

Oliver Kay: The problem is that there are gaping holes elsewhere in the team and that, as the injury to Fabregas is temporary, you would imagine they would be the priorities. If Wenger is planning for life after Fabregas, as some of you have speculated, then I can understand it, but that injury should not prove to be a significant factor for a manager like Wenger, who has often made clear his dislike of short-termism.

For starters, we don’t need a keeper. Almunia has been fantastic this season. We do need a big centre-half but that can be solved by recalling Phillipe Senderos. We do, however, urgently need a defensive/holding midfielder. I think that Miguel Veloso would be a good option for this position. Mathieu Flamini has had barely any playing time at AC Milan. Even though the (re)aquisition of Flamini is incredibly unlikely, it is still possible. Arshavin is the right player for Arsenal. He can fit in to our system well and he will be brilliant at the Emirates. MK

Why do you keep banging on about a flaky goalkeeper? Almunia is a good goalkeeper and his understudy is the Polish No 1. Give the goalkeeper issue a break for goodness sake. Gavin

OK: Almunia is not the worst keeper in the Premier League, but, off the top of my head, I can name five who are unquestionably better (Reina, Cech, Van der Sar, Friedel, Given) and another two (Howard and Jaaskelainen) who are at very least his equal. That is before we consider our many, ahem, wonderful English goalkeepers. I have here some (admittedly three-week-old) stats that list the percentage of saves that each goalkeeper in the Premier League has made out of the shots they have faced. Here goes: Reina 78 per cent, Cech 85 per cent (a surprise, because he has looked shaky to me this season), Van der Sar 80 per cent, Friedel 75 per cent, Given 68 per cent, Almunia 71 per cent. Now I’m not saying these statistics are foolproof – after all, he has a lower percentage here than Given, whom I rate higher – but they do have Paul Robinson as the worst in the league, with a terrifying 52 per cent, so there might be something to them. Almunia remains a weak link for Arsenal. It’s just that, with the deficiencies elsewhere in the team, it is no longer fair to call him the weak link. I suspect that Fabianski, from what little I have seen of him, would become the more assured goalkeeper, given the opportunity.

The claim that Arsenal need a new goalkeeper, central defenders and a tough defensive midfielder ignores the facts. Most if not all pundits would take Friedel over Almunia, Laursen over any of Arsenal's central defenders and Barry in preference to any of Arsenal's current group of midfielders. Yet up to Laursen's injury, Villa were exactly one goal better off than Arsenal and remain just one goal better off today. Arsenal have five draws and three one-goal defeats. By definition, one goal more scored would be as good as one less goal conceded in changing every one of those results. Petr

OK: Since when have Aston Villa been Arsenal’s yardstick, Petr? I know what you’re getting at, but let’s look at things another way. In 21 games, Arsenal have conceded 23 goals – ten more than Liverpool, 11 more than Chelsea and 13 more than Manchester United. Arsenal have won 11 games, which means they’ve dropped points on ten occasions. I don’t see any 0-0s in those ten games and I only see one 1-0 defeat. There are a couple of 1-1s, a 2-2 (conceding a last-minute equaliser) and a famous 4-4 (conceding a last-minute equaliser). So, by your reasoning, one goal fewer conceded would be as good as one more goal scored. Some of the performances – Fulham away, Manchester City away – have been dire from back to front, but flaky defending is a recurring theme on Arsenal’s off-days.

Arsenal should buy Arshavin – and also Tymoschuk, who is a wonderful defensive midfielder. Arsenal needs a backbone of classy experience at this moment. As for Arshavin, he is experienced, he is eager to play for Arsenal and, last but not least, he is the best Russian player in history, including 70 years of the Soviet Union. Arshavin's hidden passes are so sublime, and his football intelligence and unpredictability on the pitch are so good that it sometimes amounts to a genius. Arsene Wenger is deep enough to see such things. This is why he wants AA. It does not mean that a cementing midfielder is not needed. WhitePage

OK: Arshavin is a beautiful player, absolutely sublime. I’ve been fortunate enough to watch him in the flesh on several occasions over the last 18 months, both for Zenit and for Russia, and he has taken my breath away at times. If he signs and, crucially, if he settles, I can see him taking Arsenal’s attacking play to yet another level. BUT ... they do badly need more experience in midfield and more presence in the centre of defence. Tymoschuk is an interesting proposal for what you – and I henceforth shall – call “the cementing role.”

No we do not need Arshavin. It’s a panic buy. Arshavin would take six to 12 months to settle in. Russian players are notorious slow in adapting to the Premiership. What Arsenal need is Miguel Veloso of Sporting Lisbon, one of the best young defensive midfield players in the world. This would represent a typical Wenger purchase – not Arshavin who seems to be on the wrong side of 26 and overpriced. Nicholas Barrow

OK: You Arsenal fans have even started to think like Wenger. “The wrong side of 26” – at most clubs it would be “the wrong side of 30” and they wouldn’t give two hoots about the price. At 27 (and the wrong side of 27 and a half), he is old for a Wenger signing and there would, as you say, be the risk that he would take time to settle in and potentially not settle at all. Of all the players imported to England from the former Soviet Union, perhaps only Andriy Kanchelskis and Aleksandr Hleb have been great successes. (You could make a case for Georgi Kinkladze, but you won’t have given him a thought unless you’re a Manchester City fan.) If Arshavin needed 12 months to settle in – as Hleb did, and as even Bergkamp and Pires did – that would take him to 28. Maybe they could still get five or six great seasons out of him, but it does seem a strange and un-Wengerlike idea to me.

I don't see how Arsenal need Arshavin. Perhaps this is paving the way for Cesc to leave for Barcelona come summertime? Also with Nasri and with Rosicky to return and Wenger wanting to slowly integrate Ramsey and Wilshire, there are a lot of players all fighting for that creative midfield role. Surely purchasing Arshavin only poses more “good problems", but good problems are not necessarily very good for the players. Tom Wesseldine

Arshavin is the wrong choice to improve the side and the proof is in our goals-against column. Arsenal have the worst defensive record of any of the “Big Four” and it’s a fact that you need to be the best or near the best in defence to win titles and certainly the Premier League. Arshavin will merely add a further creative midfielder to the six or so who, when not playing, are either warming the bench or in for prolonged treatment. Spending this kind of money will also stop the expensive surgery that is required in central defence and central midfield from happening in the summer. AB Harrison

OK: Can’t take issue with much of that. Arshavin is a wonderful player, but, to me, Arsenal have far more pressing requirements. Their small net transfer outlay in recent years would suggest that there will not be much money left over for the summer to address the other shortcomings – unless there is a clear-out on the cards.

Arsenal need a more combative midfielder to compliment the likes of Fabregas, Nasri and the injured Rosicky. Denilson and Diaby are not suited to that role. Letting Flamini leave was a big mistake. Arshavin isn't the answer. Dare I suggest Wigan's Palacios in the holding midfield role? Purchasing a quality centre back wouldn't be a bad idea either. Floyd Green

OK: Letting Flamini leave was indeed a mistake. By the end of last season, when his wage demands had gone through the roof, it seemed prudent to let him go, but the mistake was in letting his contract run down so far that he was able to have the club over a barrel. That was one consequence of going more than 18 months without a chief executive between the departure of David Dein and the arrival of Ivan Gazidis this week. Gazidis is a great appointment, but it’s a shame it took them so long to get him. As for Palacios, he’s a fine player, but he’s not what I would call a holding player. Combative as he is, his real strengths are going forward.

Arsenal need Arshavin, Yaya Toure or Arteta to bolster the midfield. Yemco

OK: Three very different players there, Yemco. Which one is it to be?

People continually talk about how we need some "big, tall, tough" centre-backs and a "world-class keeper". These same people seem to forget that we were top of the league this time last year with Gallas, Toure and Almunia and that our possession football demands a high line which means the likes of Upson would be too slow to fit in (unless you’re suggesting completely changing our style of play). We didn't start dropping points last season because of Gallas, Toure and Almunia. We started dropping them because we lost Van Persie, Eduardo, Rosicky and Diaby - all attacking players. That would imply to me that we could do with strengthening in attacking areas to cover for the inevitable injuries that have hit again. Jim

OK: I agree it has to be the right type of central defender and that Upson, for the reasons you mention, is not it. But, on the evidence of the past 12 months, nor is Toure, who, though he has picked up lately, has suddenly begun to look alarmingly sluggish. Maybe, as another reader, Richie, suggested, this is due to a difficult recovery from malaria, which he contracted in the summer, but I think his dip in form goes back further than that. If Arsenal had all their attacking players fit – plus Arshavin – they would have a team that would have the flair to destroy any opponent on a good day. But I would still have concerns about the defence. And the goalkeeper. Sorry.

Thanks very much to all of you for your comments, including those that I wasn’t able to include today (such as the Van Bommel debate between Morgao and JVO, which took things off at something of a tangent). Your numerous replies were full of intelligent analysis and trenchant opinion and I look forward to more of the same next week.

Comments

[J. WATERS]

Firstly, if Arshavin is such a 'quality' player, where has he been for the last 10 years...he is 27. I'm afraid critical as this may sound, he had one good international tournament, but even then, finished on a downer as he went missing in the game against Spain.

Time and time again, Arsenal are not solving their real problems. Yes Fabregas is out for practically the season, but Arshavin isn't a central midfielder?

Arsenal lack the 'ugly' players that get the job done. They do not attain a Makelele or an Essien or a Hargreaves or a Mascherano in midfield.

Arsenal also do not have anyone that can organize the defence! Toure and Gallas are good defenders but they cannot command the way Terry, Rio, or Carragher can.

Almunia should never have been given the No. 1 jersey at Arsenal, he is no where near good enough, again making comparisons to certainly Cech or Van Der Sar.

Arsene Wenger for me is looking in the wrong direction. Look at United, seven 1-0 wins this season but look at the attacking options they possess.

This could have been Arsenal had they had a Makelele and a Ferdinand, they have great attacking options, and Nasri has been a delight to watch. Van Persie and Adebayor are proven goalscorers and there is just no need for Arshavin.

The point I am trying to make is that without a strong base you do not stand a chance in the Premier League.

Every attacking player will go through a dry patch, and that is exactly what United are going through now, but if you don't concede, you only need 1 goal!

Wenger, time to get ugly!

[Martin Hinton]

There's a lot of amnesia around concerning the departure of Flamini. With one year left on his contract he wanted to leave, he was playing poorly, not starting much, and Wenger persuaded him to stay and try to turn it around. At that point he had a very low transfer value and no-one wanted to give him a new contract. He got his chance, and did well. By that time, however, he was close to the six months deadline for negotiating with other clubs, he decided to see what he could get and wasn't that interested in staying at Arsenal.

His turn-around in form surprised everyone. It's simplistic to stay Arsenal let him leave.

The Gilberto case is interesting too. When he came in for Flamini last season he was poor, very poor. Yes he's experienced, yes he's tough, but his play was not good enough last year and probably wouldn't have been much better this season.

Wenger presumably planned to bring in a replacement but couldn't get one who was good enough. The really interesting question is, why does he keep Eboue?

[ALEX]

I think Arshavin would be a good signing. The main reason is we lack creativity. Against Hull we created a lot, but it was all down to Van Persie. What happens if he gets injured? His record with injuries is terrible and we already have all our other creative players out. He was rested for the Portsmouth game and we created absolutely nothing against one of the league's worst defences.

I say yes to Arshavin, bring him in on the left of midfield, move Nasri to the center or right and put Eboue out to pasture.

Then the deep problems others have mentioned.

First, the goalkeeper. A Hassan got it backwards. Almunia is awful rushing out. Look at the Liverpool equalizer. Long punt forward with Almunia on the edge of his box. Instead of rushing out to clear he runs back and Keane runs on and strikes in the box. Yes if Almunia stood on the edge of the box he could have picked it up with his hands. Shocking error of judgement, similar to Stuart Taylor against Liverpool and Riise's equaliser at Highbury some years back. Taylor never played for Arsenal again. All the top teams have an international keeper. Almunia hasn't even been called up to the Spain squad. Ever. If he's never been one of the 3 best keepers in Spain, he simply is not good enough for a team with Champions League pretentions. Hopefully that will nail it for all you Almunia supporters. Simply not good enough.

Center Back. Toure's dip in form started with his return from the African Nations Cup. He's been pedestrian since. No idea why, but he's been at fault for nearly as many goals as Clichy.

Clichy: great defensive work in the opponents half with his interceptions, but running back to goal, absolutely woeful. Wingers must love playing against him. Can't block a cross. Our best defenders are Gallas and Sagna. They know how to defend, two more such players required. Upson was quick at Arsenal so I think would fit in pretty well. Miles better than Senderos.

The Denilson experiment is not working. He's been mediocre as a holding player. Song is better, but still not the level required. Wenger's decision to sell Diarra made my stomach churn then, and the consequences were disastrous. Our failure to win anything while still going in four competitions was largely a result of selling Diarra. I was 100% convinced Flamini would leave. I'm sure I wasn't the only one, so what made Wenger think otherwise? Who to buy? Anyone who is bigger than Five foot two and 100 pounds (Denilson). Some good options have been mentioned. I like Timoschuk. Van Bommel would do a job as would Frings, Senna, Alonso, or even buy someone from the lower echelons of the championship. Bring in Bullard, bring back Muamba or Sidwell. Admit it AW, you sold them too soon and you should have kept Palacios when you could have had him for nothing.

[dujon]

Everbody seems to have forgotten something in past games this season. when we lack real wingers or creative midfielders ie walcott nasri or even rosiky teams have had a better chance of getting a draw or even beating us. so to me short run, we need a winger or creative midfielder. long run we need a solid and intelligent seasoned pro defensive dinamo but then so do chelsea and any other side.
right now we are using nasri and eboue if eboue gets sent off and nasri gets injured we then have a midfield of denilson on the wing...... basically we are screwsd so idiots talking about veloso, watch the games. we need arshavin because if we dont get a winger or creative midfilder we are not gettin 4th spot. a central or defensive midfielder is not needed. we dont have the best in the prem but we have players that have been trusted to improve in this role ie denilson song diarby cesc even nasri can play this position. goal keepers look bad when the the team looks bad so im ok just about with almunia abviously i want superman in goal but you cant have everthing. again if arsenal have no creativity then teams like stoke bolton or any other lesser side can get points. we look terrible with denilson or diarby on the wing. ramsy and vela are too inexsperianced to face the likes of bolton or hull and lets face it most teams just sit back against us and united the latter is copping better they have more creative options. so with arshavin a seasoned pro added i believe we can be taken more seriously, he can also bring maturity to the dressing room also.
center backs are long run also and a real search is required. djourou and toure are perfect. i think gallas and toure are too short but toure is faster and would have stopped agbonlahour in both games. but great center backs are hard to find for us. not for manu or liverpool i must add.
come on arsenal lets continue this unbeaten run.
ps give van p the captancy or 2nd ahead of cesc. van p shows steel all the time. his head never drops ok Mr Wenger.
you heard it here first Arsene will not buy arshavin for 20 mill.

[Damo Girling]

Arshavin represents an extravegant tokken signing, of short term benefit, but potentially of long term disruption. It has already been noted that a foward, no matter how gifted, is not the area that requires attention; Wenger needs to prioritise making his team competitive, not grappling to tackle for the long since lost title of most attractive team in Britain, Europe, the world. Defensive midfield and Central defense are the priorities and Wengers obstinate refusal to accept this reality will see Arsenal slip further away from contention for any major trophies, CC included. He needs to first sign either Velouso or Tymoschuk, the problems in central defence and goal would be much alieviated by this. What is clear is that Denilson and Diaby are not the answer, but what appears equally clear is that Wenger rejects this reality.

[Peter]

Just as bad, if not as worse, as letting Flamini leave, was getting rid of Gilberto. He was a defensive stalwart and experienced! Arsenal need experience. Gilberto would not slump to the ground and cry.

[Newmy]

For me, the money we might need to spend on Arshavin would be better spent on 2 players not 1. Inler and Kranjcar would be the 2 names i would like to see at the Arsenal. £20mill would get these 2 players, where as £20mill is what Zenit want just for Arshavin. My 1st team: Almunia, Sagna, Toure, Djourou, Clichy, Inler, Cesc, Nasri, Kranjcar, RVP, Eduardo. Subs: Lukasz, Senderos, Eboue, Ramsey, Diaby, Walcott, Adeyabor. In the summer sell, Gallas, Traore, Bentdner and buy a top, top central defender.

[Richie Woodcock]

RE: OK's comments on Kolo and his form....I can see your point on this. In my opinion he has suffered since Sol Campbell left the club who was not only a great defender with a knack for excellent recovery tackles when mistakes were made and aerial presence but also a lion-like figure at the heart of the defence....A leader and organiser. We have lacked a defender like this for a while. He was good with Senderos...trouble is Senderos was a bit inconsistant at times and his errors cost us at sometimes crucial times.

However I refuse to believe he is over the hill just yet. Once he gets his fitness and match sharpness back and sheds a couple of pounds I feel he can strike up a good understanding with Djourou who adds a bit more balance to the CB partnership rather than pairing him with Gallas (or Silvestre who isn't good enough anymore anyway). Maybe not this season but next season, with a full rest and pre-season under his belt, we might start to see the beast that is King Kolo again.

Wildly off-topic I know but felt the need to express this particular point.....

[petr]

OK,

Aston Villa are not the yardstick for Arsenal, merely a club often quoted as having the kind of player they lack. My point is that having them, and other well-regarded players besides, isn't the panacea writers would like them to be.

My salient point was that it's a team sport - improve the team in any way and you improve results, given ten close contests.

Yes, one fewer goal conceded would have changed all those ten results, but the question wasn't should Wenger sign a DM. If Arshavin brought goals he could change results.

Nice job on this topic BTW.

[jim]

" If Arsenal had all their attacking players fit – plus Arshavin – they would have a team that would have the flair to destroy any opponent on a good day. But I would still have concerns about the defence. And the goalkeeper. Sorry."

Oli in reply to my comment you seemed to miss my point. It's not that I think that our defense and keeper are the best in the world, I would still have concerns as well no need to apolagise. My point is that we've still managed to look good with them and it's only when we picked up injuries in attack that we start having problems.

At the end of the day not every team can be perfect in every way. Take ManU's midfield against Chelsea the other day, Giggs, Fletcher and Park we're SAF's first choice despite only having Hargreaves out. Now if I were a United fan and I were to compare that midfield with Liverpools, Chelseas, or Arsenals (with Fab and Rosicky fit), I might be concerned, one ageing player and two hard working but far from "world class" players. Still they won as they were brilliant at the back and strong with their attacking players, the fact that Chelseas midfield was better didn't matter, they bi-passed it. Thats my point, not every team has to be, or even can be perfect every where, Arsenal will always be weak at the back playing possesian football, but that type of play should mean it matters less as long as we have enough top quality players to hardly give up the ball.

[Warren]

I am sceptical that Arshavin is going to be signed, we have seen these sagas so many times. What is more pertinent than my opinions are the comment made by AW "Arsène Wenger believes that Samir Nasri's influence from the middle of the park helped make the difference against Bolton on Saturday.

The French international has been deployed on the left flank for most of his first season at Arsenal and has made a good impression, netting five times in 20 starts while offering a creative threat from the flank.

Nasri started Saturday's game in his customary position but was shifted inside by Wenger after the break as the home side struggled to break down a stubborn Bolton back line. With Nasri pulling the strings, Arsenal looked more dangerous and were rewarded for their persistence when Nicklas Bendtner scored a late winner.

Afterwards, Wenger explained why he asked Nasri to play a different role in the second half.

"He gave us a little bit more creativity in the centre, especially in a tight game like that," said the manager.

"Of course, he [Nasri] is a link player and can also pass people.

"From then on it became a little bit more difficult for Bolton. It was my idea - sometimes accidentally!"

[Danny Darcy]

Mr.Wenger just finds it harder and harder every year to turn water into french wine,the problem with ballet style skillful footballers is the breakdown far to easy,how Rosisky is still out injured is beyond me..even longer than Edurdo,Theo will always have that injury label on him..even at 19 it's scarry.We need a few harder mentally and phyically bought players...we can not wait any longer,I'm thrilled Sir Arsene has found that the Premiership has changed in the last 12 years...thank God,...I look at Man U...I look at alex Ferguson as a exmodel tanked up with bottox and gold jewels bought of course on credit..."Ya not wearing the Berbatove tonight Al"..."Na,I'll stick with the tevez...anyone see my Rio"...Poor Sir Arsene...has to use creditcrunch aftershave's like Almunia for men,Gallas as a Prada handbag, God forbid..Nikolas Benthanar shoes...but hopefully..not sendedros as foot powder..Sir Arsene...We love you,you will go to the ball,just wear a warm coat because it cold out there.

[A Hassan]

The first talking point regards Almunia.

Almunia is needed more than someone like Given. Why? Because Given will be too slow coming off the line with Arsenal’s high line. Almunia is more tested on anticipation, rushing out, command of area and kicking which he is better than Given.
Same for a defender like Hangeland; they need to be mobile as well. A real point you haven't understood Mr Kay.

Another reason we have let in goals is because against the more capable clubs we are not as effective in keeping possession, therefore denying pressure. Djourou has answered some of the defensive frailties with his mobility and aerial pressence. A creative player will allow better possession like Hleb but when we get our players back this will be less of a need.

I think Arshavin is a class player and apart from Messi the most effective player in the final third. Probably but his work rate is lacking so the question is how long will he last in the Premiership?

[Manix]

If i remember correctly Kolo was a Midfielder before he went to CB. Why doesn't Arsene try him as holding Midfielder. I am sure that with Kolo playing in front of the back four, and with his attacking skills, it would alleviate the playmakers.

[Ben]

Some interesting points made re: the Arshavin signing.

I'm sure most Arsenal fans would recognise that the players we need fall into a pretty clear list of priorities - defensive midfielder > centre back > attacking creative - but this is very much based on the assumption that this is an ideal world, and the players we need are all available right now. I don't think they are.

Or to put it another way, I'm sure there are defensive midfielders and centre backs out there in January, but not really of the standard we should be aiming for. The players we should be looking at are higher profile: they'll be in the middle of campaigns, with a very real shot at medals, and they'd be cup-tied if they move. The fact is we're not going to persuade the likes of Alonso or Y.Toure, etc to move mid-season. Their clubs wouldn't let them go, and the players wouldn't want to go. Not yet anyway. I also think the centre back issue is a little more complicated than many people think. The general consensus is that we need someone in the Vidic mould - a no-nonsense foil to Toure / Gallas' pace who can win a few balls in the air - but, meaning no disrespect to Vidic, I really think we need the organ-grinder and not the monkey. We need the main man and not the sidekick - a Ferdinand or a Terry who can really marshal the back line. In my opinion, Toure and Gallas should be the foil. And, as with the defensive midfielder, a player of that quality is going to be rare and extremely hard to get in January.

For me, this isn't about needing an attacking creative like Arshavin more than we need other players - it's simply a matter of getting any of the players on our list whenever they become available, even if they come in the wrong order. Arshavin undoubtedly falls into that World Class bracket and he's available now. Being cup-tied doesn't even matter to him.

And I do think we need him (and not just as a short-term fix to the Fabregas injury). At the end of last season, Wenger triumphantly declared that he was after 2, maybe 3 players, including a dominant centre back and an extra man in mdfield, and that all business would be completed before the Euros. However that was before Hleb and Flamini left. Most people seem to think that Nasri was the replacement for Hleb, but I'm not sure - I think he was the extra man in midfield we were talking about (Ramsey was the bonus 3rd signing), and that side Wenger was/is trying to build should currently include Hleb and Flamini (or their replacements). Signing Arshavin would at least give us the replacement for Hleb, and that would then leave us with 4 wide players - Arshavin, Rosicky, Nasri and Walcott. Given Rosicky's injury record, and the relative inexperience of Walcott and Nasri, I think the signing makes a lot of sense.