Lukasz Fabianksi vs Manuel Almunia

Lukasz Fabianski blue steel1.jpg
Lukasz Fabianski practising his Blue Steel look that freezes the ball in flight
I am serious- these could be our choices. Actually, it could be Fabianski as first goalkeeper because Arsene Wenger never ever gave up on him.
All through those painful matches, while Arsenal fans groaned through each of his mistakes, the one constant was Wenger’s defense of Fabianski’s goalkeeping. He kept reiterating he would eventually be one of the best in the world.
Now, here is a hint: Fabianski rates the other players in the recent AC Milan match on Arsenal tv!
“Not only the goal, he [Chamakh] played well collectively. He always wanted to give a good pass, he has great movement as well, so I think he can improve us.”
“Koscielny did well, he’s a good reader of the game and he’s strong and aggressive with his tackles. He has a good understanding with Thomas Vermaelen as well.”

Normally, if someone’s position is in danger- they would be the last person to turn to get an opinion on other players or the game. Instead, it is Almunia who feels threatened.
The goalkeeper market is tight with much less motility – there are obviously fewer of them, they tend to grow with one club, and there is the element of getting better with age and experience. If a clubs wants to look for one, usually you have to start looking much earlier and with more endeavour than Arsenal have shown so far.
On the goalkeeper issue, he has mentioned performance over the pre-season being key and has rotated them. Having said that a last minute development could bring Mark Schwarzer and Almunia more than Fabianski could be forced to leave. But I think Wenger’s priority has moved to getting a central defender with Per Mertesacker being mentioned a lot.
So really, Gooners should not be very surprised to see either one of them in goal when the season starts. And brace yourself it could be Fabianski- Wenger has proved that stubbornness pays off with Fabregas. He’ll be encouraged to try and make it two for two.

, , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *