The goals will come for “underperforming” Viktor Gyökeres

2 Replies

In day two of talking about the “instant results era of football“, we look at Viktor Gyökeres.

Like with Eze yesterday, Gyökeres has the negative nancies, the moaners, the unhappy in their home lives already on his back.

I really do not understand why fans are moaning about Gyökeres and goals. We are top of the table and only Manchester City have scored more. Clearly, scoring goals has not been a problem for us this season.

The criticism of Gyökeres comes from those who do not really watch the game and only care about statistics. For then, 3 goals in his opening 8 Premier League games is not good enough. But they ignore everything else he is bringing to the team right now.

Gyökeres occupies defenders is the best analysis I have read of his game.

Whilst I get the comparisons to Olivier Giroud (although I am sure many are comparing him to Giroud in a negative way), the Frenchman did not have that turn of pace to also be a threat in behind. He could be too easily pinned high up the field knowing that ball over the top would not kill you.

Gyokeres has the strength and power to pin a defender like Giroud, but also the pace and directness to be a threat in behind. That means teams can no leave him one on with a centreback. They need to send someone up with him to compete, and also leave a sweeper behind incase that ball is played over the top. The result is a lot more space for the likes of Bukayo Saka.

Saka has spent most of his career in 2v1 situations. This season it has certainly felt like he has been left in more 1v1 situations – and that is mainly because of Gyokeres.

The way Viktor plays is freeing up space for others on the pitch beyond Saka. Leandro Trossard and Gabriel Martinelli on the left also have more space, as does Declan Rice, Martin Odegaard and Eberechi Eze in the middle. All their extra space comes from teams having to double up on Gyokeres, and having to sit that little deeper due to his pace in behind.

I also find the criticism of Gyokeres returns as laughable when you look at other “new striker signings” in the Premier League.

Gyokeres has received more criticism this season than players he has outscored and, in most cases, cost more. It just shows that mainstream media and those that make money from social media are heavily reliant on Arsenal-led negativity to pay their bills.

Anyone that has watch Gyokeres, live, in the stadium can see what he brings to the team. And you also know that the goals will come.

Bar Erling Haaland, no other striker has really lit the touchpaper this season. Everyone else is in and around the same place as Gyokeres when it comes to goalscoring output. But anyone that has watch Mikel Arteta’s Arsenal over the years will know his football is not about one player scoring a bucketful of goals.

Under Arteta, we score goals from across the pitch. It is about everyone being confident in front of the goal, not just the striker, and engineering positions for easy-to-take chances.

We are the second top scorers this season, with 10 different players scoring in 8 Premier League games.

As a comparison, Liverpool have 7 different scorers this campaign, with none scoring more than Gyokeres. Whilst Manchester City have 5 different scorers, with Erling Haaland scoring 73% of their goals (excluding own goals).

I am not bothered if Gyokeres does not score, as long as Arsenal score and Arsenal win. We are a threat across the pitch whilst others are not.

Instead of looking for reasons to criticse Arsenal, embrace that we are top of the league, playing brilliantly, and in a title race that many had written us out of before the game at Newcastle.

Keenos

Eze needs to take it easy

1 Reply

In the era of “instant results” we currently live in, both Eberechi Eze and Viktor Gyökeres have come in from some criticism from certain quarters for a perceived slow start to their Arsenal careers.

Whether this criticism is just due to them being impatient (imagine the criticism Dennis Bergkamp, Thierry Henry and Robert Pires would have received in the current era), are attention seeking, or are simply negative nancies who want to find something to complain about despite us being top of the league, these people need to wind their necks in.

However, I am not saying either man is immune from criticism, nor should they not be criticised. However, there is a huge jump from constructive criticism and analysis of their game, and those who simply message “not good enough or “waste of money”.

For Eze, I feel that he is trying too hard right now. And it is a common trait for players who go from being a big fish in a small pond to a small fish in a bit pond.

Following the departure of Michael Olise, Eze was Crystal Palace’s only top attacker. Literally everything went through him. He saw a lot of the ball. Would play every minute. And if Eze played well, Palace played well.

At Arsenal, things are very different.

We have an array of attacking talent. From Bukayo Saka and Martin Odegaard, to Leandro Trossard, Gabriel Martinelli, Ethan Nwaneri and the front men Gyokeres and Kai Havertz. Our more defensive players in Declan Rice, Martin Zubimendi, and even Ricardo Califiori and Jurrien Timber are also more comfortable on the ball than anyone Palace had bar Eze.

Not only does that mean Eze is not necessarily the first name on the team sheet, it also means that when he does play, his team mates are not looking up and with first thought being “where is Eze, we need to get him the ball”.

The result is when Eze does get the ball, he tends to feel like he needs to do more with it. And rather than keeping it easy, he continually tries to make something happen, tries to impress. When actually a lot of the time the easy ball is the better option.

Also at Palace, as their sole decent attacker, Eze could try something magical every time he got the ball and escape criticism when it did not come off. Attempt something special 10 times across two games, and if it comes off once, you’re a hero. At Arsenal, the standards are higher.

You can not try and make something happen every time you get the ball at a club like Arsenal. It is about trying to make something happen at the right time, not every time. And Eze needs to adjust to that. He needs to begin playing it easier. Realise that when he receives the ball on the half way line, the key is about retaining position and not trying to beat 2 or 3 players in the hope of creating something.

It will take time for Eze to adjust.

Going from a counterattacking team where everything went through him to playing for a possession-based team where he sees less than the ball. He will need to become better at deciding what to do with the ball when he receives it. But he has the ability to do that.

For me, I still see Eze’s main position on that wide left. I see a lot of Robert Pires in him. The way that he can start on that left but look to continually come inside. And with the way we are setting up right now with Declan Rice a little deeper and Calafiori bombing on, Eze will have the space to dictate play from the left sided attacking quadrant.

Eze has already shown his worth to us. He was brought in as a utility attacker who can cover all 4 positions behind the striker. And it is that reason he will also go to the World Cup for England. The fact that Odegaard has suffered a few injuries this season and Eze has slotted in nicely shows he has the ceiling to become what is needed to play for a team like Arsenal.

Eze just needs to take a breath, relax a little, and play a little easier. Then his talent will shine through.

Keenos

Are rumours of the demise of AFTV true?

1 Reply

The internet is awash with talk about AFTV’s demise.

In the last week and a bit, at least 3 contributors have taken to social media to announce they will no longer be appearing on the toxic YouTube channel. This has led to questions around what is happening, and talk of dwindling revenues and sponsors walking away. But what is actually happening?

Follow the money

AFTV’s bread and butter is its post-match interviews. They did not care who appeared on camera after a match or their background. Wife beaters, racists and fellas that have now had to flee the country were not only given a platform, but ended up being paid to appear due to their viewing figures.

For those who run the channel, it was all about the hits. They did not care about the background of those appearing or the damage they were doing to Arsenal. It was all about the money. And that money drives decisions.

The “podcast shuffle”

The channel was built on the back of those toxic rants of the mid-00s, which fueled a lot of anger, animosity and division at Arsenal.

As time went on and AFTV became more of a broadcasting business rather than just a place for fans to have their say post-match, the more popular contributors were offered an opportunity to participate in podcasts, with some even getting their own “shows”.

It was a simple business model.

Take those that are popular post-game at the weekend and give them more airtime with a mid-week show, to fill the gap between games. It was an attempt to take the channel away from being just about post-match rants and to create a network of creators sharing their views and further driving revenue.

But anyone who has worked or been involved in podcast networks will know, they often have a yearly shuffle.

The networks invest in their contributors. Pay them to appear and provide them with the infrastructure needed to put on a professional show – whether it be recording equipment, studio space or access to editors and graphic designers. From here, everyone profits.

But then, if a podcast does not take off as expected, or viewing numbers dwindle, the networks are in a position where they are investing more into the content than it is making.

For years, YouTube’s average advertising payout is estimated to be $1 for every 1,000 views. That means when a video is being watched 100,000 times, it will make $1,000. Or about £750.

Now, if you are putting on a weekly show, paying 4 contributors, providing studio space, studio space and paying editors and graphic designers, £750 does not go very far. And how long will sponsors such as William Hill be willing to pay for such a small reach? And the result will be with poor viewership and no external sponsorship funding, you will be dropped.

Some networks may recycle their contributors into other shows, and others may end ties completely. And as they are not employees but usually self-employed contractors, contracting out their services to the network, then it is much easier to break the contract in comparison to if they were PAYE.

And this is probably where AFTV are at right now, with so many departing – and it is important to note that those leaving are not just those who spew toxicity or have decided to use the channel to make political points.

Those shows that were not very successful are being cancelled, and investment will go into others, either by paying more for popular shows or by pushing new faces.

Contributors own channels

So you can on AFTV because you want a bit of attention and like the idea of becoming a YouTuber. After 6 months of grafting in the wind, rain and snow outside the Emirates, you get invited to contribute occasionally on existing shows. Your popularity continues to rise, and you end up with your own show. But it is only once a week.

In the meantime, you have also been appearing on other podcasts. After all, you are not an employee of AFTV and they are not blocking you from contributing elsewhere. Another 6 months go by and you decide to take the plunge and set up your own YouTube channel and go “full time”.

A couple of days a week you are making yourself look a div outside the Emirates stadium. Another couple of days a week you are sitting in the AFTV studio recording content for them. And on top of that you are doing your own show on your own channel. Maybe a live or two. On top of this you might appear on others shows to further boost your bank balance.

You are probably only getting a couple of hundred quid each time you appear on either AFTV, another show, or through advertising revenue from your own show. But if you are getting that daily, thats a grand a week. £52k a year. Not bad if you delivered Percy Pigs to M&S or sold double glazing on a commission-only content.

But then you become frustrated. you are doing all this work for AFTV but only getting a share of the profits, or a flat fee way below what you might generate. So you decide to reduce your availability to them and spend more time on your own channel. Push out more content where money goes straight into your pocket.

That creates friction between yourself and AFTV, with those who run AFTV then feeling like you are just using the huge platform to promote yourself. They either ask you to stop doing as much on your own channel, or you make the decision to do less. The result of the friction is you no longer appear on AFTV, and as a consequence, they will not longer video your post-match rants after the game.

You make the decision to go alone. Cut the ties with AFTV. We have seen a couple go down this route before with varied success. Some still shout and scream down the camera. Others have gone back to their boring accounting jobs.

Is AFTV on the demise?

It is too early to say if this is the end of AFTV.

With around 90m views in the last 6 months, the network would have brought in around $90k from YouTube advertising revenue. Or around £67k. This is the level the channel has consistently been at for the last few years.

It might be that sponsors and external advertisers have pulled the plug, no longer willing their brand to be associated with something so toxic. Or, likewise, it might be that the owners have decided to consolidate the channel, produce less content without

The Pareto principle is that roughly 80% of outcomes or results come from 20% of causes or inputs. If that is the same with AFTV, the owners could cut 80% of content and only see a 20% drop in revenue.

That 80% in content reduction could lead to huge cost reductions without impacting revenue too much, and in turn increasing profit.

To see how the impact of 3 contributors affects the total channel over the next 6 months will be the test. If they maintain their 90m viewership, the channel would have shown that the brand is bigger than any individual contributor. If the next 6 months show a significant reduction in channel viewership, then the end may be near (although we may just see a complete pull back and the channel return to post-match interviews only).

Keenos