William Gallas:
His attitude, leadership, and performances have been questionable, and to some people he is like a poison in the Arsenal squad.
I suppose he is not the best captain the club has ever had, but it is perhaps a more difficult team to captain than some others.
Vieira was captain of a team that didn't need captaining with players like Campbell, Ljungberg, and Gilberto having experience of the job themselves while other senior players like Pires and Henry were hardly the types that needed keeping in line.
Vieira still managed a widely publicised physical confrontation with Lauren though!
This young team needs more considered thought to get the best out of them. In some ways Gallas takes the job of captain too seriously and his comments will not help him. However, stripping him of the captaincy now, as much of the press are urging, will not serve the cause of harmony within the team well.
Gallas has, more often than not, done his job reasonably well. It is when the going gets tough that he fails to set the example that is expected of him.
I will not delve into the over-publicised incident at St. Andrews last season. He shouldn't have done what he did. What the incident did however, was give everybody a glimpse of what sort of captain and leader he was.
His latest outbursts, as pointed out by our good friend Alex Dimond, will not go down favorably. As a captain, a lot of issues will depend on how he handles it and going public is a definite no-no.
He has clearly shown that he does not want the responsibility that goes with being a club captain.
His football ability has never been in doubt as his career across London with Chelsea proves. He has never quite been able to recapture the form he enjoyed at Stamford Bridge, though.
In his defence, he has managed to produce some critically important goals for his team like the winner against Chelsea and the late equaliser against United.
comments (41) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
Cole - Younger, Better.
from about 1 month ago
Cheers mate..
about 1 month ago
Chelsea in my opinion. Gallas is older and definitely not captain material. Why Wenger chose him as captain I'll never know. I think he has had a destabilising effect on Arsenal.
In Gallas' absence Carvalho has really come into his own and has proven to be our best defender in the past two seasons. We also now have Alex who can come in and perform solidly whenever Terry or Carvalho are injured.
from about 1 month ago
Exactly.
I think a lot of people who say he isn't world class anymore or Clichy is better, are just blinded by their hate for him.
about 1 month ago
Until this year most people would have answered Arsenal...
from about 1 month ago
haha I suppose so but player for play Cole is and has always been better. The fact that Arsenal recieved 5M on top of a very good player in Gallas, is what would sway people to that side.
about 1 month ago
Sad to say, but it looks very much like Cashley now.
from about 1 month ago
I suppose so.. Cheers
about 1 month ago
Ca$hley or Mad Willie ... meh
I'll have to see how this Gallas things plays out although going by things now he'll hardly play for us again and if he does he'll need to apologise to Wenger.
from about 1 month ago
So Neither?
from about 1 month ago
Nope
about 1 month ago
Without much doubt, Arsenal did.
Why? Because we got rid of a greedy player.. and got 5 million pounds + whatever we'll get for Gallas when we sell him in Jan.. lol.
from about 1 month ago
Well most players are greedy anyway. If Chelsea got rid of Lampard because he wanted a few extra thousands, would that be rational? And why are you measuring everything in money anyway? Cole is younger and has always been the better player of the two.
If you think Arsenal got the better deal because of the money they'll get from selling Gallas plus the 5M, then what if Chelsea sell Cole? Who'd you think get more money then?
from about 1 month ago
ha ha I wonder what we'll get for him, the refund for his plane ticket to france :-P
from about 1 month ago
Well seeing is he 31 and seemingly suffering from psychological problems, I doubt you'd get very much for him but who knows..
from about 1 month ago
But what did Arsenal get in return? A defender who was nearing his peak and who's ill-timed outbursts, childishness and lack of leadership has been all to evident let in his spell at Arsenal.
Ashley Cole may not be a particularly loveable person, but he has been delivering on the pitch and has begun to show the form he displayed in his best days at Arsenal.
Gallas has just been a liability in my opinion. You could see the petulant and tempermental side of his character when he was angling for a move in the early summer of 2006, and then of course there was the furore over whether he actually threatened to score an own goal. I'm glad we got shot of him when we did, I don't regret it one bit.
from about 1 month ago
Come on now Shyam, surely you can cume up with better reasoning than that...
from about 1 month ago
Good point Alan
from about 1 month ago
God, I was joking.
In my opinion, both teams got players who were temperamental. At the time, certainly Arsenal got the better deal.
Don't you think that its kind of a rhetorical question to ask when Gallas has been stripped off his captaincy, and is about to leave Arsenal?
How about I ask you the same question when Cole does something stupid?
from about 1 month ago
To be fair Shyam, I wrote this before he had been stripped of his captaincy hence i had no idea he would. This article was inpired by what has been going on lately in the Arsenal camp but i did my best look at both players' flaws. Since I dont neither of the teams or particularly like neither of the players, I like to think it was an objective assesment and completely valid question.
I dont expect nothing else but for you to fight to the death for your club so its all good. But we all have our opinions and at the moment, very few agree with your view on it.
Thanks for your comments none-the-less...
about 1 month ago
good article jermaine. i think chelsea got the better deal, for the reasons alan said above.
from about 1 month ago
Cheers Yoosof
about 1 month ago
Chelsea for sure. I dont know what Wenger was thinking when appointed Gallas as his captain.
from about 1 month ago
haha thats beyond me as well..
Thanks for the comment Sunny
about 1 month ago
When the signings happened I would've said Arsenal, because Gallas was then one of the top defenders in England and had a seemingly better attitude than Cashley. Now though I would say Chelsea because, although Gallas is still a very good player, the issues surrounding him are having a negative effect on the team, whether he meant it like that or not. Cole, on th other hand, seems to have sorted his attitude out (almost) and developed into the fine defender he always had the potential to be!
from about 1 month ago
Well many (including me) feel he has never reached the heights of his Arsenal days, meaning he was a better player for them than he has been for Chelsea. Having said that, the potential and platform is there for him to reach new dizzying heights and I wouldn't bet against him doing so...
about 1 month ago
Why Gallas was handed the captaincy I don't understand but I definitely think that Chelsea got the better deal in this one.. Great article Jermaine
from about 1 month ago
Thanks for the pick Marzia and thanks for commenting. Glad you agree
about 1 month ago
Bit out of my scope of fanaticism. Nice read anyway.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks S B. Its a funny issue though and seeing as Gallas has just been stripped of his captaincy, there is all sorts of turmoil going on at Arsenal.
Thanks for commenting
about 1 month ago
Dont we all agree now, what a fantastic job Chelsea did as a club, and the various personel involved (Ranieri, Mourinho, Desailly, JT etc) at getting that lunatic to fully concentrate on his football week after week, and consistently produce top class performances, even when regularly being played out of position.
Arsenal fans were quick to start calling him one of the best center backs in world football shortly after he joined them, but their weak management, has seen him descend into an inconsistent, arrogant and disruptive member of their playing staff.
from about 1 month ago
And it goes without saying Chelsea obviously got the better end of the deal. Fantastic article Jermaine
from about 1 month ago
Well well Salomon. Glad to see your still around mate
You raise some very good points and I no doubt agree with you. Your team did a splendid job at keeping him check.
Thanks for commenting mate and I hope you stick around this time
from about 1 month ago
Weak management?
For god's sake - just because one player has had a poor career at the club, doesn't mean that the management is weak.
We didn't play a centre back on the left side of defence, Salomon.. that was Chelsea.. that is odd in my opinion. Of course, today, you wouldn't have him on the pitch at all.
At the time, Arsenal did get the better deal - so that should be the reasoning behind Arsenal having got the better deal.. hindsight is always 20-20, and you can go on about every single transfer and which club got the better deal.. this is a silly question to ask at a time when Gallas has done something crazy.. so obviously, now everyone is going to say Chelsea..
But, hey... when have fans ever looked at the bigger picture?
from about 1 month ago
Fair point mate, i'll leave it upto Salo to respond to it..
from about 1 month ago
In this particular case it has been weak management bro. Not saying Arsenal as a club have weak upper tier managers, far from it actually. Simply pointing out that Arsenal failed to get the best out of this lunatic and failed to keep him focused. Thats all bro..
from about 1 month ago
I suppose you have a point too Salo.
about 1 month ago
I personally think Gallas' choice as captain was not the right choice given that Kolo and Gilberto had held that role very well before he was given the job. However, I think Arsenal got a better deal than Chelsea because even though Cole is younger, he's just as brash and somewhat less intelligent. To go by Alan's argument, Arsenal have found an appropriate replacement for Cole in Clichy just as Chelsea have replaced Gallas with Carvalho. The reverse argument though, has to do with which of the two is easily replaceable by current players at both clubs. In my point of view, Chelsea can, and has easily found a replacement for Cole while he's injured whereas Arsenal cannot, and has not been able to easily and effectively replace Gallas when he's out.
Gallas may not be the "best" captain for Arsenal but he's definitely more important to Arsenal as a player than Cole appears to be for Chelsea. I really think the press' handling of Gallas' "Birmingham sit-down" has influenced a lot of the negative comments about the Frenchman but any objective person should be able to judge the player based on his performances for the club.
If the problem with Gallas is that he takes the captain's job "too seriouly", then I wonder what kind of captain the gunners want. The last time I checked, a certain Roy Keane was not taking his role lightly. Who remembers Keane's outbursts against Rio Ferdinand? If you do, why do you see Gallas in a different light?
from about 1 month ago
I respect your point of view, because at the time Cole was just a lunatic as Gallas is now. A couple of years down the line, things have changed dramatically...
Thanks for commenting Ziggy
about 1 month ago
Neither! Haha
Cole, if I had to pick
Good article, though!
from about 1 month ago
Cheers Michelle...
write a new comment