Well the answer to that question is yes. I have noticed that in the past 4 years and at present Henry hasn’t been substituted unless for injury worries and so forth and i am sure that a lot of you will agree that it is not fair.
I guess you could say the same for Vieira but he is our captain but with Henry especially he has had some of the worst performances and he has not ever been subsituted. Freddie, Bergkamp, Reyes and Pires have given excellent performances (maybe not Reyes lately but during August, September) have all been subsituted even though they are playing excellent football. What angers me even more was that Wenger decided to take out freddie in the Champions League tie and leave Henry on, when Henry was the worst performer on that pitch.
I think it is unfair and Wenger should be brave enough to take him out. Coaches like Filipe Scolari had the guts to take out Figo when he was not playing well, Why can’t Wenger do the same for Henry. And to finish off, if any one says that Henry is a big game performer is a fool, because he is not. My idea of being a big game player is not scoring 3 goals against the likes of Crystal Palace, Leeds, Norwich, Fulham….well you get my point.
7 Responses to “Is Henry given special treatment?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 25th, 2005 at 10:43 pm
Well if you worked for a company and brought in half their business (his goals & assists)…wouldn’t you deserve special treatment???
February 25th, 2005 at 11:40 pm
Honestly, this has more to do with the lack of depth at striker than anything. Aside from Henry and DB10, we haven’t had consistent strikers in a long time (*cough*Jeffers*cough*). Reyes might still be that guy, but his form took a nosedive from early in the year when he was shredding defenses. And van Persie needs some time to develop.
The other thing you need to look at is how Henry changes the game simply by being on the pitch. Even if his form is poor, defenses have to know where he is at all times, which forces them to back off a bit. He’s also a lot like Jordan or Lemieux, where he can look terrible for most of the game but still come through in the end. And I wouldn’t want to be the coach or manager who pulls any of those three guys.
February 25th, 2005 at 11:49 pm
You are waaaaaaay off base.
He can score a goal or set up a goal… and change a game in an instant. He can do next to nothing for 85 minutes, and BAM! a moment of sheer utter footballing genius. This is true of many of the world’s best strikers, but HENRY is the BEST. He sets up as many as he scores, showing how unselfish a player he is.
The BULL-S*** about him not playing well in big games is just that…. NON-SENSE. And a very good and valid point was made… that he forces the other team to focus alot of energy and man-power to STOP HIM… allowing the Freddie Ljungberg’s of the world to score alot easier.
I find it truly amazing that there are still doubters and detractors of the SUBLIME skills of Thierry Henry. He needs to be on the pitch ALL THE TIME.
You don’t take the best striker in the world off unless he is exhausted or injured.
It would be INSANE to do so.
February 26th, 2005 at 1:37 am
Of all the players, Henry is most deserving of special treatment for the reasons mentioned - if he shows up for just 5 minutes of the game, he can control the outcome.
With that said, I think he should sit more than he does. With a game out here and there, he’ll be consistently dangerous throughout the games he plays. He doesn’t seem to get physically tired from all the games he plays, but mentally tired. I also think we need to learn to play without him, to rely less on him, to give our other players more confidence to take responsibility.
Of course, when Henry sits out we lose something, and of course, we should rely on him more heavily than other players. Of course we give up our most potent threat when he doesn’t play. But because PV has been injured so much over the past couple years, we learned to rely on him less. Other mids stepped up. Who consistently scores goals for us when Henry is not there? (Bob, despite being on for only 5 minutes. But that’s a tap in off a crazy deflection, which is not a tactic we should rely on.)
It seems like when we are losing at the end of an important game, we either go into panic mode with everyone pushed up trying to score, or we stop playing with ten minutes to go. Both approaches are much less effective than what we did in the first 80 minutes. What we need are players to have enough confidence to keep their discipline and to trust that the whole team will keep fighting until the game is done. Learning to sometimes play without Henry will help develop that.
February 26th, 2005 at 3:04 am
Who else on our current squad could turn a game around most often and/or consistently. I don’t have the hard stats but I have watched every single Arsenal game over the past 2 years. Henry is the man.
Contrary to popular belief he is not God. He does sulk & show all of the negative body language as & when things go wrong. He has not performed well in all games. And others have also turned the game around - Berkamp, Pires, Paddy, Freddie and even Reyes, Edu, Campbell & Van Persie to name a few. But who does it most consistently & more often than not?
It is essentially the law of probably. Perhaps it reflects on the lack of depth of our squad or the argument that we rely on him too much. But this is what we have and he is the most likely to create that magic when needed. Bear in mind no striker, or footballer could do so game in & game out! It is just that because he is our main man, when he does not perform well it is glaringly obvious.
I was irritated and disappointed with the entire squad on the BM game, because it was largely a poor team performance. Henry & co. were all underachieving (with the exception of Cygan!!). But who do you want to bring on to replace Henry? Law of probability suggests that you keep him on.
February 26th, 2005 at 5:55 am
SOmetimes HENRY plays through pain with both France and Arsnal. Not ony Wenger, you’ll find no manager in this planet to leave Henry on the bench or to substitute him. Why ? because you won’t find any decent team in this world to leave Henry alone, no matter he’s totally fit or not. The facts remain the fact. The “big match” debate is aimed at unsetting Henry. That’s what anybody does when playing Arsenal. Opposition players try this mind game with Henry.
It’s surprising to see an “fan” claiming Henry don’t perform in big games.
A Game becomes big when we loose it and people go freely on Henry’s back.
Heny’s scored lamost against any bigteam ARsenal have faced more than twice in recent years. You cannot say the same to any others strikers the word.
Every football fan in this planet remember Henry against Barthes at OT. One of his most beautiful ever goal was there. A light copy on the same has been scored at Highbury this year against Chelski. He scores 2 and created 2 against in our BIG BIG GAME at Milan.
Henry’s not a machine. If you cannot give credit to the boy for what he’s doing week in week out, just respect yourself and shut up.
Senderos’s coming for Kolo and Kolo for Lauren. At least Arsene istrying to solve the problem. I would have find a better solution at the moment. It’s easier to lament the lack of defender but that won’t help solve our problem. Wenger’s reacting well and let’s see if it works.
Senderos/Cygan should give us more presence in the air. Kolo could be tremendous at right back defensily.
His work rate is huge and his a fighter. Above all he’s pace wich vital for the position.
February 28th, 2005 at 8:14 pm
Whenever we are up comfortable and have 15 or 20 minutes to go he should be substituted off the pitch. It makes no sense whatsover to keep him on.
What if we’re up 5-1 like we were against Palace and he gets injured in the 90th minute?
The game was done and won but we risked injury to our biggest asset when it wasn’t necessary.
I guarantee you, the minute he suffers an injury in that way most of us will be on here saying why wasn’t he substituted.