Olivier Giroud

[DialSquaregooner]

He does not look like a natural footballer when he plays, he looks like someone who has never kicked a ball before. The chances he f***ked up last night. He is much better as a impact sub where he knows he has to make a difference to the result. He is not the type of main guy you should really on for goals or creativity . He was awful in Chelski fa cup win against man u. Anonymous

[theHotHead]

I am so glad we got rid of him !! Praise be !!

[Ach]

I am so glad we got rid of him !! Praise be !!

Yup. Has shown nothing at Chelsea or the World Cup to make me think we should've kept him.

[DiamondGooner]

I am so glad we got rid of him !! Praise be !!

Yup. Has shown nothing at Chelsea or the World Cup to make me think we should've kept him.

I've never seen a striker who has 3 goals all year in all competitions get so much leeway it's insane.

The only explanation is that there are a lot of men who are confused about their feelings? Giroud seems to have gained a firm following ever since his naked picture came out.

Because lets be honest how can you defend this current goal record? Morata must have similar numbers in the same period and he's been slaughtered ........ maybe he should release a nudie pic as well?

[Losmeister]

The only explanation is that there are a lot of men who are confused about their feelings? Giroud seems to have gained a firm following ever since his naked picture came out.

know what , asshole?, your f***ing schtick is tired.

leave that nonsense aside, you know better.

[Callum]

It's really not that hard to comprehend if you take away the bias held against Giroud from a number of Arsenal fans here.

France's attack is exclusively made up of fast, skilful but physical diminutive forwards - Mbappe, Griezmann, Dembele etc. Without a physical focal point in the attack, most defences are able to snuff them out because they attack the same way (see the Australia game). Giroud occupies the centre backs and allows the players around him more freedom to operate. It also means the French midfield have more options to play in the attackers - without Giroud all they can really do is try and play through balls to the other attackers, which is difficult when a defence sits deep against France, or just play it to feet to these players and hope they run past/ play through the defence themselves. With Giroud on the pitch they now have the ability to play it to his feet where he can hold up the ball and distract defenders whilst the other attackers run into space, or they can find him via crosses.

Anyone who's watched France play over the past couple of years can see the attack just doesn't work in Deschamps' system when he just fields the best players he has. He trusts Giroud and France generally play better when he's in the team than when he's not, and the likes of Griezmann and Mbappe benefit from his presence. He can be a frustrating player to watch but France have made two consecutive finals with him spearheading the attack and eventually people might need to just accept that there's a reason why Wenger wanted him, why Deschamps likes him, why Conte and Chelsea bought him, and that these people might know more about Giroud and his suitability than they do.

[Va-Va-Voom]

Bring it home.

[LMAO]

It's really not that hard to comprehend if you take away the bias held against Giroud from a number of Arsenal fans here.

France's attack is exclusively made up of fast, skilful but physical diminutive forwards - Mbappe, Griezmann, Dembele etc. Without a physical focal point in the attack, most defences are able to snuff them out because they attack the same way (see the Australia game). Giroud occupies the centre backs and allows the players around him more freedom to operate. It also means the French midfield have more options to play in the attackers - without Giroud all they can really do is try and play through balls to the other attackers, which is difficult when a defence sits deep against France, or just play it to feet to these players and hope they run past/ play through the defence themselves. With Giroud on the pitch they now have the ability to play it to his feet where he can hold up the ball and distract defenders whilst the other attackers run into space, or they can find him via crosses.

Anyone who's watched France play over the past couple of years can see the attack just doesn't work in Deschamps' system when he just fields the best players he has. He trusts Giroud and France generally play better when he's in the team than when he's not, and the likes of Griezmann and Mbappe benefit from his presence. He can be a frustrating player to watch but France have made two consecutive finals with him spearheading the attack and eventually people might need to just accept that there's a reason why Wenger wanted him, why Deschamps likes him, why Conte and Chelsea bought him, and that these people might know more about Giroud and his suitability than they do.

Callum imparting knowledge on these fools.

Giroud is the glue that holds France together. It's like Benzema at Real; his primary job was to occupy defenders and lay the ball off to Ronaldo.

[Ach]

A striker with no shots on target.

He's brilliant.

[Losmeister]

It's really not that hard to comprehend if you take away the bias held against Giroud from a number of Arsenal fans here.

France's attack is exclusively made up of fast, skilful but physical diminutive forwards - Mbappe, Griezmann, Dembele etc. Without a physical focal point in the attack, most defences are able to snuff them out because they attack the same way (see the Australia game). Giroud occupies the centre backs and allows the players around him more freedom to operate. It also means the French midfield have more options to play in the attackers - without Giroud all they can really do is try and play through balls to the other attackers, which is difficult when a defence sits deep against France, or just play it to feet to these players and hope they run past/ play through the defence themselves. With Giroud on the pitch they now have the ability to play it to his feet where he can hold up the ball and distract defenders whilst the other attackers run into space, or they can find him via crosses.

Anyone who's watched France play over the past couple of years can see the attack just doesn't work in Deschamps' system when he just fields the best players he has. He trusts Giroud and France generally play better when he's in the team than when he's not, and the likes of Griezmann and Mbappe benefit from his presence. He can be a frustrating player to watch but France have made two consecutive finals with him spearheading the attack and eventually people might need to just accept that there's a reason why Wenger wanted him, why Deschamps likes him, why Conte and Chelsea bought him, and that these people might know more about Giroud and his suitability than they do.

Callum imparting knowledge on these fools.

Giroud is the glue that holds France together. It's like Benzema at Real; his primary job was to occupy defenders and lay the ball off to Ronaldo.

ssssshhhhhhhh!!! undertsaning the dynamics of a team sport, on a forum infested with weak egos aligning themselves with great footaballers
masquerading as fans of sport is often and vigorously met with endless whingeing....

[Highbury Hillbilly]

The Giroud hate on here is crazy. May I remind you all that he currently has the same number of assists in this WC as world class Ozil had with GER in 2014.

One.

[Fran Solo]

These things will never end even if he scores a hattrick or bottles 25 sitters in the final.

[Nuggets]

The big man WILL score in the final, haters will go into meltdown lol

[KG3]

Giroud is at his best as an impact sub which is why the France manager should have taken Laca/Benzema as well but anyway if they win the World Cup with Giroud starting who can complain lol

[Angelito]

What Callum said.

Giroud's presence helps create space for Griezmann and Mbappe. When you have two lethal, world-class attackers as those, you don't need someone like Lacazette. You need someone completely different to them, which is Giroud.

Actually, that's one of the issues with Argentina.

You have players that shrink Messi's space and they force him to go deeper and deeper rather than creating space for him and allowing him to express himself in the final third. That's why Messi works better with Higuain than with Aguero even if Higuain is a choker. Higuain's movement at least allows Messi to operate well as opposed to di Maria on the flanks where he just ends up squeezing the play, or Aguero who likes freedom and ends up eating Messi's space.

I had pointed out about this during Laca's barren run when Welbeck was playing on the flanks last season. Danny would just end up running into Lacazette's space, which really hindered Laca's productivity. You could clearly see the difference once Aubameyang arrived.

Nvm, France have reached two major international finals with Giroud up top. It surely can't be worse. Individuals don't win you trophies or bring success at international level. It's about team and team chemistry. Giroud is a team player and has perfect chemistry with both Griezmann and Mbappe.

Even if France lose, it won't be on Giroud as two back-to-back major finals would warrant.

Having said that, my Lord, I realized yesterday that France have been the most dominant European side of the past 20 years.

- 1998 WC
- 2000 Euros
- Meh
- 2006 WC Final
- Meh
- 2016 Euro Final
- 2018 WC Final

As opposed to Spain:

- Meh until 2007
- 2008 Euros
- 2010 WC
- 2012 Euros
- Meh

And Germany:

- Meh until 2001
- 2002 WC Final
- 2006 WC SFs
- 2008 Euro Final
- 2010 WC SFs
- 2014 WC
- Meh

Spain 08-12 aside, they have been pretty meh since 1998. That 08-12 dominance, however, might be the greatest by a European side ever.

Five finals for France that includes 3 WC Finals in the last 20 years.
Three finals for Germany.
Three finals for Spain - having won them all.

- Peaks = France (1 WC, 1 Euros, 3 Finals)
- Consistency = Germany (1 WC, 2 Finals, 2 SFs)
- Domination within a short span = Spain (1 WC, 2 Euros)

Which one would you rather?