Arsenal Message Board
We all know he's training with us, keeping fit until the MLS kicks off again in March.
Moyes who has previously brought in the services of Landon Donovan from LA Galaxy, is rumoured to have spoken to Henry about a loan deal.
Now, there is also a rumour going that AW is looking to sign a 24yr old African striker form Porto in the summer, (on a free, just like Chamakh)
So does anyone else think that Henry would be an asset to us during the ACoN? (Jan/Feb)
Or should his services be left to the history books.
keep him at the club and around the younger players to show them what they can aspire to be whilst at a great club like Arsenal..............But as for playing,as Nig says, it often spoils the memory.
Hi Nige. Thanks for the reply.
You join the rest here, that believe that we shouldn't go backwards.
Much as I agree, I also believe that his presence at the training ground is perhaps having a positive influence.
I would love him to come back, though not necessarily as a player.
Thanks also to Raider and some others (non-Arsenal) for their input. It is worth noting if nothing else, that we all share a common regard for the legends of the game, even if they didn't play for our team.
Just passing by John...noticed this thread...a football thread..well.
My view is this. You should never go back, be it a factory, or football club, it never works out. Treveor Francis at our place proved this. Thierry should remain a legend at Arsenal and not try to repeat his pat exploits cause there will always be comparrisons made, and usually not favourable.
Any other views ?
For me Arsenal had the best years from Henry and whilst I am sure he is a top player still I would hate for him to come back and not deliver as that would be the image you last remembered.
I think on the up side he would generate a lot of belief from the younger players and would be a great player to learn from.
It is a really hard call as there are pluses and minuses with Henry.
I guess if push came to shove I would rather have him then not have him purely because he has Arsenal in his blood and loves the club and sometimes that's all you need to get the performaces you need.
- 1 Reply to Raider
I guess the main thing that sticks in my mind are:-
1. Sol Campbell, whilst he did a job for us, it was clear he was no where near the player he used to be. Which was a shame.
2. Bobby Pires, got found out and left wanting for pace and stamina in the season he spent with Villa.
Both these guys got to play again because they trained with the club. They got 'fit' again. Geez, even David Seaman did several stints of training with us after his career ended.
Some things are best left to the history books.
Left to the history books, ditto Beckham. Leaving aside Spurs little publicity stunt last season with Beckham name me one top club which is interested in taking on loan a player from the MLS. Such loans are for mid-table teams who are short on money for transfers not teams looking to finish in the top four. Henry was a great player but he is 34 and hasn`t played in the Premier League for 4 years. You only have to look at how Pires struggled when he tried to readjust to the pace of the Premier League.
- 1 Reply to A Yahoo! User
I don't really agree that it's just for mid-table teams. United and AC Milan have made these sorts of moves in recent seasons with success.
I think Henry would definitely be able to do a decent job for us still. But I don't want him to come back as I don't think it's the right thing to do. He's got his own statue now, and to me it just seems wrong to have honoured a player (bring closure to his career with us) and then him playing for us again.