if your team’s provider is a winger, you’re in trouble. or you’re blackburn. same difference, really.

In at least one respect, I agree with b. You cannot compare Song or Diaby to Modric. They play very different roles in their teams. Your judgment of Song and Diaby is that they were “dominated by Spurs” because “they created nothing”. But, as b pointed out, attacking creativity is not the role of either of these players. Both Song and Diaby are there, like Palacios, to break up opposition attacks, win back possession of the ball in the middle of the pitch, and shield the back four. Creativity IS the role expected of Modric, while Palacios and Huddlestone perform the roles assigned to Song and Diaby. If you want to properly compare midfield players, then you should be comparing Modric to Fabregas, who performs the creator role, and I don’t think there is much of a comparison to be had there.

As for Huddlestone and Palacios over Song and Diaby, based on the roles described above, I think you excessively unfair to Song. He has been very effective at winning possession and breaking up play. Much more so than any similar player on Spurs – he has been vastly superior to Palacios or Huddlestone in both the derby match and most of the other games in the season.

After that, I concede that Palacios has been better than Diaby, both in the derby and overall. I would probably put Huddlestone ahead of Diaby, but only on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes he is better and sometimes Diaby has his moments. If I had to rate the four of them at the holding midfielder role I would put them: Song, Palacios, tie.

Whether or not Lennon is the “provider” on Spurs depends on your definition of that term. If by “provider” you mean that he creates space for others because he is pacy and backs up defenders with that pace, then yes, he is a “provider”. But I think of a provider as the person who uses passing and field control to open up defences for the whole team. In that regard, players like Modric, Fabregas, Fletcher, and Alonso are real “providers”. And I also disagree with your assertion that Lennon is better than Walcott when both are fully fit.

I don’t think Arsenal need to improve in the midfield or up front, as you assert. They have the lead in the league in goals scored and have only not had the majority of midfield possession in the Manchester City game. I would suggest that evidences plenty of strength in the middle and up front.

And Lennon is the provider on Spurs. Modric is a fantastic player, but Lennon is a game changer.

Eduordo vs Defoe is a push? You’re kidding, right. Thanks for the laugh.

and now you’re just dreaming. sure, diaby played like he was on your team during most of the game. but palacios and huddlestone were nowhere on saturday. palacios started out ok and is a decent stopper.

but you’ll note one team failed to score and had absolutely nothing to offer in the final third. song played great.

palacios did get an assist on cesc’s goal though, so i suppose it’s not all for nothing.

but taking modric over song and diaby isn’t even a debate. he plays a different position. defoe over bendtner, sure. eduardo v. defoe is a push for me, but whatever.

jenas was the only midfield threat on your squad saturday. he may not fit the mix of the team, but i think he’s starting to figure things out.

And you can have Jenas. In fact, please take him. He’s awful.

Complete BS. No top team, bottom team, mid-team, can withstand injuries to their top players. Look at Liverpool without Torres and Gerrard! When Arsenal have had injuries in the past couple seasons, they faltered. Would they have finished higher without the injuries – probably. Would ManU have won without Ronaldo? Unlikely. To discount that Tottenham was missing 4 of their best players and ALL their creative players (Modric, Lennon AND Defoe) is to deceive yourself and gives too much credit to Arsenal. Not to mention they played at the Emirates where Arsenal are extremely hard to beat. That Arsenal won isn’t shocking. That Arsenal was lucky to win that easily is.