Olivier Giroud fell foul of injury as Arsenal overcame West Ham in the Carabao Cup last week, and is now expected to be ruled out until February.
The French striker limped out of our League Cup win over the Hammers, and reports are claiming that he will now miss the entirety of January with a hamstring problem, likely ending any hopes his potential suitors had in signing him.
The World Cup next summer had expected to play a part in Giroud’s thoughts in the run up to the winter transfer window, and he was claimed to be considering an exit in order to secure more regular action having fallen down the pecking order in North London.
Alexandre Lacazette has usurped him as the first-choice striker since his arrival from Lyon in the summer, and Giroud has had to settle for only one start in the Premier League so far this term.
Everton and West Ham had been linked with a move for the 31 year-old, and the guarantee of a first-team role may have proved tempting as he looked to secure a place in what would likely be his last chance to feature in a World Cup.
Arsenal fans should be happy that they will be able to keep their super-sub, who has already bagged himself seven goals in all competitions, and will most certainly help our cause in the second half of the campaign, but it will make things more complicated over the busy festive period with Alexandre Lacazette rarely playing the full 90 minutes of the match.
Is it better news to have Giroud for the remainder of the campaign, or would it have been better to have him for the busy festive schedule?
Pat J