Arsenal v Bournemouth Player Ratings – Disney couldn’t write it…

My nerves can’t cope with this!!!  by Peter Doherty
Here follows a highly improbable plot line, that if it was pitched to a production company it would be laughed out of the studio:
The league leaders are struggling against the team second from bottom who have scored a goal after just nine seconds.
The home side cannot penetrate the massive rearguard of the visiting side succeeding only in winning fifteen corners.
Their woes deepen when the strugglers score from their first corner!
Things improve when a player who has barely featured all season heads a ball across the box and it is sneaked in at the far post by an unlikely source, a player whose goal contributions only arrive from outside the box.
The tie is levelled when the aforementioned player who has barely featured is replaced by an even lesser spotted team member who provides a cross that enables a defender to score his first ever goal for the club after almost two years.
The story climaxes when the lesser spotted team member scores a screamer in time added on to time added on!!
Let’s face it, this highly improbable plot line wouldn’t even be entertained by the most optimistic of Disney executives because it is too far fetched. But there you have it.
Here are my ratings for this wonderful script:
Ramsdale (8)
If Arsenal win the title this year this man’s contributions will have been pivotal. Two vital saves at critical junctures once again ensured that the momentum was possible to come back.
Tomiyasu (5)
Couldn’t get to grips with the game and was ring rusty that was evident in some poor decisions and executions.
White (8)
What a time to score your first goal for the club, and showed great composure for what was an awkward finish. Linked up consistently with Saka in the second half to create more penetration.
Saliba (7)
Bournemouth were a constant threat on the break so he had to make several important interventions under pressure. Dealt with awkward balls with renewed calmness and quality.
Gabriel (6)
Crucially missed the opportunity to clear the ball for the early goal when the ball went under his foot. Was called into action frequently and like his defensive partner did well to snuff out the counter attacks as they were exposed when Arsenal were on the front foot.
Zinchenko (7)
Did his customary roving role and popped up in all areas of the pitch. Kept the tempo of the attacks high with swift and accurate distribution and intelligent crosses.
Partey (8)
Lost his man for the second goal and obviously took this as a personal affront as from that point on he took the game completely by the scruff of the neck. Performed his excellent interventions throughout, but at 2-0 was the driving force behind the comeback with his incisive passing and driving runs, and of course the crucial first goal.
Vieira (5)
In a game where instant decision making was required his propensity to take several touches was obvious. There’s no doubt he has vision and can pass a ball, he just needs to do it a hell of a lot faster.
Odegaard (8)
In sharp contrast to Vieira, Odegaard’s footballing brain works in hyperdrive. Was the conductor for the constant relentless probing of the Bournemouth resistance. Arsenal had thirty attempts and he was instrumental in the majority of them.
Saka (7)
His qualities are so consistent that they are almost taken for granted. His control is ever present and he poses so many problems for a defence even when they double up on him. Created multiple chances with good balls into the box but there was nobody to get in the end of them. This was a game that Nketiah would have relished because of the amount of balls in the six yard box that Saka and Odegaard provided.
Martinelli (7)
Was a constant threat and his work rate is always outstanding. Made a few great runs that deserved a better end product but he posed problems for Bournemouth throughout with his speed, control and awareness.
Trossard (6)
Hopefully isn’t seriously injured as his presence creates a nice fluidity in the forward line when he and Martinelli interchange positions.
Smith Rowe (6)
What a joy it is to see him back on the pitch and will take time to get back up to speed, but showed signs that his footballing intelligence remains undimmed. Even bagged himself an assist.
 Nelson (9) What an impact!! Excellent cross for the equalizer, and this was followed up with several others. Every time he was on the ball he did something productive and then THAT goal. He will never strike anything sweeter for the rest of his career.
Resilience was abundant in this game and this is a quality that all successful teams need. The fact that the subs were pivotal in winning this game will give the players belief in the strength of the squad, and the replacements faith in their capacity to make a difference.
How do you Gooners rate it?

Watch Arteta’s full emotional reaction to Arsenal amazing comeback against Bournemouth – “It was madness!”

See the latest Arsenal press conferences for Arteta and Eidevall at subscribe to JustArsenalVids

Tags Arsenal v Bournemouth


  1. Another predictable ratings article. Only wish I could take part, but until and unless ratings marks(as to what each mark actually means) are made standard to all fans, I simply will not take part, as it is based on ratings which are NOT understood by all, but by myriad personal and very different individual takes.

    Which thus renders it meaningless!

      1. Pat, It is not Peters personal standards that concern me but the standards of ALL fans. IF all fans were able to sing from the same hymnsheet, by having marks that meant the same to all of us, then ratings would have a meaning.

        But as things are, it is simply a mishmash of various fans individuual opinions about what any particular mark means. Example: one fan thinks nine means good; another things it means out ot this world.
        Conversely, one things five is extreme rubbish; another things it means average. And so on!

        YOU could, were you minded to, give us all meanings for each mark, so that we all start with the same meaning for each mark.

        But all you do is tell me off for stating the obvious solution.

        Do you actually want REAL thinkers or simply sheep type followers on here ?

        1. Jon, I should have outlined the standard I use to rate these earlier so I apologize. Here are the ratings as I perceive them and hopefully this will enable you o join the debate armed with a reference.
          10 – Otherworldy
          9- Outstanding
          8 – Excellent
          7 – Very Good
          6 – Good
          5 – Average
          4 – Below Average
          3- Poor
          2 – Very Poor
          1 – Bruno Fernandes at Anfield
          Hope this clears things up

          1. So Scootsiegooner, YOU are Peter, apparently. I thank you for posting your own ratings meanings, though I have a slightly different take on precisely what ALL marks mean, compared to your own meanings.

            But THAT is in fact , exactly the problem I outline in my above post.

            I also make this necessary comment whenever ratings articles , WITHOUT PRECISE MEANINGS ATTACHED, appear.

            IMO, we fans ALL NEED one definitive , agreed by all, set of meanings, failing which, ALL ratings are the mishmash of individual opinions, I refer to above.

            My view is that Ad Pat OUGHT to decide for all of us and that we all, once he has decided, need to strictly abide by his decision. Only THEN, and not otherwise, will ratings have any real meaning.

            I sing in choirs and we ALL sing from the same music book( known as a score). If we did not do this, the sound would be a hideous cacaphony.

            Unless that analogy applies to ratings, they are pointless. Over to you now Ad PAT!

            1. As Peter is the one that writes the Ratings this season (and very well according to most readers – other than you of course) so the fact that he has given you clearly what each rating means, why are you still questioning the definitions and trying to make things difficult? Eh?

              1. AD PAT Not only an incorrect interpretation by you of my post but a most disapppointing one too. I have no objection whatsoever to PETERS POST.

                IN FACT, I THANKED HIM FOR IT, A S YOU SURELY SAW, IF YOU READ MY POST FULLY. He gave me only his personal view and as such I said that I had a SLIGHTLYdifferent take and that the many different takes that Gooners in general will have, IS PRECISELY THE PROBLEM.

                IF, however, as Admin in charge of JA , YOU were to say that you adopt his ratings in its entirety and that you recommend them to us all to use in future, I would be glad to comply.

                THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL SOLUTION TO WHAT I, almost alone, have seen as an obvious problem from the very start of ratings articles being aired on JA

                So will you adopt them? Or else provide your own? And if so, when?

                We first need an OFFICIAL CONFIRMATION of their use from YOU !

          2. Peter, In another reply to your 1-10 ratings post, I refer you to my reply to you and the consequent incorrect interpretation by Ad PAT,of that post to you – which only aimed to help finally get an OFFICIAL set of meanings to all ratings(1-10).
            I said to AD PAT THAT i WOULD BE GLAD TO ADOPT YOUR OWN PERSONAL RATINGS , if they have his blessing and thus make them OFFICIAL for use in future by all.
            Just wanted you to know that, and that I was NOT in any way in disagreement with the theme of your own ratings post; even though*as I said) I had a slightly different personal take compared with your own.

            But that is of a trivial concern compared with FINALLY getting a n OFFICIAL set of ratings meanings.

            Ad PAT found a bizarre personal offence at my post. I trust and believe YOU will not, as none was meant. In fact, I repeat my thanks to you for setting out each marks adjective.

      2. @ad-pat…. I thought I was d only noticing, I dnt get it my self, he complain about rating like every week, same thing. Like what does jfox really want us to do about it.

        1. He wants everything here to go according to his below average intellect. He will have better luck breathing in Jupiter. What a moaner!

  2. Great job by the players to focus, fight, and turn things around. There is that mentality that is often discussed, and crucial element in our run in for the title.

    Nelson was fantastic, and I hope he gets many more chances to show what he can do. He needs to continue having an impact so the club has to consider offering him a new contract rather than losing him on a free.

    We need options in the attack, and his skill set fits into what Arteta is building at Arsenal

    1. 👍 spot on Durand. Reiss Nelson has been an underrated llayer at Arsenal. Injuries at the wrong times have not helped him, but the underlying talent at his age is hard to dispute.

  3. Nelson is technically gifted and would likely be a perfect competitor for Martinelli in the LW position. After saving us in two games, he deserves a new contract

    Smith-Rowe is better suited for a central role, because he isn’t as good as Martinelli, Nelson and Trossard in tight spaces on our left wing

  4. I see Peter that you have your favourites ,to do these ratings you have to be impartial ,quite predictable each week which players you favour even when not playing well .

    1. Hi Dan. It’s Peter here. I don’t feel I set out to promote individual players when making the ratings. What is probably showing a pattern in my ratings is the values I have for certain traits and characteristics. When I do the ratings I watch the game twice. Once as a fan and then record it and view the game a second time dispassionately which allows me to appreciate the structure of the play and how it develops without being emotionally involved. One particular trait I value highly is work rate. When watching the game as a fan I tend to only follow the ball, but on the second viewing I can see the effort applied away from the play. So a player will get an uptick for every lung bursting overlap run that was ignored but may have been instrumental in opening gaps elsewhere, or similarly if they sprint back to defend when the opposition is counter attacking. Ultimately the ratings are subjective and I absolutely accept that many will disagree with my views and I encourage that in order to promote debate. It’s only a bit of craic among Gooners as far as I’m concerned.

    1. Difficult for ESR to play out of position, when returning from long term injury. To see him back on the field, albeit only shortly, was a positive.

  5. I think the ratings are a bit too high for the whole team. I would not give anyone more than a 6 because of the lack of quality and maybe a 7 for showing a fighting spirit with the exception of Nelson who would get an 8 who showed quality as soon as he came on yesterday. The crosses were whipped dangerous ones and not high floated ones.

    Liverpool have dismantled Man Utd 7-0. We have to go to Anfield. Apprehensive yet looking forward, I can’t wait to see how this team reacts to that cauldron of noise.

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors