The Moroccan could understandably do nothing but be a bystander as Van Persie occupied the role of the loan striker in the 2011/12 season injury free.
While Arsenal have reinforced the striking position with the signings of Podolski and Giroud, Chamakh is the only recognised striker in the squad for Arsenal’s Far East Tour with the two new signings plus Van Persie remaining in London.
Chamakh is quoted as saying by The Sun:
Yes [I could benefit if Van Persie left]. If I am staying here with Arsenal, I will do my best for the team and give the maximum.
Last season was difficult. We were playing with just one striker and that striker was the best player in Europe. There was not a lot I could do.
I was upset because thought I could have played more but football is like that. Sometimes you do not have a chance.
- David Dein: Wenger Will Have No Shortage Of Offers
- Wenger Reveals The Extent Of Elneny’s Gruesome Ankle Injury
- [Match Highlights] Arsenal 4-1 West Ham – All The Goals And Best Bits
I hope this season I will play more than last. I have not spoken with the manager but I will soon.
In the first six months after signing I had lots of games but after that I only played a few. Now I hope this season will be good for me and the club.
Yes, I need more confidence. But to be confident I need to play more. I am determined to stay.
It has definitely been a difficult time for Chamakh, who is both low on confidence and game-time. While I have no doubt the Moroccan will gain more match-time in the absence of the Dutchman, there is little doubt that Giroud is likely to become the first-choice striker if Van Persie leaves.
What do you guys think? Should Chamakh be given more chances? Should he be kept whether or not Van Persie leaves? Feel free to leave a comment below!