As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Alright I admit it. Amorim is a tactical genius. It wasn’t luck which saw them win through. It was a genius ploy to allow us to dominate them and create 6 clear cut chances. 5 of which we missed. Their goal came from a freak slip by Gabriel. They had another breakaway in extra time. One! In over 60 minutes of football. Again. Another tactical masterpiece. I’m staggered that we even took them to extra time. I’m also staggered how he thought up a ploy to play a low block when going down to ten men and to pray that we didn’t take any of our chances. Literally this is Manager of the Year material.
The reality (which you know full well) is that he lucked out in a game where we missed 5 clear cut chances. They scored a breakaway from a slip when it was 11 v 11. Did they deserve to win the game. Yes and no. We were not outthought if you think sitting in and praying we don’t score is the tactical plan.
Ok, one more try.
What do you think was Amorim’s game plan, if you don’t think they set out to sit deep and take the breakaway opportunities which came their way? No point crying about Gabriel slipping, that’s exactly the type of opportunity those tactics set out to capitalise on. They sat deep and absorbed our pretty impotent pressure from the first whistle. It’s hardly a unique tactic is it ffs, unless you’ve only just started watching the game….which seems possible. So, if that wasn’t Amorim’s deliberate tactic, what do you think was?
As for “sitting in and praying we don’t score”, that’s a bullshit description. You sit in, limit chances by having honed your game plan and take your chances when they come. They did exactly what the Geordies did, which is worrying because they’re not as good a side.
The no end of “sitters” you’ve been banging on about since Sunday, turns out to be the same 5 or 6 (you use both figures in your last post, but never mind) that the rest of us saw, so hardly an avalanche. In fact, if we use 5 as the figure (I’ll discount the penalty and say that we played roughly 130 minutes, including the various bits of injury time), then that’s a serious scoring chance every 26 minutes. Hardly having them hanging on for dear life and tearing Amorim’s game plan apart was it?
You’re upset we lost, we all are, but don’t lose your grip on reality. Our failure in the two games is a reflection on us, not on the luck of the two sides that beat us. They both came with a plan and their plans worked.
Btw, have you watched the Parma CWC Final? Let me know what you think our tactic was.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
Whether Amorin's tactical input was in any way responsible for the outcome is debatable. What is not debatable is that United had the balls to get rid of an underperforming manager a few weeks ago - despite him winning the FA Cup as recently as last May.
Their recent performances - Liverpool and Arsenal away - demonstrate at the very least that fortune favours the brave.
Last edited by Bob Bayliss on Tue Jan 14, 2025 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Whether Amorin's tactical input was in any way responsible for the result is debatable. What is not debatable is that United had the balls to get rid of a failing manager a few weeks ago and their recent performances - Liverpool and Arsenal away - demonstrate that fortune favours the brave.
True. Arteta is here to stay though as we are second in the League and 3rd in the Champions League Group. Ten Hag lost his job because of League performances despite wining cups. People on here appear to want us to be where United were. They want Cups. Arteta either wins the League or the Champions League. Domestic Cups are not enough.
Whether Amorin's tactical input was in any way responsible for the result is debatable. What is not debatable is that United had the balls to get rid of a failing manager a few weeks ago and their recent performances - Liverpool and Arsenal away - demonstrate that fortune favours the brave.
True. Arteta is here to stay though as we are second in the League and 3rd in the Champions League Group. Ten Hag lost his job because of League performances despite wining cups. People on here appear to want us to be where United were. They want Cups. Arteta either wins the League or the Champions League. Domestic Cups are not enough.
But he doesn't and he won't, any more than Wenger won the League or the Champions League after 2004. Fergie won them until he retired, despite the Chelsea money.
I said last May (and Augie will corroborate because he holds everyone to account ) that if we didn't win silverware by the end of 24-25 season then Arteta is underachieving:
However if by the end of the next season there isn't a trophy then yes I'd say the team is underachieving. Whether that's the team's fault for bottling a final, or whether that's by pure unluck, I'lll make that judgement this time next year. I think the team has given a lot this year. Yes some league results didn't go our way, but I don't expect a team to not lose or draw games. I think in general the team has done alright this year and like I said, it's currently an upward trend.
But this is poor. Havertz is clearly a confidence player and he is utterly bereft of that right now. I knew he wasn't scoring that penalty, he looked broken. And the chances he spooned against Newcastle and Manure are indefensible, he earns a fuckton of money and he has to shoulder a lot of blame at the moment. The shift in feeling surrounding the team since Jesus' hattrick to what I'm watching now is stark as fuck.
The injuries don't help but we look absolutely blunt, and you should be able to put a 10-man Manure to bed over 50 minutes. Not even a good Manure at that.
The players look visibly rattled and if we don't miraculously get 2 wins against Spudz and Villa then it's goodnight until August.
Confidence is through the floor. Pressure does that to you. They know we need to win something and therefore won’t. Everything has gone wrong this season. Injuries, illness, refereeing clusterfucks. A failure to recruit a new striker in the Summer. Liverpool going on a good run. Havertz out of form. It will get worse.
Alright I admit it. Amorim is a tactical genius. It wasn’t luck which saw them win through. It was a genius ploy to allow us to dominate them and create 6 clear cut chances. 5 of which we missed. Their goal came from a freak slip by Gabriel. They had another breakaway in extra time. One! In over 60 minutes of football. Again. Another tactical masterpiece. I’m staggered that we even took them to extra time. I’m also staggered how he thought up a ploy to play a low block when going down to ten men and to pray that we didn’t take any of our chances. Literally this is Manager of the Year material.
The reality (which you know full well) is that he lucked out in a game where we missed 5 clear cut chances. They scored a breakaway from a slip when it was 11 v 11. Did they deserve to win the game. Yes and no. We were not outthought if you think sitting in and praying we don’t score is the tactical plan.
Ok, one more try.
What do you think was Amorim’s game plan, if you don’t think they set out to sit deep and take the breakaway opportunities which came their way? No point crying about Gabriel slipping, that’s exactly the type of opportunity those tactics set out to capitalise on. They sat deep and absorbed our pretty impotent pressure from the first whistle. It’s hardly a unique tactic is it ffs, unless you’ve only just started watching the game….which seems possible. So, if that wasn’t Amorim’s deliberate tactic, what do you think was?
As for “sitting in and praying we don’t score”, that’s a bullshit description. You sit in, limit chances by having honed your game plan and take your chances when they come. They did exactly what the Geordies did, which is worrying because they’re not as good a side.
The no end of “sitters” you’ve been banging on about since Sunday, turns out to be the same 5 or 6 (you use both figures in your last post, but never mind) that the rest of us saw, so hardly an avalanche. In fact, if we use 5 as the figure (I’ll discount the penalty and say that we played roughly 130 minutes, including the various bits of injury time), then that’s a serious scoring chance every 26 minutes. Hardly having them hanging on for dear life and tearing Amorim’s game plan apart was it?
You’re upset we lost, we all are, but don’t lose your grip on reality. Our failure in the two games is a reflection on us, not on the luck of the two sides that beat us. They both came with a plan and their plans worked.
Btw, have you watched the Parma CWC Final? Let me know what you think our tactic was.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
Alright I admit it. Amorim is a tactical genius. It wasn’t luck which saw them win through. It was a genius ploy to allow us to dominate them and create 6 clear cut chances. 5 of which we missed. Their goal came from a freak slip by Gabriel. They had another breakaway in extra time. One! In over 60 minutes of football. Again. Another tactical masterpiece. I’m staggered that we even took them to extra time. I’m also staggered how he thought up a ploy to play a low block when going down to ten men and to pray that we didn’t take any of our chances. Literally this is Manager of the Year material.
The reality (which you know full well) is that he lucked out in a game where we missed 5 clear cut chances. They scored a breakaway from a slip when it was 11 v 11. Did they deserve to win the game. Yes and no. We were not outthought if you think sitting in and praying we don’t score is the tactical plan.
Ok, one more try.
What do you think was Amorim’s game plan, if you don’t think they set out to sit deep and take the breakaway opportunities which came their way? No point crying about Gabriel slipping, that’s exactly the type of opportunity those tactics set out to capitalise on. They sat deep and absorbed our pretty impotent pressure from the first whistle. It’s hardly a unique tactic is it ffs, unless you’ve only just started watching the game….which seems possible. So, if that wasn’t Amorim’s deliberate tactic, what do you think was?
As for “sitting in and praying we don’t score”, that’s a bullshit description. You sit in, limit chances by having honed your game plan and take your chances when they come. They did exactly what the Geordies did, which is worrying because they’re not as good a side.
The no end of “sitters” you’ve been banging on about since Sunday, turns out to be the same 5 or 6 (you use both figures in your last post, but never mind) that the rest of us saw, so hardly an avalanche. In fact, if we use 5 as the figure (I’ll discount the penalty and say that we played roughly 130 minutes, including the various bits of injury time), then that’s a serious scoring chance every 26 minutes. Hardly having them hanging on for dear life and tearing Amorim’s game plan apart was it?
You’re upset we lost, we all are, but don’t lose your grip on reality. Our failure in the two games is a reflection on us, not on the luck of the two sides that beat us. They both came with a plan and their plans worked.
Btw, have you watched the Parma CWC Final? Let me know what you think our tactic was.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
1. Havertz had two clear cut chances. Rice’s effort you’ll see in every game you watch. De Ligt got to the ball on the line before Trossard. Gabriel scored with a deflected shot. That’s it. No, I don’t think that’s normal in over 2 hours of football, I think it’s scant return.
2. You still haven’t told me what you think Amorim’s game plan was. Looks as though you’re ducking the question. Any chance of an answer?
3. Have you ever watched our CWC Final against Parma? If so, what game plan did we use? You seem to be ducking this question too.
Alright I admit it. Amorim is a tactical genius. It wasn’t luck which saw them win through. It was a genius ploy to allow us to dominate them and create 6 clear cut chances. 5 of which we missed. Their goal came from a freak slip by Gabriel. They had another breakaway in extra time. One! In over 60 minutes of football. Again. Another tactical masterpiece. I’m staggered that we even took them to extra time. I’m also staggered how he thought up a ploy to play a low block when going down to ten men and to pray that we didn’t take any of our chances. Literally this is Manager of the Year material.
The reality (which you know full well) is that he lucked out in a game where we missed 5 clear cut chances. They scored a breakaway from a slip when it was 11 v 11. Did they deserve to win the game. Yes and no. We were not outthought if you think sitting in and praying we don’t score is the tactical plan.
Ok, one more try.
What do you think was Amorim’s game plan, if you don’t think they set out to sit deep and take the breakaway opportunities which came their way? No point crying about Gabriel slipping, that’s exactly the type of opportunity those tactics set out to capitalise on. They sat deep and absorbed our pretty impotent pressure from the first whistle. It’s hardly a unique tactic is it ffs, unless you’ve only just started watching the game….which seems possible. So, if that wasn’t Amorim’s deliberate tactic, what do you think was?
As for “sitting in and praying we don’t score”, that’s a bullshit description. You sit in, limit chances by having honed your game plan and take your chances when they come. They did exactly what the Geordies did, which is worrying because they’re not as good a side.
The no end of “sitters” you’ve been banging on about since Sunday, turns out to be the same 5 or 6 (you use both figures in your last post, but never mind) that the rest of us saw, so hardly an avalanche. In fact, if we use 5 as the figure (I’ll discount the penalty and say that we played roughly 130 minutes, including the various bits of injury time), then that’s a serious scoring chance every 26 minutes. Hardly having them hanging on for dear life and tearing Amorim’s game plan apart was it?
You’re upset we lost, we all are, but don’t lose your grip on reality. Our failure in the two games is a reflection on us, not on the luck of the two sides that beat us. They both came with a plan and their plans worked.
Btw, have you watched the Parma CWC Final? Let me know what you think our tactic was.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
1. Havertz had two clear cut chances. Rice’s effort you’ll see in every game you watch. De Ligt got to the ball on the line before Trossard. Gabriel scored with a deflected shot. That’s it. No, I don’t think that’s normal in over 2 hours of football, I think it’s scant return.
2. You still haven’t told me what you think Amorim’s game plan was. Looks as though you’re ducking the question. Any chance of an answer?
3. Have you ever watched our CWC Final against Parma? If so, what game plan did we use? You seem to be ducking this question too.
Amorim played a low block which we negated by creating 6 clear cut chances.
Yes I did. Live. I recall them hitting the post and Seaman making a good save early on. Once we scored I can’t recall them creating anything clear cut. Unlike the other night where a mistake gifted them their only goal and we created all the chances throughout the game.
What do you think was Amorim’s game plan, if you don’t think they set out to sit deep and take the breakaway opportunities which came their way? No point crying about Gabriel slipping, that’s exactly the type of opportunity those tactics set out to capitalise on. They sat deep and absorbed our pretty impotent pressure from the first whistle. It’s hardly a unique tactic is it ffs, unless you’ve only just started watching the game….which seems possible. So, if that wasn’t Amorim’s deliberate tactic, what do you think was?
As for “sitting in and praying we don’t score”, that’s a bullshit description. You sit in, limit chances by having honed your game plan and take your chances when they come. They did exactly what the Geordies did, which is worrying because they’re not as good a side.
The no end of “sitters” you’ve been banging on about since Sunday, turns out to be the same 5 or 6 (you use both figures in your last post, but never mind) that the rest of us saw, so hardly an avalanche. In fact, if we use 5 as the figure (I’ll discount the penalty and say that we played roughly 130 minutes, including the various bits of injury time), then that’s a serious scoring chance every 26 minutes. Hardly having them hanging on for dear life and tearing Amorim’s game plan apart was it?
You’re upset we lost, we all are, but don’t lose your grip on reality. Our failure in the two games is a reflection on us, not on the luck of the two sides that beat us. They both came with a plan and their plans worked.
Btw, have you watched the Parma CWC Final? Let me know what you think our tactic was.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
1. Havertz had two clear cut chances. Rice’s effort you’ll see in every game you watch. De Ligt got to the ball on the line before Trossard. Gabriel scored with a deflected shot. That’s it. No, I don’t think that’s normal in over 2 hours of football, I think it’s scant return.
2. You still haven’t told me what you think Amorim’s game plan was. Looks as though you’re ducking the question. Any chance of an answer?
3. Have you ever watched our CWC Final against Parma? If so, what game plan did we use? You seem to be ducking this question too.
Amorim played a low block which we negated by creating 6 clear cut chances.
Yes I did. Live. I recall them hitting the post and Seaman making a good save early on. Once we scored I can’t recall them creating anything clear cut. Unlike the other night where a mistake gifted them their only goal and we created all the chances throughout the game.
So Amorim had a game plan to sit deep and hit us when the opportunity arose….a low block in the modern parlance. Exactly and his plan worked. If you think any team using those tactics won’t face a handful of chances against them in 2 hours of football, then you need to watch more games or follow another sport.
Were you drunk when watching the Parma game live? We set out to defend from minute one and after nicking the goal had our backs to the wall. I can recall chances they had 30 years later.
I’m out now. Annoyed at allowing myself to get drawn in to another of your circuitous, ill informed, bad faith arguments. I need to learn to ignore bollocks posts and obvious wum’s.
Why is it so low. Because ultimately the players are not good enough, even a confident havertz isn't a first choice for a club with title ambitions, at best a bench option, and ultimately because the manager has changed the style and refused to address glaring weaknesses. It all stems from the limitations of one man.
So 5 clear cut chances plus a goal scored by Gabriel is evidence of their tactical masterclass working? No it isn’t. It’s evidence of riding your luck and relying on our slip for their goal. How long have You watched football? Do you think 6 clear cut chances is normal in a game? I think we dominated them but simply couldn’t finish our dinner. I’m angry but I’m not giving their manager any credit. They lucked out. Simple as that.
1. Havertz had two clear cut chances. Rice’s effort you’ll see in every game you watch. De Ligt got to the ball on the line before Trossard. Gabriel scored with a deflected shot. That’s it. No, I don’t think that’s normal in over 2 hours of football, I think it’s scant return.
2. You still haven’t told me what you think Amorim’s game plan was. Looks as though you’re ducking the question. Any chance of an answer?
3. Have you ever watched our CWC Final against Parma? If so, what game plan did we use? You seem to be ducking this question too.
Amorim played a low block which we negated by creating 6 clear cut chances.
Yes I did. Live. I recall them hitting the post and Seaman making a good save early on. Once we scored I can’t recall them creating anything clear cut. Unlike the other night where a mistake gifted them their only goal and we created all the chances throughout the game.
So Amorim had a game plan to sit deep and hit us when the opportunity arose….a low block in the modern parlance. Exactly and his plan worked. If you think any team using those tactics won’t face a handful of chances against them in 2 hours of football, then you need to watch more games or follow another sport.
Were you drunk when watching the Parma game live? We set out to defend from minute one and after nicking the goal had our backs to the wall. I can recall chances they had 30 years later.
I’m out now. Annoyed at allowing myself to get drawn in to another of your circuitous, ill informed, bad faith arguments. I need to learn to ignore bollocks posts and obvious wum’s.
I suggest you go back and rewatch the Parma game. Or at least a highlights package. As I have told you already. After we scored they created nothing, unless you are counting shots from distance and corners. We literally snuffed out anything they attempted to create. It was a tactical master class from GG. Amorim did nothing the other night other than get lucky based on our own ineptitude. Now I would appreciate it if you can the WUM chat when you are losing argument after argument.
1. Havertz had two clear cut chances. Rice’s effort you’ll see in every game you watch. De Ligt got to the ball on the line before Trossard. Gabriel scored with a deflected shot. That’s it. No, I don’t think that’s normal in over 2 hours of football, I think it’s scant return.
2. You still haven’t told me what you think Amorim’s game plan was. Looks as though you’re ducking the question. Any chance of an answer?
3. Have you ever watched our CWC Final against Parma? If so, what game plan did we use? You seem to be ducking this question too.
Amorim played a low block which we negated by creating 6 clear cut chances.
Yes I did. Live. I recall them hitting the post and Seaman making a good save early on. Once we scored I can’t recall them creating anything clear cut. Unlike the other night where a mistake gifted them their only goal and we created all the chances throughout the game.
So Amorim had a game plan to sit deep and hit us when the opportunity arose….a low block in the modern parlance. Exactly and his plan worked. If you think any team using those tactics won’t face a handful of chances against them in 2 hours of football, then you need to watch more games or follow another sport.
Were you drunk when watching the Parma game live? We set out to defend from minute one and after nicking the goal had our backs to the wall. I can recall chances they had 30 years later.
I’m out now. Annoyed at allowing myself to get drawn in to another of your circuitous, ill informed, bad faith arguments. I need to learn to ignore bollocks posts and obvious wum’s.
I suggest you go back and rewatch the Parma game. Or at least a highlights package. As I have told you already. After we scored they created nothing, unless you are counting shots from distance and corners. We literally snuffed out anything they attempted to create. It was a tactical master class from GG. Amorim did nothing the other night other than get lucky based on our own ineptitude. Now I would appreciate it if you can the WUM chat when you are losing argument after argument.
It’s at times like this that I regret the wanker emoticon being removed from the forum.
Why is it so low. Because ultimately the players are not good enough, even a confident havertz isn't a first choice for a club with title ambitions, at best a bench option, and ultimately because the manager has changed the style and refused to address glaring weaknesses. It all stems from the limitations of one man.
I know you’re a wum mantis, but you wind up the clowns, so that’s ok.
Is it Limerick talking about confidence? I’ve no doubt confidence will be on the floor, but it’s exactly as you say, we’ve got too many bang average or inept players in the squad. For me, Havertz wouldn’t be on the bench, because he wouldn’t be at the club. An awful footballer with no redeeming features and I was fucking horrified when we bought him.
Still, I’ll say it again, it’s not his fault that he’s at the club, it’s entirely on Legohead. As are, as you say, the rest of the misfits and sub standard dross in the squad. Oh well, never mind, it only cost the thick end of £800 million.
) that if we didn't win silverware by the end of 24-25 season then Arteta is underachieving:
