DB10GOONER wrote:And there's the problem with the rose tinters... Read what you just wrote!!! Strong enough?? We were NOT strong enough to win it, that is why we finished 3rd.The team that was strong enough to win it, won it. End of.
(a) Chill out, (b) take your own advice, and read what is written. The league could have been won by any of United, Chelsea or Arsenal. It was won by United, but that doesn't mean we (or Chelsea) weren't strong enough to win it. Or do you think United were preordained to win the league, and that they were just toying with Chelsea and us for the sake of the ratings?
DB10GOONER wrote:Football is a results driven business. "Nearly" counts for sweet fuck all in the real world. "Nearly" got Dalglish sacked at Toon, "Nearly" got O'Leary sacked at Leeds. "Nearly" got Ranieri sacked at the Chavs. "Nearly" got 853 managers in ten years sacked at the spuds.
And this is the trouble with the Doom and Gloomers (or at least some): a lack of realism. You equate Wenger with three managers who had free reign with funds. One (Ranieri) had access to hundreds of millions, but still couldn't win the league. Another (O'Leary) played a part in driving his club into the dirt. And none of them ever won the leagues with the clubs you name (Dalglish of course did at Liverpool and Blackburn). It seems you want Arsenal to sack a manager just because everyone else does. That should work, great idea. I've said this dozens of times already, and I'll keep doing so: Wenger can't be judged by the same standards as other managers until he has access to comparable funds.
The Doom and Gloomers have plenty of legitimate points to make, but you're overstating the case and undermining your arguments. A bit of reason and balance might help (even if it'd be less fun).
We don't have as much depth as any of us would like (because we don't have funds - see above and the many, many previous posts), but it is inescapable that we were very unlucky with injuries: Eduardo, van Persie, Sagna, Rosicky, Gallas, Denilson, and others all had significant injuries. Christ, even Ferguson said Arsenal were unlucky with injuries. And then Toure, Eboue and Song all went to the ACN mid-season too.You mentioned injuries? So then, you would agree we did not have the strength and depth in the squad to deal with those injuries and properly cover those areas affected?? Unlike manure and the chavs who both finished ahead of us if I'm not mistaken...
United by comparison had a very smooth ride on injuries last season (about the worst of it was losing the aged Gary Neville for a while) and lost no players to the ACN - if you look at their squad, the second and third string players aren't that great. If they'd had the injury problems we had last year, they may well have struggled too. Chelsea had even worse injuries than us (plus ACN), but they have the greatest squad depth in the league, and frankly it's shocking that they haven't won the league for the last two seasons.
And if you want to see a really thin squad, take a look at Liverpool's: once you get past Gerrard, Torres, Reina etc, it is truly pitiful, but cost much more than ours.
Squads need to be carefully constructed: even with unlimited funds, you can't just have ten players for each position. They need to get game time, and to feel they can get a game. And they often need to cover more than one position. Which is why Scolari said he needs to trim the Chelsea squad down to 23-25 players.
No-one can predict who will get injured and when, or who will be suspended, or lose form, or get tired. It's all about balance. And you may not have liked the squad players including the likes of Senderos, but players like that are good squad players, even if they aren't really first team players.
Oh look, the "roll" emoticon again, isn't that smart.Bad decisions??
Again, if you actually read what I wrote, I did not say we lost the league due to bad decisions. I said "We missed out by narrow margins, did fantastically well, and but for injuries and bad decisions, could easily have got the four points to win the league, even with much more limited finances than most of the other PL teams". "Could", not "would". And I said there was more than one factor, but yes, bad decisions were one of those factors. The incorrect decision to award a last-minute penalty in the Birmingham away game when Clichy got the ball, thus costing us two points, is just one example.
Not exactly authoritative, I grant you, but Jeff Winter produced a week by week analysis of refereeing decisions last season, in an effort to show that poor refereeing decisions did essentially even themselves out. And by and large, his analysis did bear that out: United were still champions, the top three were the same, as were the bottom three. But there were two significant differences in the table once "corrections" for bad decisions were made: Everton and not Liverpool would have finished fourth; and Arsenal would have finished ten points ahead of Chelsea. That doesn't mean that literally would have happened, and of course there will always be errors, but it does support the suggestion that Arsenal (and Everton) got the bum end of decisions last season. Which is what a lot of us thought at the time.
I don't really see why you have such a problem accepting that luck played its part: luck is a crucial part of success (and failure) in any sport. But it's still just luck.
Again, I don't think I did say that. But since you raise it, I'll comment: having lost Flamini, Diarra and Gilberto, and having a fragile central defence, we clearly need to strengthen with at least one and preferably two signings. But swapping Hleb for Nasri is great, and Lehmann and Gilberto are clearly going downhill quickly, so letting them go is no problem (though I would like someone better than our new George Wood in goal). And I don't think any of us think the squad is weakened with Justin Hoyte's departure. And Ramsey and Vela look excellent, with other youngsters (such as Wilshere and Coquelin) beginning to do well too.I really cannot believe that anyone - optomist or realist - can deny that we are going into this season with a less experienced playing staff than last season.
I'd say we're currently weaker in one very important part of the team (the central defensive area covered by the CBs and the DM) but we are looking good in others (wings, up front and creative midfield). In goal, much as I would like it improved, we're not actually weaker given that Almunia was promoted last year. And despite his limitations, he is doing better than many of us would have predicted.
You state the obvious in saying that football is all about success. That's what we all want. But there is a bigger picture for Arsenal right now, and difficult as the next couple of season look, the longer-term looks very good. And with Wenger at the helm, we still have a crack at trophies, even during the transition. Without him, we'd have missed out on CL and tilts at the title three years ago. Or worse, would have ended up with a Shinawatra style scumbag taking the club over.
