THE WENGER THREAD

[northbank123]

Also looking back at old results from the early 2000s shows that the CL was a bit more exciting than the early walkovers you get today. Understand why the second group stage was dropped because of fixture congestion and the knockout roots of the tournament but it would be interesting now.

[DB10GOONER]

For me, Lehmann's mistake was where we really lost that fixture, even more so than conceding the late winner to Bridge.

How so?

That occurred in the 1st leg - Pires equalized five minutes after.

How best to explain this? Yes, on the surface you'd say Pires equalised, it was the first leg. But for me, the deciding point is that it is a goal that should never have been conceded. You take that stupid self inflicted goal away and we win the tie. I can accept losing to a goal that is scored because the oppo player demonstrated some particularly brilliant bit of technique or blasted in a 30 yard screamer. To be beaten by better skill holds no shame. But to concede a goal because your keeper is an attention seeking idiot that wants to be the hero and thus comes rushing out (totally unnecessarily) like a madman, basically doing a Billy Big Bollocks - that is a goal you should not concede and can't be accepted.

For me the Bridge goal is just a regular goal. He hit it quite well, it went in. I can accept that. But that goal in the first leg was unacceptable and totally self inflicted by Lehmann's stupidity.

The fact the Lehmann then did something just as stupid in the 06 final didn't even surprise me in the slightest and these two incidents (and a good few more during his tenure) are why I will never rate him as highly as Seamo.

[DB10GOONER]

^ Agree, you think of the pedigree of players/teams we've had over the years: Bergkamp, Adams, Overmars, Pires, Ljungberg, Henry, A.Cole, Vieira, Petit, etc. We should have at least two CL medals.

It's disgraceful that our sides from 01'-04' hardly made a dent in Europe: we had enough talent in those sides to retain CL's FFS!

Our failures in Europe from the late 90's through the mid 2000's is a subject I've spent a significant amount of time pondering...Can't wrap my head around it. We never even made a semi-final, that's just indefensible.

One word; tactics.

Another word; Wenger.

CL football is far far more tactical than the PL will ever be. Our crusading attacking free flowing football was easily exposed by managers with a decent grasp of tactics. It really is as simple as that.

[Kvltman]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

[augie]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

[kiwomya]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

I certainly know that it's not bad luck to have been drawn against the "better" sides but you want to win the thing you have to beat them at some stage though don't you? Does it matter if you meet them in first knock out game or the second?

[augie]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

I certainly know that it's not bad luck to have been drawn against the "better" sides but you want to win the thing you have to beat them at some stage though don't you? Does it matter if you meet them in first knock out game or the second?

Agree 100% with you but I was responding to the comment suggesting that it is bad luck that we keep getting drawn against these teams

[A11M11]

Question :- Does it matter if you meet them in first knock out game or the second? unquote.

The extra two games would generate more cash ( prize and gate money ) and co-efficient points. Would have thought that might appeal to at least a few in the boardroom.

[MrT]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

I certainly know that it's not bad luck to have been drawn against the "better" sides but you want to win the thing you have to beat them at some stage though don't you? Does it matter if you meet them in first knock out game or the second?

Agree 100% with you but I was responding to the comment suggesting that it is bad luck that we keep getting drawn against these teams

Surely it's better to beat the weaker teams first thus gaining more confidence and momentum before we face a team like Barca, Real, or Munich? Psychologically, to face one of the giant clubs after scraping through the group stages would not inspire confidence as a player, in my humble opinion.

[DB10GOONER]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

I certainly know that it's not bad luck to have been drawn against the "better" sides but you want to win the thing you have to beat them at some stage though don't you? Does it matter if you meet them in first knock out game or the second?

Agree 100% with you but I was responding to the comment suggesting that it is bad luck that we keep getting drawn against these teams

Surely it's better to beat the weaker teams first thus gaining more confidence and momentum before we face a team like Barca, Real, or Munich? Psychologically, to face one of the giant clubs after scraping through the group stages would not inspire confidence as a player, in my humble opinion.

I agree 100% with this. Accepted we have to meet the big teams at some point. But as MrT points out it is better to meet them later when our confidence might be higher and we have momentum. Nearly every interview I've ever seen with players that have won trophies, the players at some point nearly always point out that momentum was vital on the way to winning it.

[remigardeshair]

For me, Lehmann's mistake was where we really lost that fixture, even more so than conceding the late winner to Bridge.

How so?

That occurred in the 1st leg - Pires equalized five minutes after.

How best to explain this? Yes, on the surface you'd say Pires equalised, it was the first leg. But for me, the deciding point is that it is a goal that should never have been conceded. You take that stupid self inflicted goal away and we win the tie. I can accept losing to a goal that is scored because the oppo player demonstrated some particularly brilliant bit of technique or blasted in a 30 yard screamer. To be beaten by better skill holds no shame. But to concede a goal because your keeper is an attention seeking idiot that wants to be the hero and thus comes rushing out (totally unnecessarily) like a madman, basically doing a Billy Big Bollocks - that is a goal you should not concede and can't be accepted.

For me the Bridge goal is just a regular goal. He hit it quite well, it went in. I can accept that. But that goal in the first leg was unacceptable and totally self inflicted by Lehmann's stupidity.

The fact the Lehmann then did something just as stupid in the 06 final didn't even surprise me in the slightest and these two incidents (and a good few more during his tenure) are why I will never rate him as highly as Seamo.

The mistake he made in the second leg was far more of an influence. Yes it was a stupid decision to come out in the first leg but we equalised and were effectively ahead in the tie.

His poor parry straight to Lampard to equalise in the second leg hit us far harder, we were a goal up and had momentum, and the chavs were struggling, the mistake let them back into the game when they barely had a foothold, and the rest is history unfortunately.

[Kvltman]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

That isn't what I meant, apologies but perhaps I should have worded it better. I meant the luck we have had during the games against the bigger sides, not in drawing them in the first place. I agree that stronger finishes in the group should mean you avoid those sides but also it is never a guarantee.

Barcelona in 2011, had van Persie not been sent off, who knows how it may have gone for us (we may have ended up with a shot on goal!). Milan in '12 we had decisions go against us in the 2nd leg and chances (and yes I accept we were woeful in the 1st leg), Bayern away in 13 we could have won the tie right at the death etc, lots of its and buts but you need to enjoy this luck to win it, you only have to look at Chelsea's CL win to see that.

Some of the luck we had in the FA cup run last season wouldn't go amiss in the CL this coming season.

[markmark64]

Regarding 2004 and whether we should have won the Champions League, on paper and considering the way the side was playing, yes on that basis we should have done, however we would have run into Porto in the final and that was a Mourinho side and we all know about Wenger's record against him

2006 for me was the opportunity lost. A golden and unexpected run to the final, and I'm convinced if either we had 11 on the pitch or Wenger hadn't of taken off Fabregas we would have held on.

As for our chances these days, well they are long odds but I don't think we are as far away as some think. We have shown how we can give the likes of Bayern a game and even recent history shows that teams not expected to win it can make the final ie Atletico, Dortmund. You need a lot of luck as well as the usual (tactics )and I think its fair to say we haven't had much luck when meeting the bigger teams in recent seasons in the knockouts, hopefully that will change.

We meet the bigger teams cos le cock fcuks about in the group stages before the group is won and it is inevitable that we drop points and end up finishing 2nd thus ensuring a tough draw in the knockouts I could accept getting caught making that mistake once but to make the same mistakes again and again is a scandal so before anybody starts bemoaning our bad luck in the draw, perhaps they should ask why we are in that pot to begin with

That isn't what I meant, apologies but perhaps I should have worded it better. I meant the luck we have had during the games against the bigger sides, not in drawing them in the first place. I agree that stronger finishes in the group should mean you avoid those sides but also it is never a guarantee.

Barcelona in 2011, had van Persie not been sent off, who knows how it may have gone for us (we may have ended up with a shot on goal!). Milan in '12 we had decisions go against us in the 2nd leg and chances (and yes I accept we were woeful in the 1st leg), Bayern away in 13 we could have won the tie right at the death etc, lots of its and buts but you need to enjoy this luck to win it, you only have to look at Chelsea's CL win to see that.

Some of the luck we had in the FA cup run last season wouldn't go amiss in the CL this coming season.

not accusing you of being a wenger disciple but the luck angle is not acceptable for wenger with the talent over the years he has had at his disposal.

[SydneyGooner]

For me, Lehmann's mistake was where we really lost that fixture, even more so than conceding the late winner to Bridge.

How so?

That occurred in the 1st leg - Pires equalized five minutes after.

1-1 is a good result away from home in the CL knockout stages, we had more than enough to rectify the aggregate score at home - we bottled it - as we always do in Europe.

One of the biggest regrets of my life is that we didn't do the treble that year...Can you imagine, an unbeaten treble?

It could've easily been done: beat Chelsea in the CL as we should've done and we only have to navigate Monaco and Porto, dump United out of the FA Cup after dominating them like we should've and we play Milwall in the final.

The ironic thing is the same week that saw us crash out of the CL and FA Cup respectively, Liverpool almost ended our unbeaten run and would've done but for Henry's brilliance; probably the worst 10 day spell in our history.

Fully agree.

During those three seasons it really should've been:

2001-02: League and Cup Double
2002-03: League and Cup Double
2003-04: League, Cup and Champions League Treble

[DB10GOONER]

For me, Lehmann's mistake was where we really lost that fixture, even more so than conceding the late winner to Bridge.

How so?

That occurred in the 1st leg - Pires equalized five minutes after.

How best to explain this? Yes, on the surface you'd say Pires equalised, it was the first leg. But for me, the deciding point is that it is a goal that should never have been conceded. You take that stupid self inflicted goal away and we win the tie. I can accept losing to a goal that is scored because the oppo player demonstrated some particularly brilliant bit of technique or blasted in a 30 yard screamer. To be beaten by better skill holds no shame. But to concede a goal because your keeper is an attention seeking idiot that wants to be the hero and thus comes rushing out (totally unnecessarily) like a madman, basically doing a Billy Big Bollocks - that is a goal you should not concede and can't be accepted.

For me the Bridge goal is just a regular goal. He hit it quite well, it went in. I can accept that. But that goal in the first leg was unacceptable and totally self inflicted by Lehmann's stupidity.

The fact the Lehmann then did something just as stupid in the 06 final didn't even surprise me in the slightest and these two incidents (and a good few more during his tenure) are why I will never rate him as highly as Seamo.

The mistake he made in the second leg was far more of an influence. Yes it was a stupid decision to come out in the first leg but we equalised and were effectively ahead in the tie.

His poor parry straight to Lampard to equalise in the second leg hit us far harder, we were a goal up and had momentum, and the chavs were struggling, the mistake let them back into the game when they barely had a foothold, and the rest is history unfortunately.

Whilst I agree the impact of the 2nd leg Lumpolard goal for the chav was huge, but for me the blind charge out of goal was worse. Parrying a shot back into play can happen to the best keeper. Shot comes in, you jump at it, try get something on it. Where it deflects to can be down to luck. But to come charging out of goal like a retarded rhino with its arse on fire is down to a stupid decision and is fully avoidable. My point being that with all things equal, and looking at all the goals scored over both legs only one was down to an individual's rank stupidity and was totally avoidable.