THE WENGER THREAD

[g88ner]

I've never been able to watch a replay of the game

Nope, me neither. I've seen replays of the three goals in various forms over the years and I still have the game taped somewhere but I cannot watch it.

i watched the replay once.

It was like watching granny porn - you have to watch it, even though you don't want to and you know the ending. I felt dirty afterwards.

remi - we also absolutely scraped two of our wins - 1-0 against southampton and 0-0 AET against united.

I think if you go back and watch all the finals highlights in one sitting, you might find some interesting trends - like when we played with width and pace we won - Newcastle & Chelsea, and Wenger didn't make any changes or those he did muted the game, liverpool, united, birmingham, chelsea (again), Barca and we lost or scraped it.

so the question could be put, who really won those cups - Wenger or the brilliance of Overmars, Anelka, Ljunberg & Parlour ?

But surely most of the managers work is done outside of the 90 mins? i.e. he signs the players, he picks the team and he decides how the team sets up in terms of formation, style, etc.

So this notion that the manager didn't win the cup, but his players did, isn't fair and suggests someone is trying too hard to discredit the mans achievements.

Like it or not, without Wenger we wouldn't have assembled a team with Petit, Vieira, Anelka, Overmars, Freddie, etc. so I think he deserves a great deal of credit for the double in 1998 and the trophies that followed.

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars

Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

Agreed. Nice while in lasted but long overdue for a change.

On the other hand, I reckon your unwavering support of Wenger is keeping him in a Job, SteveO - Th club probably don't get sarcasm, so they've probably gone your posts pinned up all over Highbury house as proof that Wenger is still loved and worthy of a new contract!

[SteveO 35]

The love the club must feel from me, augie, goonersid, Falkirk goon and Mr T. must generate enough of a glow to light the bowl up for a season

[mcdowell42]

rafa benetiz when he was at the victims supposedly had someone with in the club admin monitoring social media blogs forums at his request,just to find out wht was being said about him,ive often wondered would most club managers do the same thing

[VoiceOfReason]

Not sure I go along with the belief that Henry 'bottled' the CL final ... or any of the other finals he played in for that matter. Personally I think he has been a bit unlucky in finals.

Agreed. Strikers aren't going to score every chance they get, and it doesn't mean that they 'bottle it' when they don't go in.

I don't think the occasion got the better of Henry. I just think he had his chances, and couldn't take them. That's life. Strikers aren't going to score 100% of the time. It's only because it happened in a final that it's highlighted so much.

He probably missed a couple of chances against Fulham back in 2003. Did he 'bottle it' then as well? Or, is it the law of averages that sometimes he scored and sometimes he didn't? For what it's worth, he had a pretty fucking great goals-to-shots ratio.

It's funny that Bergkamp isn't accused of bottling it in the SF against Man Utd when he missed the penalty. If anything, that was a worse crime than Henry's misses in Paris. But I'm not really in the business of slating one of our greatest players of all-time, and I'm more grateful for what he DID provide, as opposed to focusing on the odd occasion in which he didn't.

[augie]

Not sure I go along with the belief that Henry 'bottled' the CL final ... or any of the other finals he played in for that matter. Personally I think he has been a bit unlucky in finals.

Agreed. Strikers aren't going to score every chance they get, and it doesn't mean that they 'bottle it' when they don't go in.

I don't think the occasion got the better of Henry. I just think he had his chances, and couldn't take them. That's life. Strikers aren't going to score 100% of the time. It's only because it happened in a final that it's highlighted so much.

He probably missed a couple of chances against Fulham back in 2003. Did he 'bottle it' then as well? Or, is it the law of averages that sometimes he scored and sometimes he didn't? For what it's worth, he had a pretty fucking great goals-to-shots ratio.

It's funny that Bergkamp isn't accused of bottling it in the SF against Man Utd when he missed the penalty. If anything, that was a worse crime than Henry's misses in Paris. But I'm not really in the business of slating one of our greatest players of all-time, and I'm more grateful for what he DID provide, as opposed to focusing on the odd occasion in which he didn't.

It didn't happen in a final.......it happened in FINALS

[arseofacrow]

It comes down to this...what would you have done differently? Otherwise it just comes down to a frustration cos there's nothing you couldve changed.

It's ultimately a futile debate.

[clockender1]

But surely most of the managers work is done outside of the 90 mins? i.e. he signs the players, he picks the team and he decides how the team sets up in terms of formation, style, etc.

oh i agree, he is a good picker of talent - as I said before, for attacking talent he's very good - just look at Gnabry and the others he's found, van persie, ade, nasri, kanu, wiltord etc.

But he didn't sign the Invincibles - David Dein did, and as to the style and formation, i'm asking the question did it really make a difference to teams that had the Famous Five plus Keown, Parlour & Bergkamp (all inherited btw), plus Vieira, Petit, Overmars, Anelka and later Henry, Ljunberg etc as to how he set them up ?

isn't fair to suggest that those teams had the talent, fitness and quality to manage themselves in game; and when we lost that then we lost the base of our success ?

those same wonderful teams who btw were woeful in Europe - the 1998 Double winners with 14 players with ECL experience didn't make it out of the group stage....

i'm not trying to discredit Wenger, i'm just trying to rationalise 1997-2004 Arsenal versus 2005-2014 and counting Arsenal, and I for one don't believe it was the oil money, stadium or lack of support from the Board that has been the difference.

I think that had he retired in 2004, we wouldn't have had a second thought about the source of his success but after 10 years without a league title, and 8 years after the stadium completion its reasonable to ask the question - was 1997-2004 really more based on Seaman, Winterburn, Bould, Keown, Adams, Dixon, Parlour, Bergkamp and David Dein, or not ?

[clockender1]

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars
Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

what like Anders Limper bought in 1991, and John Jensen after his 1992 EC winning goal in 1992 and 2 years later Stefan Schwartz from Italy ?

George got caught with his hand in the till and we couldn't compete in the League, and Dein wanted him out in favour of Wenger - it was only 8months after Copenhagen that GG got the sack, (people forget that coneman led us to Paris).

I think its a bit harsh to stay GG was stuck in his ways at Arsenal imho.

[arseofacrow]

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars

Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

The evidence is to the contrary mate.

George did adapt in Europe and didnt stick rigidly to a formula. He put out a good team in 1991 and although we had several great chances against Benfica at home in 91 they more or less played around us and eventually took over. When George fot another crack at it in the CWC, he went with a different formation and attitude. We played controlled football and beat many more highly ranked teams, team which at the time contained some of the best players in the world.

I think that proves that he could adapt. Unfortunately, he lost his way in league football and probably more a victim of his ego, as is Wenger now.

[DB10GOONER]

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars

Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

The evidence is to the contrary mate.

George did adapt in Europe and didnt stick rigidly to a formula. He put out a good team in 1991 and although we had several great chances against Benfica at home in 91 they more or less played around us and eventually took over. When George fot another crack at it in the CWC, he went with a different formation and attitude. We played controlled football and beat many more highly ranked teams, team which at the time contained some of the best players in the world.

I think that proves that he could adapt. Unfortunately, he lost his way in league football and probably more a victim of his ego, as is Wenger now.

I think SteveO is refering more to their team building policies rather than their on-pitch tactics and style...

[SteveO 35]

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars

Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

The evidence is to the contrary mate.

George did adapt in Europe and didnt stick rigidly to a formula. He put out a good team in 1991 and although we had several great chances against Benfica at home in 91 they more or less played around us and eventually took over. When George fot another crack at it in the CWC, he went with a different formation and attitude. We played controlled football and beat many more highly ranked teams, team which at the time contained some of the best players in the world.

I think that proves that he could adapt. Unfortunately, he lost his way in league football and probably more a victim of his ego, as is Wenger now.

The evidence is not to the contrary (although heaven forbid you should want to take the contrary view with me eh ) GG was leading us to mid-table mediocrity. His past 2 seasons produced some of the most one dimesnioanl boring football I have ever witnessed - Morrow, Selley, Jensen, Hillier - lets hope Wrighty nicks a goal and shut up shop. At the time United were producing some of the most exciting football around. You should time travel back to the mid-90s because the fans mood at the time was not too different to what it is now......people were screaming for GG to splash the cash and instead he was fucking around with the likes of McGoldrick, Pates, Kiwomya, Lydersen etc. You've simply forgotten how bad that era was. What I do agree with is that GG could get us up for big games in the cup and organised us far better defensively. But we'd become just a cup side....the league was over before it began

By the way - Limpar was bough pre-Sky. Jensen was a terrible buy and he was laughed at in the way our other great Dane is now. Schwarz was reasonably succesful but ultimately GG couldn't hold on to him

I loved GG to bits but Ifolk genuinely forget how poor those final couple of years were and how stubborn the fans accused him of being in the transfer market

[Gunner Rob]

I suppose the difference is that within a couple of years of GG losing his way he was gone.
Wenger lost his way in maybe 2009, 2010? and he is STILL HERE !!

[kiwomya]

I agree. Just because we're all pissed off with Wenger its wrong that his earlier achievements are disregarded completely or simply down to the players. He's just a guy completely unsuited to the post Abramovich era of money buys success; its against his prinicples and rather than swallow it up like Ferguson did and move with the times he sticks to an outdated notion that buying cheap will one day blossom into success. People now look back at the GG era with rose tinted specs, but he went the same way.....achieving great success in the old Division 1 days pre-Sky money buy plucking the likes of Dixon, Bould, Winterburn etc up from the likes of Stoke and Wimbledon, but couldn't cope with the era of £5m+ transfer fees and the influx of foreign stars

Both men stuck rigidly to the formulas that brought early success but were unable to adapt to changing times

Sad really

The evidence is to the contrary mate.

George did adapt in Europe and didnt stick rigidly to a formula. He put out a good team in 1991 and although we had several great chances against Benfica at home in 91 they more or less played around us and eventually took over. When George fot another crack at it in the CWC, he went with a different formation and attitude. We played controlled football and beat many more highly ranked teams, team which at the time contained some of the best players in the world.

I think that proves that he could adapt. Unfortunately, he lost his way in league football and probably more a victim of his ego, as is Wenger now.

The evidence is not to the contrary (although heaven forbid you should want to take the contrary view with me eh ) GG was leading us to mid-table mediocrity. His past 2 seasons produced some of the most one dimesnioanl boring football I have ever witnessed - Morrow, Selley, Jensen, Hillier - lets hope Wrighty nicks a goal and shut up shop. At the time United were producing some of the most exciting football around. You should time travel back to the mid-90s because the fans mood at the time was not too different to what it is now......people were screaming for GG to splash the cash and instead he was fucking around with the likes of McGoldrick, Pates, Kiwomya, Lydersen etc. You've simply forgotten how bad that era was. What I do agree with is that GG could get us up for big games in the cup and organised us far better defensively. But we'd become just a cup side....the league was over before it began

By the way - Limpar was bough pre-Sky. Jensen was a terrible buy and he was laughed at in the way our other great Dane is now. Schwarz was reasonably succesful but ultimately GG couldn't hold on to him

I loved GG to bits but Ifolk genuinely forget how poor those final couple of years were and how stubborn the fans accused him of being in the transfer market

I pretty much second all of that.

Grahams final signings in 1995 were John Hartson, Glen Helder and...Chris Kiwomya. That lot cost us probably more than Graham had ever spent at the club. Helder was so unlike players Graham had gone after previously it was almost unbelievable.

[VoiceOfReason]

Schwarz was reasonably succesful but ultimately GG couldn't hold on to him

Schwarz was still at the club when Graham was sacked. Not sure what GG could've done about it four months after his contract was terminated?

[DB10GOONER]

Schwarz was reasonably succesful but ultimately GG couldn't hold on to him

Schwarz was still at the club when Graham was sacked. Not sure what GG could've done about it four months after his contract was terminated?

I seem to recall that Schwartz had made it clear long before GG left that he wanted to go. Something about his wife or family hating London?