Yesterdays defeat I feel gives the need to dispel the myth that this crop of players are potential title winners or even capable of sustaining a serious title challenge. The fact is they are almost without exception, no more than impostors of the legends that filled those positions in previous Arsenal title winning teams.
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
MYTHS AND LEGENDS
sid
man u and liverpool can say the exact same thing.
we were lucky to have seen the players we had back then in there prime but this will never happen to us again so we have to make do with what we have, lets face facts here the club doesnt have any money so we are stuck with what we have for a couple of more seasons at least.
man u and liverpool can say the exact same thing.
we were lucky to have seen the players we had back then in there prime but this will never happen to us again so we have to make do with what we have, lets face facts here the club doesnt have any money so we are stuck with what we have for a couple of more seasons at least.
Agreed. Sid, you seem to be harking back to era which is gone & can not be recaptured. Of course our current squad is not on the same level as the 03/04 or 97/98 squads but this was arguably the most brilliant, successful period in Arsenal's history. A number of decisions made by the club since then have meant we no longer have the resources to attract players of a similar level but i'm sure in the future that will change. We by no means have a bad squad & we also have no god-given right to win silverware every year.REBEL GOONER wrote:we were lucky to have seen the players we had back then in there prime but this will never happen to us again so we have to make do with what we have
Of course it's a frustrating situation but this is where we are at the moment so let's not have unrealistic expectations, stop holding them up against the invincibles & see where we end up...
-
Bring Back Pires
- Posts: 2977
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:23 pm
Yeah, it didn't look like the performance of potential league champions.
But neither did Chelsea's at Wigan or Villa, or Man Utd at Burnley or against Sunderland, and one of those two sides may also lift the trophy.
It's a relatively wide open race this year, and I don't think we're out of it yet. Obviously a win next Sunday would be a step in the right direction, but a draw wouldn't be the end of the world either.
But neither did Chelsea's at Wigan or Villa, or Man Utd at Burnley or against Sunderland, and one of those two sides may also lift the trophy.
It's a relatively wide open race this year, and I don't think we're out of it yet. Obviously a win next Sunday would be a step in the right direction, but a draw wouldn't be the end of the world either.
-
Its Up 4 Grabs Now
- Posts: 4701
- Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:08 pm
Not that I totally disagree with your overall point Sid but there’s a few examples of maybe tailoring facts (not suggesting intentionally or anything) to support your argument.
For e.g. all the CBs you mentioned (including Campbell, albeit to a much lesser extent) played their peak years with us in teams that were much more defensively set-up as a whole. Teams that defended as a unit much more than this one does.
More so though, you’ve taken the best players from over a period of at least 2 generations - ie including O’Leary and Campbell, or Smudger and Henry in the same lists - and then compared them to the players (good & bad) we have from our one current crop. Obviously if you’re only going to select the very best from previous teams then the likes of Diaby, Denilson etc aren’t gonna compare favourably. But the teams/squads those greats played in had their fair share of average & even shite players too. Either you compare the best with the best or the respective 1st teams/squads as a whole.
May well be you end up with a similar result, especially where the 2002-2004 team is concerned but you’re talking about one of the greatest club sides ever. You don’t necessarily have to be every bit as good as that side was to win the league - if you did no team would have won it before or since! You just have to be better than the other sides you’re competing with that season. In truth we’re probably not, but if we’re talking about whether this side has a chance to win the league that’s the comparisons we should be making - with the Utd/Chavs of this season, not some contrived cross-section of the very best from our best teams of years gone by.
For e.g. all the CBs you mentioned (including Campbell, albeit to a much lesser extent) played their peak years with us in teams that were much more defensively set-up as a whole. Teams that defended as a unit much more than this one does.
More so though, you’ve taken the best players from over a period of at least 2 generations - ie including O’Leary and Campbell, or Smudger and Henry in the same lists - and then compared them to the players (good & bad) we have from our one current crop. Obviously if you’re only going to select the very best from previous teams then the likes of Diaby, Denilson etc aren’t gonna compare favourably. But the teams/squads those greats played in had their fair share of average & even shite players too. Either you compare the best with the best or the respective 1st teams/squads as a whole.
May well be you end up with a similar result, especially where the 2002-2004 team is concerned but you’re talking about one of the greatest club sides ever. You don’t necessarily have to be every bit as good as that side was to win the league - if you did no team would have won it before or since! You just have to be better than the other sides you’re competing with that season. In truth we’re probably not, but if we’re talking about whether this side has a chance to win the league that’s the comparisons we should be making - with the Utd/Chavs of this season, not some contrived cross-section of the very best from our best teams of years gone by.
-
CEBS_Gooner
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:40 pm
the problem for me was the air of predictability within the game. From the fact that the weather conditions mirrored the stoke game, we were up north, lost players, international break and also the fact that the rado 5 live commentator was a wanker.
But that doesnt make it any better or give us the excuse to loose, but what i find annoying is the doom omngering that can go on after any loss, we could go on a 9 game winning streak and people may think we are destined to win.
However for myself i have always maintained that as long as we are within around 5/6 points of it after our fuck off of a fixture list at the end of january/ Feb then we have a great chance to go all the way and maybe win.
But that doesnt make it any better or give us the excuse to loose, but what i find annoying is the doom omngering that can go on after any loss, we could go on a 9 game winning streak and people may think we are destined to win.
However for myself i have always maintained that as long as we are within around 5/6 points of it after our fuck off of a fixture list at the end of january/ Feb then we have a great chance to go all the way and maybe win.
-
Radford149
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 8:47 pm
Re: MYTHS AND LEGENDS
[quote="goonersid"]Yesterdays defeat I feel gives the need to dispel the myth that this crop of players are potential title winners or even capable of sustaining a serious title challenge. The fact is they are almost without exception, no more than impostors of the legends that filled those positions in previous Arsenal title winning teams.
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
Re: MYTHS AND LEGENDS
[quote="Radford149"][quote="goonersid"]Yesterdays defeat I feel gives the need to dispel the myth that this crop of players are potential title winners or even capable of sustaining a serious title challenge. The fact is they are almost without exception, no more than impostors of the legends that filled those positions in previous Arsenal title winning teams.
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
-
Radford149
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 8:47 pm
Re: MYTHS AND LEGENDS
[quote="donaldo"][quote="Radford149"][quote="goonersid"]Yesterdays defeat I feel gives the need to dispel the myth that this crop of players are potential title winners or even capable of sustaining a serious title challenge. The fact is they are almost without exception, no more than impostors of the legends that filled those positions in previous Arsenal title winning teams.
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
Lets have a look and see just what I mean.
I won’t even even touch on the goalkeeping, as this is a no brainer that even the most deluded of rosetinters could not make a case for.
The back 4, now I like Vermalen but would he play in a team that had O’Leary, Adams, Bould, Keown or even Campbell at its disposal? I think not. In fact the growing opinion that Gallas and Vermalen are an excellent partnership, is somewhat puzzling, yes they are a better pairing than what we have had for a while, but we are still shipping goals and conceding for fun from set pieces. Maybe Vermalen with someone else would form the pairing required, but it won’t be with Gallas, who I don’t think is a Premiership centre half, Mourinho recognised this and that’s why he was moved to left back. The fact is Willy and conceding goals from set pieces go hand in hand it, doesn’t seem to matter who he is paired with the problem hasn’t gone away.
The full backs, Dixon and Winterburn / Ralph and Cashley or Sagna and Clichy I know who I would feel most confident with, I’ll give you a clue “there’s not a Frenchman in sightâ€
[quote="REBEL GOONER"]sid
man u and liverpool can say the exact same thing.
we were lucky to have seen the players we had back then in there prime but this will never happen to us again so we have to make do with what we have, lets face facts here the club doesnt have any money so we are stuck with what we have for a couple of more seasons at least.[/quote]
Why can the same manager in 2009 not build a side like the one he did in 1998 - his budget back then was hardly any different. We had 38000 gates and were dwarfed by the Mancs and the top foreign sides when it came to the really big money deals. This was still true in the days of the invincibles - whilst the Mancs could toss around £20m - £30m fees for the likes of Horseface, Ferdinand and Veron we selected a handful of quality players available for fees of less than half of that (Overmars, Petit, Vieira, Lauren, Edu etc etc)
The club took their own decision to cripple us with debt repayments for a term of 17 years with a possible shorter term based on refinancing the debt through the sale of existing property. The manager was fully in support of this and the club maintained that we would still be competing with "Europe's elite"......I don't remember having my expectations managed down to "well we'll be OK in 10 years just stay patient"
He paid less than 10 million for the combined signings of Vieira and Petit, where as these days he is happy to spend £5m on the likes of Ramsey who might be good one day. His own policy has changed, not the financial stature of the club relative to its competitors.
man u and liverpool can say the exact same thing.
we were lucky to have seen the players we had back then in there prime but this will never happen to us again so we have to make do with what we have, lets face facts here the club doesnt have any money so we are stuck with what we have for a couple of more seasons at least.[/quote]
Why can the same manager in 2009 not build a side like the one he did in 1998 - his budget back then was hardly any different. We had 38000 gates and were dwarfed by the Mancs and the top foreign sides when it came to the really big money deals. This was still true in the days of the invincibles - whilst the Mancs could toss around £20m - £30m fees for the likes of Horseface, Ferdinand and Veron we selected a handful of quality players available for fees of less than half of that (Overmars, Petit, Vieira, Lauren, Edu etc etc)
The club took their own decision to cripple us with debt repayments for a term of 17 years with a possible shorter term based on refinancing the debt through the sale of existing property. The manager was fully in support of this and the club maintained that we would still be competing with "Europe's elite"......I don't remember having my expectations managed down to "well we'll be OK in 10 years just stay patient"
He paid less than 10 million for the combined signings of Vieira and Petit, where as these days he is happy to spend £5m on the likes of Ramsey who might be good one day. His own policy has changed, not the financial stature of the club relative to its competitors.
Is this the same team that has scored more goals so far than any of the teams you mentioned? They must be complete ass!
Why compare anyway? We had great teams in the past, but incase you forgot we also had shit teams in the past.
Why is everyone so fucking negative? Most fans in the world would chop off their right arms to see some of the football we play, but for some this isn't good enough. They want Wenger sacked or millions of pounds to be spent on new players like Cana, who is obviously sooo good that he ended up at the mighty world conquering Sunderland.
We have one bad game and its the end of the world. Some of you should look up the word fan because I really don't think you understand it.
Why compare anyway? We had great teams in the past, but incase you forgot we also had shit teams in the past.
Why is everyone so fucking negative? Most fans in the world would chop off their right arms to see some of the football we play, but for some this isn't good enough. They want Wenger sacked or millions of pounds to be spent on new players like Cana, who is obviously sooo good that he ended up at the mighty world conquering Sunderland.
We have one bad game and its the end of the world. Some of you should look up the word fan because I really don't think you understand it.
It’s a disappointment, on a good day we would have scored 3 or 4, but it’s not a disaster. The key thing is for team morale to survive, and for the players to show character and determination in the next game, as they did after previous setbacks this season.
The referee’s approach to managing the game also played a significant part, allowing some highly physical play, and disregarding at least one incident that might have led many referees to award a penalty. This favoured Sunderland’s game plan, which was to defend in depth and disrupt our attack with ‘robust’ tackling.
Not that I am alleging deliberate favouritism. We should have the ability to deal with teams using these tactics. However, I was slightly sickened to see the overt level of chummy familiarity shown by the referee towards one of the Sunderland players when the teams left the field at half time. I feel that to be fair and objective requires referees to show detachment, and this was not evident in the referee’s behaviour.
What was also demonstrated is that our attacking style of play relies for its success on scoring several more than we concede. When we are unable to field our best attacking side, we become vulnerable to teams who are set up to defend in depth, and who can hold onto a single goal lead.
So for most of the match we looked composed and had much of the posession, but didn’t show our usual level of enegy, and couldn’t sufficiently disrupt their defence to score. When, in the last 10 minutes or so, we had a more actively attacking lineup, the chances came much more frequently, and we were denied a very credible appeal for a penalty.
As for World Cup football, not really interested. See you at the Standard Liege game, but probably not at the Chelsea match because I cant get a ticket.
The referee’s approach to managing the game also played a significant part, allowing some highly physical play, and disregarding at least one incident that might have led many referees to award a penalty. This favoured Sunderland’s game plan, which was to defend in depth and disrupt our attack with ‘robust’ tackling.
Not that I am alleging deliberate favouritism. We should have the ability to deal with teams using these tactics. However, I was slightly sickened to see the overt level of chummy familiarity shown by the referee towards one of the Sunderland players when the teams left the field at half time. I feel that to be fair and objective requires referees to show detachment, and this was not evident in the referee’s behaviour.
What was also demonstrated is that our attacking style of play relies for its success on scoring several more than we concede. When we are unable to field our best attacking side, we become vulnerable to teams who are set up to defend in depth, and who can hold onto a single goal lead.
So for most of the match we looked composed and had much of the posession, but didn’t show our usual level of enegy, and couldn’t sufficiently disrupt their defence to score. When, in the last 10 minutes or so, we had a more actively attacking lineup, the chances came much more frequently, and we were denied a very credible appeal for a penalty.
As for World Cup football, not really interested. See you at the Standard Liege game, but probably not at the Chelsea match because I cant get a ticket.
where did we finish in the champions league last year? what stage did we get to the season before? and bearing in mind if it werent for a moment of madness and a stupid penalty we again would have reached the semi-finals. in my books that is 'competing with europes elite'. i think you wont ever be happy until we're winning the champions league every season, along with at least 3 domestic trophies...SteveO 35 wrote:
the club maintained that we would still be competing with "Europe's elite"......I don't remember having my expectations managed down to "well we'll be OK in 10 years just stay patient"
