Football 2010-2011

[eFestivals]

Yeah pretty sure it is, certainly not a model of stability. Nor is Citehs, or Liverpools, or Arsenals if they dont spend any money. Or Chelskis. Or Real Madrids, or Barcas etc etc.

I'd disagree about Arsenal - while not buying big players might lose them some of their more fickle fans, the style of football they play gains them far more. There's more than enough neutrals who'd pay to watch footie like that for it to not cause them any problems if they were to go on forever as they've been doing.

But it's clearly the case that Wenger hasn't been spending cos of the debt the club has been carrying - and that now the debts are minimal (cos they've sold enough of highbury) he's happier to spend. But like all managers (except Arry ) he'll still want to see value from his spends, and given what he achieves with kids it's hardly surprising that he doesn't see big spends as necessarily worth it.

[ampersand]

I'd disagree about Arsenal - while not buying big players might lose them some of their more fickle fans, the style of football they play gains them far more. There's more than enough neutrals who'd pay to watch footie like that for it to not cause them any problems if they were to go on forever as they've been doing.

But it's clearly the case that Wenger hasn't been spending cos of the debt the club has been carrying - and that now the debts are minimal (cos they've sold enough of highbury) he's happier to spend. But like all managers (except Arry ) he'll still want to see value from his spends, and given what he achieves with kids it's hardly surprising that he doesn't see big spends as necessarily worth it.

[spwan-of-the-devil]

[eFestivals]

Fab was good enough yesterday and I agree wouldn't have stopped either goal however talented, but I don't think its realistic to have faith in him to be a top 4 premiership goalkeeper, let alone top 1 or 2.

I also agree that they matched Chelsea and would have done better with RVP, perhaps getting a win out of it, BUT my point is that other top clubs can lose a top player and still get results because of the depth in their squads. Arsenal have never really demonstrated that they can manage without RVP or Fabregas.

yep, agree with most of that.

But given that both you and me think they matched Chelsea yesterday aside from the result - and did that without Fabregas - then I reckon they are starting to demonstrate that they can manage without him (and given this summer, it's probably something they'll have to do next season).

If they'd had a full strength squad yesterday it still would have been hard to beat Chelsea, they're just so strong all over the park. I didn't see Chelsea/Shitty a week back, but know shitty won by playing mega-defensive - but that's not a way that Arsenal can play. They tried to play to their strengths yesterday (much as I guess shitty did a week back), and it nearly worked out for them - I don't think it really showed Arsenal as weak.

[eFestivals]

and what exactly would that be?

being in the running each year - which is much more than most other clubs manage by making massive spends.

It's not perfect for anyone obsessed by winning, but then again until a few seasons ago no team could ever really expect to win stuff each year. It's pretty much a new phenomenon.

[ampersand]

being in the running each year - which is much more than most other clubs manage by making massive spends.

It's not perfect for anyone obsessed by winning, but then again until a few seasons ago no team could ever really expect to win stuff each year. It's pretty much a new phenomenon.

Edited October 4, 2010 by ampersand

[Steve P]

always the bridesmaids though. fabregas has won the fa cup once.

andy gray asked a great question at the end of commentary. just how long can wenger go telling players that his way is the right way, without winning trophies.

the stats against man utd and chelsea in the past 33 games speak volumes. is wenger going to be allowed another 5 years of 'being in the running', without winning anything?

[eFestivals]

always the bridesmaids though.

only 'always' for the last few seasons. Utd, for example, have had far longer fallow periods.

andy gray asked a great question at the end of commentary. just how long can wenger go telling players that his way is the right way, without winning trophies.

no, andyt gray has never once asked a great question, and he's even less able to arrive at a sane answer than he's able to to ask a great question.

If Arsenal are such a failure then the likes of his home country's football teams should give up and take up knitting instead.

the stats against man utd and chelsea in the past 33 games speak volumes. is wenger going to be allowed another 5 years of 'being in the running', without winning anything?

It depends what the club priorities are, doesn't it? All the clubs around them are just a moment from being Leeds or pompey.

Not everyone thinks that selling your grannie in the hope of the unachievable is the future of football, thank f**k.

[ampersand]

only 'always' for the last few seasons. Utd, for example, have had far longer fallow periods.

no, andyt gray has never once asked a great question, and he's even less able to arrive at a sane answer than he's able to to ask a great question.

If Arsenal are such a failure then the likes of his home country's football teams should give up and take up knitting instead.

It depends what the club priorities are, doesn't it? All the clubs around them are just a moment from being Leeds or pompey.

Not everyone thinks that selling your grannie in the hope of the unachievable is the future of football, thank f**k.

Edited October 4, 2010 by ampersand

[eFestivals]

that's rich coming from an 'aldershot fan'. what makes you more qualified to question man utd than he has to question anyone?

because I'm not talking ridiculous shit that says "if a team doesn't win anything it's worthless".

If he really thinks that then he can f**k off back to Scotland and get his own footie leagues shut down before he starts down here.

Simple fact: most teams never win anything.

Simple fact: no team can win anything without there being other teams to beat.

He's allowed to ask reasonable questions, or draw reasonable conclusions. One day he might manage to do either one.

[The Nal]

The Last Word with Andy Gray is the worst program on TV. The man is a total c**t. This is one of the few things that ALL mankind agrees on.

[ampersand]

because I'm not talking ridiculous shit that says "if a team doesn't win anything it's worthless".

If he really thinks that then he can f**k off back to Scotland and get his own footie leagues shut down before he starts down here.

Simple fact: most teams never win anything.

Simple fact: no team can win anything without there being other teams to beat.

He's allowed to ask reasonable questions, or draw reasonable conclusions. One day he might manage to do either one.

[eFestivals]

so 5 trophyless seasons and no reasonable questions can be raised? yet you ask questions of man utd most weeks, win lose or draw!

Arsenal aren't claiming to be the best team in the world when they're getting whipped, unlike some others.

Yes, questions can be asked, but reasonable questions from reasonable people. So nothing from that moron Gray.

[brighteyes]

I'm impressed with the Dutch coach dropping De Jong because of his bad tackles. Very sensible decision.

[eFestivals]

a few days ago, Andy Carroll wasn't included in the u-21 squad. Everyone reckoned that meant he'd be in the seniors.

He's in neither.

Meanwhile, Wilshire is in both.

It looks like someone somewhere has messed up.

[ampersand]

andy carroll is under 21? is that what people that age look like in newcastle?

[The Nal]

Bolivian president knees someone in the groin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7N-H3E1-p8

[eFestivals]

off to see the mighty shots embarrass Rovers tonight.

I hope.

[eFestivals]

off to see the mighty shots embarrass Rovers tonight.

I hope.

Damn. A missed penalty for the Shots and a winner for them 89 minutes and 45 seconds into the match.

[eFestivals]

so .... Liverpool have announced their buyer.

And a boardroom tussle to be sorted before it can thru. Gillett and Hicks ain't happy at only getting their money back.

Mind you, another set of yanks. I'm sure it'll all go swimmingly.

[The Nal]

so .... Liverpool have announced their buyer.

And a boardroom tussle to be sorted before it can thru. Gillett and Hicks ain't happy at only getting their money back.

Mind you, another set of yanks. I'm sure it'll all go swimmingly.

[eFestivals]

Does anyone know if these guys actually have any cash?

haven't looked into it, but the Liverpool board's announcement has said it will leave the club debt-free - so from that I'd guess that they either have the readies or anything they might borrow will be a debt against themselves rather than against the club itself.

But of course, just because the buyers might not load debt onto the club when buying it, there's little to stop them doing it afterwwards - as Utd have found to their cost.

Whether the deal is really good for Liverpool it's hard to fathom - the directors who voted for it are RBS appointees, who are there to ensure that RBS get their money back. They might have little interest on how things pan out after RBS have their money.

[sifi]

Does anyone know if these guys actually have any cash?

[eFestivals]

I wouldn't worry about it. The FA Fit and Proper Test will weed out any cowboys in their thorough processes.

[The Nal]

haven't looked into it, but the Liverpool board's announcement has said it will leave the club debt-free - so from that I'd guess that they either have the readies or anything they might borrow will be a debt against themselves rather than against the club itself.

But of course, just because the buyers might not load debt onto the club when buying it, there's little to stop them doing it afterwwards - as Utd have found to their cost.

Whether the deal is really good for Liverpool it's hard to fathom - the directors who voted for it are RBS appointees, who are there to ensure that RBS get their money back. They might have little interest on how things pan out after RBS have their money.

Edited October 6, 2010 by The Nal