Spending money on transfers doesn’t relate to success

Posted on by Tony Attwood

By Tony Attwood

Below is a table that shows the league position of clubs as per Sunday morning, against the net profit or loss in transfer fees over the summer.  The last column shows the net expenditure (a minus figure) or net profit (+) on the summer’s sales.

What it shows is that spending lots of money doesn’t actually generate results straight away.  The figures for net profit and loss are taken from Talk Sport’s web site – hardly the most reliable place in terms of transfer predictions, but by and large not bad when it comes to figures.

The table suggests that the issue of the money spent – the fixation of most journalists and bloggers throughout most the year – isn’t a central decider in terms of where you might be in the league.

In fact if what was spent in one transfer window really affected clubs greatly, then the figure in the first and last column would be the same.

But of course they are not.

(By the way if the figures don’t fit neatly onto your screen, press Ctrl and the minus (-) button at the same time – that usually fixes it).

P W D L F A Pts Profit/loss £pos
1 Chelsea 8 7 1 0 23 8 22 +£8.6m  19
2 Southampton 9 6 1 2 20 5 19 +£40.8m  20
3 Manchester City 9 5 2 2 19 10 17 -£40.3m 4
4 West Ham United 9 5 1 3 17 12 16 -£24.4m 6
5 Arsenal 9 3 5 1 15 11 14 -£75.7m 2
6 Swansea City 9 4 2 3 13 10 14 +£2.4m 18
7 Liverpool 9 4 2 3 13 12 14  -£53.1m 3
8 Manchester United 8 3 3 2 15 12 12 -£133.5m 1
9 Hull City 9 2 5 2 13 13 11 -£20m 8
10 Tottenham Hotspur 8 3 2 3 10 11 11 -£2m 16
11 Stoke City 9 3 2 4 8 10 11 +£0.6m 17
12 West Bromwich Albion 9 2 4 3 12 13 10 -£12m 12
13 Aston Villa 8 3 1 4 4 12 10 -£6.4m 15
14 Everton 8 2 3 3 16 16 9 -£33.5m 5
15 Crystal Palace 9 2 3 4 13 16 9 -£12.3m 10
16 Leicester City 9 2 3 4 11 15 9 -£12.2m 11
17 Sunderland 9 1 5 3 8 17 8 -£8.4m 13
18 Newcastle United 8 1 4 3 8 14 7 -£14.8m 9
19 Burnley 8 0 4 4 4 13 4 -£7.8m 14
20 Queens Park Rangers 8 1 1 6 6 18 4 -£24.2m 7

And when we come to think about it, there are many many reasons why they are unlikely to be.  So should we stop worrying about expenditure on players at all?

I’ve long argued that we should, because expenditure on players ignores so many other factors, such as the players who come through the youth system, the way the players merge together, the ability of the club to sell high and buy quality on the cheap, the injury situation, etc.

Sometimes there seems to be no link at all between expenditure and position – as with Southampton.  They sell their best players, and then are second in the league.  Or Everton – who are currently 14th in the league despite their being the fifth highest spender.

Liverpool’s 9th place is presumably concerning for some of those who support that club, because they were hoping to maintain a top four position, and there was such a large amount of bullish talk by their manager of using the Suarez money to generate two brilliant players to take the club forwards.

Of course new players don’t fit in at once, injuries at different times in the season can affect results, the way the fixtures pan out affects early positions, and indeed with a table this early in the season, one match can change positions – as it will do this afternoon.

But… there is one other factor.  Once money has been spent, it can’t be spent again,  Of course Man U, having spent £133.5m presumably still have lots of cash lurking around which they could spend further.  Their worldwide marketing has always been praised on Untold – and here we see it working again.  And Arsenal are already talking of spending more in January.

QPR could presumably try and buy their way up the league in January, but they already know that if they go down, they’ll be kicked out of the Football League for flagrantly breaking the League FFP regulations in their promotion year.   What they also have to be wary of is the fact that the under-heralded Premier League FFP regs also come in this season – unless the League changes its mind.

But as we go on pondering it becomes ever more clear how many other factors there are here – like how much was spent in the year before and what the reserves of the club are.

In fact, what the figures seem to show is that the notion that a club underspends is not directly related to its league position, and that spending a massive amount in one transfer window does not automatically mean success.

The old Daily Mirror taunt about whether it is Wenger or the board who refuses to spend money, doesn’t really add up in the face of the above.  The issue is who you sell and who you buy, and how many of them get kicked to bits.

The books

Untold Arsenal is here

Recent Posts

78 Replies to “Spending money on transfers doesn’t relate to success”

  1. Very good article Tony, with many good points; Buying in will not guarantee success – we have been saying that for ages. But the BENT Media has to continue tailing about spending as thats how they ‘sell’ stories.

  2. Good article though it’s not really about how much you spend or how many you buy, see spurs and Liverpool, it’s more about manager knowing what is needed. See Fergie and rvp. For this season see Jose mourino and costa and cesc. Result will likely be prem title. Hopefully Arsene will rectify mistake made in jan. Come on you gunners.

  4. Spending money on transfers doesn’t relate to success- based on a sample of 8/9 games. Not on the last 10 seasons where City/ Chelsea, Barca, Madrid, Bayern, PSG have been dominating their leagues for a decade, Athletico, Dortmund and Montpellier being the exceptions for ONE season.

    Ask Ahley Cole, Toure, Nasri, Clichy and Van Persie with all their medals the same question I am sure they would disagree.

  5. I know what your saying Tony but I bet if you did a table that showed final finishing position against net spend over the last 5 years/10 years/15 years there WOULD be a direct correlation between spend and finishing position. In fact bellow I’m going to show exactly that with the figures I have accrued over the years. My figures are probably not faultless but they are pretty goog. Good enough I think.

    what it shows is that Arsenal/Wenger, and only them, would not sit in direct correlation with there net spend, because we have out performed our outlay consistently.

    correct me if I’m wrong but surely isn’t that the biggest reason why we here on untold laud Wenger so much. For that very achievement.

    If Chelsea, City and Utd, through some miracle, (if only) had to survive on a net spend of ZERO over the next 5 years, and Arsenal and Liverpool could post a net spend of £50 Million each over those same 5 years (similar to what Chelsea and City have done to get where they are)Arsenal and Liverpool would be top 2 by season 2019/2020 or possibly earlier.

    So as much as I agree in the short term big spending is not always successful due to many reasons, sustained BIG spending will inevitably bring rewards.

    Biggest net spenders 2001 to present.

    Chelsea

    Man City

    Man Utd

    Liverpool

    Arsenal

    Spurs

    It is no coincidence that the top 3 spenders are THE ONLY TEAMS to of won the PL during that period, EXCEPT FOR ARSENAL. But as we all know, even we, eventually just couldn’t continue to overcome such differentials in net spend.

    Then we have the 4th 5th and 6th biggest spenders who basically occupy the 4th 5th and 6th spot every season, baring the odd anomaly.

    So the truth is Net spend IS directly related to success, save the occasional anomaly.

    That is hard cold truth of the matter.

  6. I have to disagree on this one. Would Chelsea and Man City be where they are if not for spening cast sums of money?

  7. As usual, the only blog worth reading, thanks
    Pratt that I am, I often click on other blogs thinking perhaps they may have grown up
    One day i`ll learn !
    Negative blogs like bad news sells, it is partially for commercial reasons that negative blogs get written (i.e. the more clicks the more dosh)
    Good news doesn`t sell
    The amount of money that Leeds spent in the early 2,000`s(semi`s of Europe) where are they now ?
    No matter how logical you are, the next bad result we get “Spend some F**king Money” will echo round the Emirates
    Keep writing it please, but it aint going to change

  8. Jambug,
    It doesn’t relate to ‘immediate success” so the give it now people are wrong.
    However if like you say in the long run you can spend, spend, spend and keep on spending as the owner just pours more money and even some more after that then it relates to success.
    Something we cannot do and will not do as we work only with the money we have made ourselves.

    I think with the new FFP rules we are on a turning point in history and one we will benefit from in the long run.

  9. I’m not sure I understand the point of this in the context of our beloved club. Spending is relative and it’s about squad balance and style of play or the system.

    Having watched the highlights of every game yesterday in a row, one this is clear. We are my far the most lacklustre and ponderous in our play. We lack any fluidity or plan for how to exploit the weakness in the opposition. Bar Sanchez our midfield and wide players yesterday were poor, no movement, no combined pressing, few crosses, few combinations, poor shooting and often poor passing, rarely do we double up like we have done in the past with our wingers and full backs in tandem. Our players are so isolated with the ball and static without it.

    That simply isn’t just confidence, it plays a part but we’ve seen for several seasons now a lack of gameplan and fluidity. And that’s before we then look at out defensive inertia. Although one could argue that if our players were so static or isolated and forced into silly passes or crowds then we’d suffer fewer turnovers and less caught flat-footedly on the counter with too many spaces between out players.

    In short;

    We press poorly
    We attack with little strategy or purpose
    We lack cohesion or combinations
    Even the basics of passing and shooting are poor

    Does money solve that? Probably not. Has the manager been there long enough to ensure better preparation and purpose of how to play….yes, but where is it, where’s the direction and the leadership.

  10. This type of analysis is useless without taking into account historical figures over a acceptable period. What if a club made a cumulative spend of £400m and then nothing the point you do your analysis?
    I will rubish the myth about Mourhino & Fergie in a wink

  11. I think this article is a bit misleading as it looks at such a short period of time. What cannot be denied is the Russian and Arab millions have transformed also-rans Chelsea and Manchester City into the monsters they are today.
    Though as others have mentioned, it is not just about the amounts spent, but what players you spend on and then how you then manage them.
    Our best buy in recent years is certainly Sanchez, but he must wonder what he has stumbled into with the mediocrity going on around him.
    A Mourinho would certainly not put up with the strolling around we have seen this season from Cazorla, Ozil, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Wilshere, Ramsey etc
    Sadly Wenger seems to have lost the plot and we desperately need a thorough shake-up

  12. Minor point…..and not the point of the article, did we lreally lose that much?
    I had us spending about 80 mil on Danny, Debuchy, Alexis, chambers and Ospina, but bringing in around fifteen for TV, say six from the Cesc deal, about ten million from the vela deal…….a net loss or around 49 million?
    Splitting hairs in the context of this great article I know.
    New players, injuries, possibly a new fitness regime, confidence and referees have all played their part, but things will get better, theo will slot a lot into place,and bring out the best in the likes of Rambo and ozil. But with our luck, the minute theo comes in, we will lose sanchez!

  13. Walter

    I agree 100%.

    Please don’t get me wrong my post is in no way a criticism, if anything it is praise.

    As Tony says, just spending big in the short term is in no way a guarantee of success, as has been proved by Spurs and now it seems by Liverpool.

    We have spent big (or at least relatively for us) over the last 2 years and it has reaped reward in the way of an FA Cup win. Will it be enough to win a PL/CL? Well possibly, but unlikely, especially as City and Chelsea and United show no signs of relenting in there spend and in any case still have residual squads worth 100’s of Millions.

    But if we could continue to post 25/35 Million pound losses over a number of season we would eventually get back to being title winners.

    The thing is we cant continue spending that kind of money. I know and understand that, and what’s more have absolutely no issues with that at all.

    The thing is I have, as do so many of us here on UT, so much faith in Wenger that I think we believe even with a seasonal net spend of, lets say, 10/15 Million, that that will be enough for him to get us challenging and even winning the PL.

    If not, well such is life while the oilers are allowed to continue unchecked.

    If, and it’s a big IF, FFP proves to reign the oilers in as we hope, then I will be even more certain that in these less frugal times for AFC we will win the PL sooner rather than later.

  14. Wenger has lost the plot, things need shaking up…….let’s bring in Klopp then after his storming performance in the German league this season.

  15. Reading this is helping me understand what it is we are missing this season. We have th eplayers but something is seriously missing.

  16. Moaners-in-general,

    Please stop being melodramatic. Everybody involved with Arsenal (manager, players etc) all agree that we aren’t great at the moment. We are not putting small teams away in our usual efficient fashion and we aren’t measuring up against the bigger teams especially in the goals department. We outplayed Chelsea in arguably our best game of the season but still ended empty handed. If anyone wants to whine about us being lucky away to Anderlecht, they should in fairness, also talk about our poor luck at Stamford Bridge.

    Our performance yesterday was not bad by any yardstick. People just carried on with their pre- conceived notion that Arsenal is in crisis. We totally out played Sunderland in all departments and won by 2 unreplied goals – both from open play! ALL football goals are either from somebody’s graft or somebody’s fuck up – both of Alexis’ yesterday were from his graft and the fuck ups of others but both are absolutely well deserved on the balance of play.

    There may be something wrong with those Whining about Arsenal in a knee-jerk manner but the club is trending upward.

  17. The issue is who you sell and who you buy, and how many of them get kicked to bits.

    And who sets up the system in which they play ?

  19. It’s true to say that high transfer spending levels don’t always bring immediate success not least because players take time to gel and some, of course, never do.
    Spending over time is a much better indicator because it will include that spending which was undertaken to correct the errors of the past. That’s where the finacially doped clubs have scored over everyone else – they aren’t necessarily better buyers, they’re just more frequent buyers.
    However it’s been proven that just about the most perfect correlation is between salary level and final position in the league. And salary level will often relate closely to transfer cost. You don’t pay a fortune and then pay the player peanuts!
    Chelsea will finish high this season on the basis of their past expenditure levels and the profits they made on selling on some of thoise players in an inflated market.
    But, under FFP, they can only maintain that by continuing to be a club that funds it’s buys through its sales – or by pruducing its own talent. In other words they, like City, have to move towards the Arsenal model.

  20. Success on the field of play rely to a larger extent on correct spending I will think. In the case of our Arsenal, we must remember Arsenal was not in a position to spend big, save in the last two years or so when they bought Guriod, Ozil, Sanchez, Debuchy, Chambers and Welbeck. Good fortunes also go along with spendings. Which means a manager has to first identify if he needs to re-enforce, and is the needed material even available for procurement at the market and at a price the club can afford to pay? Arsenal have tried in the last two years in buying players. They have bought 4 quality players this season and there is a possibility they may add one or two more if it becomes necessary to that from the professional point of view, rather than from the emotional point of view, as being currently agitated for by some hard line Gooners. Currently, we have nine defenders on the payroll of Arsenal in the persons of: Debuchy, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Gibbs, Monreal, Chambers, Bellerin, Hayden and Ajayi. Only two of the nine are currently sidelined with long and short term injuries, with a possibility Gibbs may be joining them in the short term as we saw him limped off yesterday in the Sunderland game. But the hard line Gooners have made it looked as if Arsenal have no defence. Whereas we can bost of having six defenders for selections for any game at any time. The boss should not yield to pressure on this defenders issue, rather he should promote Hayden and Ajayi to his first team as he did with Bellerin, I would adviced. With Walcott soon playing again and Giroud not too far also to bust our attacking options, I think the main area the boss could strengthened is the CDM positions with two new CDMs as Arteta and Flamini are needing to be rested for some games, I am thinking.

  21. Success on the field of play rely to a larger extent on correct spending. In the case of our Arsenal, we must remember that Arsenal was not in a position to spend big, save in the last two years or so when they bought Guriod, Ozil, Sanchez, Debuchy, Chambers and Welbeck. Good fortunes also go along with spendings. Which means a manager has to first identify if he needs to re-enforce, and is the needed material is even available for procurement at the market? And at the price the club can afford to pay? In addition, the manager will hope the player will give good value for money on the field and stays fit on his feet. In this wise, Arsenal have tried in the last two to three years by buying some players. They have in the summer bought 4 quality players and there is a possibility they may add one or two more if it becomes necessary to that. This should only happen from the professional point of view, rather than from the emotional point of view, as being currently agitated for by some hard line Gooners. Currently, we have nine defenders at Arsenal in the persons of: Debuchy, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Gibbs, Monreal, Chambers, Bellerin, Hayden and Ajayi. Only two of those nine are currently sidelined with long and short term injuries. There is a possibility that Gibbs may be joining them in the short term as we saw him limping off yesterday in the Sunderland game. But the hard line Gooners have made it looked as if Arsenal have no defenders for this season campaign. Whereas we can boast of having six defenders for selections for any game at any time. The boss should not yield to pressure on this defenders issue, rather, I advice him to stay calm and please promote Hayden and Ajayi to his first team as he has promoted Bellerin. With Walcott soon playing again and Giroud not too far also to enhance our attacking options, I think the main area the boss could strengthened is the CDM positions with two new CDMs as Arteta and Flamini are thought to be needing to be rested for some games.

  22. It’s not just about spending money on players but how much you spend, when competing with the infinite wells underneath the petro-clubs.

    Lord Alan Sugar the New Labour/Tory Peer keeps on telling those who believe they know how to run a football team that:

    “Wenger knows the market”

    di Maria = x2 Alexis Sanchez
    Luke Shaw = x2 Calumn Chambers
    etc. etc. etc.

    How are Leeds FC doing these days? Remember when they “chose” to “spend spend spend”. That worked out well for them.
    (And the racism didn’t contribute to their downfall either 😉 )

    In case there was any doubt Koeman also proved that it’s possible to shop outside the Special Agents’ bazaar in the PL this summer, at a club that also brings through young players. Case closed.

    Football clubs and petro clubs. There is a difference between the two. It’s not a debate! But the presstitutes try their best to set the narrative for all football fans: Wonga peonage is good, for clubs and players to the same old sharks, sufficiency and independence and having a soul is bad.

  23. Bootoomee
    Like you, I credit yesterday’s goals to Sanchez’s graft. If he’d stopped chasing those neither brown nor their goalie would have made those errors. Brown would simply have, after scuffing his first attempt, taken a second touch to pass the ball back to his keeper. Likewise manone would’ve done the same. Yes they were errors, but forced errors due to Sanchez’s pressing. In that regard credit must go to the pressing player. There are other mistakes such as a defender trying to make a back pass to his keeper without realising an opposition player is lurking behind him. Or a goalie making a poor clearance that goes straight to an opposition player. Yes, mistakes happen that give other sides a victory, and I admit yesterday Sunderland players made mistakes which we exploited. But it’s also important to give credit to the attacking player who forced the mistake in the first place. When Obafemi Martins profited from the mixup between Sczesney and Koscielny in the CC final I don’t think we ever saw headlines saying Arsenal gift Birmingham the cup on a plate. Birmingham were described as worthy winners, and I’ll grudgingly admit had Martins not gambled on that mixup our keeper and defender would have had the chance to clear their lines.

  25. Bootoomee
    October 26, 2014 at 11:56 am
    Moaners-in-general,

    We outplayed Chelsea in arguably our best game of the season ? EH sorry they didn’t even get out of second gear stop living in a dream world

  26. Sorry Samuel Akinsola Adebosin, but you paint a misleading picture of our defensive cover.
    As can be seen with an injury to one of our centre-halves Koscielny, we end up with Monreal, a right back, in the middle and he cannot cope.
    We just do not have an experienced proper back-up centre-half with the sale of Vermaelen, an unforgivable situation to have allowed to happen.

  27. I have just watched both the goals for the first time and they were not as gift wrapped as I was expecting, having seen and heard the comments from the usual media suspects. Both goals were initiated by Sunderland errors but they were also down to the never give up desire and skill of Sanchez. The first in particular required a lot of skill to complete the job.
    Good comparison by AL with the different media reaction to the Birmingham goal. I even recall one expert congratulating the Birmingham manager for his ‘astute substitution’, Martins of course having only been on the pitch a short while prior to the goal.
    .

  28. clockendjim
    Monreal is a left back, sorry to nit pick. Given that he is a full back I think he has coped fairly well. I am actually disappointed not to have seen Haydn given a run out instead of Monreal, has he been injured?

  29. On a short side note…whilst the pundits of this planet, have already condemn us into having no chance in a PL challenge, I took a short look at something. At this exact point in time in last year, The current champions were sitting in 7th place with 16 points, and we were firmly in 1st place with 22. Exactly the same as we have today (assuming Chelsea take nothing out of their game today) and if they get all 3 points all 3 points, its not exactly far from what we have today.

    We are these pundits, “experts” wright us off so quickly??

    Is it because Citeah were playing super football last season at this point? Cant be for sure!!!

    Lazy fools!

  30. The quality or value for money is very much the most important factor.

    Here, Arsenal nearly always over-achieve.

  32. clockendjim,

    “We just do not have an experienced proper back-up centre-half with the sale of Vermaelen, an unforgivable situation to have allowed to happen.”

    Are you suggesting that we should have kept TV against his wish?

  33. 4evered

    I agree it’s debatable we played our best game against Chelsea but we was far far from disgraced.

    Our crap defence kept there free scoring attack down to 5 efforts, only 2 on target and a Penalty.

    They only scored a penalty and on the break when we where totally committed to attack.

    We had more possession and managed 10 efforts but alas none on target.

    We should of had a penalty and Chelsea should of been down to 10 men early on. It is fair to say had the referee done his job it would of been a different game.

    To say Chelsea never got our of 2nd gear is ridiculous.

    yes we lost but we played pretty well and I think deserved a point. But as Wenger said, you don’t always get what you deserve.

  34. AL,

    Nice comment pal.

    You see the usual suspects in the media and our gullible fans regurgitating the same crap. At home to Southampton last season, we won 2-0 with a 1st Giroud goal that was due to a much worse goalkeeper error than any of yesterday’s and a second goal from a penalty that might not have been given on many other occasions. Nobody called us lucky after that game because we were flying in the league.

    NOBODY!

    The only reason why we keep hearing “lucky” and “gifted” now is because of the prevailing media narrative about Arsenal being in crisis (BTW, when haven’t we?). But while it is true that we aren’t at our best yet (as all involved with the club have attested), the narrative is ridiculous with respect to yesterday’s game. We won fair and square and by every yardstick that the game of football is measured.

    Enough with the “Arsenal was gifted …….. ” nonsense. You win by taking your chances. Like you pointed out re:2011 League cup final, I saw no headline saying “Arsenal gifted Birmingham City the League Cup”. None!

  35. Mick, Hayden got injured in training before the Hull game unfortunately. We never get to hear too much about the fringe players injuries…..eg Gnabry, so not sure,how long Hayden is out for. Seems like a constant nine or ten first team squad injuries this season!
    Hope Hayden recovers from whatever it is, would like to see how he does

  36. 4evered,

    Are you sure you saw the game at SB?

    Chelsea won by a penalty and a sucker punch of a 2nd goal (from the much dreaded Costa who was made anonymous in the game up to that point) as we pressed for the equaliser. Would you describe Chelsea as lucky (as our result from yesterday is being described) or are you just another member of the “Blame Arsenal First” club?

    We played very well against Chelsea but lost and no one called Chelsea lucky. We played below par against Anderlecht and won but we are being portrayed as inadequate. We got a well deserved victory against Sunderland and it is the same nonsense about Arsenal being poor. All I am asking for is some consistency.

    If you think that Chelsea beat us by not “even get(ting) out of second gear” then you are the one “living in a dream world”. Or is it the “Arsenal Is Always Bad” world?

  37. I cannot compare the two defenders below, or the two games I’ve seen them play in. But I might as well considering the disingenious, dishonest, insincere and ignorant trolls above:

    Hayden’s performance against the impressive player who has taken Balotelli’s place for Italy against the equally impressive Southampton was far more impressive a game then we saw from Manolas for Roma in the CL this week! Manolas? Meh.

  38. Edure I am sorry I have not made myself clear. My point was that many journalists and bloggers do focus very heavily on how much has been spent in a transfer window. My argument is that it doesn’t tell us anything.

    I can’t quite make out what your second sentence means, but I suspect overall you didn’t quite get what I was talking about. Sorry about that.

  40. Monreal had a better game at CB then the player that MOTD plundit extraordinaire Alan Hansen once said would go on to become one of the best CBs of his generation (Brown).

  41. @finsbury
    October 26, 2014 at 2:14 pm

    “Manolas? Meh” ALLRIGHT!!!!! I couldn’t believe my eyes when we were SO much lined within absolutely Average player!!

  46. Don’t you think Sanchez identified (as a true goal predator would) Browns’ weakness, and pressed him into making a mistake, which he did, and nicked the ball off of him (as he had visions of doing)…hardly a damn “gift”!

  47. As for Mannone (as we know only too well), RASHING at him, causes him to panic and make a mistake (its not the first time), I bet you Sanchez has been shown videos of Mannone…rushed at him and made him try and take a second touch – JOB DONE! NO GIFT!!

  48. jambug
    October 26, 2014 at 2:03 pm

    Ok I was at the game and I grant you we put a lot of effort into it – infact I would say we were playing at almost full capacity and if we add to that the idea that it was our best performance of the season but we did not have a single shot on target I think we can agree it’s not entirely impressive .
    Not sure by what you mean about they only got a penalty ? are suggesting penalties are worth less than goals in open play ?
    As penalty claims go it was an easy one for any ref and much as I hate the chavs a brilliant run from that belgian prick
    by the way There are plenty of refs who would have sent Koscielny off and if it was the other way round we would have been asking for a red
    As for us having most possession well bit of a red herring there as we nearly always have most possession don’t we ?
    They 100% should have been down to 10 men for a horror tackle and the bonus would have been if Arsene put Maureen on his arse with a right hook
    as for the ref doing his job well again much as i love to see chelsea in pain we could have been down to 9 late on with Chambers second bookable offence .
    But really all these could have’s and might have’s aren’t the story of the game and I what I saw was money driven disgrace of a club with an extremely powerful team and a cuntish but tactically brilliant manager playing well within themselves and never really under pressure on the pitch or the sidelines.
    Sorry but i cant dress it up any other way .

  49. Bootoomee – try to not be hysterical and reach for the aaa button every time someone disagrees with you yesterday we got a deserved win if not wholly convincing and in my opinion if we did not have the brilliant (a wenger signing) Sanchez on the pitch we would not have scored those goals he is a gem .
    But there is something clearly missing in the teams psyche at the moment possibly they are effected by the freakish nature of or injuries not sure but it’s making difficult viewing .

  50. “Second book able offence”?
    How could that be so when the first was for a dive by Hazard, the player that everyone saw Chambers man-mark out of the game up till that moment when the PGMOB offical helped him out?

  52. 4evered

    You seem to be seeing it with Blue glasses on.

    I saw it as average game that was fairly even. A game that overall I thought we merited a draw in but didn’t get.

    You on the other hand just want to dismiss it out of hand as a poor Arsenal display that was a stroll for Chelsea.

    Sorry but I don’t see it that way at all.

    I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree.

  53. “Second book able offence”? My mistake it was not chmbers he was booked early it was the tackle by welbeck which I particularly enjoyed but could have easily been red .

  54. I read these comments and one thing always comes to mind , Just how many of the contributors attend the games and how many watch either on T.V or on stop start streams ?. I know that from where I stand on the North Bank I see many things that my T.V watching family and friends miss.E.G. The space that we ignore on the pitch by playing too narrow by having too many players cutting inside and reducing the space and making it easy for teams like Chelsea to create a dam across their 18 yard line and watching our short passing game founder on the rocks of Matic , Terry and Cahill. So successful is this tactic that other teams have now copied it . Anderlecht did it until we suddenly found width for Chambers to cross for Gibbs to get his goal. This in itself was a pleasure to watch but is symptomatic of our other problem with both fullbacks going forward at the same time we leave space for other teams to exploit and catch us on the break despite our usual higher percentage of ball possession we often find ourselves caught out.
    We can moan as much as we like about the money involved in buying players . however the ones we have are more than adequate , they just need to be supplemented and then organised better. Years ago we looked at lower leagues to find players as cover for our weaker positions , now we seem to look abroad all the time to find technical players hoping to convert them to fill our needs .In my opinion it’s simple if you want a winger , go and get one. After Vermaelen went we should have found cover , we bought in Chambers but he has been covering Debuchy , It is also forgotten that we let Ignasi Miquel go at the same time.Whichever way you care to look at it we are in trouble at the back and now with Kos injured are just one accident waiting to happen away from playing the youth team. Hayden may well turn out to be the answer but like all young players he should be eased in rather than thrown to the wolves with all the responsibility that comes with it.

  56. Well spotted Gord, that looks a great initiative….on so many levels. Shame such things are not more widely reported
    I have a connection or two with Luton, the football club itself has always been very good in the community. And now, after getting promoted back into the league, they sit proudly on top of league 2!

  59. Are we looking at this Teddy Sagi Gord ?

    Today, a Mail investigation can reveal that he is the king of the fixed-odds betting terminals that have brought such misery to so many — the so-called crack cocaine of the gambling world. Sagi’s company, Playtech, is behind the ­majority of software used by High Street ­bookmakers where people, often from the most deprived areas, pump billions of pounds a year into the machines.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608016/Exposed-jailbird-pornographer-Britains-crack-cocaine-gambling-machines.html#ixzz3HGJHvbkd
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  60. 4evered,

    Every now and then we people over lecturing us deluded Arsenal fans who wouldn’t see or admit all the club’s inadequacies that are just so clear to them. To each their own but please don’t use the word ‘hysterical’ to describe people who disagree with you or you would be a hypocrite.

    I like how you ascribe the team’s fortunes to the current Arsenal player in form (it’s very gracious of you to point out that Arsene signed Alexis BTW but isn’t the point redundant since Arsene signed EVERYONE of our players?). From your description, it reads like Alexis made a save from our end of the pitch and took the ball to score on both occasions all by himself and also defended and kept the goal to stop us from conceding. Your kind of comment discounts the efforts of a players like Monreal and Chambers who excelled in 2 different positions during the game. It is a team game and while we all applaud Alexis (as he deserves) we need to show some perspective when describing his team mates.

    Your comment on our game away to Chelsea is still ridiculous with your your “not get out of the 2nd gear” nonsense no matter how many words you use to dress it. You are against the use of possession as an indicator of performance (one that favoured Arsenal in the game) but build up attempts on target (that did not favour us) as a measure. But neither of these 2 count more than the other. Teams have won with a solitary shot on target against opponents with 5 or more. All that you have tried to do is dictate to the rest of us the yardsticks that are or aren’t relevant when you could have made it simple by just telling us that the team that wins is the team that you consider to be better.

  62. I didn’t see an Arsenal connection, but the connection does come in from that ForexMagnates article. I suppose it might be interesting to ask about this at the AGM, but the next one is how many months away?

    Personally, I won’t be looking into it. I have no interest in gambling.

  63. @Gord
    October 26, 2014 at 4:07 pm

    I didn’t mean Arsenal were referred to in this link…nor am I interested in gambling in anyway shape or form.

    But many are!

  64. Miscellaneous points from the news, Gnabry and Sanogo are back in training. Gnabry scored a goal against Stoke U21. The game report looks a little unusual, in that there appears to have been no substitutions made by either team, and no cards were issued.

  66. Everton was fifth in spending, they won today (away). Tottenham was 16th, and they lost (at home). Newcastle was 9th in spending, and they were the ones to beat Tottenham. As Mike Ashley has been in the news lately, does this spending include the money going into Rangers?

    Can we get a tie out of the last game of the day? Maybe they can both park the bus and give the fans a 0-0?

  67. I could live with a ManU win today to be honest. As that would mean Chelsea dreaming about being invincible would fall to pieces

  68. I suppose that would be nice as well Walter. However, the end result was a tie of a different flavour. Is Chelsea not keeping a clean sheet a reasonable replacement?

  69. Bootoomee my message clearly says ” in my opinion” so cant see how Im dictating to you but again your reaction to anyone who does not agree with your views seems to be to misrepresent what they say as slight not just on you but apparently everyone on this site – so for you once again here is what i said

    ” if we did not have the brilliant (a wenger signing) Sanchez on the pitch we would not have scored those goals he is a gem .”

    nothing about defending or goal keeping just goal scoring ok so please don’t interpret what I say to suit your own agenda – oh and the reason I mentioned him as an Arsene signing is because people criticise our managers transfer dealings .

  70. Bootoomee,in the Chelsea v Arsenal game

    It would seem that Oscar’s rotational “roughing up” role, has been ignored?

  71. I would never rely on the figures given in Transfermarkt, Transferleague and Soccerbase!

    The differences range from: £75.7 millions, £55.8 million and £62 millions respectively.

    The detail gives the reasons for the differences, between the 3 culprits.

  72. For many years, many journalists, even many of our distinguish readers at Untold, many times like to say “Arsene has lost the plot”. What plot are they talking about? Is there a script given before they take up the job? If yes, who writes these scripts? I certainly would like to have a copy, please.

  73. I’m not sure if this will work but I’ll post it any way. I did it at the beginning of last season to demonstrate to the AAA’s that there’s a big difference between spending money and being a good manager.

    Premiership Transfer Spending 2003-2013 (up to 2/9/13)

    Player Costs in £m’s yrs Pts Gained Average Points per season Net £’s spent per point won Points gained per £m spent
    Team Bought Sold Nett Per Season
    1 Arsenal £295 £278 £17 £1.55 10 749 74.9 £22,697 44.1
    2 Newcastle £188 £173 £15 £1.36 8 374 46.8 £40,107 24.9
    3 Everton £152 £128 £24 £2.18 10 570 57.0 £42,105 23.8
    4 Fulham £94 £69 £25 £2.27 10 462 46.2 £54,113 18.5
    5 West Ham £145 £108 £37 £3.36 7 310 44.3 £119,355 8.4
    6 West Bromwich Albion £93 £57 £36 £3.27 6 239 39.8 £150,628 6.6
    7 Crystal Palace £33 £28 £5 £0.45 1 33 33.0 £151,515 6.6
    8 Tottenham £474 £374 £100 £9.09 10 592 59.2 £168,919 5.9
    9 Manchester United £410 £243 £167 £15.18 10 844 84.4 £197,867 5.1
    10 Aston Villa £235 £113 £122 £11.09 10 508 50.8 £240,157 4.2
    11 Swansea £50 £27 £23 £2.09 2 93 46.5 £247,312 4.0
    12 Liverpool £486 £293 £193 £17.55 10 664 66.4 £290,663 3.4
    15 Norwich City £57 £20 £37 £3.36 3 124 41.3 £298,387 3.4
    14 Southampton £96 £60 £36 £3.27 3 120 40.0 £300,000 3.3
    15 Sunderland £210 £126 £84 £7.64 7 265 37.9 £316,981 3.2
    16 Stoke City £105 £16 £89 £8.09 5 225 45.0 £395,556 2.5
    17 Hull City £45 £11 £34 £3.09 2 65 32.5 £523,077 1.9
    18 Chelsea £768 £183 £585 £53.18 10 815 81.5 £717,791 1.4
    19 Manchester City £708 £204 £504 £45.82 10 588 58.8 £857,143 1.2
    20 Cardiff City £33 £26 £7 £0.64 0.0

  74. Clearly it didn’t work, sorry. Just to give some perspective, the penultimate figure/column is the net spening on transfers over 10 years. The final column is the number of points gained in the EPL for each £million of net spend.

    So as you will see AW achieved 44.1 points per million as opposed to the “best manager since sliced bread” who managed 5.1 points. ASs for Chelski and Citeh, well just over one point per million……………very impressive lol

  75. Bootoomee, no I am not suggesting that we should have kept Vermaelen which was not an option anyway, but that we should have signed an experienced replacement for him. And sorry Mick, you are nit-picking, but I meant to say a full-back, however the point I am making is that if either Mertesacker or Koscielny gets injured that we do not have a proper experienced replacement for them. Virtually every other PL team has more than two centre-halves for goodness sake.

  76. Mike

    Great stats, and thanks for the hard work.

    I, like you, obviously think these stats are very relevant.

    To me they are a fantastic barometer of how a manager gets the best out of what he has to work with.

    It IS an argument that Wenger could possibly have spent a little more at times, but with such a precarious and perilous path to steer he quite obviously, and understandable so, chose the safest course.

    Did doing that cost us a trophy? Well, possibly a League or FA cup.

    Did it cost us a Championship or CL? Highly unlikely.

    Did it save us from a catastrophic implosion had he gambled wrongly? Possibly.

    And that’s the rub. We’ll never know.

    But the fact is some people would rather Wenger took that risk for a cup. I most certainly was glad he did not. I think the former is the standard view of his critics. The later the view of his supporters and those that subscribe to UA blue print.

    But back to your stats.

    Whether you ascribe to the view he should of spent more or not the absolute undeniable truth is, that with what he DID spend (or in fact did not as the case may be) he achieved absolute miracles.

    Whatever you think of the spending, if you cant see that, then you really are a blind man in a darkened room with a bag over your head.

  77. Thanks Jambug. Couldn’t agree more with your final line. AW doesn’t always know best……but he knows more than the rest of us put together!

  78. The table from MIke will appear shortly in a correct form in an article.

    Man Mike this really is awesome!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *