Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News


October 2016
« Sep    

Untold Arsenal offers a total, absolute and unreserved apology

By Dr Billy “the dog” McGraw

There is a fairly well known story in literary and political circles that states that soon after the publication of the George Orwell novel “1984” a British journalist was granted a visa to visit North Korea in order to write about it for his newspaper.   The journalist had a copy of the new novel with him and read it while on his tour and unfortunately left the book with various other odds and ends he didn’t need, in his hotel on his last night, before getting a flight back to England.

The novel was discovered by a member of hotel staff who didn’t speak English, who dutifully handed it over to a representative of the Ministry of People’s Security who found a translator who read the book.

Unfortunately, with no context at hand in relation to English literature, the Ministry misunderstood the book, and instead of reading it as a dire warning of what might happen, saw it instead as a blueprint for a modern state.  Hence, the North Korea as today.

I fear that Untold Arsenal has been caught in the same position.

For over eight years we have been writing about the decline of football journalism and its retreat from evidence into opinion, in which each opinion is presented as fact and the resultant “facts” which “don’t fit” are removed from reports and wiped from reality.  

At the same time the general public are fed endless dross (the transfer rumours are a perfect example) while major issues (such as the PGMO being modelled along the lines of the North Korean state, or at least in imitation of the refereeing organisation in Italy during its time of mass football corruption, while all other major referee organisations have travelled as far away from Calciopoli as possible) are utterly ignored.

As selective in fact as the media in North Korea.

Our aim in making this point was utterly honourable.  We wanted to warn everyone of exactly where we end up when journalism in sport can be used to manipulate and twist reality, ignoring reality, ignoring stories that don’t fit, while feeding the audience mindless triva, endless pap, and a series of stories that have no basis whatsoever in fact.  

Thus we had the notion that England as a team would do better if there were more English players in the Premier League, the notion that transfers make a difference or that getting rid of one manager and replacing with another leads to success, the notion that Arsenal committed the most fouls, the notion that the FA is a decent and honourable organisation, the notion that teams can play in Fifa organised competitions while not being corrupted,  the notion that “it all evens out in the end” etc etc.

The replacement of reality by fantasy model was completed with the introduction of phone-ins, where people with interesting and insightful commentaries never get past the receptionist at the TV studio, as people replicating the mainstream media pap are given airtime.   The results are then discussed seriously by other journalists in other studios, as if they represented an insight into dominant opinion.

That is the model we have seen for a long time and which this site has, I think, been quite good at describing.   But here was where the editorial board of Untold made a dreadful error.

An error because we ignored the fact that once this model of writing and broadcasting about football had become so successful in bewitching audiences that it was the dominant – indeed the only – way of looking at football (save a few honourable blogs like this one) it was a model on public display of how to manipulate reality.  

As a result this type of corrupt journalism once restricted to football and a couple of fanatical right wing newspapers, seeped into the mainstream of writing everywhere.

That was bad enough, but when two politicians who are also journalists – or maybe two journalists who became jobbing politicians (Johnson and Gove) – the men who now run Britain – are journalist politicians.  Men who have seen how successfully journalism in sport can be used to manipulate and twist reality and have now done the same in politics.

Consider this analysis

“They grab media attention by blaring out a big, dramatic thought. An institution is failing? Close it. A public figure blunders? Sack him.”

If that reads like Untold criticising the aaa and its approach to Mr Wenger, actually it isn’t.  It is an analysis in the Observer by Nick Cohen.

It is a reflection of everything Untold has feared – that the model of corrupt media reporting of football has been so successful in grabbing and manipulating the agenda while keeping outside the debate all the important topics, that it could not be long before a bunch of politicians would see it as the way of grabbing power.

And if you think my linkage is tenuous here, try this one.

Johnson and Gove carried with them a second feature of unscrupulous journalism: the contempt for practical questions.

Indeed just as the aaa work in simple single concepts such as “Sack Wenger and Arsenal will win the League” or “what we need is a new centre forward” without any recourse to an examination of reality, so political journalists have now done the same – and with huge success.

As Cohen says, “The worst journalists, editors and broadcasters know their audiences want entertainment,” and that is what they get.   They absolutely do not get a reflection of reality.

Indeed so rapid has been the move into adopting the successful model of football journalism you need only look at Michael Gove’s “analysis” of the situation.  “People in this country have had enough of experts,” he said.   It is the political version of “you can prove anything with statistics”.

The Times, hardly my favourite newspaper, at least did manage to fire Johnson for lying to its readers.   When bluster failed he called the highly regarded head of the UK Statistics Authority, a “stooge.”

Of course politicians lie.  Everyone lies.  But the one thing we used to have, which we could hold onto, was a media that held the liars to account.  A media that looked at what was really going on and said, “hang on this can’t be true.”  The journalists who way back in 1915 helped uncover the match fixing of Liverpool and Manchester United in the first division.   What on earth happened to journalism?

Just as Match of the Day has become a total parody of football analysis, talking up Tottenham and Liverpool, simplistic analyses and one line answers which suggest that the pundits in the studio could take Arsenal to the top of the league with a five minute shake up, so the political journalists have followed the model and allowed the same corruption to develop there – for exactly the same reason.  

It is just so much easier to make stuff up, rather than even ask difficult questions.   As for answering difficult questions properly, no chance.

And when someone else asks and examines difficult questions, it is so much easier to drop in a phrase.  “You can prove anything with statistics”.  “The country is sick of experts.”

Of course we can wait and see which of the 70 odd footballers that are supposedly coming to Arsenal by the end of August actually end up at the Emirates, realise it is not what the journalists and bloggers predicted, and then blame Arsene Wenger for being so slow rather than blaming the journalists and bloggers.    Likewise we can wait for the £350m a week to be spent on the NHS, the cut to VAT, the higher pension rate for the elderly, the improved transport system and the extra money for the arts, science, and farmers.

Inevitably there are one or two journalists in the media still trying to fight the move of political reporting into the model of footballing reporting but it looks like they have lost.   Just as people daily write to Untold heaping the most appalling abuse on those of us who support Wenger and who demand either evidence or logical analysis, their voices are in the wilderness.

So, eight years ago Untold pointed out how useless and indeed corrupted football journalism had become.   We did so because we thought it was right to expose the way simplistic platitudes were being used to replace proper insight, as a result of which many people were being misled.

We thought we might, through endless prodding, change journalism a little bit, or at least make more people aware of the nonsense they were being fed.

At worst we thought that we’d have no effect.

What none of us realised is that we could describe the model of corrupt reporting and “analysis” so well, that the political journalists and then journalist-politicians, would see the message not as a warning but as a blueprint.

Elections and democracy are difficult things because, just as it seems the majority of the people who follow football phone ins, newspaper reporting of football, Match of the Day and the like, all seem to think there is nothing amiss with football.  Now that message has gone further.

Thus elections can be as fair as local arrangements can make them, and deliver awful results.  The 1932 elections in Germany meant that the Nazi Party was the largest parliamentary group in government. Adolf Hitler was appointed as Chancellor of Germany on 30 January 1933 as a result of that election.

Of course I am not saying that Johnson and co are Nazis. I am saying that just occasionally democracy can bring the wrong result.  And it tends to do it when the media is no longer holding politicians to account.

In England the newspapers have been refusing to hold football journalists on TV and radio to account for around 20 years, and as a result we have a world in which all the evidence Untold presents to the effect that there are a number of things seriously wrong with English football are dismissed as “conspiracy theories” and “fantasies”.  Now a group of three politicians have spotted how to do it, and have taken that approach to the mainstream newspapers.

Proper analysis, examination of facts, searching for evidence and drawing logical conclusions?  That stopped years ago in football.  We thought that by pointing this out we would be helping matters.  Instead it looks like Untold has helped the cessation of evidence based debating in politics as well.

Of course democracy is the best system available.   But eternal vigilance is always the price we pay when we have democracy, and a lot of people stopped paying.

From all at Untold, our sincere apologies.  We really thought we were helping, but it seems that just like that well-meaning journalist in North Korea, we’ve given the nutters a blueprint

37 comments to Untold Arsenal offers a total, absolute and unreserved apology

  • nicky

    Sorry, Doc, but having read your post twice, I still cannot fathom out the need for a “total and absolute” apology.
    Maybe I need a stay in the University Hospital of the North Circular Road. 😉

  • gigity1107

    Excellent, but depressing read.

  • The font

    Please can this site stop with the political agenda and go back to football
    As it is unbecoming to be a bad loser.
    In most of the people’s opinion it was right to leave .
    Accept it and move on.

  • Jeff

    Untold you will remain at the top. I like your articles

  • Pat

    Why drag North Korea into it? What do you actually know about North Korea besides what the press, which you freely admit distorts the truth, tells you?

    Let us not miscall any nation, especially the ones that the mighty USA has decided are the rogue states – because we all know they are the ones in the firing line for the next war.

  • GoonerDave

    Democracy is a myth. A way to fool the masses into thinking they have a say, when actually we don’t. If democracy was actually real, the will of the people would always be done. It hardly ever is. We can bang on about voting this way or that, but in reality there will always be war even though 99.9% of the population don’t want it. African children are dying of hunger while I type this, but nothing will be done about it despite the will of the people. Israel receives more foreign aid than countries with people dying of hunger – where is the democracy? Where is the will of the people?
    The best example of all is the doomed banking system which keeps us all in sophisticated slavery and demands repayment of monies which only ever existed as debt.
    Democracy? The greatest lie ever told.

  • Rantetta

    It’s funny (or not); I’ve long thought journos, among others, have sought to turn normalcy into dissatisfaction into hate.

    People spreading hatred have succeeded. Politics, Media, Twitter. Well done y’all.

    I’m glad UA is around.

  • Pat

    Following a tip on another stream of Untold Arsenal, I looked for the news that our player, Alexis Sanchez, has won the golden ball at the Copa America. I eventually found a nice picture from the Metro. As far as the BBC sport web site is concerned, the only news is that Messi is retiring from international football. Accompanied by several pictures of Messi.

    Congratulations Alexis!

  • bjtgooner

    Doc et al

    I know you guys are unhappy at the referendum results, but look, most of your readers come to the site to get sensible Arsenal comments, reports and news; something which is not available on other Arsenal blogs.

    If you persist in writing articles about the referendum there is a danger you will split the reader base even more than the situation at present. Is that what we want – would it be good for Arsenal?

    As I wrote on an earlier thread, it is too early to speculate on how leaving the EU will pan out, also, the EU itself may well (and fairly quickly) self destruct or at least change in a major way – if that happens we are all faced with a very different set of circumstances.

    So guys, I make this comment with the best of intentions, lets get back to football.

  • para

    Come on Untold, it is dangerous to take credit for something that has been worked out and implemented decades ago.

    Media manipulation has been studied for a very long time and has now evolved in to what we have today: a very precise tool to manipulate people, so precise that even those aware of the manipulation attempts are at risk if they let their diligence slip one iota.

    There are many written guidelines that explain exactly how to manipulate and control people. The “elite” have been doing this for generations, and teaching their descendants.

    The German holocaust was only one of the testing grounds(alongside removing the “Gypsies and any remaining indigenous Blacks” from Europe, very few so called “jews” were sacrificed in this, even though “media” likes to tell us otherwise), as was “Communist” Russia, “Apartheid” S Africa and the “Democratic” West, and i would not be surprised if “NorthKorea” is or has now become one of these test areas too.

    I suppose though, one can only talk about what one knows, this is why it is so important to seek out knowledge (there is plenty of it around, and not even hidden anymore because the elite trust that people have no interest in it after years and years of manipulation) oneself and not be lulled by the “official” media presentations.

  • gunner17

    get to your point faster yeah

  • Porter

    Also picked up an injury too according to the Catalan press.

  • para


    They have no intention of helping Africa, because they caused it’s state in the first place, and they use organisations like W.H.O to spread ebola and aids in Africa.

    A little test, check out where the resources in Africa are, then check out where the ebola and aids and other implemented diseases are.

    This biological warfare is just the evolution of the “smallpox blankets” given to the indigenous population of the Americas.

    It has not stopped, just being done surreptitiously, all the while the media distracts with senseless information to keep dumbing down.

    I really fear for the next 2-3 generations of children, who will grow up being drones.

    Before i forget, the book was not meant as a warning, but actually written from a blueprint on how to control the masses and meant to provide an income for the author, said author being very much in the elite circles.

  • Ajay

    The last three articles I have read here is about the referendum barring for the ladies match coverage. I didn’t have anything to say because I am not from there and it’s pointless to join in a debate I have minimal experience. The one thing that I agree with is with what GoonerDave has to say
    June 27, 2016 at 9:24 am

    Democracy is a myth.

    It is, no matter which part of the world you are in. Because if it really worked, then we would all be living in the most ideal world irrespective of which country we live in. And nobody would have had to migrate or seek another country to find work etc.

  • Jambug


    “As I wrote on an earlier thread, it is too early to speculate on how leaving the EU will pan out”

    And this is the worry. One of the biggest, if not the biggest decisions ever, regarding the British economy, and it was a guess !!

    ‘It is too early to speculate’ you say.

    Too early !!! Sorry, don’t you mean it is TOO LATE to speculate?

    The time for speculation is surely long gone. The deed is done, it is too late to speculate now, and if you, like Millions of others voted for it on a whim then I’m sorry that is poor.

    At least tell me you KNOW what’s going to happen.

    At least have the decency to put my mind at rest and say things WILL be better.

    But no, we haven’t even reached the stage where we can speculate apparently.

    Surely to vote for a change of such magnitude you should of been CERTAIN of the future, or am I missing something?

  • Josif

    During my studies, I had a professor who had been one of the most recognized intelectuals, the one that TV-stations call upon first when something big is either happening or is about to happen.

    I questioned the current form of democracy and suggested him a change as I wanted to hear his opinion. As you might have known, there is something called “legal capacity”. Now, in Yugoslavia, there is a division between “legal capacity” and “capacity to exercise rights”. The difference means that certain people (usually people who have issues with mental health) can inherit something but can’t sign a contract under which they would bind themselves to do something or to accept someone else’s doing.

    Given that every state is essentially a social contract between the people and the government, I questioned the nature of democracy that we know in which, say, a person can’t sign a binding contract for himself/herself but is allowed to vote which means a participation in signing a social contract.

    After my explanation, I asked the professor if there was any chance of stretching the “capacity to exercise rights” in a way that would include “voting capacity”. I compared a state with a carriage and that everyone don’t have the same ability to give orders to the horses about direction, pace etc. His response was pretty logical: “Who would decide who is eligible to vote and who is not? Who would name that committee at the first place?”

    The sad part about Brexit is the fact immigration was the one thing Brexit was aimed at. That sort of ethnical, religious and national short-sightedness is something I would have never expected from Great Britain.

    Yugoslavia fell apart once their citizens got right to vote for different parties and to stay or leave from Yugoslavia. A lot of old people didn’t know to write their name but “knew” how to vote thanks to the instructors before the referendums and elections (usually from their religious institutions).

    The main problem with democracy is that people who have equal right to vote don’t have equal knowledge about the subject of voting and nobody has made an algorithm to decide how much exactly each vote should count.

  • Temitope

    You are all right as well as you are all wrong.
    Thanks for the article.

  • Jambug


    The problem is that a group of intellectuals could be split right down the middle.

    Half vote to turn the horses left, half to the right. I have sat and listened to people I would call ‘intellectual’ advocate both left and right, and they can both sound convincing.

    The question is why would a group of individuals, that have almost certainly been raised through the same educational system, often with the same tutors, and reading from much the same books, come to such radically different decisions?

    The same could be said regarding a group of individuals of low education, or even no education.

    When it comes to turning left or right it comes down to so many factors, of which education is just a part.

    The problem I believe we had with this particular referendum is that the subject matter is so vast and complex that nobody, and I repeat nobody really knows what is going to happen.

    In other words, for intellectuals and the unwashed alike there vote was cast largely on Emotion, or a ‘feeling’ if you prefer.

    On the exit side:

    A feeling that things could only get better, or at least it couldn’t get any worse.

    A feeling of disillusion towards the establishment, and this was a chance to show em who’s boss.

    On the remain side:

    A feeling that we are better together.

    A feeling that we’ll be weaker alone.

    The truth is there can never be an algorithm that can take into account such a random factor as ’emotion’ or a ‘feeling’.

  • ClockEndRider

    Honestly I like to come here for the free thinking football debate. But when it sinks into 6th form politicking, I just have to switch off.

  • Samuel Akinsola Adebosin

    Democracy is not a perfect political tool on which the populace can totally cast their hopes of corruptlees governing on it, as this article writer has correctly pointed out.

    Adolf Hitler accession to power in Germany is a prove of how wrong the electorates could be in their choices of what they want which may not be the correct choice they should have chosen to address the problem or problems which are confronting them.

    Notwithstanding, democracy is all about the exercising the right to choose by the people on a matter or on some issues. However, if the electorates are not vigilant but allowed themselves to be teleguided, deceived, and be taken advantage of, of their unfavourable conditions to make them to emotionally inclined in agreeing with their point of argument without to first carefully weigh the pros and cons before making their decisions to choose to go to the right, centre or to the left, they will ultimately could be led to make the wrong choice in the final analysis.

    It can’t be true, could it that Arsenal have agreed terms of a deal with Romelu Lukaku and will table an offer to Everton to have him transfered to Arsenal for a reported £60m which Everton are said to be valuing him? But I doubt if Arsenal will pay more than £35m for Lukaku if at all it’s true they are after to sign him.

  • Rich

    I think there’s an uncanny parallel between those who want Wenger to go and what the leave campaign would have been had it been forced onto an honest footing : ‘we don’t know what will happen, it may be worse, but there’s some possibility it will be better. If you’re unhappy with things as they are, why not make a radical change and hope for the best? You never know, it might lead to something better’

    If people then demand more, more facts, more honesty in the debate, a more rigorous treatment of evidence, penalties for mistakes or outright lies in the course of examining available information, that emotive but at least honest appeal, if you make no greater promises or assertions than the above, can be treated as what it is, i.e good enough or not good enough for making a massively important decision (and that’s for the football, let alone the future of our country in a dangerous uncertain world).

    The thing is, those Wenger outers with a reasonable level of honesty can normally, after a lot of back and forth and exertions be taken to the point where they admit what they advocate is choosing uncertainty (technically you have to admit that about almost anything in a complex competitive environment in the future; at an extreme, even 99% likely still counts as uncertainty).

    Even if they have a strong sense that it may be a good thing, they also admit it could well not lead to a massive or any improvement in our circumstances. Unfortunately, high-level politics is a completely different beast, with far less scruples than your average person or football supporter possesses. Arguably, it is a plane on which moral values do not have any place or at least are entirely hidden.

    In other words, any attempt to take them to the point at which they would be forced to admit how great the uncertainty was would be was to no avail. Only the media could facilitate that. I don’t think the players needed much help from the football world to get their ideas.

    The facts were there to take them to that point but the power, or will, wasn’t.

    Sad, discomfiting stuff. At least Wenger will never be subject to such a vote but even that doesn’t cheer me up at the moment.

  • finsbury

    Dear Tony,
    anybody who makes the choice to send troops marching in the footsteps of Napolean and the Nazis (please refer to recent news on such matters) can most definitely be described as “Nazi”. Perhaps that is the most reasonable and historically accurate term to use in such circumstances. Hard to argue against (one would fail if they tried)

    Have not the football journalists copying their pals on the front pages, not the other way around.

  • GoingGoingGooner

    Let’s get back to football. A person may or may not be for the EU separation but we have to wait for events to play out to see how it will affect Arsenal. The only result at present is the weakening of the pound and a lot of political talk. How these things affect Arsenal is still up for debate…in other words there is little evidence, yet, of Arsenal or the Premier League being adversely affected…Let’s get back to Football…yeah Alexis!!

  • Chris

    Maybe, after 8 years of doing all this in writing, it is time for UA to unfold its wings and seek new heights.

    Find a real pundit, an ex footballer or 2 with brains and analysis. Same on the referee side

    And start your web TV our youtube channl, whichever.

    Letting callers ask questions should not be complicated

    8 years ago your stats were impossible to een dream of. Well see what happened

    So why not have a UA channel, treating not only about AFC but in general about refereing, transfer sci-fi, child-trafficking…..

    Just an idea….technology evolves, tis cost goes down monthly.
    If stupid gossiping blogettys can do it you can do better. With content, facts, thoughts, intelligence.


    PS : sure Arsenal is affected….or how do you think paying for Xhaka in euros is going to happen ? By paying more now that the pound has taken a beating against all major currencies. And all thoses petro-dollars are going to be worth more pounds when transfered to the clubs or their owners in the UK.

  • Chris

    Dr Billy,

    after having read what the press has been serving about Europe for years (and your M. Johnson was very active in that front when working as correspondent in Brussels years back), I fully agree with you that it is the same as what is served in terms of football.

    The 350M issue is the ‘most expensive’ one…and when M. Farage reneged on the pledge at 8 Am on TV that morning, I was just shocked and amazed at the same time that this did not make it to some sort of story.

    It just is not what I thought the british press was standing for and the concept of freedom of the press should embody.

    The question is then raised if it was a democratic outcome considering the lies spread on both sides of the divide.

    And the other question is how can people living below poverty be considered free…and why should they vote for decisions that will – from their point of view and from what past years have shown – benefit all but them ? How can their reaction not be seen as a ‘stick it up you a….you don’t care for us why should we care for you’ towards the better off ?

  • This is a time for people to come together, the vote was took and the outcome was leave. The remain camp are unhappy, I get that but we have to give it time and stop this. This site was set up for those of us who support the Arsenal Board, manager and players who put on the shirt and the last three pieces on here are political. People come on this site to share veiw’s and engage and mostly it’s enjoyable and a credit to those who set it up, it’s gives people a chance to talk football and to get away from the outside world for a little while it should not be used as a political tool.
    Arsene Wenger has had to face defeat and put up with something he may not agree with or even like(pogo) but he does it will grace and great dignity and it’s model that I try to follow in my life. If a situation comes up that I do not agree with but others want and majority wins then I take a deep breath and hope that it all works out and that I’m proved wrong,
    Congrats to Alexis and here’s hoping he carries that form into the new campaign. I have had a wonderful time on this site and most of the people on here it has been a pleasure to engage with you and I wish you all a great new season and a happy life but I came here for Arsenal not someone political view or signing a petition that has nothing to do with Arsenal if I was so inclined to, I thought yesterday was going to be the end but yet more. It’s not for me. Goodbye and good luck in life to you all. Thanks.

  • Pat – North Korea was mentioned because that was part of the joke. It’s quite an old joke but I think it is funny. If I had said “a far off dictatorship” a lot of the humour would have been lost.

  • Jambug, if I may say what I think you are missing it is this:

    First, the that referendum was not binding on Parliament – they have to vote for it and the vast majority of MPs were against leaving. Given the fact that there is turmoil in the two main political parties and the third largest party has a totally different agenda (independence for Scotland) that is uncertainty.

    Second, it is possible that the new Leader of the conservative party will opt for the Norwegian model of out but in.

    Hence uncertainty.

  • Goonermikey

    Can I just check. When you talk about a “Boris Johnson”, is that the same Boris Johnson who complained bitterly when Eurosceptic Tory MP Bernard Jenkin taunted him about wanting out of the EU, replying that “I’ve never been an Outer” and went on to say that the EU was not responsible for the problems we faced in the UK? Just asking……..

    @ the font

    you say:

    “Please can this site stop with the political agenda and go back to football
    As it is unbecoming to be a bad loser.
    In most of the people’s opinion it was right to leave .
    Accept it and move on.”

    I agree with your first point to some extent. The difference being that many ‘leave’ voters are saying they’ve won won so everybody who voted ‘stay’ should shut up. That’s not how democracy works I’m afraid. And the idea of “accept it and move on” is scary. Are you suggesting that the dissenting voice should now no longer be permitted? That would be a very dark day for a regime purporting to be “democratic”!!

    Finally, one key factual error being peddled by those who are keen to celebrate and justify their opinion is in line with the misnomer that, “in most people’s opinion it was right to leave.” (Aside from the fact that we know many people feel duped by the NHS lies) it should be borne in mind that actually a mere 34% of the those eligible to vote expressed the desire to leave, two thirds of the country did not. Just saying………

    Now, back to the football……………

  • Chris

    Politics is like football, so talking about it here does make sense

    We see a good game (with often a loser and a winner) when both teams ‘play’ and respect the same rules. When both teams respect each other. When they are fairplay.

    This referendum was played without a referee, with both sides disrespectful of each other and all others, and with the press paying the same game as it does in football.

    Maybe there is a subject of a University study there…comparing football organisation and politics country by country….after all, panem and circences….and sport replaces war…

    Back to football….just watching Spain against Italy. Frankly, I just don’t see what so many see in Morata…except fouls and fouls… and this guy should replace Giroud ?!?!

  • Ajay

    Goodbye Linda. Wish you all the best as well.

  • bjtgooner

    Hi Linda

    I would suggest you don’t leave just yet, hopefully the site will get back to football very soon & we can all continue as before.

    If not – well – I might join you!

    But just now try to hang in there!

  • Chris

    Hi everybody,

    why don’t you have some patience….the referendum was a momentuous moment. Seems quite natural that discussions occur, and here on UA they are rather polite, argumentative and interesting.

    And what is there to talk about Arsenal these days except the crap blogettas and the usual suspects cook up ?!?!

    Give it a few days and hope for Arsenal palyers to come back unhamred from this campaign.

    No need to do UAExits….



  • Pat

    Come back Linda!

  • Pete

    The EU decision has an enormous impact on all areas of life – and that certainly includes football. Yes, some of the articles have strayed beyond football – but no need to read if we don’t want to. And we have to acknowledge that this vote is the most earth-shattering event in British politics for decades – affecting nearly all our livelihoods – so it is understandable that people want to discuss it. Certainly, I have been off this site for the last 4 or 5 days as football has seemed rather insignificant in comparison.

    Also, it is for the proprietors of the site to decide what to publish on it. If people don’t like that they will stop reading (although possibly replaced by others). It depends whether the proprietors are more interested in being self-indulgent or in building readership, and that I don’t know!

  • Well Pete then the people who run this site should not ask people to sign a petition when a vote was already taken and the result as we were told repeatedly would stand no matter what. People who have come on here have been repeatedly told that this is an Arsenal site that supports the manager board and players. Tony has told people of for going of topic, why before the Brexit there was next to nothing but after we get three to four stories about what a disaster the result was. Not everyone felt it was a disaster and MR Atwood should have stuck by his own rules. It’s about Arsenal nothing should come in the way of that. Arsene Wenger would have looked at the pros and cons for Arsenal before we even went to the polls. I trust him completely and know that he will have worked out what is best for Arsenal so I have no worries and if this site is so Pro Wenger and all to do with Arsenal why worry when it’s in the hands of the master.
    As for not reading an article when it’s put up on the site if anyone does not like it that’s smacks of a playground argument. It’s so obvious that Mr Atwoods nose was put out and he hated the result that he put up this petition, my site so I can do what I like and if you don’t like it then tough, my rules my playground. I lost all respect for a site that I thought was totally what it said it was but I was wrong.
    In life there are many many things we may not like but must accept and do it with grace and dignity, what we do not do is throw are toys out of the pram. I leave this site gladly now but will miss the honest funny and lovely genuine people but then again I won’t miss an ego the size of the Brexit vote. Bye bye