• Arsenal v Dinamo Zagreb – the team with 19 consecutive titles
• The worst teams, the most injured teams, and the decline of highly tipped clubs

By Tony Attwood

Football is obviously a game of conflict.  For unlike some games such as a running race where basically each person does her/his best and doesn’t or at least shouldn’t do anything to make the other runners less likely to win, with football round about half the team (ie the defence) is of course involved in stopping the other side scoring.

So football has within itself a rampant buzz of negativity – which is perhaps why when we hear stories about clubs abusing players either through overplaying them, playing them when injured or by allowing sexual predators to go about their business without hindrance (as we have found so often in our commentaries on this sight), we can get to the stage of just seeing it as part of the show.

Except, there are exceptions.   Some of these are obvious and dictated by the law of the land. The media of course won’t cover possible child sex abuse issues within football until the trial of the latest predator to be caught is over, and even then never seem to ask why the clubs allowed this to continue.  There’s another one of these going on right now, and a huge amount pointing to one particular clubm, but no coverage.  So instead they turn their attention to the big clubs that are not doing as well as the media think they should be doing.

Except that as we look at these negative stories we find that some of the media will always attack certain clubs, but equally lay off others.

Take Manchester United for example.   Today you can find  “Are the class of 2025 really the worst Manchester United team of all time?” And “Manchester United’s £85.5m Antony mistake is the epitome of their malaise.”  And “Ruben Amorim accused of ‘pouring petrol on flames’ with worst Man Utd team comment.”

All really negative stuff.  And yet at the same time, turn to the Daily Mail you can read Why Man United will be delighted with Mason Greenwood’s form,    And, Jamie Carragher “slams Ruben Amorim’s ‘bizarre and ridiculous’ claim that his Man United side are ‘the WORST team in the club’s history.”

In short what we are now finding is newspapers pitching for readership by often (and the tendency is toward “always”) writing positive stories about one club and negative about another, while others defend the club that is written negatively about.

Then when we come to Tottenham we have “Postecoglou on thin ice at Tottenham but Levy still hoping for turnaround.” But against that  “Tottenham manager: the case for the defence of Ange Postecoglou.”   And  “Why Tottenham will stand by their man.”

The fact is that despite their position in the league and the hype that the media engaged with at the start of the season (and seemingly at the start of most seasons), that this is going to be the year when Tottenham shine, and the fact that they are constantly let down, we have very little negativity about Tottenham (at least in comparison with other clubs).  And this despite the fact that they have brought in a new manager, and yet are 15th in the league with the likes of Brentford, Fulham and Crystal Palace above them.

We can contrast this approach with the media against Arsenal.  We note the negativity towards Arsenal so often it doesn’t need repeating, but here’s just one example from the Mail: Arsenal legend Emmanuel Petit brutally snubbed two huge names when naming his best XI of former teammates.  No matter what the topic there is always negativity somewhere.

 That one individual story about Arsenal might have limited effect but when such tales emerge day after day after day, the effect will be real enough.

And when we note that many other clubs get none of these tales even when they are failing to live up to all the pre-season hype.   Consider just one more example: “Third youngest squad in the PL – Postecoglou aiming for top four with new-look Spurs side” from the Daily Mail last August.  Total positivity and no mention of how Arsenal have consistently introduced young players with success.

So it goes on.  Some clubs talked up and never talked down, some clubs talked down and never talked up.   And why?   That of course is where the real question lies.