- The lesson in Arsenal’s wonderful victory over RM that not everyone sees
- Arsenal’s injury record is awful; Merson’s TV explosion is utterly wonderful
By Tony Attwood
“We must never accept the narratives of the angry and the powerful and those who want to force their broken version of a world onto us. Instead we stand together and we face our opponents…” (Arsenal Wonderland).
How right that is. Football commentary (especially football commentary about Arsenal) has always been swamped by unreal reports without evidence. And indeed it could be argued that it is only now that the rest of the world is catching up. Because, since the launch of ChatGPT in 2022, anyone can generate commentaries on any subject, in an instant, and then attribute them to anyone they want, be that person real or mythical.
And since much of the national media joins in this malarky with their almost constant negativity, (only “almost” constant because even they couldn’t find anything wrong with the defeat of Real Mad), we get it all the time.
These days everyone can be an instant “expert commentator” and since what is in the media most of the time is nonsense, the fact that the pretend expert is also writing nonsense means it fits immediately into place. “Arsenal need a new centre forward”. Copy and paste as often as wanted.
What we have also noted for over 10 years is that most of these commentators quote other commentators as the source, as if that makes their wild and whacky stories true, whereas the commentators they are quoting are also quoting other commentators who are …. well you know how it goes.
In fact, what we now have is a plethora of companies that charge PR organisations a fee to write good or bad things to order. So if you have a product or service and it is rivalling Company X’s product or service, you can pay firms that will flood the internet and media world with articles, seemingly written by independent experts, promoting your product or service and denigrating the others. They will look like real reviews; they are increasingly written by computer programs.
Unfortunately, there has also always been a fair amount of me-too in terms of football correspondent reports, as few in the industry like to stand out on his (occasionally her) own as being wholly different from the crowd. So if the narrative is “Arsenal are in desperate need of a new centre forward” everyone adopts that line, and the media, constantly looking for a new story to back up the last story, takes it on board. The only difference today is that more and more of the stories are made up by programs rather than by people. Everyone gets mentioned online, and so credibility goes up, even when there is nothing to base this credibility on.
Most football journalists are now receiving great wodges of AI-generated articles each day, with the companies used by player or manager agents initiating such garbage hoping that just a few bits get picked up. So increasingly you can be sure that when you read an “Arsenal is buying” or “Arsenal is selling” or “This is Arsenal’s problem” article, it is now more than likely written by artificial intelligence. In short, a computer program has taken a load of previous articles and created a new one out of that and made it look novel.
Only when something that the media didn’t expect – like the 3-0 win over Real Mad – does the system take a knock and some urgent re-writing is needed. One wonders just how many “Arsenal have it all to do” articles were ready to roll before the stunning victory made “delete” the most used button on a whole range of computers.
What we are finding – and it is not only occurring in football, but is happening throughout journalism – is that articles are emerging from writers who on the surface look real enough, but in fact don’t exist. Rather the articles are written by AI programs.
Thus far this has been is less obvious in football than in other places because football articles have for years been written by people with a very limited knowledge of either journalism or what really goes on in a football club. Instead, the pieces are simply copied from other football blogs and newspaper articles.
This of course explains how the narrative about Arsenal (the club that always bottles it, the club that desperately needs to find a manager to replace Arteta etc etc)gets such a vast coverage and this writing is only derailed when a performance turns up that is so amazingly incredible and brilliant, it cannot be denigrated or even reduced to the “yes that was all right but…” level of commentary.
Of course, there is a way around all this: think for yourself, gather your own evidence. It might take up quite a bit of time, but you’ll have the pleasure of knowing you are annoying a large number of jounnalists, and AI programmers.
I note that many of the usual critics are now saying that the tie is over (partly because RM are no longer a good team and are now crap – after all how else could Arsenal beat them 3-0.
I sense that they are hoping for a second-leg turnround, so that they can re-invigorate the anti-Arsenal narrative about “bottling”, throwing the game away etc. and really put the boot in as payback for being so wrong-footed by our success in the first leg.
In a recent post, Mikey reminded us of the 0-4 to 4-4 game at Newcastle which was turned on its head by referee Dowd, so we cannot rule out a comparable event at the Bernabeu next week. Also, despite what some pundits say, Madrid are still a very strong opponent. I admit to being more nervous about the second leg than if the scores were level, or even if we were a goal down.
It’s interesting to contrast Jamie Carragher’s incessant ranting about Myles Lewis-Skelly and even Ethan Nwaneri when working for Sky and The Overlap with his more reasonable approach on CBS.
He seems to have different agendas dependent upon who he works for.
@ seismic
I genuinely believe many pundits do restrict/determine what they say based upon the company which employs them. When have you ever heard a good word said about Arsenal on Sky? Even ex-players who might be considered “Arsenal stalwarts” moderate any positives they might have to offer whilst the likes of Neville and Carragher are often given a commentary role on the basis that they can, under most circumstances, be relied upon to be critical.
I bet Merson faced disciplinary action from his employers for his jubilant reactions on Tuesday night!!
OT
Based upon recent articles concerning how Arsenal are treated by referees and still buzzing from Tuesday night, I was just looking at whoscored.com. I thought I’d have a quick look at some stats (sorry, that’s just the sort of bloke I am!!).
As a reminder, Arsenal have received 26 cards for “other offences” in the Premier League this season, the second highest in the league and almost three times that of Liverpool (9). So if Liverpool are so squeaky clean this must replicate itself in Europe surely?
So Liverpool have received seven cards for “other” offences in the Champions League so, based upon PGMO standards, we’d expect Arsenal to have received about 20…….but no, it’s actually just three!! (And don’t forget Arsenal have played more games than Liverpool!)
So, I thought I’d take a quick loo at fouls and cards. Liverpool 10.7 fouls per game: 11 cards for fouls. Arsenal 10.5 fouls per game and 12 cards for fouls (about even since Arsenal have played more games – I can’t be bothered to do the maths at the moment!)
So, what that suggests to me is that European refs are very even handed when it comes to cards for fouls. What it also suggests is that Liverpool are either incredibly better behaved (in terms of “other” offences) in the Premier League or Arsenal are incredibly well behaved in European games. How else could you explain Liverpool getting twice as many cards in Europe than Arsenal but only a third of the number Arsenal are given by PGMO officials?
I suppose it might just be something to do with the fact that none of the refs English clubs face in Europe are from the North West of England and influenced by the UK media but that, of course, is total speculation!!!
Mikey, Total speculation, no doubt, but absolutely true!
Mikey
“I suppose it might just be something to do with the fact that none of the refs English clubs face in Europe are from the North West of England and influenced by the UK media but that, of course, is total speculation!!!”
More wonderful work Mikey.
The statistics this site has unearthed regarding penalties and cards is both remarkable and damming. These are the highlights of what has been unearthed.
PENALTIES
Short term:
In comparison to our direct rivals the number of penalties we both receive and concede are so badly out of line as to be frankly unbelievable.
Long term:
And these unbelievable comparisons can be traced back 16 years to the appointment of Mike Riley at the head of the PGMOL
RED AND YELLOW CARDS
Short term:
The amount of red and yellow cards we receive is again ridiculously out of step with our direct rivals, especially when it comes to those mysterious ‘others’.
Long term:
Thein depth analysis is yet to be done, but I did do some numbers around 10 years ago that suggested a similar injustice was occurring with them that can also be traced to Riley, but until I find or re-do them, those accusations remains unproven.
PGMOL REFEREES COMPARED TO EUROPEAN REFEREES
I have said many times that I never go into a European tie fearing the referee. Of course they are not perfect but I don’t think they are as a rule biased. There are of course exceptions, and there have been some serious exceptions, unluckily for us most often when it comes to the two Spanish giants. Lets hope we don’t come across such a performance next Wednesday. But by and large, and as Mikey has shown, we get a fair crack of the whip in our European matches, mostly.
But more importantly than that, what Mikey has shown, yet again, is that there appears to be something seriously amiss with the way we are refereed in the Premier League.
To have such wildly differing numbers for the same team is shocking. Liverpool haven’t? So why have Arsenal?
More damming numbers from Mikey.
What I would like to see is somebody in the mainstream media pick up on all this hard work we have done. We know they read it because they refer to it. Not in the way they should, with acknowledgement and debate, but with ridicule and contempt.
One has to ask why is that? Why are they afraid to actually address the data that is put in front of them? Why are they afraid to put up a counter argument with their own statistics?
I think we all know the answer. Because they cant. It’s as simple as that.
I forgot to mention in my list yet another disgrace we have un earthed, and that is the NW LONDON divide.
Yes Arsenal are screwed more than most, but it is not just us. In comparison to the NW giants all the London Clubs, especially the traditional ‘big 3’ get badly treated.
It cannot be a coincidence that there is not a single London referee on the list. Can you imagine the stink the likes of Liverpool would kick up if there was 4 London referees and not one from the NW. It just wouldn’t be allowed to happen.
“Is it possible to tell a real Arsenal commentator from a computer?”
I think you can, at least to a degree.
I am always suspicious of an article that starts “XXXX sends clear message”
What journalist, even the intellectually challenged members of the sports variety, starts a piece with that? Yet it’s everywhere.
There are other key phrases or words that sound un-natural of which ‘clear’ is one of the most overused.