21 responses

  1. Mandy Dodd
    14/04/2016

    Please note, nobody is allowed to find anything rather promising when it comes to Arsenal

  2. Menace
    15/04/2016

    Tony – the scoring of goals is a requisite of winning just as the goals scored agianst you is a requisite of a loss. The only true table is that Untold table of shame. It describes the reality of the effect of officiating on the game.

    The false assumption of goal scorers being paramount in victory does not cater for the official who needs to give it as being correct. The official is more important than any other aspect in the game.

  3. Polo
    15/04/2016

    Having a striker that scores 30+ goals is good but not important, I believe what a team need are a range of players who are consistent in scoring, rather than just one person who scores 3 goals in a match but then don’t score in the next 5 matches or so. Arsenal has this where most of our players can score goals, however this season the finishing is poor hence why we are where we are.

    In addition, to scoring goals it’s important to have competent defenders because it’s pointless scoring 1 goal but concede 2. I think at Arsenal we are beginning to address this. If you look at last season, Chelsea won the league with goal for 73 and goal against 32 while Arsenal was third with goal for 71 and goal against 36. So statistically we were close in term of scoring and conceeding but we were not consistent in winning matches compare to Chelsea as they won 21 draw 9 lost 3 whereas Arsenal won 17 draw 8 lost 7.

  4. para
    15/04/2016

    Winning the matches is the most important thing. How do we win matches? By scoring more goals on the day than the opposition.

    Of course having multiple players scoring regularly is Arsenal’s prefered way, but as noted, for some reason these last seasons, the amount of goals scored by Arsenal players decreased. Why?

    Arsenal has now reached a stage where they have come up against a wall for the last times and can go no further. To continue without change in our system is just pure foolishness really. Every system needs to be tweaked to be able to compete and beat others who tweak their own system(even so far as to playing just like Arsenal) in order to remain competitive.

    10 years ago no one played like Arsenal in the PL, look today how many play a similar way to Arsenal. We should have moved on making them have to catch up again, but we are stuck, and some have overtaken us, even the dreaded “enemies” from across the road.

    And we still play the same way, only thing is, unless we are almost perfect on the day, all the other teams have devised strategies(both legal and non-legal) to stop us.

    Yet Arsenal refuses to embrace all the little changes that enhance the team and make them more competitive again.

    Yet with all that said, i still have the feeling that this team is running on a low to mid flame and have not even played on a high flame yet.

    I wait paitently(sometimes not so) for the high flame to begin.

  5. gouresh
    15/04/2016

    Para, u’ve hit the nail on the head.

  6. WalterBroeckx
    15/04/2016

    The problem was that for a period non of our forwards managed to score a goal. Chances enough but we just couldn’t put the ball over the goal line when it mattered. Now if that happens to one of the players the other can fill in or step up and finish the job. But when all your forwards are misfiring, then you have a problem.

    +30 goal scorers are rare to find. Or better said impossible to find. The CR, Messi, Suarez, Ibrahimovic, Lewandowski players are at their top club who don’t want to let them go (why would they) so unless you are Man City, Chelsea or PSG you cannot afford them. Even Manchester United struggled to find one and had to spend 50M on a kid (with potential) but who has scored 8 goals in the league so far. Not really a great return and at Arsenal the aaa would now be haunting him out and declare Wenger a fool for having spend 50M (that can go op to 80M!) of our money on an unproven young French kid.
    Benteke… yeah that turned out to be a huge success for Liverpool….7 goals… let’s just waste some 33M on him…

    Now would I mind one of the top players at Arsenal? No, surely not. But I am realistic enough to know that we will never pay over the odds for such players and so the chance of us getting one of the top, top strikers is rather low.

    Just finding our shooting boots back for our current forwards is the most important task right now. And it seems that since Iwobi has been put in the team our scoring has improved. Not bad for a 19 year young kiddo that cost us…. nothing.

  7. porter
    15/04/2016

    The Premierleague is seen throughout the world as a money pit and as such trying to deal with clubs is an uphill struggle. A player like Lacazette for instance is probably worth a punt at £ 20 million but his club will demand a lot more . Is it good value ? probably not, however is it the going rate ? yes.
    Like King Cnut holding your principals and expecting things to change just isn’t going to happen. You either take the gamble or you don’t it’s the way of the world .

  8. Pat
    15/04/2016

    Menace mentions officials. Just caught the end of Arsene Wenger’s press conference. He was asked about referees who support certain teams.

    He said he had discussed this with Mike Riley and taking that into account will make it impossible to appoint referees to games. Not only would you have to rule out games of teams the referee supported, but you would have to rule out games where the result might make a difference to the team he supports.

    Every referee should be expected to be professional and rule out his personal emotions when doing his job.

    He also said he was not happy with the refereeing of Arsenal this season and that referees need help from the use of technology, for example in the matter of offsides.

  9. WalterBroeckx
    15/04/2016

    So Pat the thing is we have to live with it….
    What is never mentioned as a solution is to have professional referees from all over Europe who do matches in different countries.
    That might be helpful in many ways.
    First of all you would get much more referees and you could actually come to a system where you only get a ref once in the season. So the bias would be almost completely wiped out. Or you should be extremely unlucky when having refs from all over Europe.
    The refereeing would be organised in Europe and that should lead to a more consistent level of refereeing. All referees would be trained in the same way and so should apply the laws in the same way.

  10. WalterBroeckx
    15/04/2016

    Or to start: having more than 14 full time refs in the PL might also be helpful….

  11. Pat
    15/04/2016

    To me the problem with PGMO is not personal bias by the referees relating to support of a team. It is far deeper than that. Untold analysis has shown some of the problems – too few referees, no referees from the London area (8 million inhabitants), Arsenal not being awarded penalties, failure to punish violent conduct on the field and a whole range of other issues.

    It is, however, interesting that the only time a referee has been changed because of the team he is alleged to support is in relation to Leicester City. Never happened to us!

    As someone says on another stream, a huge petition did not stop Mike Dean being appointed to referee Arsenal matches. One law for Leicester …

  12. WalterBroeckx
    15/04/2016

    But more on that later 🙂

  13. Ando
    15/04/2016

    Porter,
    A realistic post.

    One thing though – Cnut (Canute) actually did the thing with the waves to prove to his sycophantic courtiers that he was NOT omnipotent – they had said he was so powerful that he commanded the tides. He had them set up his throne on the beach to show them that he was not..and that they were a load of b/s artists.

    In that sense, m. Wenger seems to have a lot in common with him!

  14. Robert
    15/04/2016

    “And [Chelsea] have the money that people wish Wenger will spend.”

    Fact 1: Arsenal total revenues 2014/15 – €463.5m. Chelsea total revenues 2014/15 – €435.5m. Source: Deloitte Money League.

    Fact 2: Arsenal cash reserves 2014/15 – GBP 228m. Chelsea cash reserves 2014/15 – GBP 1m. In fact, Arsenal have more cash than any other club in world football. Source: Swiss Ramble.

  15. john
    15/04/2016

    Robert
    But that 228m cannot all be spent .We have overheads and have to leave some for a rainy day and wengers wages .And what if we spend it and then a super super player comes along that might improve our squad ( highly unlikely but possible)?No realistically out of that their is about 5 million available ,it would be stupid and might bankrupt us if we spend a penny more. Its not about spending money!!!

  16. Notoverthehill
    15/04/2016

    Robert is a fool!

    Chelsea FC plc, as an ongoing concern is guaranteed by the controlling company Fordstam Limited. Note 26 to the Chelsea FC plc Financial Report 2014/2015.

    Arsenal Holdings plc: Turnover 2014/2015 £344.5 millions
    Chelsea FC plc: Turnover 2014/2015 £314.3 millions.

    Arsenal own it’s stadium, Chelsea pay a peppercorn rent for it’s stadium.

    As for cash reserves, Abramovich has no intention of leaving spare money in Chelsea FC plc, is he?

  17. Jacobite Gunner
    15/04/2016

    **Public interest notice**

    Please note that The Daily Telegraph is owned by tax evading billionaires.

    It is also a right wing Tory championing newspaper.

  18. Jacobite Gunner
    15/04/2016

    Next season I look forward to Hayden Mullins and Chuba given the opportunity in the first team. Hayden Mullins has performed well for Hull in the Championship and would fill a good squad role seen as Arteta and Flamini are both likely to be released. Has anyone seen much of Toral and Miles Naitland? Both have performed well in the Championship with both of their on loan managers playing them reg and lavishing praise… (thoughts?)

  19. Josif
    16/04/2016

    @Tony

    You missed Drogba’s season in 2009-10 when they won the double. Drogba scored 29 league goals.

    When Torres scored 22, they won Europa League.

    When Costa scored 21, they won the league and COC.

    When we had Adebayor’s 24 league goals, United had Ronaldo’s 31.

    The thing is, attack is just one part of the team. The other end of the pitch matters as well.

    When Van Persie scored 30 in the league, we conceded 49 goals. Liverpool had Suarez and Sturridge scoring over 50 goals combined but their defence was worse than City’s.

    And, let’s not forget the matter of consistency and conversion rate. As I’ve pointed out in 2012-13 when we won games with hitting six, five, seven, five in just four games (23 goals), our goal-scoring constistency. Some of the posters even mocked my use of statistics back then but Untold Arsenal used the same correct logic when commenting our heavy defeats in 2013-14 – who cares if you get four big defeats if your defence keeps the opponents at bay for 17 times.

    And, I have already pointed out how Leicester have had much, much better conversion rate. When you apply number of chances per goal we have to make to theirs, then you realize that the real difference is much bigger in their favour than the goals for column suggests. I haven’t done the same comparison with us and Spuds but they do have Kane who is 22 and doesn’t have problems with reaching 20 goals in the season.

    Giroud was 26 when he arrived. He has failed to get us 20 league goals ever since he has arrived and it’s not that he hasn’t had enough chances to do so. He is inconsistent performer who has had too many goal-less months at Arsenal. His last league goal was against Liverpool three months ago. At the age of 30, he is unlikely to go through a transformation that would turn him into a world-class striker we need.

    And, it’s good that you have compared him with Henry. Henry scored 22 in 2000-01 which had ended three months before his 24th birthday which means he was closer to Iwobi’s age than Giroud’s. It was his third season at Arsenal while Giroud has been going through his fourth.

    But here is the biggest catch: in 2001-02 we signed a world-class central defender, Henry scored 30 and we won the double. So, adding a world-class central defender and Henry’s improvement to a striker who scores 30 goals per season DID turn Arsenal from a team that shipped six at OT and four at Anfield to the double-winning team.

    @AI

    No. If you, say, analyzed our season 2011-12 to claim Arsenal had a shaky defence and switched goals for and goals against column, you would get a goal-swing of 50 (from +25 to -25). You might have a point that our defence was poor (both 49 and 74 are big numbers) but the data you based your assumption were wrong.

    If you completely switched the data, you wouldn’t keep the + as in your example, you would turn + into -. That’s what PK did and that’s why I think Tony should have deleted that article after the mistake had been noticed. That being said…

    @serge- …I don’t think PK made an intentional mistake. It can happen to anyone.

  20. upp
    16/04/2016

    Well done josif

  21. Porter
    17/04/2016

    Having a 30 plus goalscorer isn’t always the answer? Maybe not but having watched us toiling again with total domination and doing what we have done time and time again it would bloody well help.

Back to top