We’re back with our videos: do take a peek at Untold GoonerNews
By Tony Attwood
The fact that spending money on transfers generally reduces rather than enhances the club’s league position was published here. Here is the updated list showing how much was spent, the current league position and last season’s league position…
- Manchester United £148m (currently 5th, last season 6th)
- Aston Villa £144.5m (currently 18th, last season promoted)
- Arsenal £138m (currently 10th; last season 5th)
- Manchester City £134.8m (currently 2nd, last season champions)
- Everton £118.5m (currently 11th, last season 8th)
- Tottenham Hots £101.5m (currently 8th, last season 4th)
This finding – that spending more on new players does not result in a club rising up the league – is of course counter-intuitive. We have all been told by the media for so many years that spending money on more and more expensive players is good that it seems odd that the effect of it should be negative.
But such a finding also totally screws up the entire approach of the newspaper and broadcast industry. Virtually their entire basis of daily “news” is based on potential transfers in and out of the club.
What makes it worse is that as we have shown for the past five years, 97% of the predictions that football media make as to which player is going to which club, are totally wrong.
In other words the media tell us who each club is going to buy – and get that overwhelmingly wrong, and suggest constantly that buying players is good for the club, getting that wrong too. It is hard to imagine two basic elements within journalism that are more wrong.
Now the question arises: given that the entire basis of media reporting on football is utterly false in both its main features (that spending money on transfers takes a club up the league table, and who the clubs are going to spend their money on) are utterly wrong, what should the football media do?
They might of course present counter evidence showing that our figures are wrong. But in fact the figures are very simple – there is no doubting the fact that Arsenal spent £138m last summer and are now five places worse off than they were at the end of last season.
But no, they ignore the facts and go on running transfer rumours that are unlikely ever to happen.
Let’s put this simply. The media makes up tales of transfers, knowing that they are never going to happen, and they keep telling us that these transfers are a good thing, knowing that if they did take place they would be much more likely to send the club down the league rather than take it up.
And the most amazing thing about all this is that some people still take the media seriously!!!
If we look at what they are saying now we can see just how inverted the reality of the media has become. Take the headline from Football.London
Tottenham fans slam Daniel Levy over financial findings
Of course that is false since clearly not all Tottenham fans “slam Daniel Levy over financial findings.” But according to the make-believe tale “Fans were angry with the club for the refusal to back Pochettino in the transfer market, as they went two full transfer windows without bringing in a single player – the first time any club had done so in England.”
What they ignored is that Tottenham’s decline started after it started spending money. And the reality is that if these Tottenham fans can persuade Tottenham to buy more players in this window, that could take them further down the league – which would obviously please Arsenal fans.
Meanwhile the media continues to give us “news” of Arsenal’s buys.
According to the Metro the president of Athletico Paranaense, Mario Celso Petraglia, has “confirmed” Arsenal are interested in signing Bruno Guimaraes. The only salvation for Arsenal is that almost all of the Metro’s transfer reports are utterly untrue, so he probably hasn’t.
The Express tell us that “Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta wants to make two signings before January transfer deadline”, which looks like a disaster, although it is slightly mitigated by the fact that if this is true (which is unlikely given that it is in the Express) they will be loan signings.
And we are not the only ones going down this line as the Boot Room says, in relation to John Stones, “Arsenal must avoid signing experienced Premier League defender.”
Indeed by and large the media is still ignoring the fact that this season’s transfers across the top spending clubs have been disasters, as with the HITC headline, ‘Would be one of our smartest signings in recent years’: Some Arsenal fans rave about 22-year-old”. They speak, as do most headlines at the moment of Bruno Guimaraes. Although we might be saved since the Mail tell us that Chelsea and Benfica are more likely to sign him.
Apparently we are also going to get rid of Torreira and replace him with Wilfred Ndidi, thus adding to our turmoil and taking us further down the league. I just wonder if the media will ever catch up with reality.
- The home and away scandal: ignorance, or cover up?
- The reason why Liverpool and Man C are ahead of Arsenal.
- How which referee a club gets has a major impact on the result of each game
- The statistical evidence that shows PGMO are biased against Arsenal
- How European football has taken up the fight against clubs breaking FFP