The whatever footie that's going on (with actual fans) thread

rick_chasey

lostboysaint wrote:

I forgot to mention the clubs appalling injury record during his tenure as well. Always towards the top (more often than not at the top) of the table of number of players injured - usually with long term problems as well - and yet has never changed his training methods or medical staff.

I'm sure I've "discussed" this with a Gooner on here before. And yet they've got another five out now.

Isn't that just a doping thing?

Wenger seems quite outspoken about it & how other teams dope.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... ed-up.html

I read it as 'we get more injuries because we don't medicate our players as much', but I might be wrong.

rick_chasey

*shrugs* I dunno, I just think there's more to Wenger staying on than just stubborness from the owners.

And I can't see a decent replacement. Stability is underrated in football IMO.

lostboysaint

I'm not quite as up on it as some on here but muscular and tendon & ligament damage (where most of their injuries occur) has little to do with doping does it?

rick_chasey

lostboysaint wrote:

I'm not quite as up on it as some on here but muscular and tendon & ligament damage (where most of their injuries occur) has little to do with doping does it?

Bigger heavier players with more power bundling into you; less HGH.

I might be talking sh!t, but that's how I read it. Same reason you get more injuries in rugby nowadays.

lostboysaint

Rick Chasey wrote:

*shrugs* I dunno, I just think there's more to Wenger staying on than just stubborness from the owners.

And I can't see a decent replacement. Stability is underrated in football IMO.

If Arsenal are going to persist along the same route you won't be able to identify a replacement, neither will most of their fans. They'll be fishing in the same pond as the sides I mentioned before because they'll be looking for someone who is out-performing their annual budget and those individuals are hard to recognise for most fans because they aren't already headline names (which is what you are looking for!).

Off the top of my head they could do worse (sticking with Wenger!) than pick up Thomas Tuchel, who remains available.

lostboysaint

Rick Chasey wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

I'm not quite as up on it as some on here but muscular and tendon & ligament damage (where most of their injuries occur) has little to do with doping does it?

Bigger heavier players with more power bundling into you; less HGH.

I might be talking sh!t, but that's how I read it. Same reason you get more injuries in rugby nowadays.

But most of their injuries occur in training (as I said) so that means it's their own players that are on the HGH and bundling into them.......

There are more injuries in rugby nowadays because of the substitutions available and the fact that this means that players are only conditioned to last a fixed amount of time (60 mins for most forwards) and therefore can hit harder during that time.*

*That's from a PL physio.

rick_chasey

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Stevo_666

Pinno wrote:

"The Premier League’s highest spending clubs this summer were Manchester City (£220.5m), Chelsea (£187.5m), Manchester United (£146m) and Everton (£145m). Only five clubs ended up in the black on their transfer dealings: Arsenal, Burnley, Stoke City, Swansea City and Tottenham Hotspur. For comparison, spending in the Championship was down from £215m last summer to £195m."

That means that Chelsea should be second in the league.
If you want success, you have to have high rolling Russians, Americans or Arabs to bank roll it

Sounds like Kroenke and Usmanov really need to pull their socks up then. In the meantime it's welcome to Bulgaria on a wet Thursday night to play a team nobody's ever heard of

lostboysaint

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

I have little doubt that there are drugs in the PL. Do I think that Arsene is running the Team Sky of the PL? No. Do I think it's team driven? No. Do I think individuals will be partaking? Yes. Do I think the drug testing regime in the PL is a joke? Yes I do.

Do I think that it's everyone else's fault that Arsenal's injury list is longer than anyone elses most seasons? No. Do I think it's a drug problem? No.

If we're going back to rugby union, no - I've given you the answer, and it's what you'll hear from most in the game now. It's a 60 minute game for the hitters so the contacts are more intense and that takes a toll.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Rick, why the interest in football - thought you hated it? Or is that just Chelsea fans given where you live?

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Rick, why the interest in football - thought you hated it? Or is that just Chelsea fans given where you live?

latter.

My grandfather was called up to play for Holland (but couldn't afford it so never went). He framed the invites.

The excessive tribalism bores me intensely.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Rick, why the interest in football - thought you hated it? Or is that just Chelsea fans given where you live?

latter.

My grandfather was called up to play for Holland (but couldn't afford it so never went). He framed the invites.

The excessive tribalism bores me intensely.

Fair enough. Coincidentally my grandfather was a 'Boro player (449 appearances) and an England player (capped twice).

You'll be pleased to know they're taking a wrecking ball to Stamford Bridge in the next 2 years - to build a 60,00 seater on the same site . Time to move?

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Rick, why the interest in football - thought you hated it? Or is that just Chelsea fans given where you live?

latter.

My grandfather was called up to play for Holland (but couldn't afford it so never went). He framed the invites.

The excessive tribalism bores me intensely.

Fair enough. Coincidentally my grandfather was a 'Boro player (449 appearances) and an England player (capped twice).

You'll be pleased to know they're taking a wrecking ball to Stamford Bridge in the next 2 years - to build a 60,00 seater on the same site . Time to move?

Well actually when the council asked me about (as they asked everyone) I said I was fine with it. It's the fans that are awful, not the building work.

But I am moving out anyway, so no biggie.

rick_chasey

Chelsea are worse than Sheffiled United fans were when I went to the local derby as an Owls away fan, and they soaked us in p!ss.

At that point I bail out. I get that it's fun to get p!ssed and angry about something trivial in a big crowd who all feel the same, but chr!st, it's all taken too far.

I'd probably like being an Arsenal fan, but my dad was a Red Mancunian so, growing up, Arsenal were the main rivals.

city_boy

Rick Chasey wrote:

Man City & Chelsea are just, to varying degrees, vanity toys and entirely loss making.

As a City fan I'm obviously going to take a slightly different POV

City have turned a profit for the last two years (recognising the vastly significant investment in the 5/6 years pervious) and are now in a very financially stable and, apparently, sustainable position.

Rather than a vanity toy, it seems to me that the City owners are extremely commercially astute and have used the purchase of the club as stepping stone to much more diverse portfolio of investment opportunities in the Northwest.

There's an interesting article on the most recent financial positions of all premier league clubs here...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ub-by-club

my_grandadʹs_bike

In defence of City here I have a friend who works in Manchester City Council Planning Dept. And he speaks very highly of how they have invested into the immediate local community surrounding the ground and how they go about their business with respect to the LA and others. Certainly not behaving as arrogant billy big b*ll*x money bags.

He is a Tranmere fan though so really not to be trusted.

lostboysaint

City Boy wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Man City & Chelsea are just, to varying degrees, vanity toys and entirely loss making.

As a City fan I'm obviously going to take a slightly different POV

City have turned a profit for the last two years (recognising the vastly significant investment in the 5/6 years pervious) and are now in a very financially stable and, apparently, sustainable position.

Rather than a vanity toy, it seems to me that the City owners are extremely commercially astute and have used the purchase of the club as stepping stone to much more diverse portfolio of investment opportunities in the Northwest.

There's an interesting article on the most recent financial positions of all premier league clubs here...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ub-by-club

Easy to do that when your owner writes off over £300m of loans though isn't it

rick_chasey

my grandad's bike wrote:

In defence of City here I have a friend who works in Manchester City Council Planning Dept. And he speaks very highly of how they have invested into the immediate local community surrounding the ground and how they go about their business with respect to the LA and others. Certainly not behaving as arrogant billy big b*ll*x money bags.

He is a Tranmere fan though so really not to be trusted.

That £1.2bn has to go somewhere.

my_grandadʹs_bike

Rick Chasey wrote:

my grandad's bike wrote:

In defence of City here I have a friend who works in Manchester City Council Planning Dept. And he speaks very highly of how they have invested into the immediate local community surrounding the ground and how they go about their business with respect to the LA and others. Certainly not behaving as arrogant billy big b*ll*x money bags.

He is a Tranmere fan though so really not to be trusted.

That £1.2bn has to go somewhere.

Better some of it goes into the local community then rather than on another super car or penthouse. Hard to defend the excesses of modern football I know but it's not all bad.

Everton have their own EITC which does a hell of a lot good community work which constantly gets over looked (and yes before Stevo mentions it it's good one aspect of Everton FC is thriving at the moment )

pinno

Someone like Usmanov needs to be chair of the Arsenal board and have control. The board lacks ambition IMHO.
My gripe with Wenger is that he is not prepared to use any coercion or heavy handed criticism of his players. Sometimes they have played so badly, they deserve the hair dryer treatment it's been so appalling. I think also that Thierry Henry was right when he said that the atmosphere had changed since they moved to the Emirates from Highbury, attracting the wrong sort of supporter - only the rich one's. Season tickets at Arsenal are extortionate (amongst the highest in the UK) and you can tell with the lack of vocal support the team get.
And, if the board are not prepared to alter the wage structure, then any ambitions beyond a consistent top 5/6 finish, will not be attainable.
Arsenal are not a team that to me are greater than the sum of all their parts and that's not necessarily a talent thing, it's a motivational thing.

Lastly, when Wilshere and Ramsay are both on the pitch together, the passing and play is far too elaborate. It's like Wenger can make them play pretty football but not effective football.

I'll give the City owners the credit for developing an extensive youth and playing facility. They are in this for the long haul and have invested likewise.

kingstonian

That’s a good summary of Arsenal’s situation. Wenger has always avoided calling his players out, it has always been someone else’s fault - the ref, a linesman, fixture congestion, an opposing player, the state of the pitch.......anything or anyone but his players. He’s created a environment where there are too many underperforming players getting fat and happy on long term huge money contracts - exhibit A being Walcott.

All squads suffer injuries, it is inevitable. But Arsenal have suffered more than most, yet I’m not seeing any improvement. Sports science and rehab techniques have advanced at a rapid rate, and the smart clubs are those that are keeping up to date to shave days and weeks off recovery time. Wenger has so much power at the club, so he can put the resource into this if he wants but I’m not sure he has the open mindedness to change his ways.

As a Spurs fan I’m not disappointed in the slightest with all of this, it is hopefully our time to keep pushing on. After many years we have a really solid manager who has done wonders since he joined the club. We might not have won anything under him yet, but we’re getting there and doing it while breaking even in the transfer market and having a wage bill less than half of that of our rivals.

lostboysaint

You were doing so well until you mentioned Walcott. There's nothing fat, happy or lazy about him as he proves when he's had the chance to get an England shirt on or when, for several months at the beginning of last season, he's the club's top scorer - only to get dropped.............

Walcott is the absolute example of why the myth of Wenger and "player development" should be exploded. He left Southampton as a goal-scoring striker. His finishing was excellent and natural. Wenger not only managed to somehow turn an excellent striker into a right winger (this is where someone tries to tell me about Henry without any understanding of what Henry was doing in Europe and also that Henry cost £10m in the days that £10m was actually worth something) but also managed to bleed Walcott dry of any self-confidence and natural goalscoring ability that he had. And every time it has threatened to return he's either got injured (something not confined to him in the Arsenal ranks - Kieran Gibbs, Alex O-C amongst others in recent years!) or Wenger has simply benched him for tactical reasons, see last season.

There's little or no doubt that Wenger revolutionised the English game - most particularly the professionalism. But he hasn't evolved with it since in the way that Ferguson did and Mourinho and now Pochettino have.

mr_goo

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

You don't think the speed & athleticism of games is so high now that to get there without the juice you really have to push your training quite hard?

I'm not dying on this hill, just a question.

Rick, why the interest in football - thought you hated it? Or is that just Chelsea fans given where you live?

latter.

My grandfather was called up to play for Holland (but couldn't afford it so never went). He framed the invites.

The excessive tribalism bores me intensely.

Fair enough. Coincidentally my grandfather was a 'Boro player (449 appearances) and an England player (capped twice).

You'll be pleased to know they're taking a wrecking ball to Stamford Bridge in the next 2 years - to build a 60,00 seater on the same site . Time to move?

That's quite an illustrious relative to have been in the family.

Sorry that the Cherries dispatched your boys again. Very pleased to see Callum Wilson back in the starting line up since January, and straight onto the score sheet and providing the 3rd. But the plaudits must go to Jack Simpson who starred (MoM) at centre back and scored on his first team debut. Cherries need all the defenders they can get.

Stevo_666

Mr Goo wrote:

That's quite an illustrious relative to have been in the family.

Sorry that the Cherries dispatched your boys again. Very pleased to see Callum Wilson back in the starting line up since January, and straight onto the score sheet and providing the 3rd. But the plaudits must go to Jack Simpson who starred (MoM) at centre back and scored on his first team debut. Cherries need all the defenders they can get.

Thanks - pity none of the footballing talent got passed down or I'd be a long retired multi-millionaire by now. Or a pundit with a side line in crisp adverts.

Stevo_666

City Boy wrote:

Rather than a vanity toy, it seems to me that the City owners are extremely commercially astute and have used the purchase of the club as stepping stone to much more diverse portfolio of investment opportunities in the Northwest.

Looks like some of that investment accidentally made its way down to Wolverhampton last night

city_boy

Stevo 666 wrote:

City Boy wrote:

Rather than a vanity toy, it seems to me that the City owners are extremely commercially astute and have used the purchase of the club as stepping stone to much more diverse portfolio of investment opportunities in the Northwest.

Looks like some of that investment accidentally made its way down to Wolverhampton last night

True.

Although it was my son's first visit to the Etihad on his own (well, with his mates) so at least he got his money's worth.

His mum wasn't too impressed that he wasn't in 'til nearly midnight though!

mr_goo

Oh b0ll0x! Yet another home defeat.

motogull

Mr Goo wrote:

Oh b0ll0x! Yet another home defeat.

Steady on fella, losing to the reigning champions is nothing to get upset over.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey

Classic Mourinho win.