Arsenal 2 - 1 Liverpool

Bayern Munich are the envy of every club in Europe, probably the world - and on the list of every club in Europe is Arsenal. Not sure I see your point there FatJan.

As you like making club comparison's why not do one with Arsenal and, I dunno say Leeds or Portsmouth - see how that one works out. We make no claims to be Bayern Munich or Portsmouth.

"It's not true though is it in truth. It's not all about spending. If it was Chelsea would have won everything 2005 - 2011. City since."

Erm, they pretty much have - with ManU tagging in every so often.
______________________________________________

Henry's cat - this is what you wrote. ManU tagging in every so often

They've 'tagged' in to 5 titles and the CL during this period. So no, sorry you are wrong

"Robbing you can't make reasoned points with evidence to the Gooners"

Which, ironically, is the most accurate and honest thing you've written in pretty much the entire thread.
_____________________________________________

Again, as you admit yourself. Forget the evidence...the evidence paints a true picture. Why would Gooners bother with that

Oh dear lord, this is all a bit desperate now.

I'm fully aware of ManU's success the point was it's been Chelsea and ManC, with ManU interspersed - or tagging in every so often. To say that is 'wrong' is more than just a little pedantic. I wasn't trying to make it sound as if ManU haven't won it much - why would I do that? You're the one who tries to make ridiculous claims through vague statements - please do not judge me by the standard of your honesty in conversation.

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 3 minutes ago
Bayern Munich are the envy of every club in Europe, probably the world - and on the list of every club in Europe is Arsenal. Not sure I see your point there FatJan.

As you like making club comparison's why not do one with Arsenal and, I dunno say Leeds or Portsmouth - see how that one works out. We make no claims to be Bayern Munich or Portsmouth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


We're talking of two of Europe's best clubs here who both built a new stadium within a year or so of each other when both were at the top of their respective leagues. In 2005 when the Allianz Arena was completed, Arsenal actually had a bigger revenue than Bayern, they were a richer club. They've managed to pay for a brand new stdium which cost £350m, but they've managed to maintain their success throughout. Because of their successes, they've successfully managed to increase their revenue int he last 7/8 years to make them the 3rd/4th richest team int he world, without charging their fans exorbitant prices, whilst still paying for a stadium.

I think the comparison is very apt.

" Forget the evidence...the evidence paints a true picture. Why would Gooners bother with that "

And this is genuinely bordering on the obsessive - did an Arsenal fan steal your lunch money or something? No-one has tried to distort evidence in this thread, except maybe you - just you, most of the other Liverpool fans are straight up.

I think you took more than just the word 'Respected' from RGK.

comment by FatJanMolby *I'm a boogie monster* (U4297)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 3 minutes ago
Bayern Munich are the envy of every club in Europe, probably the world - and on the list of every club in Europe is Arsenal. Not sure I see your point there FatJan.

As you like making club comparison's why not do one with Arsenal and, I dunno say Leeds or Portsmouth - see how that one works out. We make no claims to be Bayern Munich or Portsmouth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


We're talking of two of Europe's best clubs here who both built a new stadium within a year or so of each other when both were at the top of their respective leagues. In 2005 when the Allianz Arena was completed, Arsenal actually had a bigger revenue than Bayern, they were a richer club. They've managed to pay for a brand new stdium which cost £350m, but they've managed to maintain their success throughout. Because of their successes, they've successfully managed to increase their revenue int he last 7/8 years to make them the 3rd/4th richest team int he world, without charging their fans exorbitant prices, whilst still paying for a stadium.

I think the comparison is very apt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So it probably is, I have no idea - start a thread about it. Maybe we can both find out. Like I said, Arsenal are not Bayern, maybe they could learn a thing or two.

Hold on....you are clearly wrong. At least have the honestly to admit it

United have won 5 titles, Chelsea have won 3 and City 1. Including United winning 3 in a row! How do you possibly justify a comment that United have tagged in every so often?

Utter nonsense Henry's cat...sorry

And again, you haven't disproved anything I've said by reasoned debate. You've simply said that since 2004 spending figures show Spurs & Liverpool spent more and that means everything.

Neither Spurs or Liverpool were Champions in 2004. Arsenal were.

"Hold on....you are clearly wrong."

How is what I said 'wrong'? Serisouly? What part is wrong? You may have inferred something from it that wasn't there, but it was not wrong. Get over it - it was a flippant remark, christ you quoted it wrong so your clearly understood it, or at least read it, wrong.

"And again, you haven't disproved anything I've said by reasoned debate."

<yawn> But, you haven't proved anything through debate, reasoned or otherwise. Seriously, you've given your opinion, again and again, and I've politely discussed your opinion with you. You've called me names, my club names, slated the entire fanbase and here we are - I've proved nothing and nor have you. Fine, we've both wasted out time.

"You've simply said that since 2004 spending figures show Spurs & Liverpool spent more and that means everything."

I have not said that. You have made numerous claims about Arsenal's lack of achievment based on their spending, I have pointed out other clubs have spent much the same, or more, and achieved less (in some terms). I certainly have not said, or even slightly implied, it 'means everything'. I know this for a fact, as that would be a stupid thing to say as it makes no sense.

"Neither Spurs or Liverpool were Champions in 2004. Arsenal were."

So? That's your notional baseline. It means pretty much nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Hnerys cat;

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
"Well no actually we've also won an FA cup and been to various other finals. We also came 2nd in the league with 86 points. Arsenal have not done any of that. They got to a couple of finals and failed both."

Seriously read this back, apart from the FA Cup win (which I actually forgot about, apologies), you're saying nothing - you even contradict yourself.
-----------------------

Erm, no, I'm saying since you last won a trophy we have won the CL, the FA cup and the league cup whilst also getting to two other major finals and being the only team in history to lose two games in the league and not win it. We've been horribly mismanaged in that time and that's my point. I didn't have to pay £90 to see it either.

Where did lack of achievement by spending come into it?

Where have I called anyone names?

Who has achieved less than Arsenal?

I've said that Arsene Wenger has produced an average performance over the last 9 years. Certainly nothing that he should be defended for and nothing that he should be smugly throwing out there as a great achievement in that time.

Has he justified his no doubt massive new contract? No. I've suggested he takes a 50% pay cut and gains the other 50% back by actually winning things. Does anyone agree?

I've asked who are the clubs that should have been finishing above Arsenal for the Top 4 finish during this period? So far a very limited response that Spurs & Liverpool spent more than us is it. Nothing else! No other reasons...

They spent more so obviously they should

When I've pointed out that this isn't right. That Arsenal had a Champion winning squad in 2004 with Liverpool 30 points behind and Spurs 45 points behind so is it reasonable (as apparently it is according to some) that these clubs suddenly started beating Arsenal in terms of league position because they brought some players and Arsenal moved stadiums.

Like Arsenal suddenly lost their Title winning squad of players. Did they lose them in a bus on the way from Highbury?

When I point out that between 2005 and 2010 Liverpool conclusively outperformed Arsenal this is ignored.

When I point out that Arsene has had since 1996 to produce a strategy for youth development that develops enough talent to compete at the top table and negate the spending of other clubs this is ignored! I've mentioned Barcelona as a prime example...

When I've pointed out that United have competed very successfully with the new money the response was that they 'tagged along'.

They didn't just tag along, they have been the dominant force. Can anyone reasonably argue otherwise?

So overall looking at the success of clubs like United, Barca, Bayern and Liverpool to an extent the evidence suggests that Arsene has been treading water over the last 9 years and making excuses & multiple bad decisions.

Usually at football clubs this means a change, a new direction, new ideas!

Going back, as Jose said. If he wins nothing during the four years of this contract and doesn't earn a new one...he will leave London and never come back!