Fixtures Monday October 21st - Sheffield United - Bramall Lane - 8:00 Pm

Kick-Off

       Injuries                    Steve Gleiber



Get the Latest Post Go to the Bottom of Page It is currently Sat Oct 19, 2019 8:51 pm

All times are UTC


  


Reply to topic

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests

 
Post #479841  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:36 pm
Posts: 1790

Bernard wrote:
lomekian wrote:
Previous agreement with the player, rather than the club is what I'm implying - others have implied that Bremen may have had the transfer funded by Bayern, but that would be very very damaging if they were caught out, so I don't see it as implausible. Here Bayern have circumnavigated the rules using a loophole where any illegality is impossible to prove, but it is clearly in dodgy territory. If Wenger knew (as he certainly suggested) Bayern were involved in the initial transfer, as many others speculated, then technically he'd be within his rights to report them, but getting into a legal battle with Bayern would be very dangerous, and wouldn't have been worth it in this case.

There is no doubt that Bayern have at best exploited a loophole to reduce their own risk and to do Arsenal out of some money, but its impossible to prove categorically that they broke the law in doing so unless they were very naive, which I don't believe they are.

I always find that when there are unproven rumours supporting what you want to think happened you seem more than willing to accept them. But if unproven rumours contradict what you want to think happened you seem far more willing to question their reliability. Perhaps Wenger didn't know exactly what happened, whatever he chooses to suggest. Who knows how reliable the speculation of others is, as well?

To be honest, I think you're making too much fuss over very little. The money it cost Arsenal was pretty minimal considering the finances of the upper levels in modern football. Also, as I've heard rumours that Arsenal would much prefer to sell Sanchez to Bayern than a domestic rival (a rumour, but a highly logical one), even if there's truth in your accusations perhaps it hasn't annoyed Arsenal enough to make them unwilling to do business with them?


Fifa investigate transfers from time to time where illegality or breach of their own rules is suspected. I'd investigate the hell out of this one. You're falling into the opposite error that you're saying lomekian is, don't you think Bernard??

_________________
'At Arsenal it was always the same 8 or 9 who stayed behind after training. And I guarantee if you do that you'll become a better player'


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479842  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7959

old man of hoy wrote:
Didn't Ospina make important saves in the final? So long ago now I've forgotten...

He did make important saves and we won so it vindicated Wenger's decision to stick with him. And loyalty is a great quality overall. My point is though we started the game weaker and sometimes this loyalty can be to our detriment. If you go back there have been examples where Wenger has no doubt stuck with players in big games because of his policy to play certain players and we've lost important games due to squad players being chosen ahead of our first choice. Several times we threw away top spot in Champions league by fielding youngsters in the penultimate group stage games only for the regulars coming back in the final game to try and salvage top spot. There was also the final against Chavski in 2007 and that embarrassment against Tottenham in the league cup. And when you look at the list of some of those players who were given a chance, many didn't even make it, yet we more or less sacrificed the cup a couple of times so that they could play.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479843  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6277

AshleyGeorge wrote:
Fifa investigate transfers from time to time where illegality or breach of their own rules is suspected. I'd investigate the hell out of this one. You're falling into the opposite error that you're saying lomekian is, don't you think Bernard??

If they want to investigate it, fine. Whether they will is, I suppose, dependent on whether they suspect any wrongdoing has been done, or is significant.

_________________
Kroenke out!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479844  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 17804

Bernard wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
Didn't Ospina make important saves in the final? So long ago now I've forgotten...

Ospina's time-wasting was pretty effective but I doubt Čech would have let Chelsea's goal in.
You don't recall Ospina's four excellent saves from Costa twice, Kante and Moses, but do the deflected goal he let in! That is the lot of the keeper I guess.

_________________
"Young and caught up in life, we seldom watched the skies.”


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479845  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6277

Sabir wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
Didn't Ospina make important saves in the final? So long ago now I've forgotten...

He did make important saves and we won so it vindicated Wenger's decision to stick with him. And loyalty is a great quality overall. My point is though we started the game weaker and sometimes this loyalty can be to our detriment.

Thinking back though, were any of Ospina's saves in the final those you wouldn't have expected him to have kept out? I'm just trying to be fair. How many saves did he have to make, and were any of those he did keep out those where you wouldn't have expected him to save? That's why I mentioned his time-wasting, which was top notch.

_________________
Kroenke out!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479846  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 17804

Sabir wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
Didn't Ospina make important saves in the final? So long ago now I've forgotten...

He did make important saves and we won so it vindicated Wenger's decision to stick with him. And loyalty is a great quality overall. My point is though we started the game weaker and sometimes this loyalty can be to our detriment. If you go back there have been examples where Wenger has no doubt stuck with players in big games because of his policy to play certain players and we've lost important games due to squad players being chosen ahead of our first choice. Several times we threw away top spot in Champions league by fielding youngsters in the penultimate group stage games only for the regulars coming back in the final game to try and salvage top spot. There was also the final against Chavski in 2007 and that embarrassment against Tottenham in the league cup. And when you look at the list of some of those players who were given a chance, many didn't even make it, yet we more or less sacrificed the cup a couple of times so that they could play.
Yes it happens, but every manager has to address the issue of keeping all the players in a squad match fit and motivated?

_________________
"Young and caught up in life, we seldom watched the skies.”


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479847  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6277

old man of hoy wrote:
You don't recall Ospina's four excellent saves from Costa twice, Kante and Moses, but do the deflected goal he let in! That is the lot of the keeper I guess.

Do you really think any of those he kept out were really beyond the kind of shots any good keeper should have kept out? You use the word excellent. I think they were shots you would expect your keeper to save, much like the one he let in.

_________________
Kroenke out!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479848  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 17804

Bernard wrote:
Sabir wrote:
He did make important saves and we won so it vindicated Wenger's decision to stick with him. And loyalty is a great quality overall. My point is though we started the game weaker and sometimes this loyalty can be to our detriment.

Thinking back though, were any of Ospina's saves in the final those you wouldn't have expected him to have kept out? I'm just trying to be fair. How many saves did he have to make, and were any of those he did keep out those where you wouldn't have expected him to save? That's why I mentioned his time-wasting, which was top notch.
Of the four I mentioned I would say he did brilliantly to cut down Costa's space and stop his powerful first-half hit at a crucial stage of Chelsea pressure. Then in their dominant post-break period he made Kante's deflected shot look routine and also parried Moses drive very well. The other save from Costa at reasonably close range was all about his agility. OK you might say he was doing his job, but I think you rather damn him with faint praise by talking about his time wasting. I do prefer Čech in goal but in that final Ospina was no weak link at all.

_________________
"Young and caught up in life, we seldom watched the skies.”


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479849  Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 17804

Bernard wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
You don't recall Ospina's four excellent saves from Costa twice, Kante and Moses, but do the deflected goal he let in! That is the lot of the keeper I guess.

Do you really think any of those he kept out were really beyond the kind of shots any good keeper should have kept out? You use the word excellent. I think they were shots you would expect your keeper to save, much like the one he let in.
Let us disagree!

_________________
"Young and caught up in life, we seldom watched the skies.”


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479850  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Bernard wrote:
lomekian wrote:
As for the game Goetze was pretty quiet. Lewandowski gave one of the best centre-forward performances I've ever seen and Reus was excellent too.

I don't see "pretty quiet" being the same as stinking the game out. I still say Bayern would have preferred to play Dortmund instead of Real Madrid in the final, so I write off your accusation that they did it to undermine Dortmund's chances against Real as extremely far-fetched, to say the least.


At that point, Dortmund had a bloody good record against Bayern...and of course Bayern wanted to (and did) buy Dortmund's best players (bar Reus). It also possible that rather than to unsettle the team they may have just done it to urinate on the parade of a rival getting more media love...their intention isn't as important as the fact they did it...which cannot said to be entirely coincidental.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479851  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Bernard wrote:
lomekian wrote:
Previous agreement with the player, rather than the club is what I'm implying - others have implied that Bremen may have had the transfer funded by Bayern, but that would be very very damaging if they were caught out, so I don't see it as implausible. Here Bayern have circumnavigated the rules using a loophole where any illegality is impossible to prove, but it is clearly in dodgy territory. If Wenger knew (as he certainly suggested) Bayern were involved in the initial transfer, as many others speculated, then technically he'd be within his rights to report them, but getting into a legal battle with Bayern would be very dangerous, and wouldn't have been worth it in this case.

There is no doubt that Bayern have at best exploited a loophole to reduce their own risk and to do Arsenal out of some money, but its impossible to prove categorically that they broke the law in doing so unless they were very naive, which I don't believe they are.

I always find that when there are unproven rumours supporting what you want to think happened you seem more than willing to accept them. But if unproven rumours contradict what you want to think happened you seem far more willing to question their reliability. Perhaps Wenger didn't know exactly what happened, whatever he chooses to suggest. Who knows how reliable the speculation of others is, as well?

To be honest, I think you're making too much fuss over very little. The money it cost Arsenal was pretty minimal considering the finances of the upper levels in modern football. Also, as I've heard rumours that Arsenal would much prefer to sell Sanchez to Bayern than a domestic rival (a rumour, but a highly logical one), even if there's truth in your accusations perhaps it hasn't annoyed Arsenal enough to make them unwilling to do business with them?


Ah yes...there it is...accusing me of a failing and then doing exactly the same yourself without any sense of irony. :1laughter: :53big-emoticons:

Also my 'unproven rumours' are not that. Gnabry HAS joined Bayern. He has joined them for a fee far below market value. Using a clause that only they could activate. A year after Wenger implied and a number of journalists and unofficial sources said that this was exactly what was going to happen. On the DC site, we wrote that this is what we thought would happen based on the evidence. And it has happened.

Your rumour evidence actually has no outcome to support it in any way, bar Bayern telling anyone who will listen that they want the player, and others concluding that we'd rather sell to them. Sanchez is currently an Arsenal player, is he not?
And frankly, it is also meaningless evidence, because, of course, if they have to sell the player they'd rather sell him to anyone bar a domestic rival if the fee is right. That much is obvious. And there is no way the club would be unwilling to deal with someone they were unhappy with if it is in their best interests. We still sold Alex Song to Barca after they used every dirty trick in the book to get Fabregas and before him tapping up Hleb (so his form plummeted just when we needed him) and before that Petit and Overmars.

What you have said in your post above isn't evidence of anything. In fact it is meaningless.

But god forbid anyone criticise Bayern.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479852  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Bernard wrote:
AshleyGeorge wrote:
Fifa investigate transfers from time to time where illegality or breach of their own rules is suspected. I'd investigate the hell out of this one. You're falling into the opposite error that you're saying lomekian is, don't you think Bernard??

If they want to investigate it, fine. Whether they will is, I suppose, dependent on whether they suspect any wrongdoing has been done, or is significant.


Or who the parties in question are! Fifa as we know, have different rules for every team, hence Athletico Madrid having a transfer ban upheld for far less than Barca or Madrid got theirs postponed until they could conclude all their business for. Also, I doubt Bayern have done anything illegal bar a variation of tapping up that all the biggest teams do, as what I believe they have done with Bremen and the player is not technically illegal, just against accepted practice. It would be much more likely that a slight tweak to the rules comes into force next year.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479853  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

On the subject of Ospina, he makes good saves look simpler due to his speed off his line and his agility, but he also has some fundamental flaws which means he lets in goals that better keepers wouldn't. Ultimately I think the one at costa's feet Čech might not have made, as thats no longer a strength of his, but our number 1 probably would have saved the goal. Ultimately Ospina is a slightly better Almunia in terms of level. Not as bad as people think, but not at the level of an Arsenal keeper. We've had Kelsey, Wilson, Jennings, Seaman and Lehmann (and now Čech). Ospina isn't as good as Chesney or peak Lukic, but is better than others we've had for a year or two in between or great keepers.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479854  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 7:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Posts: 18133

lomekian wrote:
On the subject of Ospina, he makes good saves look simpler due to his speed off his line and his agility, but he also has some fundamental flaws which means he lets in goals that better keepers wouldn't. Ultimately I think the one at costa's feet Čech might not have made, as thats no longer a strength of his, but our number 1 probably would have saved the goal. Ultimately Ospina is a slightly better Almunia in terms of level. Not as bad as people think, but not at the level of an Arsenal keeper. We've had Kelsey, Wilson, Jennings, Seaman and Lehmann (and now Čech). Ospina isn't as good as Chesney or peak Lukic, but is better than others we've had for a year or two in between or great keepers.


Hi Lom,

Ospina is a brilliant shotstopper with great reactions, speed and bravery but he's on the short side for a PL keeper and does not fill the goal in the way that Čech does or have the presence. He is also far weaker on crosses and punching which unfortunately are not the weaknesses to have in the PL.

That said, he is ideally suited to the Spanish or Italian leagues where his weaknesses are less of an issue and a keeper of his calibre should be fetching a fee of £8-10m.

If the rumours of a fee of £3m are true then its ridiculous, we might as well gift wrap him with a pretty little bow.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479855  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6277

lomekian wrote:
Ah yes...there it is...accusing me of a failing and then doing exactly the same yourself without any sense of irony. :1laughter: :53big-emoticons:

Also my 'unproven rumours' are not that. Gnabry HAS joined Bayern. He has joined them for a fee far below market value. Using a clause that only they could activate. A year after Wenger implied and a number of journalists and unofficial sources said that this was exactly what was going to happen. On the DC site, we wrote that this is what we thought would happen based on the evidence. And it has happened.

Your rumour evidence actually has no outcome to support it in any way, bar Bayern telling anyone who will listen that they want the player, and others concluding that we'd rather sell to them. Sanchez is currently an Arsenal player, is he not?
And frankly, it is also meaningless evidence, because, of course, if they have to sell the player they'd rather sell him to anyone bar a domestic rival if the fee is right. That much is obvious. And there is no way the club would be unwilling to deal with someone they were unhappy with if it is in their best interests. We still sold Alex Song to Barca after they used every dirty trick in the book to get Fabregas and before him tapping up Hleb (so his form plummeted just when we needed him) and before that Petit and Overmars.

What you have said in your post above isn't evidence of anything. In fact it is meaningless.

But god forbid anyone criticise Bayern.

I genuinely try to not make out that unproven rumours are anything other than that. I suspect I make far more of an attempt in that respect than you, considering the level of times you strike me as doing it - apart from when they contradict what you have chosen to believe.

You appear to be suggesting that my idea based on rumours I've heard that Arsenal would rather sell to Bayern than a domestic rival is meaningless because he's still an Arsenal player, but then you go on to say they would despite the Gnabry issue because it would be in their best issues. Why not play it both ways? Oh sorry, you already are. I thought I said clearly that I've heard Arsenal would rather sell to Bayern than another English club, but it was only hearsay (or whatever words I used to make that point because it wasn't hearsay). I stand by it, and it appears logical, as you yourself now seem to think it's probably true. If you want to see an example of irony, try looking at your own posts on this. After all the fuss you've made about Bayern, you now seem to be saying that they bent rather than broke the rules. That's why I've said you were or are making too much of something fairly minor. If it happened it doesn't matter that much. as Gnabry presumably wanted to get away and you reckon it cost Arsenal a million quid, or was it Euros? Big deal. I simply don't think it deserved the reaction it got from you about Bayern. I won't call your reaction hysterical, just way over the top.

_________________
Kroenke out!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479856  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:02 pm
Posts: 6277

lomekian wrote:
At that point, Dortmund had a bloody good record against Bayern...and of course Bayern wanted to (and did) buy Dortmund's best players (bar Reus). It also possible that rather than to unsettle the team they may have just done it to urinate on the parade of a rival getting more media love...their intention isn't as important as the fact they did it...which cannot said to be entirely coincidental.

Perhaps you shouldn't have tried to claim it was to damage Dortmund's chances against Real Madrid then, which is what you did say. Whatever Dortmund's record at the time against Bayern was, and that season Dortmund hadn't beaten Bayern in the Bundesliga, I still cannot accept Bayern did it to increase their chances of facing Real Madrid in the final.

_________________
Kroenke out!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479857  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5603
Location: Townsville Australia

I was away for some holidays so did not look at the internet. Thanks to OMOH and Lom for that wonderful feedback regarding 'top top players incoming'. Lost the impetus to bother arguing it now because obviously I am correct in my views.

OMOH I agree with your views on Ospina in the Cup final. Čech made more than a few mistakes this year and to me looks like he his age is catching up as he is just that split second slower at reaction time. I back Wenger on Ospina in the cup final. He was obviously promised the cup games. It is not Ospinas fault the EPL challenge faded and it should not be presumed that Čech should fill in for the final.

I went to Melbourne to watch Brazil v Argentina. I was impressed by Messi as he just glides around the field.

Good luck to you Brits with negotiating a good deal in the Britexit after the election result. Do pollies not get it that going to the polls early to satisfy their personal ego does not go down well with the electors?

OH before I go what has Wenger done about signing those top top players. Have we had anyone confirm that we bid 150mil for Mbappe or was just that a dream. In case you are wondering WENGER OUT.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479858  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 25758
Location: The North Bank

Gaz from Oz wrote:
Lost the impetus to bother arguing it now because obviously I am correct in my views.


Never knew Theresa May posted on here.

_________________
Oh, to capture just one drop of all the ecstasy that swept that afternoon.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479859  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5603
Location: Townsville Australia

Exiled wrote:
Gaz from Oz wrote:
Lost the impetus to bother arguing it now because obviously I am correct in my views.


Never knew Theresa May posted on here.

We know everything you say and think. There is no privacy. welcome to the way most pollies would like it.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479860  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 10997

If anyone's not watching the new season of house of cards I recommend it. Spacey is excellent as usual but it seems to be raising the point i said on here the other day which is that we are getting the governments in which we deserve. Moan about trump, the tories, climate change denial etc but we choose these people and give them power. Spacey raises this in an excellent monologue.

Worth a watch

_________________
A manager is a guide. He takes a group of people and says, 'With you I can make us a success; I can show you the way.
Arsene Wenger


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479861  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:38 pm
Posts: 4789
Location: ɹǝpu∩uʍop

Kylian Mbappe seemingly rules out Arsenal move after claiming winning the Champions League is an 'obsession'

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-transfer-news-kylian-mbappe-rules-out-move-champions-league-obsession-a7785566.html


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479862  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 28054

I know we may end up 5th or worse next season but as a football fan I'm anxiously anticipating the upcoming season. It may be the most competitive I've ever seen since I started watching the league. I've never seen more than 3 clubs who could win the title. Back in '99/'00 Man Utd, Arsenal and Leeds. '02, Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool. Since Roman and City arrived it was either of those two or Man Utd. Yeah, us and Liverpool flattered a few times but generally it was no more than 3 clubs.

This season. Chelsea, Tottenaham, City for sure, Liverpool, Man Utd could challenge. We round that out. Week to week all the clubs will have to keep pace. Any prolonged slump and you are out. Mourinho will spend big this summer. No doubt about that. The real questions are going to be us and Liverpool. The others have a squad that doesn't need much tinkering. Klopp has to come good. I got a feeling if he doesn't start looking like he can win things the Anfield faithful will start asking questions.

_________________
"Satire is meant to ridicule power. Ridiculing people arbitrarily isn't satire, its bullying" - Pratchett


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479863  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 979

What a wind up that was on Arsenal Twitter earlier, said Arsenal were signing Cent Turan from Beksitas, even quoted Sky Sports news and John Cross, now been removed!


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479864  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:19 pm
Posts: 1944

TOP GUN wrote:
If anyone's not watching the new season of house of cards I recommend it. Spacey is excellent as usual but it seems to be raising the point i said on here the other day which is that we are getting the governments in which we deserve. Moan about trump, the tories, climate change denial etc but we choose these people and give them power. Spacey raises this in an excellent monologue.

Worth a watch


Superb series. I thought it was how one would imagine a Trump Presidency. So many dodgy dealing going on in background, is this too far from the truth?


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479865  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 2:58 am
Posts: 28054

Just read Liverpool supposedly have provided up to 200 million pounds for Klopp to spend.

_________________
"Satire is meant to ridicule power. Ridiculing people arbitrarily isn't satire, its bullying" - Pratchett


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479866  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 4:02 am
Posts: 1516
Location: Liverpool/Caernarfon

How good was Aaron Ramsey last night?

Best player on the pitch, and the Serbs have some good ones.

_________________
Gorau chwarae cyd chwarae


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479867  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 10997

Northbank Memories wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
If anyone's not watching the new season of house of cards I recommend it. Spacey is excellent as usual but it seems to be raising the point i said on here the other day which is that we are getting the governments in which we deserve. Moan about trump, the tories, climate change denial etc but we choose these people and give them power. Spacey raises this in an excellent monologue.

Worth a watch


Superb series. I thought it was how one would imagine a Trump Presidency. So many dodgy dealing going on in background, is this too far from the truth?


The problem with the show Steve is that it was initially pre trump so now trump has been elected he has effectively robbed the writers of all their potential storylines as our current reality is far more ridiculous than the corruption showed in the first few series of the show :laughing7:

_________________
A manager is a guide. He takes a group of people and says, 'With you I can make us a success; I can show you the way.
Arsene Wenger


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479868  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 1971

grantyboy wrote:
Daz wrote:

Totally disagree. We have some really good politicians, many of whom I am delighted to see back in parliament from both sides who do excellent work on behalf of their constituents sometimes in really difficult circumstances and for comparatively little financial reward.


Bollocks. They work for getting reelected and perpetuating their own view of the world. Evidenced by most opposition objecting merely because the other side thought of it rather than it being the good of the country.

Just having a wee browse through the last few days , as I don't come on here these days ( or many football sites) but I thought I'd see the election feedback out of curiosity

"Bollocks" your right your talking it , like everything there are some politicians who are out for themselves and many others who put in many selfless hours in return for a salary that is far less than many would make elsewhere , unfortunately the bar room cynic crap gets banded around by uninformed people

My local mp peter Kyle just increased his majority from 1200 to 18000, in an area such as hove , why do you think it went up that much ? ( hove hadn't had a Labour mp until, 1997) , he did it through being a hardworking sincere local mp ( and I predict in 5-10 years will be a national figure, maybe even leader) , I know this is true because I've spoken to him regularly and he has answered e mails to my wife on an issue she had with a detailed replies within half a day . Next door in Brighton caroline Lucas increased her majority as the greens only mp, she is a national figure, so unless your in denial you you will already know that she is far from being a careerist. That's two round here , there are many others , equally there are many other crap ones too.

I don't know maybe you have a bad local mp yourself which gives you that view


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479869  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Bernard wrote:
lomekian wrote:
Ah yes...there it is...accusing me of a failing and then doing exactly the same yourself without any sense of irony. :1laughter: :53big-emoticons:

Also my 'unproven rumours' are not that. Gnabry HAS joined Bayern. He has joined them for a fee far below market value. Using a clause that only they could activate. A year after Wenger implied and a number of journalists and unofficial sources said that this was exactly what was going to happen. On the DC site, we wrote that this is what we thought would happen based on the evidence. And it has happened.

Your rumour evidence actually has no outcome to support it in any way, bar Bayern telling anyone who will listen that they want the player, and others concluding that we'd rather sell to them. Sanchez is currently an Arsenal player, is he not?
And frankly, it is also meaningless evidence, because, of course, if they have to sell the player they'd rather sell him to anyone bar a domestic rival if the fee is right. That much is obvious. And there is no way the club would be unwilling to deal with someone they were unhappy with if it is in their best interests. We still sold Alex Song to Barca after they used every dirty trick in the book to get Fabregas and before him tapping up Hleb (so his form plummeted just when we needed him) and before that Petit and Overmars.

What you have said in your post above isn't evidence of anything. In fact it is meaningless.

But god forbid anyone criticise Bayern.

I genuinely try to not make out that unproven rumours are anything other than that. I suspect I make far more of an attempt in that respect than you, considering the level of times you strike me as doing it - apart from when they contradict what you have chosen to believe.

You appear to be suggesting that my idea based on rumours I've heard that Arsenal would rather sell to Bayern than a domestic rival is meaningless because he's still an Arsenal player, but then you go on to say they would despite the Gnabry issue because it would be in their best issues. Why not play it both ways? Oh sorry, you already are. I thought I said clearly that I've heard Arsenal would rather sell to Bayern than another English club, but it was only hearsay (or whatever words I used to make that point because it wasn't hearsay). I stand by it, and it appears logical, as you yourself now seem to think it's probably true. If you want to see an example of irony, try looking at your own posts on this. After all the fuss you've made about Bayern, you now seem to be saying that they bent rather than broke the rules. That's why I've said you were or are making too much of something fairly minor. If it happened it doesn't matter that much. as Gnabry presumably wanted to get away and you reckon it cost Arsenal a million quid, or was it Euros? Big deal. I simply don't think it deserved the reaction it got from you about Bayern. I won't call your reaction hysterical, just way over the top.


The sell on Arsenal got from David Bentley was £8m. Gnabry last year was better than Bentley ever was. By circumnavigating both a larger initial fee and any sell on clause, it has undoubtedly cost the club a significant amount of money. Further newspaper reports today state that Bayern themselves managed to secure a lower release clause for the player from Bremen at the time Bremen bought him. Did they make a payment to Bremen for the option. It actually makes the situation look dodgier than I first thought.

As for the rest, your capacity to be a spectacular pedant for the last 18 years I've been on here whilst refusing to accept being pulled up when being careless yourself comes as no surprise. No matter how much you suggest I am playing it both ways, I don't see why being annoyed with someone (which you can question but Wenger made it pretty clear) is inconsistent with still being willing to do business with them if it is more in your own interests than other available alternatives.

What I was saying, as you well know, is that you were dismissing what I said as unproven rumours (despite the fact that the only facts we have at least partly support what I was saying - with more coming out daily), before two sentences later using a self identified rumour as proof for me being incorrect and having no factual basis for my assertion.

I know attrition is your primary debating tactic, as is pretending to not insult me while insulting me (again), but your argument on this one subject is weak, contradictory and when breaking it down says nothing bar that you think I'm wrong because you don't like what i;m saying (while simultaneously saying that me being right is unimportant).

And then you tell me that I am playing it both ways. As I said before, however often I may stumble into accidental irony, I am no match for you. But then, after almost two decades I'm genuinely not sure if your postings are just an incredible commitment to parody.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479870  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

TOP GUN wrote:
If anyone's not watching the new season of house of cards I recommend it. Spacey is excellent as usual but it seems to be raising the point i said on here the other day which is that we are getting the governments in which we deserve. Moan about trump, the tories, climate change denial etc but we choose these people and give them power. Spacey raises this in an excellent monologue.

Worth a watch


Still not seen any. As good as the BBC original (I know the first season is a straight plot lift)?

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479871  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

john1 wrote:
How good was Aaron Ramsey last night?

Best player on the pitch, and the Serbs have some good ones.


Its true. When he finds his form, he's a fine footballer. And another who needs a new contract sharpish.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479872  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

TOP GUN wrote:
Northbank Memories wrote:

Superb series. I thought it was how one would imagine a Trump Presidency. So many dodgy dealing going on in background, is this too far from the truth?


The problem with the show Steve is that it was initially pre trump so now trump has been elected he has effectively robbed the writers of all their potential storylines as our current reality is far more ridiculous than the corruption showed in the first few series of the show :laughing7:


Yeah..some mates want me to be part of a series about Brexit negotiations, but the utter Tory cock-up of the last few weeks culminating with TM and the DUP is leading to almost daily re-writes!

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479873  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Pete on the beach wrote:
grantyboy wrote:

Bollocks. They work for getting reelected and perpetuating their own view of the world. Evidenced by most opposition objecting merely because the other side thought of it rather than it being the good of the country.

Just having a wee browse through the last few days , as I don't come on here these days ( or many football sites) but I thought I'd see the election feedback out of curiosity

"Bollocks" your right your talking it , like everything there are some politicians who are out for themselves and many others who put in many selfless hours in return for a salary that is far less than many would make elsewhere , unfortunately the bar room cynic crap gets banded around by uninformed people

My local mp peter Kyle just increased his majority from 1200 to 18000, in an area such as hove , why do you think it went up that much ? ( hove hadn't had a Labour mp until, 1997) , he did it through being a hardworking sincere local mp ( and I predict in 5-10 years will be a national figure, maybe even leader) , I know this is true because I've spoken to him regularly and he has answered e mails to my wife on an issue she had with a detailed replies within half a day . Next door in Brighton caroline Lucas increased her majority as the greens only mp, she is a national figure, so unless your in denial you you will already know that she is far from being a careerist. That's two round here , there are many others , equally there are many other crap ones too.

I don't know maybe you have a bad local mp yourself which gives you that view


Totally agree. The only reason Corbyn is still about is because he was a very very good local MP for a long time. Sadly most of the good ones round my way have retired and their replacements are not at the same level locally or more broadly.

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479874  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 am
Posts: 11657
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

.
Amidst the transfer speculation ..... considering his lack of input why aren't there moves afoot to offload Walcott , :blob8: and why is no - one interested in buying him .


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479875  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 am
Posts: 11657
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

lomekian wrote:
Yeah..some mates want me to be part of a series about Brexit negotiations


Take Bernard along , you two seem to sing from the same hymn sheet .


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479876  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

Robert Halfon, of Harlow, the one Tory minister who saw the Corbyn bounce coming, has been sacked, presumably for his record of actually giving a monkey's about poor people...

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479877  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:31 pm
Posts: 8152
Location: London

kiwipete wrote:
lomekian wrote:
Yeah..some mates want me to be part of a series about Brexit negotiations


Take Bernard along , you two seem to sing from the same hymn sheet .

:53big-emoticons:

_________________
"....its up for grabs now.........THOMAS!"


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479878  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5603
Location: Townsville Australia

kiwipete wrote:
.
Amidst the transfer speculation ..... considering his lack of input why aren't there moves afoot to offload Walcott , :blob8: and why is no - one interested in buying him .

You know yourself you get up close to roadkill and it has a smell about it. Same with manure. Theo has the whiff.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479879  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 5:38 pm
Posts: 4789
Location: ɹǝpu∩uʍop

Arsenal get tough with Alexis Sanchez and deliver brutal transfer ultimatum

http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/12/arsenal-get-tough-with-alexis-sanchez-and-deliver-brutal-transfer-ultimatum-6704415/


 Profile  
 
 
Post #479880  Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:04 am
Posts: 5603
Location: Townsville Australia

warrior wrote:

Too bad we didn't apply that rule to RVP. It all sounds good but really you could get around it by Man City finding a friendly German club - lets call them Schalke and get them to buy Alexis for a large amount of money.

Then say a day later sell them on to someone for 10% more - lets call that club Man City. Of course that takes trust between all the parties and lets be honest most of these clubs cannot be trusted. You might say that Arsenal can put in a clause that says the person cannot be sold on to a english club. However I think such a clause would be invalid as it is restraint of trade.

Its not like it hasn't happened before. I am pretty sure Clive Allen never played a game for us. All Mr Smiley games to play but wouldn't you love to be doing this type of work and playing with peoples minds. I would.

_________________
If this policy does not deliver then I would say we have to change it.
AW 150810


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     [ 511895 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 11994, 11995, 11996, 11997, 11998, 11999, 12000 ... 12798  Next

All times are UTC

Gooners Online - Click to see what Everyones Doing

Colour Key:  Visited Profile    Members Profile      Admin

Get Latest Post

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests


Search for:

Go to Top

Powered by php BB © 1993 - 2018