Fixtures March 31st - Manchester City - Etihad Stadium - 3:30 Pm

Kick-Off

       Injuries                 Steve Gleiber



Get the Latest Post Go to the Bottom of Page It is currently Tue Mar 19, 2024 3:13 am

All times are UTC


  


Reply to topic

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], warrior and 34 guests

 
Post #472001  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

socrates wrote:
bubblechris wrote:
Take the money for Sanchez. City will have an even bigger problem than us fitting him into their team thus causing chaos that will benefit us.

Sell Ox as in all the years we've had him he has rarely strung a number of good games together. Possibly not his fault but we have several replacements for his position just as good as he is.


Selling City our only worldclass player for less than his market value is madness, allowing him to join in a years time for free is even more crazy unless we can afford to lose the money. We are basically stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Imagine us getting Aguero for <£50m, we'd be jumping for joy.

It's a right mess with all these players entering the last year of their contracts. It may well be a damage limitation exercise now.
Lift your chin off your chest! Don't worry - we'll sell Sanchez, Ox and any other semi-detachee and use the money to buy Ronaldo. Simple. Win the quadruple next season; Wenger manager of the year; England win The Ashes and Continuity Corbyn takes over at Number 10.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472002  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:45 pm 

old man of hoy wrote:
Bernard wrote:
The London Live channel is currently showing The Arsenal Stadium Mystery, a murder whodunnit movie made in the late thirties. To be honest, I didn't really get into it from the bit I saw. But I did look up what Wikipedia says about the film.

The start of the second paragraph on Wikipedia says "The film is a murder mystery set, as the title suggests, at the Arsenal Stadium, Highbury, London, then the home of Arsenal Football Club, who were at the time one of the dominant teams in English football." Am I right in thinking that implies Wikipedia no longer consider Arsenal one of the dominant teams in English football? Oh dear, are we in such decline that an independent online encyclopedia no longer considers Arsenal as even 'one of' the dominant football clubs in the country?
Everybody knows you can't trust Wikipedia, but to be fair that comment is right. We have not been one of the dominant teams in English football since the period 1998-2005. We do win the FA Cup a fair amount though. So, Wiki's words are nothing to do with decline, just an accurate statement.

Sorry but periods of not being one of the best teams does not, in my view, stop a club from being one of the dominant forces. I think Liverpool still warrant being seen as such, as did Manchester United pre-Ferguson and still now post-Ferguson. If Wikipedia is right and Arsenal are genuinely not one of the dominant forces, then I see that as a decline. Moreover, I see it as a reason to get rid of the person or people responsible for that decline. If that is one of Wenger or Kroenke, I'd like to see the back of the guilty party. If it's both of them together, which personally I believe it is, I hope they both bugger off.

I accept Wikipedia said team, not club or force. But would they imply Manchester United are no longer one of the dominant teams? I doubt it, despite their disappointing run in the league since Ferguson left. That's because, my guess would be, they still perceive them as one of the biggest or dominant clubs, with the same thing applying to Liverpool even though they haven't won the league for donkey's years. But they said it about Arsenal, and I do think a possible reason is what they perceive as our decline as a club.


  
 
 
Post #472003  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

Bernard wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
Everybody knows you can't trust Wikipedia, but to be fair that comment is right. We have not been one of the dominant teams in English football since the period 1998-2005. We do win the FA Cup a fair amount though. So, Wiki's words are nothing to do with decline, just an accurate statement.

Sorry but periods of not being one of the best teams does not, in my view, stop a club from being one of the dominant forces. I think Liverpool still warrant being seen as such, as did Manchester United pre-Ferguson and still now post-Ferguson. If Wikipedia is right and Arsenal are genuinely not one of the dominant forces, then I see that as a decline. Moreover, I see it as a reason to get rid of the person or people responsible for that decline. If that is one of Wenger or Kroenke, I'd like to see the back of the guilty party. If it's both of them together, which personally I believe it is, I hope they both bugger off.

I accept Wikipedia said team, not club or force. But would they imply Manchester United are no longer one of the dominant teams? I doubt it, despite their disappointing run in the league since Ferguson left. That's because, my guess would be, they still perceive them as one of the biggest or dominant clubs, with the same thing applying to Liverpool even though they haven't won the league for donkey's years. But they said it about Arsenal, and I do think a possible reason is what they perceive as our decline as a club.
You sure do read a lot into a few lines about a 1930s film written on an online 'encyclopaedia' that anyone can contribute to! And if Liverpool are currently a dominant team/force/club then the meaning of the word has changed beyond all recognition.

Time to take the anti-Wenger/Kroenke pot off the oven - you'll burn the stew.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472004  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:43 pm 

old man of hoy wrote:
And if Liverpool are currently a dominant team/force/club then the meaning of the word has changed beyond all recognition.

Time to take the anti-Wenger/Kroenke pot off the oven - you'll burn the stew.

Liverpool are a huge club though. Look at the size of their fan base. Is it only about the state of the current team for you? If so, how many years of having an under-performing team does it take for you to downgrade a club? Because it only took some three or four years, maybe five, of Abramovich's ownership (I'm pretty sure it wasn't that long after Cole's departure because that was a justification you used) for you to declare Chelsea as a bigger, and presumably thus more dominant, club than Arsenal.

By the way I'll keep going about Kroenke and Wenger because they're the people I see as primarily responsible for Arsenal's current problems.


  
 
 
Post #472005  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 8102

Liverpool are about as dominant as a Theo Walcott performance

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472006  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 4206
Location: Turnford, Broxbourne, Herts

Chile playing Cameroon in Moscow. Sanchez on the bench I think, earlier heard a report he had an ankle injury.

It's on ITV4 if anyone wants to watch it.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472007  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:58 pm 

dec wrote:
Liverpool are about as dominant as a Theo Walcott performance

They're still the second biggest club in England though. As I asked hoy, are you only seeing the word 'dominant' as relevant to the quality of the current team?


  
 
 
Post #472008  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 8102

Bernard wrote:
dec wrote:
Liverpool are about as dominant as a Theo Walcott performance

They're still the second biggest club in England though. As I asked hoy, are you only seeing the word 'dominant' as relevant to the quality of the current team?

Not just the current team. All they have won in the last decade is a single League Cup. They haven't won the league in 27 years.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472009  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 8:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:15 am
Posts: 2691

'at the time one of the dominant teams in English football'? Ha! We won the league five times in eight years. We were the dominant team. Great work, Wikipedia - you suck.

_________________
'It's the gaps what rocks' - Steve Marriott


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472010  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 9:00 pm 

dec wrote:
Bernard wrote:
They're still the second biggest club in England though. As I asked hoy, are you only seeing the word 'dominant' as relevant to the quality of the current team?

Not just the current team. All they have won in the last decade is a single League Cup. They haven't won the league in 27 years.

But hoy said Wikipedia were correct in not calling Arsenal dominant by whatever measure they were using. I was surprised. I think Arsenal and Liverpool both should be. If they're not, it represents a decline that needs to be sorted out, although I don't care if Liverpool fail to sort themselves out.


  
 
 
Post #472011  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 9:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 8102

Bernard wrote:
dec wrote:
Not just the current team. All they have won in the last decade is a single League Cup. They haven't won the league in 27 years.

But hoy said Wikipedia were correct in not calling Arsenal dominant by whatever measure they were using. I was surprised. I think Arsenal and Liverpool both should be. If they're not, it represents a decline that needs to be sorted out, although I don't care if Liverpool fail to sort themselves out.

Both Arsenal and Liverpool have gone into decline. There is no doubt about that. Liverpool's fall is considerably greater.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472012  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 am
Posts: 12622
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

dec wrote:
Kiwi

How does a blue-eyed, blond lad with a Scottish surname get to play for the Maoris? :icon_scratch:



yes it is a bit of mystery Dec ...they mention Ngati Tuwheretoa bloodlines which seems a bit vague instead of saying his grandmother was Maori . http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/ar ... d=11482487
His trial at first five eight was a bit of a disaster , he is a very potent player for the Chiefs at full back

Ruminating on the subject ; vaguely remember a mate of mine [ now dead ] mentioning he had a Maori mother and you'd never have guessed .

We are looking good in the America's Cup but there is a five day lay over ; so time for Larry Ellison to fly in every yachting expert on the planet , build a new boat , spend two billion dollars in chump change , arrange a three day rap concert outside the Kiwi hotel
...... all to massage his enormous ego .... he's worse than Kroenke


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472013  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 am
Posts: 12622
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

bubblechris wrote:
kiwipete wrote:

Read my explanation you bed wetting old nanny ..... engage your two remaining brain cells

The American connection is exactly as my friend from Townsville says .... you couldn't get a more graphic example of penalising people without due cause than the way white Americans treated African Americans .


Unfortunately a bleedin awful analogy.


Why ..... on reflection I'm at a total loss as to the hysteria surrounding that comment .

It is not as if I've called anyone a n******ger .

"The KKK liked nothing better than to lynch a few n********gers ........." ISIS likes nothing better than to behead a few infidels " ?


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472014  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:10 pm 

dec wrote:
Bernard wrote:
But hoy said Wikipedia were correct in not calling Arsenal dominant by whatever measure they were using. I was surprised. I think Arsenal and Liverpool both should be. If they're not, it represents a decline that needs to be sorted out, although I don't care if Liverpool fail to sort themselves out.

Both Arsenal and Liverpool have gone into decline. There is no doubt about that. Liverpool's fall is considerably greater.

Yes I would agree that they've gone into decline. I couldn't care less about Liverpool, but that's why I would like to see the back of those responsible for Arsenal's decline. I see that as both Wenger and Kroenke. Who else is there? But size wise, I believe they should both be domineering clubs.


  
 
 
Post #472015  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 am
Posts: 12622
Location: Rotorua New Zealand

Bernard wrote:
The London Live channel is currently showing The Arsenal Stadium Mystery, a murder whodunnit movie made in the late thirties. To be honest, I didn't really get into it from the bit I saw. But I did look up what Wikipedia says about the film.

The start of the second paragraph on Wikipedia says "The film is a murder mystery set, as the title suggests, at the Arsenal Stadium, Highbury, London, then the home of Arsenal Football Club, who were at the time one of the dominant teams in English football." Am I right in thinking that implies Wikipedia no longer consider Arsenal one of the dominant teams in English football? Oh dear, are we in such decline that an independent online encyclopedia no longer considers Arsenal as even 'one of' the dominant football clubs in the country?

A multitude of equations can be used here .... you could pitch your argument either way . I don't see any problem with their wording we were dominant then , A Sahara desert from '53 to 71 .... the Gobi desert from 72 to 89 except for the oasis of 1979 .
Are we a dominant now ...not really but then again it depends how many teams can be fitted into the dominant equation .
1990s we were now the mantle can be held by Man U , City , Chelsea

If we hadn't beaten Chelsea we definetely wouldn't qualify .

All manner of criteria can be cobbled up to fit any dominace discussion ...fan base , buying power , stadium size , recent success , type of trophies won , history .


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472016  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

Bernard wrote:
old man of hoy wrote:
And if Liverpool are currently a dominant team/force/club then the meaning of the word has changed beyond all recognition.

Time to take the anti-Wenger/Kroenke pot off the oven - you'll burn the stew.

Liverpool are a huge club though. Look at the size of their fan base. Is it only about the state of the current team for you? If so, how many years of having an under-performing team does it take for you to downgrade a club? Because it only took some three or four years, maybe five, of Abramovich's ownership (I'm pretty sure it wasn't that long after Cole's departure because that was a justification you used) for you to declare Chelsea as a bigger, and presumably thus more dominant, club than Arsenal.

By the way I'll keep going about Kroenke and Wenger because they're the people I see as primarily responsible for Arsenal's current problems.
Typically you've moved the goalposts. Of course Liverpool are a huge club but they are not dominant, which was where you started with a tenuous reading of the content of a Wikipedia film article! In defining dominance in football there is only one measure that would mean anything to 99.9% of people i.e. great, even overwhelming success on the pitch. Size of fan base, history, income generated may be of interest but do not equal dominance.

As for Chelsea and Arsenal for well over a decade there is no argument that the Blues are the more dominant team in terms of their general success, meeasured by trophies, and their record in games between the two sides. Regrettably they are now the bigger club too. Fuelled of course by rotten money.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472017  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

Bernard wrote:
dec wrote:
Not just the current team. All they have won in the last decade is a single League Cup. They haven't won the league in 27 years.

But hoy said Wikipedia were correct in not calling Arsenal dominant by whatever measure they were using. I was surprised. I think Arsenal and Liverpool both should be. If they're not, it represents a decline that needs to be sorted out, although I don't care if Liverpool fail to sort themselves out.
No! You are getting your wires crossed. I agreed with the Wiki comment that Arsenal were one of the dominant teams in the 30s, and as has been pointed by McQ that is an understatement because at that time we were the dominant team - nobody else came close.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472018  Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

kiwipete wrote:
bubblechris wrote:

Unfortunately a bleedin awful analogy.


Why ..... on reflection I'm at a total loss as to the hysteria surrounding that comment .

It is not as if I've called anyone a n******ger .

"The KKK liked nothing better than to lynch a few n********gers ........." ISIS likes nothing better than to behead a few infidels " ?
Kiwi - no one has been at all hysterical in pointing out that the use of that word on here is out of order. You surely can't be at a total loss as to why there have been objections. To carry on repeating it is shameful.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472019  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:38 am 

Hoy, do you no longer consider Manchester United dominant?

Also, as you no longer see the word as relevant to Arsenal, why do you not equate that with a decline?


  
 
 
Post #472020  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:58 am 

Let me try and make my position clearer on the debate. I started off undecided about some aspects of it. But overall I think Arsenal have declined in recent years, so on that I'm certainly more in agreement with dec as unless I misread it, hoy wanted to avoid associating Arsenal's non-dominance, or lack of dominance, with a decline. That's how I took his comment "Wiki's words are nothing to do with decline, just an accurate statement." I can't help wondering if he did that to not open Wenger up to any blame, although only he knows the answer to that and I might be wrong.

However, I do believe Arsenal is easily a big enough club, and as kiwi pointed out there are various factors that contribute to how big a club is, to be one of the dominant forces in English football. Therefore, if we are falling short of that I'd suggest we are underachieving, which was the reason I brought up wanting to see the back of both Wenger and Kroenke, which hoy made reference to.

What I will say is that I don't think a country need only have a single dominant club, even when over periods one club has had more success than another or others. Scotland have traditionally had Rangers and Celtic; Spain have had Real Madrid and Barcelona; Italy has had Juventus, AC Milan and Inter; while England have traditionally had Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal. But it's also a changeable list, and I'd accept Chelsea are now a dominant force in English football. If they've replaced Arsenal rather than added themselves to the list, it's what I find disappointing. Maybe Liverpool have fallen off the list as well? If they have I would make the same point about them as I did Arsenal. They are easily a big enough club to be one of England's dominant forces. Have City joined it yet?


  
 
 
Post #472021  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

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

You know it is summer when people are arguing over the meaning of the wording used in an encyclopaedia that babu edits.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472022  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:06 am 

Exiled wrote:
You know it is summer when people are arguing over the meaning of the wording used in an encyclopaedia that babu edits.

I'm sure you must have seen the film. What do you think of it? Allison had a talking part in it.


  
 
 
Post #472023  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

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

Bernard wrote:
Exiled wrote:
You know it is summer when people are arguing over the meaning of the wording used in an encyclopaedia that babu edits.

I'm sure you must have seen the film. What do you think of it? Allison had a talking part in it.


As a film it is nothing amazing but a good solid detective movie of the age - really it is the clips of Arsenal that make it special otherwise it may have been forgotten, like many films of that period.

The book was rather popular going into various re-prints (then slightly re-written to include post-war players and released as Arsenal Stadium Mystery - the Replay). There was a Guild Services version for soldiers during the war and it was also reprinted in both German and French (may be others that I don't have).

If people are interested in films of the thirties that feature Arsenal there is actually an earlier one that gets ignored but features some great clips of Highbury http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023165/

Edit - Italian not German.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472024  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:53 am 

Exiled wrote:
Bernard wrote:
I'm sure you must have seen the film. What do you think of it? Allison had a talking part in it.

As a film it is nothing amazing but a good solid detective movie of the age - really it is the clips of Arsenal that make it special otherwise it may have been forgotten, like many films of that period.

The book was rather popular going into various re-prints (then slightly re-written to include post-war players and released as Arsenal Stadium Mystery - the Replay). There was a Guild Services version for soldiers during the war and it was also reprinted in both German and French (may be others that I don't have).

If people are interested in films of the thirties that feature Arsenal there is actually an earlier one that gets ignored but features some great clips of Highbury http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023165/

Edit - Italian not German.

I agree, it wasn't anything amazing. I didn't watch the whole film for that reason. I did see George Allison's speaking scene, although for all I know maybe he had more than one and I missed the other or others through my giving up watching it. I just looked him up, yes on Wikipedia. I didn't realise he was originally from Teesside. When I saw him talk on the film, I didn't notice a north-east accent.


  
 
 
Post #472025  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7962

Hi Bernard, Arsenal included a dvd of that movie a while back in the membership pack. It was pretty standard fare for movies of the age. I enjoyed the shots of the stadium but I think they missed an opportunity to really show it off a bit more. There's still some interesting scenes from an Arsenal historical point of view.

Ex thanks for the recommendation, never heard of that one but I'd be interested to see the Arsenal related footage...if that movie can still be found.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472026  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:27 am 

Sabir wrote:
Hi Bernard, Arsenal included a dvd of that movie a while back in the membership pack. It was pretty standard fare for movies of the age. I enjoyed the shots of the stadium but I think they missed an opportunity to really show it off a bit more. There's still some interesting scenes from an Arsenal historical point of view.

Ex thanks for the recommendation, never heard of that one but I'd be interested to see the Arsenal related footage...if that movie can still be found.

Did they? Good lord, I obviously never watched it.


  
 
 
Post #472027  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7962

You've obviously been missing out on other Arsenal goodies when renewing.
Did you use your leather passport holder? :icon_smile:


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472028  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

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

Sabir wrote:
Hi Bernard, Arsenal included a dvd of that movie a while back in the membership pack. It was pretty standard fare for movies of the age. I enjoyed the shots of the stadium but I think they missed an opportunity to really show it off a bit more. There's still some interesting scenes from an Arsenal historical point of view.

Ex thanks for the recommendation, never heard of that one but I'd be interested to see the Arsenal related footage...if that movie can still be found.


It's out of copyright so whilst it may be difficult to get a legit copy they often turn up on ebay for a few quid. If you can't get it give me a shout and I'll do you a copy*.

Haven't watched it in years but from memory it's the early and late part of the film that feature Highbury. The actual story is about a lottery ticket and the guy trying to get back to London from France to get it cashed after running away.




* Give it to Jr and ask him to copy it for me.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472029  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:11 pm 

Sabir wrote:
You've obviously been missing out on other Arsenal goodies when renewing.
Did you use your leather passport holder? :icon_smile:

No. :icon_mrgreen1:
The main thing I used was the sort of tweed bag they gave one year. Exiled kindly gave me a spare.


  
 
 
Post #472030  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

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

Possibility of Linfield v Celtic in the Champions League on July 12th.

Surely if drawn that way the dates must be changed?

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472031  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7962

Bernard wrote:
The main thing I used was the sort of tweed bag they gave one year. Exiled kindly gave me a spare.

Was it the same bag Chris Armstrong used to enjoy in the 90s...oh sorry you said 'tweed bag' lol


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472032  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:02 pm
Posts: 7962

Cheers Ex. And thanks also for sharing your Flickr page. Loads of treasures there, currently reading George's book.


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472033  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:26 pm 

Sabir wrote:
Bernard wrote:
The main thing I used was the sort of tweed bag they gave one year. Exiled kindly gave me a spare.

Was it the same bag Chris Armstrong used to enjoy in the 90s...oh sorry you said 'tweed bag' lol

I still use it to this day to carry programmes and such like in. It's really useful. Maybe it wasn't tweed, but a sort of linen-type material like that.


  
 
 
Post #472034  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 6:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

Bernard wrote:
Hoy, do you no longer consider Manchester United dominant?

Also, as you no longer see the word as relevant to Arsenal, why do you not equate that with a decline?
Most people would say United are not dominant in the way they were a while back when they used to regularly win the league or cups without too much trouble. These days it is shared out between them, City and Chelsea, and even us when it comes to the FA Cup.

Arsenal decline? Depends where you want to start with that. It could be argued we have been on the downward slope ever since our true greatness of the 30s when to call us dominant was accurate. Ever since then we have had periods of success, and none more so than under Arsene. We have declined since his peak year in 2004, but nowhere near as steeply as we did between 1958-1968, when only once did we finish in the top six and only once got as far as the sixth round of the FA Cup.

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472035  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 6:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:52 pm
Posts: 18758

Exiled wrote:
You know it is summer when people are arguing over the meaning of the wording used in an encyclopaedia that babu edits.
:laughing7:

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


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472036  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 18359

Whilst I'm a fan of Özil and Sanchez you can't deny that what they are currently doing is extremley damaging for the club and totally inconsiderate.

Basically we've made 2x 300 grand a week life changing offers but they will both drag this out now to the last moment on the off chance the club might add ten percent or something. This means that we can't plan for additions or squad building until they let us know if their both arseholes or not.

You absolute spunk monkeys, how much *%^@*** money is enough. I mean seriously.

Ox gets a pass on this, I'm genuinely surprised arsene hasn't tried him in goal yet as he's played everywhere else. That's gotta piss you off


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472037  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:30 pm
Posts: 8102

TOP GUN wrote:
Whilst I'm a fan of Özil and Sanchez you can't deny that what they are currently doing is extremley damaging for the club and totally inconsiderate.

Basically we've made 2x 300 grand a week life changing offers but they will both drag this out now to the last moment on the off chance the club might add ten percent or something. This means that we can't plan for additions or squad building until they let us know if their both arseholes or not.

You absolute spunk monkeys, how much *%^@*** money is enough. I mean seriously.

Ox gets a pass on this, I'm genuinely surprised arsene hasn't tried him in goal yet as he's played everywhere else. That's gotta piss you off

It's a business. Look at what Ronaldo is doing.

Ox wouldn't get a pass from me at all. He has never put a decent run of games together. He says that central midfield is his position but he has yet to show the composure, passing ability or positional sense to play there.

_________________
"I just kept going pretty lively. Them killers wasn't too healthy company."


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472038  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:02 pm
Posts: 18359

dec wrote:
TOP GUN wrote:
Whilst I'm a fan of Özil and Sanchez you can't deny that what they are currently doing is extremley damaging for the club and totally inconsiderate.

Basically we've made 2x 300 grand a week life changing offers but they will both drag this out now to the last moment on the off chance the club might add ten percent or something. This means that we can't plan for additions or squad building until they let us know if their both arseholes or not.

You absolute spunk monkeys, how much *%^@*** money is enough. I mean seriously.

Ox gets a pass on this, I'm genuinely surprised arsene hasn't tried him in goal yet as he's played everywhere else. That's gotta piss you off

It's a business. Look at what Ronaldo is doing.

Ox wouldn't get a pass from me at all. He has never put a decent run of games together. He says that central midfield is his position but he has yet to show the composure, passing ability or positional sense to play there.


Seriously how much *%^@*** money is enough ?

If your getting 280 grand a week why behave like a prize *%^@ to get another 20


 Profile  
 
 
Post #472039  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:22 pm 

old man of hoy wrote:
Most people would say United are not dominant in the way they were a while back when they used to regularly win the league or cups without too much trouble. These days it is shared out between them, City and Chelsea, and even us when it comes to the FA Cup.

Arsenal decline? Depends where you want to start with that. It could be argued we have been on the downward slope ever since our true greatness of the 30s when to call us dominant was accurate. Ever since then we have had periods of success, and none more so than under Arsene. We have declined since his peak year in 2004, but nowhere near as steeply as we did between 1958-1968, when only once did we finish in the top six and only once got as far as the sixth round of the FA Cup.

You always seem to try and compare Arsenal's current state with absolute low points in the dim and distant past to try and lessen how bad things may be getting under Wenger.

Rather than comparing ourselves to a decade from the late fifties, what performance on the pitch next season you you consider unacceptable for Arsenal and worthy of Wenger getting sacked? Nothing to do with any revelations about his personal life or corruption, which I simply don't believe there will be. I'm talking about the performance of the team on the pitch. Is there anything that would make you support his sacking?

Don't be restricted by the unlikelihood of some things. If it would take nothing less than relegation for you to support his dismissal, that's fine.


  
 
 
Post #472040  Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 pm
Posts: 4206
Location: Turnford, Broxbourne, Herts

TOP GUN wrote:
Whilst I'm a fan of Özil and Sanchez you can't deny that what they are currently doing is extremley damaging for the club and totally inconsiderate.

Basically we've made 2x 300 grand a week life changing offers but they will both drag this out now to the last moment on the off chance the club might add ten percent or something. This means that we can't plan for additions or squad building until they let us know if their both arseholes or not.

You absolute spunk monkeys, how much *%^@*** money is enough. I mean seriously.

Ox gets a pass on this, I'm genuinely surprised arsene hasn't tried him in goal yet as he's played everywhere else. That's gotta piss you off


Good to see you're beginning to smell the coffee......................


 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     [ 570665 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1 ... 11798, 11799, 11800, 11801, 11802, 11803, 11804 ... 14267  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], warrior and 34 guests


Search for:

Go to Top

Powered by php BB © 1993 - 2018