Liverpool are about as dominant as a Theo Walcott performance

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.

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.

'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.

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 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

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 " ?

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.

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 .

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

Surely if drawn that way the dates must be changed?

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

50% scorecard ...first totally wrong , far from a problem I think Sanchez would fit seemlessly into the Man City lineup . Better than Aguero in my book
Second correct ....... the Ox , to be applauded for his speed and work ethic , but some of his passing and shooting is abysmal ...not sure who replaces him though like for like

I wasn't "shamefully" waving it around like some red rag in front of a bull , and I am at a total loss , it must be the only word in the English language to have that distinction . People can F &^% and C*&^ quite happily on here ...but I value your slow paced narritives and takes on most things Old Man ..... so will never utter it again and leave you to concentrate on your current battle with Bernard ... Good Luck

Too late for a Newk v Bungert result I feel ... I'd liken an argument with Bernard to gently slipping into a quagmire with an octopus clamped over your face

You have to keep the retorts short , decisive don't leave him wriggle room a chance to move the goalposts , the ground , the venue ...and don't get me wrong ; I like Bernard .

How have I moved the goalposts? It was he who decided to associate decline with a decade from the late fifties.

Well I did actually say in the post above that we have declined since his peak year in 2004, which is not too far in the past? We see things differently. You are now obsessed with getting rid of the manager, whereas I am not overly-bothered either way because he will be leaving sooner rather than later anyway. The issue for me during all the airplane and wanting the team to lose nonsense, was not wanting to see him hounded out in a poor and undeserved way. Also, I couldn't see another obvious available alternative manager big enough to take over and improve Arsenal. I am a positive Arsenal fan, and after the brilliant win over Chelzee, my spirits are up. I am not interested in negativity.