Arsenal Post Match Thread.

[Cityfan]

Got to echo this and what @cleavers and @SWP's back have said. We were far the better side, in both halves.

After the game I thought we'd dominated both halves and Arsenal scored off their only chance. Never seen a Wenger team sit so deep and have so little of the ball.

I heard a load of comments from rag mates and media saying "game of two halves" and Arsenal were the better team in the first half. So I decided to watch it back to make sure my eyes weren't decieving me.

Sure enough, on second play, we dominated them in both halves, just like I thought! There was a stat on screen after 20 minutes saying the ball had been in Arsenal's third for 40% of the time and in our third 10% of the time. If that's not dominating, then I don't know what is! Neville even said City are dominating.

20 minutes later, with the game following a similar pattern, Neville and Tyler started saying Arsenal had dominated the half and City had been poor! I couldn't believe what I was hearing! I'm not one for conspiracies, but either Neville got out the wrong side of bed, or he was being "encouraged" by his Producer to big up Arsenal.

Another stat flashed up after about 70 ninutes that showed Cech had made 33 passes - more than any other Arsenal player. Now if that's not a sign that they've been dicked for the whole game, I'd love to see one.

I think that's the problem with your casual football fan, they don't pay too much attention, they rely on the commentstors to analyse the game for them. The rest of the media picks up on it, amd so the narrative of the game becomes Arsenal battered us first half and we scored 2 offside goals in the second.

If you actually watch the game without commentary and look at what actually happened, we dominated both halves, Arsenal scored off their only shot on goal, they forced 1 corner and had 39% of the ball. We absolutely battered them from beginning to end. The only difference in the second half is we had more of a cutting edge.

Mmm I put my thoughts earlier in the thread without recourse to the pundits as I had just got back from the match.
I thought we played well both half's but I don't think we really battered Arsenal first half , although they didn't create many clear cut chances apart from their goal they definitely looked dangerous on the break and I thought played pretty well.
The idea that we were poor first half is I agree nonsense , but I thought it was two good teams playing fairly well with us dominating possession through being at home but Arsenal looking dangerous when breaking.
Second half we didn't allow them them any freedom and were better but although I definitely don't buy the agenda that were poor first half, I don't think Arsenal were either.

 

[Burtonblue]

Got to echo this and what @cleavers and @SWP's back have said. We were far the better side, in both halves.

After the game I thought we'd dominated both halves and Arsenal scored off their only chance. Never seen a Wenger team sit so deep and have so little of the ball.

I heard a load of comments from rag mates and media saying "game of two halves" and Arsenal were the better team in the first half. So I decided to watch it back to make sure my eyes weren't decieving me.

Sure enough, on second play, we dominated them in both halves, just like I thought! There was a stat on screen after 20 minutes saying the ball had been in Arsenal's third for 40% of the time and in our third 10% of the time. If that's not dominating, then I don't know what is! Neville even said City are dominating.

20 minutes later, with the game following a similar pattern, Neville and Tyler started saying Arsenal had dominated the half and City had been poor! I couldn't believe what I was hearing! I'm not one for conspiracies, but either Neville got out the wrong side of bed, or he was being "encouraged" by his Producer to big up Arsenal.

Another stat flashed up after about 70 ninutes that showed Cech had made 33 passes - more than any other Arsenal player. Now if that's not a sign that they've been dicked for the whole game, I'd love to see one.

I think that's the problem with your casual football fan, they don't pay too much attention, they rely on the commentstors to analyse the game for them. The rest of the media picks up on it, amd so the narrative of the game becomes Arsenal battered us first half and we scored 2 offside goals in the second.

If you actually watch the game without commentary and look at what actually happened, we dominated both halves, Arsenal scored off their only shot on goal, they forced 1 corner and had 39% of the ball. We absolutely battered them from beginning to end. The only difference in the second half is we had more of a cutting edge.

Your last paragraph sums it up beautifully!
We were the better team over the 90 and would have won by a bigger margin if we had taken just some of our (several) chances.

 

[Dax777]

Of course, and that's why we're meant to play a high line with a 'hard' press. As long as the team are singing from the same hymn sheet these situations won't occur.

Agreed. But Bluearmy is on some fake stats based on who started shit. Weakest argument ever. Lol

 

[Hart of the Matter]

Watched the whole lot again. Tried it without sound and we mullered them first half as well. Play it with the commentators and feels like a different game. They really talked up Arsenal and barely acknowledged some of our great build up play. Apart from an eight minute quiet spell in the middle of the half. Too many people are influenced by commentators. Their tone was much more excited anytime they got near the box.

 

[Bluebee2]

Watched the whole lot again. Tried it without sound and we mullered them first half as well. Play it with the commentators and feels like a different game. They really talked up Arsenal and barely acknowledged some of our great build up play. Apart from an eight minute quiet spell in the middle of the half. Too many people are influenced by commentators. Their tone was much more excited anytime they got near the box.

Exactly, that's why I prefer to speak to others who go to the match rather than armchair fans who listen to the shit spouted on the TV.

 

[Father Paul]

What did they edge, other than being in front at half time ?

They didn't have the most territory, possession, nor the most passes, they had the same or very similar chances, so basically they scored we didn't, but in almost everything else (apart from media/pundit comments) they were no better than us.

Maybe it was my nerves but I thought that they were more likely to get a second in the first half. The goal after the break changed all that though.

 

[Father Paul]

Exactly, that's why I prefer to speak to others who go to the match rather than armchair fans who listen to the shit spouted on the TV.

Good point but OHHHHHH don't start that old debate again please

 

[SWP's back]

Got to echo this and what @cleavers and @SWP's back have said. We were far the better side, in both halves.

After the game I thought we'd dominated both halves and Arsenal scored off their only chance. Never seen a Wenger team sit so deep and have so little of the ball.

I heard a load of comments from rag mates and media saying "game of two halves" and Arsenal were the better team in the first half. So I decided to watch it back to make sure my eyes weren't decieving me.

Sure enough, on second play, we dominated them in both halves, just like I thought! There was a stat on screen after 20 minutes saying the ball had been in Arsenal's third for 40% of the time and in our third 10% of the time. If that's not dominating, then I don't know what is! Neville even said City are dominating.

20 minutes later, with the game following a similar pattern, Neville and Tyler started saying Arsenal had dominated the half and City had been poor! I couldn't believe what I was hearing! I'm not one for conspiracies, but either Neville got out the wrong side of bed, or he was being "encouraged" by his Producer to big up Arsenal.

Another stat flashed up after about 70 ninutes that showed Cech had made 33 passes - more than any other Arsenal player. Now if that's not a sign that they've been dicked for the whole game, I'd love to see one.

I think that's the problem with your casual football fan, they don't pay too much attention, they rely on the commentstors to analyse the game for them. The rest of the media picks up on it, amd so the narrative of the game becomes Arsenal battered us first half and we scored 2 offside goals in the second.

If you actually watch the game without commentary and look at what actually happened, we dominated both halves, Arsenal scored off their only shot on goal, they forced 1 corner and had 39% of the ball. We absolutely battered them from beginning to end. The only difference in the second half is we had more of a cutting edge.

Great post.

 

[SWP's back]

Exactly, that's why I prefer to speak to others who go to the match rather than armchair fans who listen to the shit spouted on the TV.

Well as an armchair fan these days, I have probably been one of the more vocal posters at the start of this thread insisting we were all over them in both halves.

I also fought a lonely battle saying the same at half time in the match thread when the majority were saying we were shite and Pep was clueless.

 

[inchy14]

Got to echo this and what @cleavers and @SWP's back have said. We were far the better side, in both halves.

After the game I thought we'd dominated both halves and Arsenal scored off their only chance. Never seen a Wenger team sit so deep and have so little of the ball.

I heard a load of comments from rag mates and media saying "game of two halves" and Arsenal were the better team in the first half. So I decided to watch it back to make sure my eyes weren't decieving me.

Sure enough, on second play, we dominated them in both halves, just like I thought! There was a stat on screen after 20 minutes saying the ball had been in Arsenal's third for 40% of the time and in our third 10% of the time. If that's not dominating, then I don't know what is! Neville even said City are dominating.

20 minutes later, with the game following a similar pattern, Neville and Tyler started saying Arsenal had dominated the half and City had been poor! I couldn't believe what I was hearing! I'm not one for conspiracies, but either Neville got out the wrong side of bed, or he was being "encouraged" by his Producer to big up Arsenal.

Another stat flashed up after about 70 ninutes that showed Cech had made 33 passes - more than any other Arsenal player. Now if that's not a sign that they've been dicked for the whole game, I'd love to see one.

I think that's the problem with your casual football fan, they don't pay too much attention, they rely on the commentstors to analyse the game for them. The rest of the media picks up on it, amd so the narrative of the game becomes Arsenal battered us first half and we scored 2 offside goals in the second.

If you actually watch the game without commentary and look at what actually happened, we dominated both halves, Arsenal scored off their only shot on goal, they forced 1 corner and had 39% of the ball. We absolutely battered them from beginning to end. The only difference in the second half is we had more of a cutting edge.

The majority who went know we dominated, those listening to Tyler and Neville believe we were poor first half.
I've been told it was a poor game and both sides were shite, obviously by a rag who listens to talk sport. He probably didn't watch the game ffs!!

Well as an armchair fan these days, I have probably been one of the more vocal posters at the start of this thread insisting we were all over them in both halves.

I also fought a lonely battle saying the same at half time in the match thread when the majority were saying we were shite and Pep was clueless.

All depends on who you end up listening too mate, I'm guessing in Qatar it wasn't Tyler?