Arsenal thread 2011/12

Braggster said:
The Fat el Hombre said:
Wenger needs to pull some rabbits out of the hat and pronto. If they'd only lost fabregas this summer they'd have needed two players to replace him, letting go of Nasri as well is criminal, but signing no established players to replace them yet is insane. I think they need at least one quality midfielder and defender to stand a chance at making the top four. They could really do with 2/3 midfielders, a centre half, left back though and possibly a striker.

Some journo tweeted that van rapist and walcott have 2 years left on their contracts. Can you see them signing? Theo might but van rapist will be out of there next summer I reckon
I believe Vermaelen also has 2 years to go

Time for Vinny to give him a call...
 
RandomJ said:
bluevengence said:
I just came across this on goonersweb...the op and some of the posters seems to have grasped what our owners are all about,then you have the usual numpty replys of... "no history,would`nt want their owners,doing it the right way "


heres the ops post..


City's Owners

City's owners get a lot of stick from a lot of people. I think some of it is down to the fact that they're from the Middle East and there's a bit of latent racism there (not on this messageboard though), and there's also a lot of populism surrounding their takeover and the actions they have taken.

If you examine their record, they've actually been quite sensible in their ownership. They gave Mark Hughes a lot of time to get things right, and only after failing to convince that he was the right manager did they sack him. Moreover, they've retained Gary Cook as Chief Exec and Brian Marwood as Football Adminstration Officer, making use of their local knowledge having accepted that there are many things about English football that they don't understand yet.

Yes, they've spent a lot of money, and they've ruffled a few feathers with some of their transfer dealings (i.e. Lescott) but which club hasn't? Transfers don't always go through smoothly, and some of them go through after a lot of acrimony (you only need to look at Arsenal)

Furthermore, they are working hard to improve the local area around the stadium, building new schools and trying to regenerate a quite deprived area. You could say this is just a PR stunt, but all the information coming out suggests the owners have a real commitment to the club and the local area, understanding that the club is not just a business but a social institution that means a lot to people.

I think sometimes we're too quick to jump down the City owners' throats, thinking of them as some tinpot Arab Charlatan when their actions suggest they're anything but. Moreover, they actually seem to care about football and success on the pitch, rather than simply using City as a vehicle for a vanity project and to line their pockets with gold. Can you honestly say you get the same impression with our owners? Do you really think our owners put the welfare of the fans and sucess on the pitch ahead of seeing a good return on their investment?


here`s a taster of some replys..:-)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join Date:May 2011

I think City's owners are rightly hated for two reasons, one moral and the other a football reason.

The moral angle is obvious. Oil, Middle East, USA - the dead bodies are piled sky high on the back of that association, once you do your reading beyond the BBC and BP's press office. But not many people look in that direction, especially the FA with the ludicrous "fit and proper" test.

In football terms I suppose the thing that I dislike most about them is their ignorance. Their ignorance of the game, its history and traditions but even more their ignorance of the damage they are doing to it. That's because when you drench a sand rat in cash he'll make a chav look cultured. Oh yes, they have their Oxford education, much like a whore dresses nice so the neighbours won't talk. Is that racist? If so, I don't really care. I know I'm not a racist and that's good enough for me. So even if I call a rat in a suit a rat in a suit and even if people take offence at that, don't bother to talk to me about it because my interest in the issue will have longed waned by the time you get the first word out.

City are the lottery winning gypos who have chosen your street to live in - caravans and all. The socially sterile city banker who has the biggest car in the street but lacks the manners not to park it in your space. We all have to live together in the football world or else the competition ceases to be all that it could be and the entertainment suffers as a result. If things go on then eventually Chelsea, City, Real Madrid and probably some obscure Russian team manned round the clock by scrubbers trying to get the blood off the changing room floors - that will be all there is. And the City fans can sit there and sing, "We are top of the fucked up league", but I think they'll probably look back instead and yearn for a cold English winter, pies on the terraces and a must win clash with the bitter rivals from up the road.

These "gentlemen" from the Middle East can't ever buy the history, that's safely locked away beyond their reach and it's still something we can tell our kids, "I was there before the arabs came, when Thierry Henry and Dennis Berkgamp and Tony Adams and the rest of the Invincibles were showing the world how the game should be played." Try buying that - you can't for any amount of money. You need class to produce that, a thing City will never, ever have.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=639</a>

Do they mean Henry who they signed for £11 million and Berkgamp for like £7.5 million? They bought their "history".

Seems to be the only thing other fans say these days is how City have no history whereas they do. They seem to think City is a 4 year old club by the looks of it. All fans who go on about history are blind to the fact that their teams bought that history just like we are.

Exactly. An added criticism of us from the likes of Arsenal in particular is that they only spend self-generated cash and implying that this has always been the case so in that thread I was more than a little interested to discover this:

The vast majority of Citys squad is bought with money garnered outside of the club. But outside investment has always happened. In 95/96 Fiszman put £50m of his own money in, money made of pure diamonds.

Implicit in the criticism of City is that the sheer scale of their investment is tantamount to cheating, which runs against the whole ideal of sport. It's a matter of degree.

So the bolded bit is being justified by the point in the last paragraph. Personally, I think that is a crock of fucking shit because ever since the game turned professional well over 100 years ago rich benefactors have existed and it's never been a level playing field as a result.

As for the sheer scale of our investment being "tantamount to cheating", coming from a Gooner that has got to be the most laughable statement ever. Firstly, because our club hasn't done anything that can be considered cheating but secondly because it takes some serious fucking neck coming from a supporter of a club that bribed their way into the top flight all those years ago.

Very good OP though, and not everyone was slagging us off - some refreshingly honest comments saying fans of all clubs would be happy if it was happening to them.
 
Joga Bonito said:
Now Wenger is allowed to be on the touchline against Udinese....surprise surprise

Wenger didn't do anything wrong to begin with. While serving his ban he asked a UEFA official if he was allowed to communicate through Pat Rice and they gave him the okay. Then when he does exactly what they allowed him to do they extend his ban?
 
Arshavin23 said:
Joga Bonito said:
Now Wenger is allowed to be on the touchline against Udinese....surprise surprise

Wenger didn't do anything wrong to begin with. While serving his ban he asked a UEFA official if he was allowed to communicate through Pat Rice and they gave him the okay. Then when he does exactly what they allowed him to do they extend his ban?
I agree. Must admit I find this bizarre. UEFA don't know what they're doing. Arsene often gets the rough end of the stick on these matters for some reason - like his ludicrous (and disgracefully humiliating) sending off at OT.
 
Arsenal straight into CL because of Fenerbahce's ban?

<a class="postlink" href="http://twitter.com/#!/SamWallaceIndy/status/106413019688468480" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://twitter.com/#!/SamWallaceIndy/st ... 9688468480</a>
 
I feel sorry for Wenger

I don't know why I should either...I loathe the man and he's slagged us off on many occasions but I feel sorry for him at the moment.

He's lost 2 important players, he's got a big stack of injuries piling up and the media are treating him like shit.

The fans are also starting to get on his back, which is very rare as the Arsenal fans see him as a god.

If this was Ferguson in this situation, the media would be grieving and saying how he'll bounce back but no, with Wenger, they're attacking him at every opportunity...Sky took the piss with the end credits after the Liverpool game.

I think they'll sign a few players and finish in the top 4 but it's not looking good at the moment.

I actually hope they win tonight.
 
Re: I feel sorry for Wenger

Them end credits were a fooking disgrace, the more i thought of it the less i laughed.

If that was bacontwunt no chance in hell would they have done that.

Very poor form that skysports, for shame.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.