Wenger Has Got To Go
Neil
is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
season but just didnt want to say it.
Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
He had one good year and a bunch of bad ones. The talent he has
bought has not kept up with the rest of the league. He has let the
defenders age with no replacement talent in sight (except for Cole,
but there he replaced the only young capable defender in Silvinio). He
is a poor tactitian and does organize the play of the team.
Although it pains me to say this, watch MU and Liverpool. They have
set plays when they get the ball. We kick it up the wings and hope
something happens. It is a joke for a so-called "Top Club".
And I am really getting sick of hearing him spout off about how we
should have won and how we deserved to win, BUT DID'NT.
Clearly he wont be here at the start of next season, so get rid of him
now. He has been overrated since his second year at Highbury and it
is time for him to say "Sianara".
I have come to the end of my rope.
Neil
neil
tactically he is inept.
consider the amount of money spent on attacking players as opposed to
defensive players........
end of september and we r out of europe and have dropped two valuable points
at home to 10man Bolton and again against Leeds we should have earned a
draw.
as far as i am concerned there are too many players going throught the
motions-not committed to the club.
with a world cup at the end of the season a lot of players are taking it
easy with hopes of avoiding injury.
i also agree that we have no pattern.
highbury is such a small pitch and this doesnt suit our type of play.it
saves us defensively because our slow lumbering centre halves have less
ground to cover but on attack we cant stretch a team because there is so
little space.
i think that any artsenal team foelding any of the following players will
win nothing:-
wiltord-all pace no skill (could have bought fowler for wot we paid for
jefferes and wiltord)
grimandi-headless chicken-contributes nothing
kanu-only likes it when the sun shines
edu-never fit in with game here,too quick for him
inamoto-a gimmick buy
bergkamp is only good as a sub-never scores against the bigger teams-only
lesser teams.
henry-still relied on too heavily
pires-like bergkamp cant do it against the bigger clubs
vieria-doesnt want to be here-WILL go to juve
cole-still learning
lauren-tries and u cant ask more than that
adams/keowen/campbell-either unfit or too slow-cant cope with ball on the
ground teams-aerial battles they win every time
parlour-gives 100%
ljungberg-as parlour only ten times more skillful
seaman/wright not much between them
jeffers-unproven at top level
bronckhurst-premier league and scottish are poles apart-and it shows
these guys are earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a month.
we're not getting back wot we are putting in their pockets.
wengers out of ideas-time for a change.
lets have some passion back in the club.
as for who.......i have no idea.
i want a british manager-oneill,burley??
any suggestions??
neil
"Neil" <rat_w...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3bb2a781...@news.telus.net...
Ian Harvey
>I know it sounds like I an just pissed about the gam today, but that
>is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
>season but just didnt want to say it.
>
>Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
>
>He had one good year and a bunch of bad ones. The talent he has
WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool. Look at our record over the last 30
years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
the 30s.
>bought has not kept up with the rest of the league. He has let the
>defenders age with no replacement talent in sight (except for Cole,
Upson and Campbell and Lauren?
>but there he replaced the only young capable defender in Silvinio). He
>is a poor tactitian and does organize the play of the team.
>
>Although it pains me to say this, watch MU and Liverpool. They have
>set plays when they get the ball. We kick it up the wings and hope
>something happens. It is a joke for a so-called "Top Club".
>
>And I am really getting sick of hearing him spout off about how we
>should have won and how we deserved to win, BUT DID'NT.
>
>Clearly he wont be here at the start of next season, so get rid of him
>now. He has been overrated since his second year at Highbury and it
>is time for him to say "Sianara".
>
>I have come to the end of my rope.
Tether.
Robert the 'erbert
ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com (Ian Harvey) wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 04:25:39 GMT, rat_w...@hotmail.com (Neil) wrote:
>
> >I know it sounds like I an just pissed about the gam today, but that
> >is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
> >season but just didnt want to say it.
> >
> >Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
> >
> >He had one good year and a bunch of bad ones. The talent he has
>
> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool. Look at our record over the last 30
> years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
> the 30s.
So? Things have changed we have pretentions to compete with the best in Europe not
with the likes of Huddersfield.
The game changed.
> >bought has not kept up with the rest of the league. He has let the
> >defenders age with no replacement talent in sight (except for Cole,
>
> Upson and Campbell and Lauren?
Upson, Campbell and Lauren are not proven replacements. Although, it's fair to say
they look capable of doing so.
Robert the 'erbert
A bit harsh but you should judge Wenger on trophies won and he hasn't delivered.
If the League isn't won or CL Semi-final place achieved, then it's time he was on his
bike. That's what would happen in Europe.
Ian Harvey
(Robert the 'erbert) wrote:
>In article <1ro5rt8v7pn94otfb...@4ax.com>,
>ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com (Ian Harvey) wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 04:25:39 GMT, rat_w...@hotmail.com (Neil) wrote:
>>
>> >I know it sounds like I an just pissed about the gam today, but that
>> >is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
>> >season but just didnt want to say it.
>> >
>> >Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
>> >
>> >He had one good year and a bunch of bad ones. The talent he has
>>
>> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool. Look at our record over the last 30
>> years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
>> the 30s.
>
>So? Things have changed we have pretentions to compete with the best in Europe not
>with the likes of Huddersfield.
My point is that we are performing to a higher level than at any time
since then. People talk as if we have some divine right to be in the
top 3. We don't. Check the tables for the last 30 years...
>The game changed.
When? Because GG took us to mid table obscurity c. 6 years ago.
>> >bought has not kept up with the rest of the league. He has let the
>> >defenders age with no replacement talent in sight (except for Cole,
>>
>> Upson and Campbell and Lauren?
>
>Upson, Campbell and Lauren are not proven replacements. Although, it's fair to say
>they look capable of doing so.
If Campbell isn't, there isn't such a thing as a proven replacement.
Robert the 'erbert
ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com (Ian Harvey) wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 11:41 +0100 (BST), robbie@leave_it_out.co.uk
> (Robert the 'erbert) wrote:
>
> >In article <1ro5rt8v7pn94otfb...@4ax.com>,
> >ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com (Ian Harvey) wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 04:25:39 GMT, rat_w...@hotmail.com (Neil) wrote:
> >>
> >> >I know it sounds like I an just pissed about the gam today, but that
> >> >is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
> >> >season but just didnt want to say it.
> >> >
> >> >Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
> >> >
> >> >He had one good year and a bunch of bad ones. The talent he has
> >>
> >> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool. Look at our record over the last 30
> >> years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
> >> the 30s.
> >
> >So? Things have changed we have pretentions to compete with the best in Europe
> not >with the likes of Huddersfield.
>
> My point is that we are performing to a higher level than at any time
> since then. People talk as if we have some divine right to be in the
> top 3. We don't. Check the tables for the last 30 years...
I know the tables. As for the question of divine right, all we do is listen to the
statements from the Arsenal board who constantly tell us of their pretensions for
greatness. The fact is, until we win the CL, we're nobody with the constituency that
really counts now: Europe.
Second best is no good.
> >The game changed.
>
> When? Because GG took us to mid table obscurity c. 6 years ago.
GG was and still is the most successful Arsenal manager. We all know he lost the plot
but wasn't helped by a tight board. Why you have mentioned him I don't know.
When Wenger goes I'm confident we'll get a better manager. We have the whole of
Europe to choose form.
John Porcella
"neil" <ne...@nalex.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ounbl$c8j$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> totally agree with you.
> tactically he is inept.
> consider the amount of money spent on attacking players as opposed to
> defensive players........
> end of september and we r out of europe
We are not out of Europe! Even Schalke 04 could still get through, and they
have three points less than us!
Even if we finished third, we would go into the UEFA Cup, so we would not be
out of Europe even then.
Get your facts straight.
and have dropped two valuable points
> at home to 10man Bolton and again against Leeds we should have earned a
> draw.
Should have beaten both.
> as far as i am concerned there are too many players going throught the
> motions-not committed to the club.
Probably true.
> with a world cup at the end of the season a lot of players are taking it
> easy with hopes of avoiding injury.
I hope you are wrong.
> i also agree that we have no pattern.
> highbury is such a small pitch and this doesnt suit our type of play.it
> saves us defensively because our slow lumbering centre halves have less
> ground to cover but on attack we cant stretch a team because there is so
> little space.
When we had a better left winger in Overmars, we had Wembley and this is now
agreed to have been a strategic mistake, even though it is a wider pitch.
> i think that any artsenal team foelding any of the following players will
> win nothing:-
> wiltord-all pace no skill (could have bought fowler for wot we paid for
> jefferes and wiltord)
No we could not. Firstly would Liverpool have sold him to a close rival,
and secondly would he want to come to London (he has just moved into a
larger house in the NorthWest).
> grimandi-headless chicken-contributes nothing
> kanu-only likes it when the sun shines
> edu-never fit in with game here,too quick for him
I do not see how you can comment like this given that he has hardly ever
played.
> inamoto-a gimmick buy
> bergkamp is only good as a sub-never scores against the bigger teams-only
> lesser teams.
Whilst this comment is patent nonsense, we need players that can score
against lesser teams too...you still get three points for beating them.
> henry-still relied on too heavily
> pires-like bergkamp cant do it against the bigger clubs
> vieria-doesnt want to be here-WILL go to juve
How do you know the former about Vieira (and learn to spell it correctly),
and how do you know the latter?
> cole-still learning
> lauren-tries and u cant ask more than that
> adams/keowen/campbell-either unfit or too slow-cant cope with ball on the
> ground teams-aerial battles they win every time
Can you name any central defender that do not get injured and were equally
brilliant against attackers fromt the air and from the ground.
> bronckhurst-premier league and scottish are poles apart-and it shows
>
> these guys are earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a month.
> we're not getting back wot we are putting in their pockets.
> wengers out of ideas-time for a change.
A change is fine if you can get better, or more appropriate. Who do you
recommend that is available?
> lets have some passion back in the club.
> as for who.......i have no idea.
Well then keep quiet!
> i want a british manager-oneill,burley??
Burley? Hah-hah!
--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella
John Porcella
> is not really it. I have been thinking it since the beginning of last
> season but just didnt want to say it.
>
> Now I want to say it....WENGER HAS TO GO.
Whilst there is some merit in this view, I would go no further than to say
that he is under probation at the moment given his expenditure and lack of
trophies in the cupboard lately. It might be a blessing that he will not
sign a written contract.
>
> He had one good year
Yes.
and a bunch of bad ones.
He has not had bad ones, just unsuccessful ones, which are not the same
things.
The talent he has
> bought has not kept up with the rest of the league.
Actually it has, withe only exception being Manure.
He has let the
> defenders age with no replacement talent in sight (except for Cole,
> but there he replaced the only young capable defender in Silvinio). He
> is a poor tactitian and does organize the play of the team.
Agreed, he is not the best of tacticians.
>
> Although it pains me to say this, watch MU and Liverpool. They have
> set plays when they get the ball. We kick it up the wings and hope
> something happens. It is a joke for a so-called "Top Club".
Things are not as bad as that.
>
> And I am really getting sick of hearing him spout off about how we
> should have won and how we deserved to win, BUT DID'NT.
I am getting tired also of seeing the opponent's goalie being voted the man
of match for the opposition.
>
> Clearly he wont be here at the start of next season,
It is not clear.
so get rid of him
> now.
That would be madness, unless a replacement was lined up behind the scenes
(and I can think of one candidate who knows Arsenal and is available).
He has been overrated since his second year at Highbury and it
> is time for him to say "Sianara".
>
> I have come to the end of my rope.
Don't hang yourself! It is not that bad.
John Porcella
> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool.
We're better than them, though their cupboard is full and ours is empty and
gathering dust.
Look at our record over the last 30
> years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
> the 30s.
Whilst true, coming second consistently is not as good (in my view) as
coming first as in '89 and '91.
John Porcella
> I know the tables. As for the question of divine right, all we do is
listen to the
> statements from the Arsenal board who constantly tell us of their
pretensions for
> greatness. The fact is, until we win the CL, we're nobody with the
constituency that
> really counts now: Europe.
>
> Second best is no good.
There is some merit to it (ECL qualification) but I agree with your
sentiment here.
>
> > >The game changed.
> >
> > When? Because GG took us to mid table obscurity c. 6 years ago.
>
> GG was and still is the most successful Arsenal manager. We all know he
lost the plot
> but wasn't helped by a tight board.
What could he do when Manure were outspending us big time (and still could
do)? If he lost the plot it was because of the an overly-miserly approach
of the Board.
Why you have mentioned him I don't know.
>
> When Wenger goes I'm confident we'll get a better manager. We have the
whole of
> Europe to choose form.
And from closer to home too!
John Porcella
was on his
> bike. That's what would happen in Europe.
>
Whilst I think this is harsh, it is probably true. He has had the time and
money to do better. It is not too late, he can save his Arsenal career (if
AW is interested in doing so).
Gareth Bourne
could
> do)? If he lost the plot it was because of the an overly-miserly
approach
> of the Board.
This is an absolute myth. ManYoo have only out spent us by about £2m
in total. Both Arsenal and ManYoo have squads that cost over £100m to
assemble. Leeds are not that far behind. ManYoo are not successful
because of the size of their income, when their success started there
income was no more than Arsenal's or Liverpool's. The majority of
their team has been developed from the youth teams, Beckham, Giggs,
Scholes, Butt, Brown, Gary Nevile, Phil Nevile, Fortune, Chadwick, the
list goes on.
Also their present income is also a myth, Arsenal have had £50m from
the sale of players and a similar amount from an investment by
Granada, although I suspect that has been put towards the new stadium.
I also think that it was GG who was miserly because why would Dein and
Co have such a sudden change of heart and allow Rioch sign Bergkamp
and Platt for club record fees, record fees by a considerable margin
(£7.5m and £5m respectively)
Over the last TWO seasons Wenger has spent roughly £60m, more than
ManYoo who didn't buy anyone last lear but spent £47m this year on
VanNistlerooy and Veron.
In case you don't believe me...
Wiltord, £13m
Edu, £6m
Lauren, £7.2m
Stepanovs, £1m
Pires, £6m,
Wright, £6m
Inamoto, £4m
Jeffers, £8m
GvB, £8.5m
Total, £59.7m.
Plus the £15m+ that Campbell or similar would have cost us (that it
has cost us in wages and a signing on bonus!) and that makes £74.7m
worth of players. And we are still shite!
> And from closer to home too!
I want Mike Bassett!
The Ma-jin
>
>We're better than them, though their cupboard is full and ours is empty and
>gathering dust.
Only on paper, and even then not by much. Unlike yourselves, SUPER LIVERPOOL
don't routinely shoot themselves in the foot. Stop making excuses.
~~~~~~~~~
" I switched my motto -- instead of sayin f*ck tomorrow
That buck that bought a bottle could've struck the lotto " (Nas)
Ian Harvey
(Robert the 'erbert) wrote:
>> My point is that we are performing to a higher level than at any time
>> since then. People talk as if we have some divine right to be in the
>> top 3. We don't. Check the tables for the last 30 years...
>
>I know the tables. As for the question of divine right, all we do is listen to the
>statements from the Arsenal board who constantly tell us of their pretensions for
>greatness. The fact is, until we win the CL, we're nobody with the constituency that
>really counts now: Europe.
Yes and there are many teams in real contention. How many times have
Barca, Juve or Inter won it recently?
>Second best is no good.
It is better than 6th best.
>> >The game changed.
>>
>> When? Because GG took us to mid table obscurity c. 6 years ago.
>
>GG was and still is the most successful Arsenal manager. We all know he lost the plot
>but wasn't helped by a tight board. Why you have mentioned him I don't know.
Because he was our last long term manager perhaps?
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> I know the tables. As for the question of divine right, all we do is
>listen to the
>> statements from the Arsenal board who constantly tell us of their
>pretensions for
>> greatness. The fact is, until we win the CL, we're nobody with the
>constituency that
>> really counts now: Europe.
>>
>> Second best is no good.
>
>There is some merit to it (ECL qualification) but I agree with your
>sentiment here.
>
>>
>> > >The game changed.
>> >
>> > When? Because GG took us to mid table obscurity c. 6 years ago.
>>
>> GG was and still is the most successful Arsenal manager. We all know he
>lost the plot
>> but wasn't helped by a tight board.
>
>What could he do when Manure were outspending us big time (and still could
>do)? If he lost the plot it was because of the an overly-miserly approach
>of the Board.
Manure are still outspending us big time, but we aren't 12 places
below them anymore.
> Why you have mentioned him I don't know.
>>
>> When Wenger goes I'm confident we'll get a better manager. We have the
>whole of
>> Europe to choose form.
>
>And from closer to home too!
Such as?
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool.
>
>We're better than them, though their cupboard is full and ours is empty and
>gathering dust.
Historically we are not.
>Look at our record over the last 30
>> years. This is our best period of sustained league posiitions since
>> the 30s.
>
>Whilst true, coming second consistently is not as good (in my view) as
>coming first as in '89 and '91.
But is better than mid table.
Info
> Even if we finished third, we would go into the UEFA Cup, so we would not
be
> out of Europe even then.
Uefa Cup is second rate. It is all about the CL now.
Robert the 'erbert
ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com (Ian Harvey) wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 14:38 +0100 (BST), robbie@leave_it_out.co.uk
> (Robert the 'erbert) wrote:
>
> >> My point is that we are performing to a higher level than at any time
> >> since then. People talk as if we have some divine right to be in the
> >> top 3. We don't. Check the tables for the last 30 years...
> >
> >I know the tables. As for the question of divine right, all we do is listen to
> the >statements from the Arsenal board who constantly tell us of their pretensions
> for >greatness. The fact is, until we win the CL, we're nobody with the
> constituency that >really counts now: Europe.
>
> Yes and there are many teams in real contention. How many times have
> Barca, Juve or Inter won it recently?
But they've won it and 'recently' ('cept for Inter). That means they are respected.
Arsenal flatter to deceive sadly.
> >Second best is no good.
>
> It is better than 6th best.
<cough>
nick hunt
you have written slagging off the whole team.
You are a sad (i shant swaer, because you really arent worth it) get a life
"neil" <ne...@nalex.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ounbl$c8j$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Gareth Bourne
> below them anymore.
Manure DO NOT out spend us by any considerable margin, they just make
fewer signings for more money. People want to use this as an excuse
for our poor performances or lack of sucess, but it is not the reason
Manure are so sucessful. Taggart was at Manure for 6 years before he
won the championship, he has built amazing teams from youth players,
developed them and, most importantly, KEPT developing. How many
players in Manures team now won that first Championship for Taggart in
1992? or 93 or when ever? The only one I can think of is Roy Keane
and I'm not even sure about that. They have a constant stream of
class youth players emerging, Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Brown etc. By
contrast George Graham had Steve Morrow, David Hillier and Ian Selley.
Not really the same thing.
Wenger hasn't yet had the time to do the same thing at Arsenal,
develop the players and introduce them, perhaps Cole is the first
player to emerge into the first team squad and is now going to be
followed by Pennant, Barratt, Upson and a string of others. Perhaps
we are being to harsh on Wenger to soon and he is setting this club up
for the next 10 years, just as Taggart did in the late 80's and early
90's with Manure. His buying policy usually supports this, he didn't
buy anyone over the age of 26 in the summer and Jeffers is only 20.
If this is the case then Wenger has done bloody well so far.
Let's see the results before we judge.
John Porcella
could
> >do)? If he lost the plot it was because of the an overly-miserly
approach
> >of the Board.
>
> Manure are still outspending us big time, but we aren't 12 places
> below them anymore.
Very true, granted. But it is still not top.
>
> > Why you have mentioned him I don't know.
> >>
> >> When Wenger goes I'm confident we'll get a better manager. We have the
> >whole of
> >> Europe to choose form.
> >
> >And from closer to home too!
>
> Such as?
GG, of course!
John Porcella
"Info" <in...@colourpages.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9p1no4$fbg$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
Second, smecond! The poster wrote that we would be out of Europe which is
highly unlikely, as either we will progress to the second league stage, or
we shall be in the UEFA Cup.
It might well be second rate, but if it is the only European competition you
are in, then you should try to win it. It did Liverpool no harm to win it.
John Porcella
> >Second best is no good.
>
> It is better than 6th best.
Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition, but
it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be the
Champions.
John Porcella
"The Ma-jin " <mad...@aol.comVEGETA> wrote in message
news:20010928031915...@mb-cg.aol.com...
> >> WHo do yu think we are? Liverpool.
> >
> >We're better than them, though their cupboard is full and ours is empty
and
> >gathering dust.
>
> Only on paper,
Not just on paper! Arsenal have finished above Liverpool in the last four
seasons (and maybe before that, but I would have to look up some archives to
be sure).
and even then not by much.
We shall see.
Unlike yourselves, SUPER LIVERPOOL
> don't routinely shoot themselves in the foot.
True.
Stop making excuses.
What excuses?
Gareth Bourne
> > below them anymore.
>
> Very true, granted. But it is still not top.
Have we ever been 12 places below Manure?
> > Such as?
>
> GG, of course!
This will never, ever, happen, I can't see Hill Wood and Dein back
tracking like that. Anyway, a return to the GG era would be going
backwards, undoing all of the fantastic work that Wenger has done to
bring the club into the 21C, better methods, training and fitness
regimes, dietry control, facilities etc. The last thing I EVER want
to happen is to go back to the GG era, and that includes Adams
becoming manager in the future. Adams is an arrogant clone of GG, my
god, have you read his autobiography! I think that Martin O'Neil
would be a good choice, providing that Manure don't get him as
successor to Taggart, I would be happy with that.
John Porcella
"Gareth Bourne" <bour...@orange.net> wrote in message
news:3bb4c431$0$232$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
> > Manure are still outspending us big time, but we aren't 12 places
> > below them anymore.
>
> Manure DO NOT out spend us by any considerable margin, they just make
> fewer signings for more money. People want to use this as an excuse
> for our poor performances or lack of sucess, but it is not the reason
> Manure are so sucessful. Taggart was at Manure for 6 years before he
> won the championship, he has built amazing teams from youth players,
> developed them and, most importantly, KEPT developing. How many
> players in Manures team now won that first Championship for Taggart in
> 1992? or 93 or when ever? The only one I can think of is Roy Keane
> and I'm not even sure about that. They have a constant stream of
> class youth players emerging, Giggs, Scholes, Beckham, Brown etc. By
> contrast George Graham had Steve Morrow, David Hillier and Ian Selley.
> Not really the same thing.
True, though I can think of Adams and Merson coming through, though.
Anyway, when Taggart does not have somebody good in the reserves coming
through, he spends big (van Nistelrooy and Veron being the latest examples),
which is something that was denied GG.
>
> Wenger hasn't yet had the time to do the same thing at Arsenal,
> develop the players and introduce them, perhaps Cole is the first
> player to emerge into the first team squad and is now going to be
> followed by Pennant, Barratt, Upson and a string of others. Perhaps
> we are being to harsh on Wenger to soon and he is setting this club up
> for the next 10 years, just as Taggart did in the late 80's and early
> 90's with Manure. His buying policy usually supports this, he didn't
> buy anyone over the age of 26 in the summer and Jeffers is only 20.
> If this is the case then Wenger has done bloody well so far.
I did not realise he was only twenty! In which case, I can understand his
errors thus far with missed chances. However, it makes me wonder why Wenger
did not buy more experience...hmm, probably because he had used up his £25m
budget.
>
> Let's see the results before we judge.
Sound advice! The results of the last three years would make for a negative
judgement, alas!
Ian Harvey
Gareth this is nonsense, quite simply because you ignore player sales.
Anelka £21.5m
Overmars+Petit £30m
Silvinho £5m
The net figures between us and United make interesting reading. Net we
are one of the lower spendiers in the Premiership.
Ian Harvey
<bour...@orange.net> wrote:
>> Manure are still outspending us big time, but we aren't 12 places
>> below them anymore.
>
>Manure DO NOT out spend us by any considerable margin, they just make
Yes they do Gareth,
Ian Harvey
Yes, let's push for relegation. He hasn't the netork of tactical flair
to make it in the modern game. He failed at Leeds and he failed at
Spurs and let's face it for 5 years he failed miserably at Arsenal.
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> >Second best is no good.
>>
>> It is better than 6th best.
>
>Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition, but
>it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be the
>Champions.
No it isn't. Financial well being is a contributent to future success.
For us finishing mid table a la GG would be a difficult habit to break
as we failed to generate the revenue to buy players.
Gareth Bourne
>
> Anyway, when Taggart does not have somebody good in the reserves
> coming through, he spends big (van Nistelrooy and Veron being the
> latest examples), which is something that was denied GG.
Yes, true, although Adams was there or there abouts before GG took
over. He had already made the first team. There was also Rocky and
Michael Thomas. In fact there were a good many people who praised
Arsenal for their youth policy in the late 80's and early 90's.
However it has not consistently delivered players of high quality. You
are right about Taggart spending big when he doesn't have the youth
players, perhaps Wenger has the wrong approach in buying many players
for less or perhaps it's all part of the long term plan.
> I did not realise he was only twenty! In which case, I can
> understand his errors thus far with missed chances. However, it makes
> me wonder why Wenger did not buy more experience...hmm, probably
> because he had used up his £25m budget.
Talent is cheap, look at Nick Anelka, Vieira, Pires and Freddie. It's
experience and reputation that costs money, Zidane, Figo, Veron etc.
> Sound advice! The results of the last three years would make for a
> negative judgement, alas!
Well, yes, but my point was that Fergie didn't win a great deal in the
late 80's with ManYoo, the FA Cup and the ECWC, but even that was
after a three or four years of his management. The test will be if we
are still in send place in two years time or if we are the "next
ManYoo" and win everything for a decade with a whole host of world
class players from our youth team.
Gareth Bourne
No they don't and it is certainly NOT the basis of their success over the last
decade.
Gareth Bourne
>
> Anelka £21.5m
> Overmars+Petit £30m
> Silvinho £5m
>
> The net figures between us and United make interesting reading. Net we
> are one of the lower spendiers in the Premiership.
As I said we have matched ManYoos income through the sale of players. Players,
who a lot of people would say, added little to the overall team at the end of
their Arsenal career. Read all of my posts/replies on this, I talk about income
as well as spending.
My point was that the excuse that ManYoo will always be better because of the
size of their income is blatantly false. Look at how many of their FIRST team
came from the youth team. Giggs, Beckham, Scholes, Butt, Brown, Gary Neville.
Then there is Phil Neville, Fortune, Chadwick and the rest in their SECOND team.
All we have is Adams, Cole and Parlour.
Parlour, we all agree, wouldn't make the ManYoo squad and shouldn't be in ours.
Adams is from an generation of players that have all been replaced by Taggart
several times over, whatever reason. Cole is the only one from Arsenal who
would make the ManYoo team. I'm saying that Taggart keeps developing his team
and that there is a constant stream of QUALITY youth players coming into the
ManYoo squad, something Arsenal haven't had.
ManYoo have at least HALF of their team made up from players from their youth
team. We have, at best, 1 on the same level or with the same future in the game
as Adams is set to retire, something that none of the current crop of ManYoo
first team players are planning to do. That's the reason for ManYoos success.
Wenger has to buy more players, perhaps more "average" or "unproven" players to
try and improve the team in all positions, all for £6m - £12m. For Taggart to
improve his team he has to spend £28m on 1 player for 1 position.
Ian Harvey
<bour...@orange.net> wrote:
>> Gareth this is nonsense, quite simply because you ignore player sales.
>>
>> Anelka £21.5m
>> Overmars+Petit £30m
>> Silvinho £5m
>>
>> The net figures between us and United make interesting reading. Net we
>> are one of the lower spendiers in the Premiership.
>
>As I said we have matched ManYoos income through the sale of players. Players,
That's not sustainable income. In fact, sale of assets isn't even
considered as income from an acounting perspective.
>who a lot of people would say, added little to the overall team at the end of
>their Arsenal career. Read all of my posts/replies on this, I talk about income
>as well as spending.
>
>My point was that the excuse that ManYoo will always be better because of the
>size of their income is blatantly false. Look at how many of their FIRST team
>came from the youth team. Giggs, Beckham, Scholes, Butt, Brown, Gary Neville.
>Then there is Phil Neville, Fortune, Chadwick and the rest in their SECOND team.
>All we have is Adams, Cole and Parlour.
And that is down to GGs lack of a coherent youth policy. Cole,
Pennant, Barrett are all examples of our new youth policy.
>Parlour, we all agree, wouldn't make the ManYoo squad and shouldn't be in ours.
I disagree. He shouldn't by any means be starting (and once GvB is
fully fit I'm sure he won't) but he is worth a squad place.
>Adams is from an generation of players that have all been replaced by Taggart
>several times over, whatever reason. Cole is the only one from Arsenal who
Such as Irwin?
>would make the ManYoo team. I'm saying that Taggart keeps developing his team
>and that there is a constant stream of QUALITY youth players coming into the
>ManYoo squad, something Arsenal haven't had.
Agreed. But not because of Wenger. Wenger has helped to turn the tide
here. We now have the best youth team in the country without doubt.
>ManYoo have at least HALF of their team made up from players from their youth
>team. We have, at best, 1 on the same level or with the same future in the game
>as Adams is set to retire, something that none of the current crop of ManYoo
>first team players are planning to do. That's the reason for ManYoos success.
Blanc and Irwin?
>Wenger has to buy more players, perhaps more "average" or "unproven" players to
>try and improve the team in all positions, all for £6m - £12m. For Taggart to
>improve his team he has to spend £28m on 1 player for 1 position.
Look at the starting 11
Barthez - Bought
Silvestre - Bought
Brown - Youth
Blanc - Bought
Veron - Bought
Keane - Bought
Giggs - Youth
Beckham - Youth
RvN - Bought
Cole/Yorke/Solskjear - Bought
Look at ours
3 players from the youth set-up, 4 if Scholes play. That's not filling
in. With Cole, Adams, Parlour we have 3. It isn't as clear cut as you
think.
Gareth Bourne
> considered as income from an acounting perspective.
Perfectly true. However, the point that everyone seems to have missed is that
if you add up the total cost of every player CURRENTLY in the Man Utd squad and
compare it to the total cost of every player CURRENTLY in the Arsenal squad then
the difference is only one or two million. How we paid for those players wasn't
the point I was making, and I even mentioned that. The excuse that Man Utd are
better than us because they out spend us is false. Man Utd owe their long term
success over the last 10 years to their unbelieveable youth policy. Taggart was
given years to develop it and it has kept on producing. When their success
started in the early 90's their income was no more than that of Arsenal or
Liverpool and their trophy wining squads have consistently featured a high
number of excellent youth players.
You cannot deny that just as I cannot deny that their present income is greater
than that of Arsenals. The point being that you cannot generate that level of
income without first being very successful on the pitch.
> And that is down to GGs lack of a coherent youth policy. Cole,
> Pennant, Barrett are all examples of our new youth policy.
I completely agree, this is the point I was making, look at what it has done for
Man Utd. The whole point of this post was should we get rid of Wenger, I said
we should wait to see the results of his work before we judge and that he could
be setting the club up to dominate for the next 10 years, just as Taggart did
with Man Utd, I think he was their for 6 years before he won the league, 1986 to
1992, if I remember correctly. Also Wenger bought Pennant from Notts County for
£2m!.
> Such as Irwin?
Yes, Man Utd have Irwin, Arsenal have Adams, Dixon, Keown and Seaman. We have
held onto the past for too long, Man Utd haven't, apart from in the odd extreme
case. I think that Blanc was an emergancy measure after Taggart got rid of
Stam, he signed a day before the Champions League deadline.
> Look at the starting 11
>
> Barthez - Bought
> Silvestre - Bought
> Brown - Youth
> Blanc - Bought
>
> Veron - Bought
> Keane - Bought
> Giggs - Youth
> Beckham - Youth
>
> RvN - Bought
> Cole/Yorke/Solskjear - Bought
Thats 10!. Scholes is as good as those listed above and you omitted Gary
Neville completely and he is their first choice right back, thats 5 out of 11,
plus the ones on the subs bench and the rest of the squad. Irwin and Blanc were
both bought, they were not developed from the youth team. Adams is retiring
next year, none of the home grown Man Utd players are, so that means only Cole
and Parlour will remain, and we all agree that Parlour is crap and not first
team material. So that means that Arsenal have, at best, 1 class youth player
in their first team (Cole) and Man Utd have at least 4 and probably 5 (Giggs,
Beckham, Scholes, Brown, Gary Neville). Arsenal have never even come close to
producing a Giggs or Scholes from our youth team, even Pennant was bought from
Notts County for £2m, as was Upson from Luton and Aliadare from PSG or who ever.
John Porcella
>
> Yes, let's push for relegation.
This could not happen! Even the rubbish Spurs were not ever going to do
down.
He hasn't the netork of tactical flair
> to make it in the modern game.
The 'modern' game has condemned us not to win anything for three seasons,
now! I do not want to wait another season for a trophy in the cupboard.
Perhaps some more traditional values of team defending is in order! My
source for this view, why AW himself after the Bolton game!! There is no
better manager for maximising defensive qualities than GG, which partly goes
to explain why the Spurs fans hated him.
He failed at Leeds
Yes, he failed so badly, he was not sacked from there, but headhunted by
another Premiership side.
and he failed at
> Spurs
Failed? They have won more than us in the last three seasons!! Therefore
that must make AW an even bigger failure then!
and let's face it for 5 years he failed miserably at Arsenal.
And for the rest of the time we won competitions against better teams,
whereas now we lose or draw games against inferior teams.
John Porcella
> > Gareth this is nonsense, quite simply because you ignore player sales.
> >
> > Overmars+Petit Ł30m
> > Silvinho Ł5m
> >
> > The net figures between us and United make interesting reading. Net we
> > are one of the lower spendiers in the Premiership.
>
> As I said we have matched ManYoos income through the sale of players.
Players,
> who a lot of people would say, added little to the overall team at the end
of
> their Arsenal career. Read all of my posts/replies on this, I talk about
income
> as well as spending.
>
> My point was that the excuse that ManYoo will always be better because of
the
> size of their income is blatantly false.
Not necessarily so...because if the people you mention below were not
available internally, they would have the money to go and get them
externally.
Look at how many of their FIRST team
> came from the youth team. Giggs, Beckham, Scholes, Butt, Brown, Gary
Neville.
> Then there is Phil Neville, Fortune, Chadwick and the rest in their SECOND
team.
> All we have is Adams, Cole and Parlour.
>
John Porcella
"Ian Harvey" <ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c7abrtcq6eussbq4n...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 23:27:49 +0100, "John Porcella"
> <bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> >Second best is no good.
> >>
> >> It is better than 6th best.
> >
> >Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition,
but
> >it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be the
> >Champions.
>
> No it isn't.
This is debatable, though to be honest I tend to agree with you, though the
argument against is very strong.
Financial well being is a contributent to future success.
Yes! Manure are very well off financially. Which makes me wonder why the
new Arsenal Stadium will only have a capacity of 60,000, whereas Old
Trafford currently has gates of 67,000 (last week's game versus
Ipswich)...7,000 at £20 (say) each is £140,000 for each home game (ignoring
programme sales, teas, coffees, prawn sandwiches, beer sales etc.), so over
a season this is an easy couple of million. We are doomed to remain in
their shadows forever at this rate.
> For us finishing mid table a la GG would be a difficult habit to break
> as we failed to generate the revenue to buy players.
GG was the most successful post-war Arsenal manager.
Gareth Bourne
> available internally, they would have the money to go and get them
> externally.
How do you know? A lot of people said that Stam was sold to recoup some of the
outlay on Van Nistlerooy and Veron. Man Utd don't have an unlimited source of
funds, in fact last year during the initial bid for Van Nistlerooy Martin
Edwards admitted that they were spending more on Van Nistlerooy they had earned
in profits during the year, and this wasn't, in reality, very sensible. Man Utd
are a business just like Arsenal.
Also when their success started they did not have any more money than Arsenal or
Liverpool, the massive super rich club they are now has all happened under
Taggart. Also if they had not developed the players they have, Beckham, Giggs,
Scholes, Brown, Neville etc, then the money they did have would have to go
further, in the same way Wenger has to buy more players with the money he has
available. So it is fair to assume that had Man Utd not developed half a team
of world or nearly world class players then they would not have enough money to
buy world class players, like Van Nistlerooy and Veron, to fill in the gaps.
The point I was making and what is perfectly true is that if you add up the
total cost of both CURRENT squads, irrespective of where the funds came from to
pay for them, then the difference is only one or two million. Yet because Man
Utd already had a lot of class players from the youth team they had the luxury
of spending £28m on a single world class player but Wenger, who needed to
strengthen all areas of the team, had to spend £28m on five players, none of
them world class, or with a current world class reputation. See.
Basically to match Man Utd we need to develop half a team of world class players
from the youth team or for a relatively tiny amount of money, like Anelka.
David Mooney
>>> Second best is no good.
>> It is better than 6th best.
> Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition, but
> it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be the
> Champions.
It makes you wonder why the 91 teams who aren't champions bother to put
out a team every Saturday, then. I don't think that anybody is arguing with
you that it's better to finish first than to not finish first. But if you
think that there is no difference among finishing second, tenth, or ninety-
second, there's no point in arguing with you about it because you won't be
convinced otherwise. Although if you ever are out for a pint with a Spurs
supporter and a Barnet supporter, they would probably tell you that they'd
have rathered finish second than where they did finish, even if it wasn't
as champions.
Personally, I follow sports because I find it inherently interesting, both
watching the games themselves and the exhilaration of the title chase. I'll
lose sleep when dodgy defending and ludicrous refereeing hand the FA Cup to
Liverpool, and I'll curse at the TV and rant to anyone who will listen (and
even to those who won't) when indifferent performances from the players and
bizarre tactics from the manager lead to points lost against Bradford or
Spurs or Boro and the title goes yet again to the Pride of Singapore. But
I'd rather be in the fight to the end and finish second than to live the
life of a Spurs supporter, out of the race by Christmas and wondering
whether the Intertoto might be the ticket to Europe.
dave
--
David Mooney | "My orders are to sit here
pez at vex dot net | and watch the world go by."
Gareth Bourne
> out a team every Saturday, then. I don't think that anybody is arguing with
> you that it's better to finish first than to not finish first. But if you
> think that there is no difference among finishing second, tenth, or ninety-
> second, there's no point in arguing with you about it because you won't be
> convinced otherwise. Although if you ever are out for a pint with a Spurs
> supporter and a Barnet supporter, they would probably tell you that they'd
> have rathered finish second than where they did finish, even if it wasn't
> as champions.
>
> Personally, I follow sports because I find it inherently interesting, both
> watching the games themselves and the exhilaration of the title chase. I'll
> lose sleep when dodgy defending and ludicrous refereeing hand the FA Cup to
> Liverpool, and I'll curse at the TV and rant to anyone who will listen (and
> even to those who won't) when indifferent performances from the players and
> bizarre tactics from the manager lead to points lost against Bradford or
> Spurs or Boro and the title goes yet again to the Pride of Singapore. But
> I'd rather be in the fight to the end and finish second than to live the
> life of a Spurs supporter, out of the race by Christmas and wondering
> whether the Intertoto might be the ticket to Europe.
Well said.
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>"Ian Harvey" <ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:c7abrtcq6eussbq4n...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 23:27:49 +0100, "John Porcella"
>> <bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> >Second best is no good.
>> >>
>> >> It is better than 6th best.
>> >
>> >Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition,
>but
>> >it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be the
>> >Champions.
>>
>> No it isn't.
>
>This is debatable, though to be honest I tend to agree with you, though the
>argument against is very strong.
>
> Financial well being is a contributent to future success.
>
>Yes! Manure are very well off financially. Which makes me wonder why the
>new Arsenal Stadium will only have a capacity of 60,000, whereas Old
>Trafford currently has gates of 67,000 (last week's game versus
>Ipswich)...7,000 at Ł20 (say) each is Ł140,000 for each home game (ignoring
>programme sales, teas, coffees, prawn sandwiches, beer sales etc.), so over
>a season this is an easy couple of million. We are doomed to remain in
>their shadows forever at this rate.
As our poor suffering season ticket holders will tell you, 60,000 x
Ł30 is a lot more than 67,000 x Ł25....
>> For us finishing mid table a la GG would be a difficult habit to break
>> as we failed to generate the revenue to buy players.
>
>GG was the most successful post-war Arsenal manager.
And the worst of the last 15 years in terms of average league
position.
Gareth Bourne
Yeah, but 67,000 x £30 is even more still!
> >GG was the most successful post-war Arsenal manager.
>
> And the worst of the last 15 years in terms of average league
> position.
Is that true!
Ian Harvey
<bour...@orange.net> wrote:
>> As our poor suffering season ticket holders will tell you, 60,000 x
>> £30 is a lot more than 67,000 x £25....
>
>Yeah, but 67,000 x £30 is even more still!
No, really? I think given the planning problems they've had, it's
probably a sensible choice. In addition playing to a stadium with many
empty seats isn't going to feel great.
>
>
>
>
>> >GG was the most successful post-war Arsenal manager.
>>
>> And the worst of the last 15 years in terms of average league
>> position.
>
>
>Is that true!
Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Rioch's was 4th.
Gareth Bourne
> probably a sensible choice. In addition playing to a stadium with many
> empty seats isn't going to feel great.
God point about planning permission, I guess it would also effect the transport
proposals as well. Protestors could say that the transport links barely work
now and will be even worse with 60,000 and unimaginable with 67,000.
But why would there be empty seats, there is a 5 year waiting list for season
tickets. Getting tickets to a game is nearly impossible.
> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
Ian Harvey
<bour...@orange.net> wrote:
>> No, really? I think given the planning problems they've had, it's
>> probably a sensible choice. In addition playing to a stadium with many
>> empty seats isn't going to feel great.
>
>God point about planning permission, I guess it would also effect the transport
>proposals as well. Protestors could say that the transport links barely work
>now and will be even worse with 60,000 and unimaginable with 67,000.
>
>But why would there be empty seats, there is a 5 year waiting list for season
>tickets. Getting tickets to a game is nearly impossible.
Are there 29,000 people on those waiting lists? I doubt it. My guess
is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
course I could be wrong!
>
>
>
>> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
>
>Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
IMO GG is a dinosaur.
Gareth Bourne
> is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
> course I could be wrong!
I doubt there are 29,000 on the list but I am sure Arsenal could sell an extra
29,000 tickets per game.
> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
It's funny, as I was writing some posts last night there was a programme on C4
about Dodo's and apparently there was a sub species known as "The Graham".
Strangely it would keep and hide a small fraction of everything you gave it,
even if it was for another Dodo, stand in a line with all of it's "friends" and
not let you past and then kick apples and fruit 100 yards and then squawk at one
of his "friends" to run after it. European sailors found this amusing and
introduced them to Scotland as a practical joke.
Ian Harvey
<bour...@orange.net> wrote:
>> Are there 29,000 people on those waiting lists? I doubt it. My guess
>> is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
>> course I could be wrong!
>
>I doubt there are 29,000 on the list but I am sure Arsenal could sell an extra
>29,000 tickets per game.
For some games I think yes, but IMO they'd be others where we'd
struggle.
>
>
>> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
>
>It's funny, as I was writing some posts last night there was a programme on C4
>about Dodo's and apparently there was a sub species known as "The Graham".
>Strangely it would keep and hide a small fraction of everything you gave it,
>even if it was for another Dodo, stand in a line with all of it's "friends" and
>not let you past and then kick apples and fruit 100 yards and then squawk at one
>of his "friends" to run after it. European sailors found this amusing and
>introduced them to Scotland as a practical joke.
lol, how appropriate.
John Porcella
>
> Are there 29,000 people on those waiting lists? I doubt it. My guess
> is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
> course I could be wrong!
It was tricky to get tickets for Champions' League games at Wembley where
capacity was over 70,000 and there were not that many away fans looking for
tickets. I am slightly surprised that Arsenal have not put in a bid for
70,000+, but I suspect that corporate boxes have taken up so much room that
it is these that have kept maximum capacity down.
> >> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
> >
> >Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
Rioch was a fool.
>
> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
IHLTHO he is not!
John Porcella
"David Mooney" <p....@vex.net> wrote in message
news:9p594q$1c4v$1...@news.tht.net...
> John Porcella <bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >>> Second best is no good.
> >> It is better than 6th best.
> > Is it? Financially, yes, and we end up in the top European competition,
but
> > it is still not top. A miss is as good as a mile if the aim is to be
the
> > Champions.
>
> It makes you wonder why the 91 teams who aren't champions bother to put
> out a team every Saturday, then.
Their expectations are a lot lower given that they do not have as good a
squad as we do. With the team we have had over the last few years, we have
underperformed badly.
David Mooney
"In Hellish Leicester They Hope Otherwise"?
Gareth Bourne
Isn't it funny that only over the week end I was speculating over the future of
GG, and within 72 hours my prediction was proved to be true! I amaze myself
sometimes.
Gareth Bourne
> capacity was over 70,000 and there were not that many away fans looking for
> tickets. I am slightly surprised that Arsenal have not put in a bid for
> 70,000+, but I suspect that corporate boxes have taken up so much room that
> it is these that have kept maximum capacity down.
Yes, but I had the thought that stadium protestors would complain about the
transport links. Arsenal are already having to include plans for upgrading tube
stations and such like with the current plans so if they had an extra 10,000
people wanting to get to the venue this could effect those plans. London
Transport could say it is unrealistic or whatever. Just a thought.
> Rioch was a fool.
Out of his depth with the players, yes, a fool, no. He brought in some good
players, took us up the league and into the UEFA cup, what was wrong with that.
It was better than GG achieved in his last season.
> IHLTHO he is not!
Yes he is!
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Are there 29,000 people on those waiting lists? I doubt it. My guess
>> is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
>> course I could be wrong!
>
>It was tricky to get tickets for Champions' League games at Wembley where
>capacity was over 70,000 and there were not that many away fans looking for
>tickets. I am slightly surprised that Arsenal have not put in a bid for
>70,000+, but I suspect that corporate boxes have taken up so much room that
>it is these that have kept maximum capacity down.
70,000 tickets for a big game priced at £10 adults and £5 children is
not the same as 70,000 for home vs Bolton at £30 a ticket.
>
>> >> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
>> >
>> >Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
>
>Rioch was a fool.
But better on average than GG. Not that is saying much.
>>
>> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
>
>IHLTHO he is not!
?
John Porcella
> > It was tricky to get tickets for Champions' League games at Wembley
where
> > capacity was over 70,000 and there were not that many away fans looking
for
> > tickets. I am slightly surprised that Arsenal have not put in a bid for
> > 70,000+, but I suspect that corporate boxes have taken up so much room
that
> > it is these that have kept maximum capacity down.
>
> Yes, but I had the thought that stadium protestors would complain about
the
> transport links. Arsenal are already having to include plans for
upgrading tube
> stations and such like with the current plans so if they had an extra
10,000
> people wanting to get to the venue this could effect those plans. London
> Transport could say it is unrealistic or whatever. Just a thought.
I suspect that you are correct. However, it would not have been beyond the
wit of man for Arsenal to come up with some transportation ideas e.g. laying
on buses to take people to Finsbury Park and/or King's Cross to stop them
all jumping onto the tube nearest the new ground.
Incidentally, I once read that Arsenal have the largest proportion of fans
who use public transport to get to the games.
> > Rioch was a fool.
>
> Out of his depth with the players, yes, a fool, no. He brought in some
good
> players, took us up the league and into the UEFA cup, what was wrong with
that.
Nothing wrong with climbing the table, for sure! He was a fool for
immediately being antagonistic towards Arsenal's one-man goalscoring
machine, Ian Wright. A story I heard was that an Arsenal director said to
Wrighty not to worry about Rioch's attitude, as if it ever came down to
Wright or Rioch, Wrighty would be kept. Events seem to have turned out that
way. Incidentally, why was Rioch sacked? And why did the Board allow him
to sign his contract before doing so?
> It was better than GG achieved in his last season.
But not as well as many other GG years, notably 1989 and 1991, oh, yes, and
the year of the Cup Double.
John Porcella
> > "In Hellish Leicester They Hope Otherwise"?
Oops a mistype!
I meant to write IMLTHO (In My Less Than Humble Opinion).
>
>
> Isn't it funny that only over the week end I was speculating over the
future of
> GG, and within 72 hours my prediction was proved to be true! I amaze
myself
> sometimes.
Which prediction has come true? I have read that Rednapp is the favourite.
John Porcella
"Ian Harvey" <ianeh...@DELCAPSbtCAPSinternet.com> wrote in message
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 23:47:47 +0100, "John Porcella"
> <bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >> Are there 29,000 people on those waiting lists? I doubt it. My guess
> >> is that for most games getting seats in a 60k stadium will be easy. Of
> >> course I could be wrong!
> >
> >It was tricky to get tickets for Champions' League games at Wembley where
> >capacity was over 70,000 and there were not that many away fans looking
for
> >tickets. I am slightly surprised that Arsenal have not put in a bid for
> >70,000+, but I suspect that corporate boxes have taken up so much room
that
> >it is these that have kept maximum capacity down.
>
> 70,000 tickets for a big game priced at £10 adults and £5 children is
> not the same as 70,000 for home vs Bolton at £30 a ticket.
Who is to know what a 70,000 stadium club might charge for games? Perhaps
the equivalent of £10 or £12 when the stadium opens for lesser games and
much more for the bigger games?
> >
> >> >> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
I am not sure I would call Rioch's one year with us an *average* of fourth!
After all, an average is usually seen as a point of central convergence, and
one season is not really long enough to qualify, three being the minimum.
> >> >Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
> >
> >Rioch was a fool.
>
> But better on average than GG. Not that is saying much.
It is not saying anything.
>
> >>
> >> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
> >
> >IHLTHO he is not!
>
IMLTHO I should have typed.
Ian Harvey
<bron...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> 70,000 tickets for a big game priced at £10 adults and £5 children is
>> not the same as 70,000 for home vs Bolton at £30 a ticket.
>
>Who is to know what a 70,000 stadium club might charge for games? Perhaps
>the equivalent of £10 or £12 when the stadium opens for lesser games and
>much more for the bigger games?
Hmm, that will go down well with fans. For a couple of the European
games touts were selling tickets at face value. Yes face value. Do you
think we'd fill that stadium against Bolton, Charlton, Ipswich etc?
>> >> >> Obviously yes. Wenger's average is between 1 and 2. Ricoh's was 4th.
>
>I am not sure I would call Rioch's one year with us an *average* of fourth!
>After all, an average is usually seen as a point of central convergence, and
>one season is not really long enough to qualify, three being the minimum.
Technically speaking It is still an average, but the point is, GG was
awful after 91.4-10-4-12 does not make good reading.
>> >> >Good reason not to go back to his systems then!
>> >
>> >Rioch was a fool.
>>
>> But better on average than GG. Not that is saying much.
>
>It is not saying anything.
It is saying that Rioch outperformed GG. On past performance GGs team
would have finished half way that year, no more.
>> >>
>> >> IMO GG is a dinosaur.
>> >
>> >IHLTHO he is not!
>>
>
>IMLTHO I should have typed.
He is a failure. Unwanted and a failure.
GG last 4 years, next to AW last four years:
4-----1
10---2
4-----2
12---2
Black and white really.
We'll forget about the damage he did to our youth scheme as well.
Gareth Bourne
The mere fact that Leicester fired Taylor, thus opening up the opportunity,
secondly that one of the first names mentioned was GG and thirdly that,
apparently the Leicester board is split over who to appoint, with half of them
wanting GG.
Gareth Bourne
> wit of man for Arsenal to come up with some transportation ideas e.g. laying
> on buses to take people to Finsbury Park and/or King's Cross to stop them
> all jumping onto the tube nearest the new ground.
I compelely agree, however the protesters don't. Residential area, noise and
pollution from the extra coaches etc.
> Nothing wrong with climbing the table, for sure! He was a fool for
> immediately being antagonistic towards Arsenal's one-man goalscoring
> machine, Ian Wright. A story I heard was that an Arsenal director said to
> Wrighty not to worry about Rioch's attitude, as if it ever came down to
> Wright or Rioch, Wrighty would be kept. Events seem to have turned out that
> way. Incidentally, why was Rioch sacked? And why did the Board allow him
> to sign his contract before doing so?
I was under the impression that he hadn't signed his contract at all, he was
stalling over it and this is what pissed off Dein and Hill Wood. Apparently
they were both in a car going to a game and were talking about this when Dein
said he knew this chap in Japan called Wenger. Hill Wood made Dein call Wenger
right there and then on his mobile.
I agree about Rioch and Wright.
> But not as well as many other GG years, notably 1989 and 1991, oh, yes, and
> the year of the Cup Double.
Fair point.
John Porcella
> > I suspect that you are correct. However, it would not have been beyond
the
> > wit of man for Arsenal to come up with some transportation ideas e.g.
laying
> > on buses to take people to Finsbury Park and/or King's Cross to stop
them
> > all jumping onto the tube nearest the new ground.
>
> I compelely agree, however the protesters don't. Residential area, noise
and
> pollution from the extra coaches etc.
Once the stadium is built it may be difficult or impossible to enlarge it
(unless of course, they have planned the construction in such a way as to
allow expansion in the future if necessary). The time to go for a 70,000
seater stadium is now, if the Plan fails on this point, it can be easily
redrawn and reduced to placate the Council Planning Committee.
>
> > Nothing wrong with climbing the table, for sure! He was a fool for
> > immediately being antagonistic towards Arsenal's one-man goalscoring
> > machine, Ian Wright. A story I heard was that an Arsenal director said
to
> > Wrighty not to worry about Rioch's attitude, as if it ever came down to
> > Wright or Rioch, Wrighty would be kept. Events seem to have turned out
that
> > way. Incidentally, why was Rioch sacked? And why did the Board allow
him
> > to sign his contract before doing so?
>
> I was under the impression that he hadn't signed his contract at all, he
was
> stalling over it and this is what pissed off Dein and Hill Wood.
That is right, he was stalling, but when he knew he was to be 'let go', he
signed it to ensure a good payoff.
Apparently
> they were both in a car going to a game and were talking about this when
Dein
> said he knew this chap in Japan called Wenger. Hill Wood made Dein call
Wenger
> right there and then on his mobile.
>
> I agree about Rioch and Wright.
Yes, he was silly.
What of Rioch now?
Gareth Bourne
> games touts were selling tickets at face value. Yes face value. Do you
> think we'd fill that stadium against Bolton, Charlton, Ipswich etc?
I would go to more, perhaps lesser, games if the tickets were cheaper. Also the
touts probably still made money on the tickets because they bought them from
people for less than face value. I think if the tickets were proportional to
the importance of the game then we would sell out every game. There are
internet cafes in London called EasyEverything, these places charge you
different amounts depending on how full they are at the time, if its empty it's
really cheap, if it's full it's a lot more expensive. In my experience it is a
business model that works, and works well. There is no reason not to apply it
to football.
> Technically speaking It is still an average, but the point is, GG was
> awful after 91.4-10-4-12 does not make good reading.
I had forgotten we went down to 12th.
> It is saying that Rioch outperformed GG. On past performance GGs team
> would have finished half way that year, no more.
Agree, we were boring and predictable.
> He is a failure. Unwanted and a failure.
>
> GG last 4 years, next to AW last four years:
>
> 4-----1
> 10---2
> 4-----2
> 12---2
>
> Black and white really.
>
> We'll forget about the damage he did to our youth scheme as well.
Agree, 100%. I'm just suprised it took us so long to fire him, in some ways I
think the bung scandle gave the board the excuse they had been looking for.
Gareth Bourne
> (unless of course, they have planned the construction in such a way as to
> allow expansion in the future if necessary). The time to go for a 70,000
> seater stadium is now, if the Plan fails on this point, it can be easily
> redrawn and reduced to placate the Council Planning Committee.
That's very sensible. I like that.
> That is right, he was stalling, but when he knew he was to be 'let go', he
> signed it to ensure a good payoff.
Bastard.
> Yes, he was silly.
>
> What of Rioch now?
He was somewhere very small, I think he had a spell at Norwich but he is now
somewhere even smaller. I could never get over the fact he went to be Stuart
Houston's assistant at QPR. What of Stuart Houston now?