Football 2012-2013

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

Barca are a bit crap really aren't they?! Especially that Messi chancer!

With regard to the finacial fair play, hasnt this already started didn't Ethiad pay some phenominal amount of money as part of the sponsorship deal?

Anyway, the revolution is coming in the lower leagues atleast, contracts have been exchanged just need the court case to go our way and we're going to buy the club!

[thetime]

That was wonderful from messi. Absolutely wonderful.

[thegremlin_1999]

Was the passing also which was sublime, I cant see milan holding on barca are all over them.

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

Was the passing also which was sublime, I cant see milan holding on barca are all over them.

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

Unlucky AC!

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

and punished....

[thetime]

Unlucky AC!

[kaosmark2]

Not watching properly, just looking up occasionally. Only saw the replay of the goal which was mainly the finish. Gorgeous stuff tho.

Milan only need to score once tho, if they do barca gotta score 4...

[pink_triangle]

Watching the barca highlights now, some amazing stuff. Would love a barca v bayern final, cant remember those 2 in a big knockout game but am probably mistaken,

Regarding teams like PSG (correctly in my opinion) working ways round financial unfair play, what are the other teams realistically going to do about it. The likes of man u, bayern and arsenal may moan but what can they really do about it. Anything a PSG or man city will be covered by a loophole. I suppose they could break away in protest but are there enough teams in europe making a profit to make this viable, also a european super league without a team in paris may affect the commerical potential of any breakaway league.

On the other end of the scale was sittting in front of the parents of a wrexham player at the match today. They were talking about how he had done a degree (amazingly for a footballer!) but couldnt afford the 5k a year to convert it into a masters. Amazing when you think that kind of money is less than an hours wages for a big premiership player.

[kaosmark2]

I'm really looking forward to the next round of games, reckon we're in for some tasty ones. Draw Friday morning right?

[pink_triangle]

I'm glad arsenal made a fight of the match. Unfortunately I think its another example of unfair away goals rule ruining a game. If 2 sides score the same amount of goals, a game should continue. At least in a penalty shootout one team has to score more than the other.

[strummer77]

I'm glad arsenal made a fight of the match. Unfortunately I think its another example of unfair away goals rule ruining a game. If 2 sides score the same amount of goals, a game should continue. At least in a penalty shootout one team has to score more than the other.

Edited March 13, 2013 by strummer77

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

I think away goals is fair to be honest. Surely the point of inter-national club football is to show your club can compete in your own away country but away from it too. Especially over two legs, clubs should be looking to show they can perform at a high level. Arsenal paid a price for failing to show up in the first leg, Bayern did and were rewarded for it.

[pink_triangle]

On another basis you could say arsenal defence keeping a clean sheet away from home is a sign of performance at the high level and should be rewarded. The rule kills off too many games at a stage when they would otherwise be open. If 2 teams have played over 2 games and are level, that's a draw in my book. Both sides have scored and conceded the same amount of goals, playing in the same circumstances.

In leagues we don't use away goals as a determinining factor if teams are level, so I don't see the need for an artificial method in cup competition. People talk about the lottery of penalties, but if a team can't beat another its a lottery they deserve. I want to see more 2 legged ties competitive untill the end, I want to see less home teams playing in fear of conceding goals.

[Jaybles]

Nice work from Arsene, deflecting media attention away from another trophyless season on to the "decline of english football"

Arsenal did well last night and went out due to inept defending in the first leg.

Man Utd went out party thanks to inept refereeing. Both came up against very strong sides.

I think the only dissapointment comes from Man City and Chelsea. Saying that, no side has ever defended the Champions League and Man City are still relative fledglings in the competition.

To say the premier league is in decline is a bit of a knee jerk reaction. To sustain the level of success in the competition English clubs have had is almost impossible.

The cyclic nature of football is always going to present itself over a long period and English clubs have done well to be ever present over such a long period.

The dominant years of 06-09 may be over but the level of competion has increased too. If we continue to fail to have clubs in the last 8 over the next couple of seasons then we can talk.

Considering experience and the amount of money being ploughed in to English football, I would be surprised to see a repeat performance next year.

[pink_triangle]

I think its a suggestion more than a trend. Last season also had 2 english teams out at the group stage and another out in the last 16. Chelsea winning the thing covered up what was in general a poor year for the English teams. As you say you would have to judge things over a few more years, but with financial powers spread more widely throughout europe rather than concentrated in 2 or 3 countries its quite possible the trend could continue.

[eFestivals]

Nice work from Arsene, deflecting media attention away from another trophyless season on to the "decline of english football"

I think he's spot on. The last few years have shown that the Prem likes to think itself the best in the world with the largest amount of great players, but the facts of the Chumps in the last few years prove otherwise.

As an easy example, Arsenal have picked up two players from Malaga - who are in the last eight - in the last year, with Cazorla being a bargain buy and a great player, but clearly off the radar of English clubs until then.

OK, Chelsea won it last year, but they won by playing anti-football that Mcleish would have been proud of.

There's just three domestic trophies, and Arsenal are not the strongest side in the league. "Another trophyless season" is a rather pathetic stick to beat any manager with, unless that manager is manager of a club that has a genuine chance of winning the title, and (for whatever reasons) it's a while since Arsenal have been that.

And in reality few of those "for whatever reasons" come back onto Wenger. While Arsenal fans might not like how the new stadium debt has been managed (and, it's got to be said, managed very well on a financial basis!) that has impacted onto what he could spend. And it's not Wenger that has caused many of their better players to leave the club as they have (and it's probably the case that most would have still left if Arsenal were winning stuff [including even perhaps the Chumps] regularly).

And while this season is looking like it's going to be a disaster for Arsenal unless they scrape top-four, even much of that shouldn't necessarily be held against just Wenger. They're still a formidable team at their best - possibly even in with a shout for best in the country at their best against other teams' best - but have just been too inconsistent.

[Jaybles]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not having a go at Arsene, I think he does a great job at Arsenal. I just think he was clever in deflecting media attention on to english football rather than Arsenal's failings.

The media (right or wrong) will constantly remind Arsene every year he continues without winning a trophy. Considering his dominance in the game a decade ago fans are also frustrated they have gone so long without a trophy.

Personally I think without heavy investment it will continue to be hard for Arsenal to win anything (though with the quality they still possess they probably should have done better in domestic cups)

You are right in that the standard of English football in the champs has gone down, they quality of competition has also gone up.

I just find it funny how one year without an English team in the last 8 = a crisis in some peoples book. Things will come back around again, we may never see the dominance of 3 clubs in the last 4 again but I would argue that's a good thing for the competition.

[eFestivals]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not having a go at Arsene, I think he does a great job at Arsenal. I just think he was clever in deflecting media attention on to english football rather than Arsenal's failings.

Is going out last night a failing? It is only against the possibility of winning, but that aside they put up a decent fight over two legs against one of the best teams in Europe. Only one team would win, and while the best probably won here, it's not always the best who win.

As I laid out in my last post, there's not really anything meaningful for a realist to beat Arsenal with for 'failing' in a wider sense.

Personally I think without heavy investment it will continue to be hard for Arsenal to win anything

Not so sure about that. They need to strengthen of course, but they have the nucleus of the team for the next 5 years on contract and all of whom should improve by a meaningful amount.

I'm guessing that Wenger will look to build around that nucleus, rather than go out and buy a new team.

(though with the quality they still possess they probably should have done better in domestic cups)

you could say the same thing about Utd - who no one would dispute are the better team - and that gets to mean that it becomes an impossibility for Arsenal to win cups.

But the reality is that cups are a lottery. Which is why Utd don't win it nearly every year, and makes the likes of Arsenal even less likely to win than their league position suggests.

[Jaybles]

Is going out last night a failing? It is only against the possibility of winning, but that aside they put up a decent fight over two legs against one of the best teams in Europe. Only one team would win, and while the best probably won here, it's not always the best who win.

As I laid out in my last post, there's not really anything meaningful for a realist to beat Arsenal with for 'failing' in a wider sense.Not so sure about that. They need to strengthen of course, but they have the nucleus of the team for the next 5 years on contract and all of whom should improve by a meaningful amount.

I'm guessing that Wenger will look to build around that nucleus, rather than go out and buy a new team.you could say the same thing about Utd - who no one would dispute are the better team - and that gets to mean that it becomes an impossibility for Arsenal to win cups.

But the reality is that cups are a lottery. Which is why Utd don't win it nearly every year, and makes the likes of Arsenal even less likely to win than their league position suggests.

[Jaybles]

*Double post

Edited March 14, 2013 by Jaybles

[pink_triangle]

If you are a team continuously playing in the top tier of english and european football you will be judged by trophy haul.

[Jaybles]

*Triple post......Stupid phone

Edited March 14, 2013 by Jaybles

[eFestivals]

Take your arsenal blinkers off ;-)

Of course going out is a failing, unless they had no desire to win the thing.

No blinkers here.

I'm coming back at you with the opposite exteme to your view, that's all - but one that's infused with more realism (and less red blinkers) than you're managing.

Only one team can win any trophy in any year. That makes every team that fails to win each trophy a failure in what you're laying out.

Realism says that Utd are more likely to win the FA Cup - so that actually gets to mean that each year that Utd don't win the FA and neither do Arsenal, Utd are the bigger failure.

And yet you wouldn't have that. You'd say "but they win it sometimes". So what? They're the strongest team, they should win it every time if your view has meaning.

Arsenal are not the strongest team. Yes, they might get lucky and win something despite not being the strongest team, but that success would be down to luck, which would also mean that not winning is not unlucky, it's not a failure, it's just how it is right now.

Are they failing? With all realism taken into account and real-world comparisons made with other teams, they're the biggest success in the league. Cos would Utd be doing as well if they made a profit, had no money to spend on players and lost their best players each season? I think not.

Like it or not, Arsenal have failed to deliver a trophy for 8 years, and due to their previous success and the history of teams like 'the invincibles' fans and media will keep pointing out this failure (especially under the same management). If you are a team continuously playing in the top tier of english and european football you will be judged by trophy haul.

only by those not working on a realistic basis.

I support Aldershot. They're not a failure because they never win things. They're competing (poorly right now ) at the level they're able to.

It's really no different with Arsenal. They're going to have to get lucky to win something, and that's something beyond what the club, manager, or players are able to consciously influence. If it happens it happens, but with how luck works for a league like the Prem it's much less likely to happen than happen.

It may have dropped a little off the pace at the highest level, but it is much more competitive than most leagues outside the top 2.

I'd say a quick look at the facts gets to show both those as wrong.

No Prem teams in the last 8 of the Chumps. Huge gap at the top of the Prem.

I think the power shifting to being spread out across Europe is a good thing for competition.

In theory, yes. In reality I suspect it means the end of grass roots footie is nearer thru the advent of a Euro super league.

[kaosmark2]

More the suggestion that English football is in a downward spiral. Its still arguably the best league in the world.