Approximately 18 months ago I, World's End Stella, went on an extensive youtube

[Sir C]

But you know that isn't true. You were here, you must remember it.

What isn't true?

Did we, or did we not, finish above them? We did finish above them. You contend that they were challenging for the title. Any team finishing above them must also have been challenging for the title, but more successfully than them.

[Monty92]

Not by me

Fine, but I didn't particularly feel that Spurs were ever in the race that season either. They always seemed to have too much to do. The same last season, in fact. They were ALWAYS major outsiders.

And I'm pretty sure you'd say the same about us if we'd have had the same end of season, yet because it's spurs you claim they "meaningfully challenged".

The only outlier is Liverpool, who did meaningfully challenge in their Suarez season.

[Peter]

We were still considered to be in the race that season without 6 or 7 games to go.

I believe we were 8 points behind with about 6 or 7 to play, with a trip to City to come. I could be wrong.

[Peter]

Fine, but I didn't particularly feel that Spurs were ever in the race that season either. They always seemed to have too much to do. The same last season, in fact.

And I'm pretty sure you'd say the same about us if we'd have had the same end of season, yet because it's spurs you claim they "meaningfully challenged".

I would tend to agree. In both seasons they left it too late and had too much to do in the last third of the season. In neither season were they considered anything other than an outside possibility.

However....if they put in a slightly more meaningful challenge in the next two years then they would fit your criteria. That was my point.

And an outside chance of Spurs winning the league is still far too much to bear.

[Rich]

I’ve realised that I’m simply too old now to stay up half the night watching the ashes They shall just have to get on with it without me, I’m afraid.

Also, we’re gonna get gubbed.

Surely you can manage the first hour of play and maybe even the last hour, too?

[Monty92]

I believe we were 8 points behind with about 6 or 7 to play, with a trip to City to come. I could be wrong.

And Spurs were 4 points behind Leicester having played a game more with about 6 or 7 to play, with a trip to Chelsea to come.

You judge us by different standards and I'd like to know why.

[Monty92]

I would tend to agree. In both seasons they left it too late and had too much to do in the last third of the season. In neither season were they considered anything other than an outside possibility.

However....if they put in a slightly more meaningful challenge in the next two years then they would fit your criteria. That was my point.

And an outside chance of Spurs winning the league is still far too much to bear.

No, your point was that they've challenged twice in recent years while we haven't, but are now shifting the goalposts having had the flaws in your argument exposed.

[World's End Stella]

Of one of the 10 richest clubs in the world.. how many others are also English?? So I would have thought the ability to challenge must also depend on what the other clubs in your league are also generating money wise?

True but only to the extent that you fall into Monty's trap of trying to excuse Wenger's performance by believing that money is the only factor. Money helps but as Leicester proved, there are many other factors, many other ways to be successful.

I guess the point really is that if you are one of the ten richest clubs you have enough money that it isn't an excuse.

[World's End Stella]

. Any team finishing above them must also have been challenging for the title, but more successfully than them.

This is untrue, I'm afraid.

With 4 games to go Team A is 12 points behind the league leaders and have been for some time and they finish 12 points behind the champions. Did they challenge for the league? Absolutely not.

Team B is top of the league with 4 games to go but lose their last 4 games and finish third behind Team A on goal difference. Is being top with 4 games to go challenging for the league? Absolutely, yes.

[Peter]

No, your point was that they've challenged twice in recent years while we haven't, but are now shifting the goalposts having had the flaws in your argument exposed.

I am not shifting the goalposts. They did leave themselves too much to do but it is rather silly to say they didnt challenge. Our challenge two years ago was faltering badly from March onwards and I dont think anyone genuinely thought, going into April, that we were going to win the league or even come close. Spurs, while being an outside bet, were at least winning games and gathering momentum. At the time, everyone was talking about their title challenge. I cant recall anyone talking about ours going into the last 6 or 7 games. We ended up above them because they collapsed after their title challenge ended at Chelsea.

Last year they did challenge but left it too late. We were nowhere.

I am not really sure where you are going with all this. I am not going to patronise you by explaining the difference between challenging for the title and winning it, even though you seem confused between the two things.