I wonder if the blame for the patchy home form is going to be put squarely on

[reg]

OK, but there is an equal tendency among those fans who most vocally complain to deny that their actions may have any negative consequences for the team.

Right, but A has already pointed out, even decent teams get the bird sometimes. Crucially though, points are still awarded for the players' performances and results regardless.

You don't appreciate that in our haste to banter off the supporters, we risk ignoring a rather more essential aspect of the matter?

[TheCurly]

Right, but A has already pointed out, even decent teams get the bird sometimes. Crucially though, points are still awarded for the players' performances and results regardless.

You don't appreciate that in our haste to banter off the supporters, we risk ignoring a rather more essential aspect of the matter?

Correct,this is why my initial response was NOT to blame the fans for the results (ergo blaming players and management) but say the fans were a contributary factor in some results.I stand by that.

[reg]

Correct,this is why my initial response was NOT to blame the fans for the results (ergo blaming players and management) but say the fans were a contributary factor in some results.I stand by that.

Fair enough. But it simply makes no sense to me. We employ some of the top people in the world in each and every department of the football club, but yet we are supposed to believe that our fortunes really actually depend on what mood Claude & Co. happen to be in on a matchday.

Ridicules.

My point, if there is one, would be that it actually makes no difference either way. And the only time it's mentioned is as an excuse.

[Burney]

Fair enough. But it simply makes no sense to me. We employ some of the top people in the world in each and every department of the football club, but yet we are supposed to believe that our fortunes really actually depend on what mood Claude & Co. happen to be in on a matchday.

Ridicules.

My point, if there is one, would be that it actually makes no difference either way. And the only time it's mentioned is as an excuse.

The logical conclusion of your argument is that whether the fans cheer or boo should make no difference to the team. Unfortunately, that runs counter to the entire logic of football, in which home support is considered to be a major advantage as it encourages our players and intimidates theirs. By the same token, a lack of support or worse at home is bound to have a negative effect on the team. There is simply no escaping this logic, I'm afraid.

However good a player is, they are still subject to human factors. They can still use home support to raise their game as they would use any other advantage. Thus, the absence of home support makes a difference.

[reg]

The logical conclusion of your argument is that whether the fans cheer or boo should make no difference to the team. Unfortunately, that runs counter to the entire logic of football, in which home support is considered to be a major advantage as it encourages our players and intimidates theirs. By the same token, a lack of support or worse at home is bound to have a negative effect on the team. There is simply no escaping this logic, I'm afraid.

However good a player is, they are still subject to human factors. They can still use home support to raise their game as they would use any other advantage. Thus, the absence of home support makes a difference.

No, I disagree. We *have* escaped your logic; we are fourth in the league, not bottom. Even at this late stage and despite everything we could still win the title.

Of course, players are human! However, professionals give up the right to use human factors as an excuse; they do their job, they win or they lose and that's it. Then they get ready for the next one. That's why they are professionals. They don't care about outside factors.

And that is true for Curly's wife's brain surgeon as it is for me and Arsene Wenger or the nice lady who's just been here to fix a minor problem with a car.

[Burney]

No, I disagree. We *have* escaped your logic; we are fourth in the league, not bottom. Even at this late stage and despite everything we could still win the title.

Of course, players are human! However, professionals give up the right to use human factors as an excuse; they do their job, they win or they lose and that's it. Then they get ready for the next one. That's why they are professionals. They don't care about outside factors.

And that is true for Curly's wife's brain surgeon as it is for me and Arsene Wenger or the nice lady who's just been here to fix a minor problem with a car.

We can only be said to have escaped it if you believe that this team has performed to the utmost of its ability and that fourth is the best it could have expected.

But I don't think that is your argument, is it? You believe we have underperformed and refuse to accept that the poisonous behaviour of our supporters may be any sort of factor in that underperformance on the grounds that professionals shouldn't allow the fact that the people who are supposed to be on their side are instead consistently booing them. And if you refuse to accept that, the logic dictates that you don't believe there is or should be such a thing as home advantage.

Effectively, you are arguing that among professionals, there should be no such thing as morale. You seem to think that anyone getting paid to do a job will do the job the same way regardless of human factors. I would have thought you of all people would understand the importance of morale to performance.

[reg]

We can only be said to have escaped it if you believe that this team has performed to the utmost of its ability and that fourth is the best it could have expected.

But I don't think that is your argument, is it? You believe we have underperformed and refuse to accept that the poisonous behaviour of our supporters may be any sort of factor in that underperformance on the grounds that professionals shouldn't allow the fact that the people who are supposed to be on their side are instead consistently booing them. And if you refuse to accept that, the logic dictates that you don't believe there is or should be such a thing as home advantage.

Effectively, you are arguing that among professionals, there should be no such thing as morale. You seem to think that anyone getting paid to do a job will do the job the same way regardless of human factors. I would have thought you of all people would understand the importance of morale to performance.

Regardless of expectations, we have done alright. Could've done better, could've done alot worse. Don't forget that I am firmly in the "we need to buy a fifty million pound striker" camp so my own hopes for us are always adjusted accordingly.

As I say, we can still win the title. You know, despite half the season's matches being subject to the "poisonous behaviour of our supporters". What do you imagine Leicester City's fans were like last season as they played their way towards relegation? Did they change out the whole thirty thousand of them for this term (although, I did read an amusing tale about one poor chap there who, after many years, finally allowed his wife to persuade him to give up his season ticket last Summer)?

No, getting paid and results is the most important thing. You do your job, they pay you for that and also to do it again tomorrow; no problem. That's being a professional. Morale is simply a term used when dealing with folk from outside, to be polite, if and when necessary. An excuse. It's nothing to do with the truth, but simply we supporters feel better if the players and staff at least pretend to care about how we feel, good or bad.

[Ash]

...refuse to accept that the poisonous behaviour of our supporters may be any sort of factor in that underperformance

Lumping all our supporters together and calling them all poisonous is reductive and an over-statement. As an witness to events I would say that apathy and resignation are more prevalent feelings than toxicity. None of us know how much an effect the crowd has either way. 1%, 2%, 5%? Of course every bit helps, but systematically blaming the crowd with exaggerated rhetoric while the club's staff keep ****ing up their jobs seems wrong to me.

Also there is the false assumption that Arsenal are uniquely bad. It's like Jorge's hate for his country, assuming we are the worst and everyone else is better.

I don't know why I bother saying this tbh. It just goes round in circles.