Yeah, about that 'decline' we're supposedly arresting...

[Burney]

:rubchin:

https://twitter.com/shivwhorra/status/1123168806908469249

[Sir C]

:rubchin:

https://twitter.com/shivwhorra/status/1123168806908469249

It's interesting that the stats support what is evident to the meanest of intellects; that rather than improving this season, we have become the footballing equivalent of a glass of water.

[WES]

:rubchin:

https://twitter.com/shivwhorra/status/1123168806908469249

Wow, you really are desperate. I had always thought your anti-Emery stance was a wind up.

Anyway, that's almost all nonsense as the only thing that matters really are trophies, league placing and points (I would put them in that order).

And on the points front his conclusion is 'Even if we win both games this wouldn't be a massive improvement on the last 10 years or so.'

And you're using this as proof of the Emery not having stopped the decline under Wenger? :hehe:

And are you now accepting that we were in decline under Wenger?

[Pokster]

:rubchin:

https://twitter.com/shivwhorra/status/1123168806908469249

My god, you are a loon if you use that...expected goals for v expected goals against!! FFS, we also have the highest convertion factor of actual goals v expected goals, so using that we have improved.

Now to move onto points you couldn't be bothered with earlier. in his first 50 games he has won more games than any other manager, how is that not an improvement??

[Burney]

It's interesting that the stats support what is evident to the meanest of intellects; that rather than improving this season, we have become the footballing equivalent of a glass of water.

Worse in pretty much every metric and we play crappy football.

Still, at least we've got 'hope' now, eh?

[WES]

Wow, you really are desperate. I had always thought your anti-Emery stance was a wind up.

Anyway, that's almost all nonsense as the only thing that matters really are trophies, league placing and points (I would put them in that order).

And on the points front his conclusion is 'Even if we win both games this wouldn't be a massive improvement on the last 10 years or so.'

And you're using this as proof of the Emery not having stopped the decline under Wenger? :hehe:

And are you now accepting that we were in decline under Wenger?

Oh, and if our goals for and against are linear for the next two games we will finish almost exactly where we did last year in both categories. He's engaging in number games by looking at the last 5 years, the valid comparison is to last year.

[Sir C]

Worse in pretty much every metric and we play crappy football.

Still, at least we've got 'hope' now, eh?

I wouldn't be terribly fussed about poor results in the first season while a new manager imposes his ideas and teaches his players a new system. What concerns me is that there doesn't seem to be a coherent idea or an identifiable system. "What's the vision Unai?" I ask, plaintively. Sadly, answer comes there none. Well nothing comprehensible, anyway. :-(

[redgunamo]

T'other way about, I'd've said? You can only really develop by winning lots of games. Otherwise, a manager won't get the time for visions and systems and all that rot.

"Wengerball" didn't begin in '97, for example, did it. He'd inherited a squad full of big lads who just liked kicking people.



I wouldn't be terribly fussed about poor results in the first season while a new manager imposes his ideas and teaches his players a new system. What concerns me is that there doesn't seem to be a coherent idea or an identifiable system. "What's the vision Unai?" I ask, plaintively. Sadly, answer comes there none. Well nothing comprehensible, anyway. :-(

[Burney]

Wow, you really are desperate. I had always thought your anti-Emery stance was a wind up.

Anyway, that's almost all nonsense as the only thing that matters really are trophies, league placing and points (I would put them in that order).

And on the points front his conclusion is 'Even if we win both games this wouldn't be a massive improvement on the last 10 years or so.'

And you're using this as proof of the Emery not having stopped the decline under Wenger? :hehe:

And are you now accepting that we were in decline under Wenger?

Er, no. The point is that last season was a massive aberration in Wenger's time at Arsenal (much of which is probably attributable to him being kicked out). Compared to pretty much every other previous season under Wenger, Emery's record so far is appreciably worse.

And from 2014-18, Wenger delivered three trophies and 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th and 6th (the aberration).

So, by your own logic if (as seems likely) we finish 6th and do not win the Europa League, you must accept that we have not improved on last year and are, in fact, doing worse than at most points in the last five years?

[Sir C]

T'other way about, I'd've said? You can only really develop by winning lots of games. Otherwise, a manager won't get the time for visions and systems and all that rot.

"Wengerball" didn't begin in '97, for example, did it. He'd inherited a squad full of big lads who just liked kicking people.

But I think that's the point, isn't it? He inherited a group of violent lumps, added Vieira and Petit and turned them into Brazil. Bould to Adams, and that sums it all up, doesn't it? That was Arsene's vision.

What's Unai's vision?

[Burney]

But I think that's the point, isn't it? He inherited a group of violent lumps, added Vieira and Petit and turned them into Brazil. Bould to Adams, and that sums it all up, doesn't it? That was Arsene's vision.

What's Unai's vision?

He also won the league in his first full season, so Pokster can take his '50 games' and shove that right up his hole.

[Burney]

Oh, and if our goals for and against are linear for the next two games we will finish almost exactly where we did last year in both categories. He's engaging in number games by looking at the last 5 years, the valid comparison is to last year.

Well no. He's judging Wenger's recent record on more than one season - something you're pleading that we should do with Emery. :shrug:

[Burney]

I wouldn't be terribly fussed about poor results in the first season while a new manager imposes his ideas and teaches his players a new system. What concerns me is that there doesn't seem to be a coherent idea or an identifiable system. "What's the vision Unai?" I ask, plaintively. Sadly, answer comes there none. Well nothing comprehensible, anyway. :-(

I doubt anyone can understand him. Imagine that - we could have the greatest tactical genius in the history of football, but because he talks like a ****, it counts for nothing. :hehe:

[WES]

Well no. He's judging Wenger's recent record on more than one season - something you're pleading that we should do with Emery. :shrug:

He's ignoring the clear decline during the 5 year period by averaging the results out. And I don't agree that the 6th place was an aberration. I would have sympathy for that argument if there had been no sign of decline the previous 4-5 years but there clearly was.

And the last season comparison is far more valid simply because the players (at Arsenal and other teams) are far more similar.

We're going to score and concede more or less the same number of goals and finish probably 6-9 points ahead of where we were last year, to deny there has been improvement is a nonsense. So the decline has stopped, not only have we not declined, we've not stood still either, in fact we've improved. All in a manager's first season at the club with relatively little investment.

You really do need to get over that or risk looking biased and silly.

[redgunamo]

That was largely a title-winning team that had simply, perhaps understandably, overdone it a little with the celebrations. Of course, they could already play a bit :shrug:



But I think that's the point, isn't it? He inherited a group of violent lumps, added Vieira and Petit and turned them into Brazil. Bould to Adams, and that sums it all up, doesn't it? That was Arsene's vision.

What's Unai's vision?

[Burney]

He's ignoring the clear decline during the 5 year period by averaging the results out. And I don't agree that the 6th place was an aberration. I would have sympathy for that argument if there had been no sign of decline the previous 4-5 years but there clearly was.

And the last season comparison is far more valid simply because the players (at Arsenal and other teams) are far more similar.

We're going to score and concede more or less the same number of goals and finish probably 6-9 points ahead of where we were last year, to deny there has been improvement is a nonsense. So the decline has stopped, not only have we not declined, we've not stood still either, in fact we've improved. All in a manager's first season at the club with relatively little investment.

You really do need to get over that or risk looking biased and silly.

A 'clear decline' would show results getting progressively worse year-on-year over a significant period. Wenger's results don't bear that out at all. The last two league positions were poor (although the one in 2016/17 was offset by a cup win against Chelsea), but the fact that results went from 4th to 3rd to 2nd in the years before that (including two more cups) show the very opposite of a decline. By your own criteria (trophies, league placing and points) the only possible argument for there having been a decline is between 2016 to 2018 - and even in that time we won a trophy!

[Burney]

That was largely a title-winning team that had simply, perhaps understandably, overdone it a little with the celebrations. Of course, they could already play a bit :shrug:

We hadn't won a title (or even come close) for seven years at that point, r.

[Sir C]

That was largely a title-winning team that had simply, perhaps understandably, overdone it a little with the celebrations. Of course, they could already play a bit :shrug:

The 'bit' they played under Graham bore no relation to the 'bit' Arsene had them playing.

[IUFG]

The 'bit' they played under Graham bore no relation to the 'bit' Arsene had them playing.

All relative, innit, sc.

George Graham took us to a whisker of an unbeaten season in 91.
So by that measure, Wenger only marginally better than George Graham.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIPznj9VQvA

Chelsea. always been ****s

[redgunamo]

Class is permanent, B. Just a long hangover, is all.



We hadn't won a title (or even come close) for seven years at that point, r.

[WES]

A 'clear decline' would show results getting progressively worse year-on-year over a significant period. Wenger's results don't bear that out at all. The last two league positions were poor (although the one in 2016/17 was offset by a cup win against Chelsea), but the fact that results went from 4th to 3rd to 2nd in the years before that (including two more cups) show the very opposite of a decline. By your own criteria (trophies, league placing and points) the only possible argument for there having been a decline is between 2016 to 2018 - and even in that time we won a trophy!

Again you're focusing on the data that supports your view and ignoring that that does not.

I will go back to my initial point about winning titles, challenging for titles, barely making the top four and then falling out of the top four two years in a row with the last of these being a truly appalling year for a club of our size and financial standing.

The decline is clear, and when comparing how emery has done after only one year the most valid comparison is to the last year.

This is boring now, if you can't accept that we were in decline and that an improvement in points means the decline has not only stopped but is an improvement then there is no point in taking this any farther.

[redgunamo]

That doesn't mean anything to me, I'm afraid. Either you enjoy watching people play football or you don't.

That's why trophies were invented.



The 'bit' they played under Graham bore no relation to the 'bit' Arsene had them playing.

[Sir C]

That doesn't mean anything to me, I'm afraid. Either you enjoy watching people play football or you don't.

That's why trophies were invented.

With the utmost respect, r, that's a steaming pile of cobblers.

One might as well say that one enjoys eating, therefore any digestible comestible is as enjoyable as any other. It's simply not true.

[Sir C]

All relative, innit, sc.

George Graham took us to a whisker of an unbeaten season in 91.
So by that measure, Wenger only marginally better than George Graham.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIPznj9VQvA

Chelsea. always been ****s

Yes, but Arsene had us playing football that was quite beautiful. Arsene's teams created art.

What's Unai's vision again?

[Burney]

Again you're focusing on the data that supports your view and ignoring that that does not.

I will go back to my initial point about winning titles, challenging for titles, barely making the top four and then falling out of the top four two years in a row with the last of these being a truly appalling year for a club of our size and financial standing.

The decline is clear, and when comparing how emery has done after only one year the most valid comparison is to the last year.

This is boring now, if you can't accept that we were in decline and that an improvement in points means the decline has not only stopped but is an improvement then there is no point in taking this any farther.

No, I'm sorry, but you talked about decline over the five-year period discussed and you set your own criteria of what constituted success. I applied your criteria to that five-year period and demonstrated that - BY YOUR OWN CRITERIA - there was no demonstrable 'long-term' decline.

I'm sorry if you don't like the outcome, but I didn't set the parameters. :shrug:

[redgunamo]

I'm not a homo :shrug:



With the utmost respect, r, that's a steaming pile of cobblers.

One might as well say that one enjoys eating, therefore any digestible comestible is as enjoyable as any other. It's simply not true.

[7sisters]

Yes, but Arsene had us playing football that was quite beautiful. Arsene's teams created art.

What's Unai's vision again?

I’m not convinced anyone really knows just yet, not even the players. In his defence, he’s having to make do until he’s able to assert a genuine influence on the make up of the squard.
This is still largely Wengers team. The introduction of Leno,Torreira and Guendouzi are at least a positive.

[WES]

No, I'm sorry, but you talked about decline over the five-year period discussed and you set your own criteria of what constituted success. I applied your criteria to that five-year period and demonstrated that - BY YOUR OWN CRITERIA - there was no demonstrable 'long-term' decline.

I'm sorry if you don't like the outcome, but I didn't set the parameters. :shrug:

No, the bloke on Twitter used the 5 year period and I pointed out that he was playing a numbers game. You then used the first 3 years of that 5 years and then decided to ignore the last two because they contradicted your theory.

Bored now :yawn:

[redgunamo]

No, Emery has been a very slight disappointment and I'll tell you why: His job, as I see it, is to coach the team and the players he actually has. It's not about him or his vision or the future and how he wants his team to play. He must do better now.

Even though Wenger took on a far better Arsenal team, in my view, the job he had was much tougher. Em needs to learn from his predecessor. And fast.



I’m not convinced anyone really knows just yet, not even the players. In his defence, he’s having to make do until he’s able to assert a genuine influence on the make up of the squard.
This is still largely Wengers team. The introduction of Leno,Torreira and Guendouzi are at least a positive.

[7sisters]

Yes, but Arsene had us playing football that was quite beautiful. Arsene's teams created art.

What's Unai's vision again?


No, Emery has been a very slight disappointment and I'll tell you why: His job, as I see it, is to coach the team and the players he actually has. It's not about him or his vision or the future and how he wants his team to play. He must do better now.

Even though Wenger took on a far better Arsenal team, in my view, the job he had was much tougher. Em needs to learn from his predecessor. And fast.

Fair points but would GG have brought the best out of Henry, Pires & Ljunberg ? I guess we’ll never know. Certain managers need specific players to carry out their natural style of play. Certainly United found that out the hard way with Mourinho .

[Burney]

No, the bloke on Twitter used the 5 year period and I pointed out that he was playing a numbers game. You then used the first 3 years of that 5 years and then decided to ignore the last two because they contradicted your theory.

Bored now :yawn:

You referred to decline over the previous 4-5 years. I’ve demonstrated that there was no such decline by the criteria you chose to define success.

You’re ‘bored’ because you’ve made a bit of a twàt of yourself and I’ve hoist you by your own petard.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

My god, you are a loon if you use that...expected goals for v expected goals against!! FFS, we also have the highest convertion factor of actual goals v expected goals, so using that we have improved.

Now to move onto points you couldn't be bothered with earlier. in his first 50 games he has won more games than any other manager, how is that not an improvement??


Improvement is relative. According to points obtained, we have not improved but stayed largely where we are but, we appear to have regressed as others seem to have passed us by.

Perhaps we should look at the change in Spurs and Liverpool points total, for example?

One should look at what Chelsea and manU have been doing of late as well, points wise.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

I doubt anyone can understand him. Imagine that - we could have the greatest tactical genius in the history of football, but because he talks like a ****, it counts for nothing. :hehe:

Old Potato head doesn't exactly speak the best Ingerlish and his players understand him. It's not as if he has Villa and Ardilles to translate either.

[WES]

You referred to decline over the previous 4-5 years. I’ve demonstrated that there was no such decline by the criteria you chose to define success.

You’re ‘bored’ because you’ve made a bit of a twàt of yourself and I’ve hoist you by your own petard.

No, I’m bored because you seem incapable of even superficial quantitative analysis, but we already knew this.

You claim there was no season-on-season decline in Arsenal’s results over the latter years of Wenger’s tenure. There is really nothing I or anyone else need to add to that.