I guarantee that Chelsea, West Ham and Spurs have been in the Northbank Highbury more times than you.
Arsenal played at Highbury for close to a hundred years, so Chelsea, spurs and west ham will have visited, what, a combined 200+ times? So I would need to have been a season ticket holder and attended all home games for about ten years prior to 2006 to have been to highbury more times than those teams. Given I'm currently in my mid twenties I would have to have been a very dedicated and rich child to see that many games... What exactly is your point? I feel a bit sorry for you lol
I think you're deluding yourself a bit off the back of a win in a competition that, unfortunately, is a very distant third choice for top clubs nowadays.
Fair enough but there is no guarantee that changing managers would have seen you fall out of top 4. It is a very conservative approach especially. If the club had such great faith in being well run then maybe you could survive a managerial change and a season out of top 4. Was the club that unstable that it could handle one season without CL?
My post had nothing to do with the FA Cup, I was having a discussion about the years without a trophy. Bit of a random comment there lol.
Fair enough. I just don't see what was so great about finishing top four every year, qualifying for a competition the club rarely came anywhere close to winning, while winning relatively little or nothing. Say Wenger had left four or five years ago and replaced by Ancelotti, for example. Purely hypothetical of course but would the club really be in any worse a state?
It's not that the club couldn't cope with a season out of the CL as much as it's about setting us back in the time it would take us to reap the rewards of our stadium move and financial approach. Over the last couple of seasons we have seen the benefits with signings like Ozil and Sanchez but if we'd ended up outside the top four for a couple of seasons we could have ended up playing catchup, prolonging the benefits of taking the approach we have over the last decade. The consistent CL money allowed us to stay on track with stadium repayments, keep pace with the pack and maintain a good platform for when more money was available. It was a rather conservative strategy in that we chose not to risk the consistency that wenger gave us in search of a few more trophies (bare in mind we have come close to winning every competition in that time), but it's meant the club are in a very healthy position now. The directors had a manager who had done very well for a decade, always qualified for the CL year on year and got to the knockout stages, looked like he would add the odd trophy getting to a final every 2-3 years and could do it on a tight budget whilst losing his best players, all at a time when they wanted stability and consistency for there long term vision for the club (new stadium and healthier financial position etc). It's no surprise they stuck with him rather than take a risk which may or may not pay off, when you look at the position they were in it seems a fairly straight forward choice.
This may shock you a bit but so is 1998 (league Cup, Cup Winners Cup & Super Cup). Oddly enough 2000 is also ( F A Cup). I won't count the Charity Cup/shield whatever it is - only Arsenal consider it worthy of honour. You ****ed up good and proper as you do in a lot of threads.
You went 26 years winning **** all and you're trying to wum us because we went 9 years. I know who's ****ed up good and proper here
'However, even during those lean seasons, it pales into insignificance when you consider how long Chelsea went without winning a trophy before they got pumped by Roman.' Above is your ridiculously incorrect statement. As I pointed out Chelsea went just 3 years prior to Abramovich's arrival. The 26 years you refer to was pre 1997 for the record. We all make mistakes mate but you do seem to make more than most. No wonder that Hiag fella runs you all over the shop and makes you look dim.
London's most successful club have won two trophies in successive seasons now to add to our superior trophy haul over the other London clubs and cement our place as the Capital's premier club Whilst we had 9 years of lean times, I'm just glad we didn't go 26 years in the wilderness between winning anything. And let's not even mention the league, the Chavs record of wilderness years is almost as bad as the Spuds'
Depends on your definition of success but, much as I don't like Chelsea, a fortuitous European Cup win counts for an awful lot more than domestic cups.
Yeh agree with this. Until they win a european trophy (bear in mind Wenger has won absolutely nothing in europe during his whole management career) then Arsenal wont really be considered more successful.
I bet the French Cockneys have a bigger turnout when they parade the FA cup than Chavbus FC did when they won the league
Poor bastards have no idea that you failing to hit your targets in favour of posting endless nonsense about QPR's away support is the reason they lost their jobs.
