We have gone backwards as a team, but what would we have won if we did not go for the new stadium? With Chelseas money and Man Us revenue we were always struggling to compete financially and then those 2 and Man C started putting wages on offer out of our reach so the top players would have started choosing them anyway. and we would have dropped behind. As it is Wenger has kept us consistently the top team other than those three with the battle for 4th effectively being the title challenge for teams without bottomless pitd of money. So by that standard we are doing well. And during that period we have developed the top grossing stadium in football (well that and stupid prices). If we are now in a situation to compete more financially we may actually be doing well. But if we want to be there at the end of the season we need to spend and spend now. A top striker and DM are top of my list
How bad was Arshavin's little cameo? The fact that Wenger has been reduced to using him and is still not doing anything in the transfer window makes me questions Wenger's sanity.
Alot of Ja606ites were saying he was quality and should be used Anyway like I said let's wait until the window.
Thats what happens when you've been left to rot for months. If Wenger had used him more, he might have been the difference maker he normally is.
Problem is, I don't buy the argument that our regression is linked to our move to the new stadium, I think that's been used as a convenient excuse by Wenger and the board for the regression and their greedy ways. Even though it cost a lot of money to move in, by the time we moved into the Emirates, and by the time revenue started rolling in, it was already more than we were ever making at Highbury. So how come at Highbury with less money we achieved much more when we have much more available money right now? United always had more money than us even before Chelsea and City, yet we still competed with them, so I don't buy the argument either that our regression is also highly down to City's and Chelsea's riches. I feel we have the resources and money to have been able to compete with them, and win things. But we just didn't do things properly, being too stingy in spending money on quality players, and deciding to go for lower priced average players, letting go of our best players etc. Here's an example, instead of buying Gervino and Santos, that money combined could've been used on Mata. Instead of 2.5 million on Park, that 2.5 million could've been saved as an extra 2.5 left over on a 15 million when 17 million was needed. Or the 2.5 million could've been saved on being able to pay high wages to a deserving player (RVP, Nasri) etc.
Exactly, Wenger discards him but because his squad is so **** he has to do a u-turn and use Arshavin.
To trick straight hetrosexual guys. They look at it, and think not bad, sexy, not knowing they just found a transexual sexy thinking it was a lady. I've already had a couple fall for it, you too I bet. You felt a twinkle somewhere when you saw it.
Hey guys just had to say well done on a great game of association football this afternoon in West London. Good 2nd half by you gunners but I thought you just lacked some quality in attack. Good luck for the remainder lads!
Why discard him in the first place? He's capable of magic, we need more players like that. We have the solid workman type players like Arteta and Ramsey, we need more of those eccentric something from nothing players.
Because we didn't have huge debt straddled on us at Highbury. Gervihno was quality in Ligue 1 and many people were applauding him when we first got him, Santos was boutgh as a backup LB and that's his role. Park was bought to be backup but we shouldn't have got him. No matter how much we saved we would NEVER have matched what City wanted to pay in wages for Nasri, and Wenegr was FORCED by the board to sell RvP
One direction, they may act girly, but it's all an act, behind the cameras, they are normal pervy guys.
