For me Arsenal man for man a much superior side. United 98/9 were resilient but never dominated the league or European Cup. Vieira seemed to own Keane Henry and Bergkamp class above Sherry and Yorke
Worst attempt ever. The 'never dominated europe' part was a major aspect of the threads downfall. We also went on a longer unbeaten run.
I'm biased, but I'd say they are even, you can't discount winning a treble, each side had their plus and minuses. The Arsenal team were definitely more flamboyant with better attacking play to the eyes, though United weren't that far off...United on the other hand had maybe some more grit and resilience, which Arsenal weren't far off either.
The 'Which is a better achievement' is discussed in a slightly different poll/thread on the Chelsea board... please visit and vote
The 99 side is tge third best side in pl history after united 08 and chelsea 05. United 08 Chelsea 05 United 99 United 07 United 94 Arsenal 98 Arsenal 04 Arsenals 98 double winning side was better than the 2004 draw specialists.
Interesting debate. I think it's almost impossible to compare teams from different "times" and 4 years is a long time in football (most managers don't last that long). The Arsenal 03/04 team was electric to watch but they were something of a flash in the pan. They didn't win the league the season before or after and didn't make a major impression in Europe. They may not have lost any games domestically but they did draw nearly a third of their PL games and won fewer than the vast majority of Premier League champions since. I don't recall whether a lot of the draws were at the back end of the season, perhaps they were trying to protect their "unique" achievement? The United 98/99 team was obviously also a great team to watch and won the lot in style. They had to play the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea to win the FA Cup and Barca, Bayern and Juve to win the CL. Obviously they had the advantage of Fergie being their manager so every single player performed above their natural level. The squad coped incredibly with the volume of games and showed it could switch between domestic and European football. Which was the better team? Hard to call. Obviously I'd go for United. I believe they lost fewer games across the entire season than the Invincibles, although I could be wrong. Which was the most successful team? Obvious and trophies are important in football. Jose said as much yesterday after his Invincibles were beaten. And Katie, Vieira owned Keane? One of your best yet. Time to dig out that vid of Vieira crapping himself in the tunnel at Highbury! Should be an entertaining thread. Strange for a Chelsea fan to start it though!
Its not even a debate. Arsenals draw specialists come way down the list of best premier league sides. The fact is arsenal were very fortunate that year. A van nistelrooy penalty miss and some shocking diving from pires and co meant they avoided defeat when they shouldnt have. Like i said. Their 98 double winning side was a better team.
Could you point out which country these teams play in and then remind me of which league is being discussed.
I would argue the better achievement by the better team. And there is life on the Chelsea board? I went to pay a nice friendly visit yesterday to apologise for our disgraceful ball boys but couldn't see anyone home.
OMG I nearly forgot, ofcourse they are! There's reports John Terry has his kit ironed, ready to get changed cos he heard there'll be a trophy presentation.
Who cares both have won more titles than plastic Routemaster FC and ££££. Both had great teams in respective years. But UTD would be the better team. (They did the double over Newcastle)
