Arsenal Thread

Maltz was one of the players I was thinking of, so yes there is just one more.

I think Eisfeld hasn't played for the first team yet - only reserves but I'm not 100% sure on that.

Actually if you got Maltz and Mendez, this last guy is a bit more famous than both of them - not much more famous, but a bit. I dont know if he played much in the league for Arsenal, but he definately played in the league cup.
 
Treetopp said:
You wrote earlier that Arsenal fans should be thankful to RVP. You get several answers indicating his statement as the real issue. Why not respond to that!?
Click to expand...

he diddnt respond because he has nohing to respond to, only a simple "oops my bad u are right, i understand" but some folks dont put up there hands and admit they are wrong.

instead they will brush it aside, ignore it and let it run its course. i always thought Gerd is a man that would put his hands up and admit he is wrong.
 
What about Amaury Bischoff! He is half Portuguese and half German isn't he?
...but he never even played anyway :P

So yeah, the 4 easiest Germans to remember now are Lehmann, Mertesacker, Podolski and Eisfeld.

On another note, there are rumours of Arsenal negotiations with Jovetic from Fiorentina, it's all over the place. Fingers crossed guys :BOP:

Always rated that lad highly. The first time I watched him for Fiorentina was 2 or 3 years ago. He impressed me straight away. He seems to play with great personality.
 
Rentboy said:
What about Amaury Bischoff! He is half Portuguese and half German isn't he?
...but he never even played anyway :P

So yeah, the 4 easiest Germans to remember now are Lehmann, Mertesacker, Podolski and Eisfeld.

On another note, there are rumours of Arsenal negotiations with Jovetic from Fiorentina, it's all over the place. Fingers crossed guys :BOP:

Always rated that lad highly. The first time I watched him for Fiorentina was 2 or 3 years ago. He impressed me straight away. He seems to play with great personality.
Click to expand...

About Jovetic, I thought his potential move was heavily reliant on you shifting Van Persie to pay for him..
 
jonneymendoza said:
he diddnt respond because he has nohing to respond to, only a simple "oops my bad u are right, i understand" but some folks dont put up there hands and admit they are wrong.

instead they will brush it aside, ignore it and let it run its course. i always thought Gerd is a man that would put his hands up and admit he is wrong.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't see what is wrong with his statement. But maybe one of you can help me...to be honest i don't even remember it exactly. I've read it and it never struck me as being disrespectfull, maybe there was another statement that i missed.

Don't you guys understand that there is something other than your favourite club (and i'm not only talking to Arsenal fans here). Fans reactions to transfers are imo absolutely ridiculous. It first dawned on me when Campbell went from Spurs to Arsenal. What was all the fuzz about? I never saw him as a Judas.
Oh, that is maybe a good question, what do you guys think of that transfer, was he really Judas? To help you, what would any of you think if RVP would go to Spurs (purely hypothetical of course, just humour me and answer). To help you: Modric is my favourite player, and obviously i want him to stay at Spurs, but i wouldn't think him a Judas if he went to Arsenal, even if he said he would like to win silverware. Luka always gave everything for my club, that is enough for me.
 
gerd said:
I honestly don't see what is wrong with his statement. But maybe one of you can help me...to be honest i don't even remember it exactly. I've read it and it never struck me as being disrespectfull, maybe there was another statement that i missed.

Don't you guys understand that there is something other than your favourite club (and i'm not only talking to Arsenal fans here). Fans reactions to transfers are imo absolutely ridiculous. It first dawned on me when Campbell went from Spurs to Arsenal. What was all the fuzz about? I never saw him as a Judas.
Oh, that is maybe a good question, what do you guys think of that transfer, was he really Judas? To help you, what would any of you think if RVP would go to Spurs (purely hypothetical of course, just humour me and answer). To help you: Modric is my favourite player, and obviously i want him to stay at Spurs, but i wouldn't think him a Judas if he went to Arsenal, even if he said he would like to win silverware. Luka always gave everything for my club, that is enough for me.
Click to expand...

The Sol Campbell situation was different, that is crossing a line a deep rivalry, in the same way if a united player joined Liverpool he'd be hated with no respite, even if it was someone like Giggs or Scholes, it's a tribal instinct really.
 
cfdh_edmundo said:
it was Maurice Voltz
Click to expand...

I thought he was just a Fulham fullback ? I used to hear commentators say his old club vs Arsenal, I just brush it off so many players were at Arsenal but never made the cut it seem. Its like buying a cheap house n hope the area blossom to sell.
 
Taylor_94 said:
The Sol Campbell situation was different, that is crossing a line a deep rivalry, in the same way if a united player joined Liverpool he'd be hated with no respite, even if it was someone like Giggs or Scholes, it's a tribal instinct really.
Click to expand...

It depends on the level too Owen went to MUTD ,but he wasnt the same player. Arry try to take Henry on loan I would of been gutted. It is not easy to be at a club so long and leave in good standing regardless.

Campbell was wrong ,but we know what gerd is looking for so I wont bite. Im a foreigner and the time I went to Highbury I encounter 'what correlation do I have in Highbury to support Arsenal?' There are 2 types of supporters I found 'hardcore locals' and the 'more the merrier' I sort of adopted the local hardcore and wanted to prove my worth at the time. Im an old geezer now f`all really. I love Arsenal even though I was almost a Milwall fan at 17yrs going to a game I loved it I felt like being at a U2 concert "Joshua Tree" to be exact. Nothing with their football just the rush I spoke bad English at the time to it was wild.
 
I'm such a hardcore style fan I refuse to sell to rivals on FIFA or PES. And if I sell a player and he ends up at a rival club I go out of my way to injure the bastard in my next match vs him :L
 
Oh come on Bebo, the only thing i'm looking for is an honest answer...
What i want to prove is that lots of you (as in "fans" and not "Arsenal fans") have certain principles about some things, but if your own club does something "wrong" according to those principles, suddenly you find that for some reason the club isn't doing anything wrong.

If you challenge that you are being provocatieve or you hate the club (and i can assure that i really like Arsenal, because i really like the way they play football, but that doesn't mean that they can't be wrong now and then).

You have standards and principles but you take your own club as a moral benchmark. An example. What is the definition of an inappropriate rich club? Answer: every club that is richer than my favourite club.
 
These forum could be harsh because once you post your tainted, to a certain degree. I hate the fact RVP is leaving during his best form ever and injure free. Why do I have to accept that another club will benefit the best of Rvp while it took ages to develop. I know what your going say too gerd. You can be cruel sometime :LOL:


I was tired of rvp before this and I hated fabregas when he come on after veira. I also, hated Song when he started. Why do players get better and leave! If, they won us something I would be likely not to be bitter , or not. You want honesty I had a hatred for Barca, from cl final`06. I just got over them in the summer! honesty is a dangerous ask! i hope i didnt offend any mugs w/ this.:JAY:
 
I have no beef with RVP leaving, personally. He's 29 this year, and has given his service to Arsenal, including a fantastic last season. It's up to him if he wants to go and work somewhere else, that's how contracts are supposed to work. His is up.

What is unnecessary and frankly embarrassing are his comments to the press. He sounds like he's trying to justify a move to himself. It's fine Robin, you want more money/ trophies - great. That's fine. But don't disparage the team that has turned you from a relative nobody to a massive star.

More to the point for me, however, is how Arsenal proceed. As I see it there are only two options:

1. Continue to live within their means, and overachieve on the pitch relative to their spend. There are only 3 teams 'better' than Arsenal in the division: City, Chelsea and United. One is reliant on a freak of nature manager who is soon to retire/drop dead. The other 2 operate at losses of > £150m a season.

2. Borrow £150m a season to compete with City and Chelsea's spending, and then go out of business in 2 years when they can't afford it.

Face it, the economics of football is such that teams with big stadiums and lots of following will always have an advantage (Arsenal, Liverpool, United, Newcastle) and along with them will be teams with 'financial doping'.

Arsenal are well run, well managed, and over-perform. Be content with that. Unless some absurdly rich man with an inferoirty complex decides he needs a new way to show much bigger his bank account is comes along, this is the best they can do. Which sucks, but there you go.
 
Tbf. When Ronny left United I was completely devasted.. I hated the man, it's always hard when the best player at a club decides he wants more, but give it two or three years and now he's probably my 2nd favourite player again.
He created a shit storm like Van Persie did as well; so you know I know how you feel..

Basically, when Robin is gone someone will step up and take the reigns, at Arsenal you see it all the time.

Veira left, Henry managed to become that little bit more influential which was awesome to see.
Henry left, Fabregas found his potential and then some to pick it up.
Fabregas left, Vermaelan stepped up but he unfortunately picked up an(other) injury, then Van Persie became insane.

After Van Persie you just have to look at your team and I'd imagine you will see a player who can step it up massively and become the next big game star.

United lost Ronny and Tevez, Rooney found something extra. Valencia found the form which makes him an integral part of this side and Nani (sort of) found his potential!

In short, there's always a carrot at the end of the tunnel!
 
we seem to going in circles here, but I'll try once more to put my point across.

RvP does not have to stay at Arsenal. It's not really a moral obligation, although it would be nice to pay Wenger's trust back.
What is fucked up about the whole situation is having your captain, who spent 8 years with Arsenal and owe much to the club, airing dirty laundry in public like that, saying the club is going nowhere and criticising his employers' work. I think Arsene Wenger deserves much more respect than that.

As for the definition of an "inapropriate" rich club, I think the answer is pretty damn obvious and anybody can see. There is financial doping with a billionaire owner and there is wealth achieved over the years with tradition, consistency in results and good management. Come on people, connect the dots.

This "anyone who is richer than my club" thing is complete bull! I'm an Arsenal fan but I acknowledge that the likes of United, Real Madrid and Barcelona built true empires over the years, making it on their own steam. And Arsenal cannot compete with them financially and I'm fine with that.

But clubs that were nowhere near the top 4 and start spending £100m in one season totally out of the blue? please Gerd don't tell me you think this is natural and that Arsenal is one of them! You're about to defy logic here, mate.
 
It is not natural.
But it is not natural that clubs like Arsenal have much more money than most other European football clubs. Now you will say that Arsenal is a bigger club than those clubs. Are they?

Compare their palmares with Ajax, Porto or even Anderlecht. Ajax won 4 EC1 or CL, Porto won at least two CL's, Anderlecht won an UEFA CUP and 2 EC2. They all have a palmares that is at least as good as Arsenal. I could also have mentioned clubs like PSV and Benfica. Yet from the 90's on those clubs can't compete financially with the average English club of the championship (when West Ham was in the Championship, their budget was bigger than Anderlecht's). Is this a natural evolution? No.

Just like most fans of big English clubs, your outrage is very selective.

And to end this rant, would you complain if Abramovich would have invested his money in Arsenal or Fluminese? Be honest and say no.

This said, for the sake of football, i hope Arsenal can compete for the title this season (and loose it to Spurs on the last day). Oh and i would say exactly the same in the Spurs thread.
 
gerd said:
It is not natural.
But it is not natural that clubs like Arsenal have much more money than most other European football clubs. Now you will say that Arsenal is a bigger club than those clubs. Are they?

Compare their palmares with Ajax, Porto or even Anderlecht. Ajax won 4 EC1 or CL, Porto won at least two CL's, Anderlecht won an UEFA CUP and 2 EC2. They all have a palmares that is at least as good as Arsenal. I could also have mentioned clubs like PSV and Benfica. Yet from the 90's on those clubs can't compete financially with the average English club of the championship (when West Ham was in the Championship, their budget was bigger than Anderlecht's). Is this a natural evolution? No.

Just like most fans of big English clubs, your outrage is very selective.

And to end this rant, would you complain if Abramovich would have invested his money in Arsenal or Fluminese? Be honest and say no.

This said, for the sake of football, i hope Arsenal can compete for the title this season (and loose it to Spurs on the last day). Oh and i would say exactly the same in the Spurs thread.
Click to expand...


Ajax is not a micky mouse team. they are a well established team so i fail to see why you even mention them.

And just because they may NOT be financialy on same level as arsenal doesnt mean they are a inferior club.

You do know that top clubs CAN make bad business decisions and therefore suffer in terms of competing financially. Look at rangers, Leeds etc etc both well established teams that are down the pan.

That is not arsenals, barca's or united fault that they could not sustain a good business model whilst winning stuff in the past.

Arsenal did. they maintained that and they are trying to expand that now we have a new stadium that is fileld with 60k every week with the highest ticket price. Money is coming in and that is because of the style of our football, the history of our football and the business decisions made by the board in the past 20+ years.

You are dellusional in thinking Arsenal and co are just as bad as suger daddy clubs like city. You are Dellusional in thinking Arsenal and co bought there way to success like city.

Your points i disagree mate. You simply cant compare arsenal with city in terms of financial gain/advantage.

How can u bloody support a club going nowhere and someone buying that club and buying the title? How can u support that went arsenal and co have worked for 100+ years building there clubs success on and off the field?

how can u? i dont.
 
Come one jonney, you are hopeless.
I never said that Arsenal are "as bad" as the sugar daddies team (for the record: i don't think the sugar daddies team are bad).
Let me give it one more try: you complain that sugar daddies have an unfair advantage towards Arsenal and other clubs (this is not about Arsenal specifically). That is true. I never discussed this. That unfair advantage came forth from the fact that the big 14 clubs started to act protectionistic towards other clubs and the only way to break through the glass ceiling was doing what both Chelsea and Man City have done. It's a logical result of a policy sustained by Arsenal. I know i will never convince you of that, but it is the simple truth and every objective football fan will agree with me (like drekkard for example).

Ajax and those other clubs did not make bad business decisions. They simply lost the race because of the television money. I've already told you how the CL money is divided and how the clubs from the big countries always get the biggest share no matter how early they were eliminated. To give you an example: Man Utd will have earned more that both clubs that eliminated them (Basel and Benfica). That has nothing to do with good or bad decisions. That is simply unfair.

In short: your outrage is very selective. You complain about an unfair advantage for the sugar daddies clubs (and i agree with that), but English clubs have had unfair advantage for years, you never complain about that. We live in a free market economy and those sugar daddies clubs are as much the result of that free market as is the wealth of clubs like Arsenal, Man Utd and every other EPL and chamionship team.

Treetop: ok. In the case of Anderlecht it's obvious. Do you think Arsenal is more popular than Juventus? Do you think WBA is more popular than Juventus. And if popularity is the reason, pray that all the Chinese or Russian football fans don't start to support their home league clubs, because otherwise English clubs will have the same problems as Belgian, Portugese and Dutch clubs now. Personally i'm pretty sure that this will happen in time. I see a CL final between Shanghai and Anzhi possible in the future.
Maybe you guys should be happy that sheik Mansour, the PSG people and Abramovich didn't invest their money in a local football team. Now we can see Silva, Balotelli, Hazard, and all those other stars in Europe otherwise we would not be able to seem them play in Russia or the Emirates. But why wouldn't Arab or Chinese people not want their local clubs be as big as the European ones?

I've said what i had to say. This discussion is pretty useless, as most English fans don't agree with me. Let's just agree to disagree...and just enjoy what we have in common: good football.
 
Last edited:
gerd said:
Treetop: ok. In the case of Anderlecht it's obvious. Do you think Arsenal is more popular than Juventus? Do you think WBA is more popular than Juventus. And if popularity is the reason, pray that all the Chinese or Russian football fans don't start to support their home league clubs, because otherwise English clubs will have the same problems as Belgian, Portugese and Dutch clubs now. Personally i'm pretty sure that this will happen in time. I see a CL final between Shanghai and Anzhi possible in the future.
Click to expand...

I was talking leagues not clubs. You should have read what I wrote (now deleted), not what you think I wrote. And why would I have a problem with chinese football growing in popularity, because im your stereotype english big club fan!?

One thing I'll give you, this discussion is pretty useless and thats why I deleted my previous message. Moving on
 
Basically there are two types of stupidly rIch..

The kind where a Billionaire has take over the club, and now they have no worries.. The unsustainably rich as I call them. This is the one I think is wrong, a club where their history is sudden with no real growth or battle to gain their berth as one or the best.

Then theirs the other side, ones who have grown in popularity and then exploited this to earn millions.

The key difference is that while both are criticised for being too rich the 2nd set have been given respect for the graft they put in too get there, it didn't happen over night:

At least, that's how we see it in this country.

In other countries, where big players aren't produced often and the best players don't play there isn't so much of a mass following from around the world, for some reason the global brand of amazing football clubs such as Ajax has never taken off, in fact ask some people my age it's scary how many don't think the club was ever successful outside of the Dutch league.

Small clubs without the global superstars or mass appeal to other countries can't benefit from the global phenomenon that football has become, but because this is recent these "Band Wagon" fans don't give a flying fuck about history and graft they want too see their club win something, hence why money runs the game.
Players are no longer footballers, they're walking advertisements and th best go where the money is, and they've also gained a show me the money and we can talk, and when a team can afford to pay millions for a player with high talent levels, ten that player will be a idol to a million more fans, then you know the rest.

Gerd, I'm not saying its right that these "little league" clubs are not able to compete financially, I am just saying that there is legitimate reasoning for it.
These giant clubs from out memory I.e Ajax, doesn't have that appeal anymore, and history counts for nothing.
I for one don't agree with money running the game the way it does, but it's something we have to put up with.
And these small clubs with the potential superstars can't hold on too their talent when they know the money is elsewhere, the thought of "hey! I could make my club huge if I stay and help them raise their profile with my advertisement power! He just sees the blank cheque in the window and so goes"

Basically, don't blame loyal fans.. Blame bandwagon fans for why clubs can't compete, they're the reason Revenue at clubs in the big leagues and even the championship are so much higher.
 
gerd said:
Come one jonney, you are hopeless.
I never said that Arsenal are "as bad" as the sugar daddies team (for the record: i don't think the sugar daddies team are bad).
Let me give it one more try: you complain that sugar daddies have an unfair advantage towards Arsenal and other clubs (this is not about Arsenal specifically). That is true. I never discussed this. That unfair advantage came forth from the fact that the big 14 clubs started to act protectionistic towards other clubs and the only way to break through the glass ceiling was doing what both Chelsea and Man City have done. It's a logical result of a policy sustained by Arsenal. I know i will never convince you of that, but it is the simple truth and every objective football fan will agree with me (like drekkard for example).

Ajax and those other clubs did not make bad business decisions. They simply lost the race because of the television money. I've already told you how the CL money is divided and how the clubs from the big countries always get the biggest share no matter how early they were eliminated. To give you an example: Man Utd will have earned more that both clubs that eliminated them (Basel and Benfica). That has nothing to do with good or bad decisions. That is simply unfair.

In short: your outrage is very selective. You complain about an unfair advantage for the sugar daddies clubs (and i agree with that), but English clubs have had unfair advantage for years, you never complain about that. We live in a free market economy and those sugar daddies clubs are as much the result of that free market as is the wealth of clubs like Arsenal, Man Utd and every other EPL and chamionship team.

Treetop: ok. In the case of Anderlecht it's obvious. Do you think Arsenal is more popular than Juventus? Do you think WBA is more popular than Juventus. And if popularity is the reason, pray that all the Chinese or Russian football fans don't start to support their home league clubs, because otherwise English clubs will have the same problems as Belgian, Portugese and Dutch clubs now. Personally i'm pretty sure that this will happen in time. I see a CL final between Shanghai and Anzhi possible in the future.
Maybe you guys should be happy that sheik Mansour, the PSG people and Abramovich didn't invest their money in a local football team. Now we can see Silva, Balotelli, Hazard, and all those other stars in Europe otherwise we would not be able to seem them play in Russia or the Emirates. But why wouldn't Arab or Chinese people not want their local clubs be as big as the European ones?

I've said what i had to say. This discussion is pretty useless, as most English fans don't agree with me. Let's just agree to disagree...and just enjoy what we have in common: good football.
Click to expand...
Yes u once did compare arsenal to suger daddy clubs saying arsenal and co controlled the world of football and outspent the other teams.


But arsenal and co deserve to be where they are. they have made good strides both on and off the pitch for years unlike the sheiks who just buy success outright.

If Ajax made good business on and off the pitch they would be up there alongside arsenal. easily.

You say clubs from rich countries like england are the reason for them being where they are? how? there is only about 3-4 english teams that have a so called finance advantage(pre chelsea/city) but you make it sound as if all english sides have a unfair advantage over teams like Ajax.

Does West brom get more financial backing then Ajax?

Seriously i dont know why you can say arsenal and co are like city i.e buying there way to success with an infair andvantage.

What unfair advantage?

Arsenal and co started from scratch! same as Anderleight etc. they all started from nothing!


i keep telling u mate, Arsenal wasnt born inside the emirates stadium! why cant u grasp that? Why cant u grasp the simple fact that Arsenal and co deserve there current status in the footballing world. unfair? So is it unfair that us working people have jobs earning decent money whilst others dont have a job? are we being unfair too?

Should we all take a massive paycut/quit our jobs so we dont have a so called "advantage" over others in low paid jobs/no jobs? same thing can be applied to football clubs. Should Arsenal sell there stadium, reduce there finance income to match anderleit and Ajax?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Yes u once did compare arsenal to suger daddy clubs saying arsenal and co controlled the world of football and outspent the other teams.


But arsenal and co deserve to be where they are. they have made good strides both on and off the pitch for years unlike the sheiks who just buy success outright.

If Ajax made good business on and off the pitch they would be up there alongside arsenal. easily.

You say clubs from rich countries like england are the reason for them being where they are? how? there is only about 3-4 english teams that have a so called finance advantage(pre chelsea/city) but you make it sound as if all english sides have a unfair advantage over teams like Ajax.

Does West brom get more financial backing then Ajax?

Seriously i dont know why you can say arsenal and co are like city i.e buying there way to success with an infair andvantage.

What unfair advantage?

Arsenal and co started from scratch! same as Anderleight etc. they all started from nothing!


i keep telling u mate, Arsenal wasnt born inside the emirates stadium! why cant u grasp that? Why cant u grasp the simple fact that Arsenal and co deserve there current status in the footballing world. unfair? So is it unfair that us working people have jobs earning decent money whilst others dont have a job? are we being unfair too?

Should we all take a massive paycut/quit our jobs so we dont have a so called "advantage" over others in low paid jobs/no jobs? same thing can be applied to football clubs. Should Arsenal sell there stadium, reduce there finance income to match anderleit and Ajax?
Click to expand...

Mate, look at these stats and then re-think what you're saying.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League#section_1

The fact is financially, because of the global nature of the English, Spanish and Italian leagues.. Other leagues just can not compete.
 
gerd said:
Maybe you guys should be happy that sheik Mansour, the PSG people and Abramovich didn't invest their money in a local football team. Now we can see Silva, Balotelli, Hazard, and all those other stars in Europe otherwise we would not be able to seem them play in Russia or the Emirates. But why wouldn't Arab or Chinese people not want their local clubs be as big as the European ones?
Click to expand...

Actually these rich people do invest in their local clubs. The difference is their local clubs don't have the same appeal. They see they have the money, why not go for a worldwide known club?

EDIT: Forgot to add, in case of Sheikh Mansour, he's proud of his country. So buying a PL club, turning it into a champions club, also brings about popularity and fame to his country/city.
 
Last edited:
Lami said:
Actually these rich people do invest in their local clubs. The difference is their local clubs don't have the same appeal. They see they have the money, why not go for a worldwide known club?
Click to expand...

But they're getting clever, the financial clout they have they're signing big names with big appeal e.g Drogba going to china, his exploiting could see that clubs revenue boosted a late amount.. And so the evolution begins, and players go where the money is, our top talents will want to go to that league, and as it gets stronger soo too does its global image.. Till one day it's the biggest and best in the world.
 
Taylor_94 said:
Mate, look at these stats and then re-think what you're saying.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League#section_1

The fact is financially, because of the global nature of the English, Spanish and Italian leagues.. Other leagues just can not compete.
Click to expand...
I have read it and dont change my mind because like i keep saying, arsenal and co started in the exact same position as every club in the world.

Please tell me, how did england spain and italy become big global leagues? did they all started with billions of pounds poured into each league?

Nope. they all started same way as the dutch, french and other leagues.

They gained there advantage over other leagues due to success, history and good business(advertisements etc etc).
 
Taylor_94 said:
But they're getting clever, the financial clout they have they're signing big names with big appeal e.g Drogba going to china, his exploiting could see that clubs revenue boosted a late amount.. And so the evolution begins, and players go where the money is, our top talents will want to go to that league, and as it gets stronger soo too does its global image.. Till one day it's the biggest and best in the world.
Click to expand...

It's not that easy mate. Appeal isn't an easy task to achieve. For example, Dubai, with all it's touristic popularity, people go there for a change, not to stay. The weather doesn't help as well. The Asian CL isn't the same, not even close. It will take either quite a long time for that to ever happen naturally, or God forbid, a financial disaster in Europe.
 
Actually when money and success came into the game Arsenal and other clubs had the advantage of being successful post-money, you actually are a prime example of a fan who knows nothing about a clubs history, if football was such a global thig back when Ajax where dominate you can bet your last dollar that they would be up there with the best.

The fact is arsenal had the advantage of having players who when globalisation began, and television matches began people wanted to watch and so they got the biggest deals, the biggest amounts of money and so since SINCE the money taking over the game they've had the advantage, if it was about money however and people liked their club and players stayed for the sake of football.. Well you would see little clubs rising more and more, however they're continually suppressed by their clubs lack of a global appeal to their own stars and to any other stars.

There is no way of explaining it that you will accept, Arsenal got lucky so did every top club. Rome wasn't built in a day, but hell having large sums of unrelated footballing money each year sure does help.

In fact, watch Scotland in the next few years, they're about to lose HUGE revenue, because Sky won't want to televise so many games with the lose of the Old Firm derby, and so revenue drops, and stars will leave.

You need to calm down and stop seeing everything as a confrontation, seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom