The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Peggles_*
No, you're not.


He's allowed to have a view that goes against the majority, just like you and wanting Wenger out.

It is refreshing to see posters like butty though, he just wants what's best for the club.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Basically anyone could make a dupe, claim to be a fan then post some thing and as long as it's anti arsenal they will be praised for being a good poster


Posted from TSR Mobile
Should do something similar to the UTD thread on how they call out eboracum's ridiculous posts

Do it on the next arsenal thread, we're not long away. Keep a track of what this guy actually says and then you've got a log for evidence for the one's who aren't convinced.
Original post by 419
People always keep saying this. So, lets but look at the WC for example. People talk more about the dutch total football team and Zico's Brazil of the 80s than any of the German team that won the WC and everyone wants to forget about the 94 Brazil team.


Zico's team are remembered as the greatest never to win. Cruyff's team are remembered for their revolutionary playing style, and because they won other club trophies. And which PL teams are most remembered? The winners. Which CL teams? The winners. No-one remembers Eindhoven's brave run in 2005, or Monaco's run to the final the year before, or Leverkusen who lost in back to back finals, or Ozil's Germany team that annihilated England and Argentina. Rafa's Liverpool, Mourinho's Porto, Ancelotti's Milan, Xavi and Iniesta's Spain.

At most in the future, after Arsenal have dipped and then re-start playing good football, you might get references to 'it's like football from the Wenger years'. No-one else will ever remember anything about a very forgettable and miserable decade for Arsenal fans. No-one will ever remember anything because there is nothing to remember barring some minnow-bashing football, the sales of many great players, and constant underperformance in big games.

No-one in football is remembered but the winners, and Arsenal haven't won ****.

edit: and if any Arsenal fan is kidding themselves that they wouldn't swap their position for Chelsea's trophies in the last 10 years, well, you'll have a different opinion in 5 years, 10 years, 50 years.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 8424
So, the fifa 15 trailer is out and in it he's talking about how a goal, a shot, a save etc can change a season (I'm paraphrasing) and then he goes, a slip can change a season.. And then it shows Liverpool & Suarez LOL. I don't think it was intended to resemble their crumble at the end of last season because it's Suarez scoring. It would have been funnier if they actually animated gerrard. Poor fella

http://youtu.be/TnTYVT6lwBc
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by 419
Now, this is just embellishing your original point and did nothing to adhere to what I said- which was that winners aren't the only ones remembered. Where you tried to address it, you went ahead and just put words in my mouth or went ahead and put cliff notes to dismiss why the dutch teams and Brazilian teams were remembered (both are remember for been the best football team ever rather than for not winning- anyone form the era say this). Tbh, loads of people remember those teams- it was one of the reason Hiddink was hired by Chelsea for example.

Again, I'm merely stating that the it isn't factually correct to state that history ONLY remembers winners and gave examples to prove this is strictly true. There are loads of reasons why history remember certain teams- been a winner is one of them but not the sole reasons. If it was the case, very few teams in actual terms would be remembered as its generally the same clubs/ teams that keep winning.

We sacked a manager mid season, we didn't have time to get a long term manager so got Hiddink as interim, he'd have stayed on potentially but we were looking for a high profile manager. We got Di Matteo in and got Rafa Benitez in(who was looking for a job for over 2 years) so it's not really as if we got the creme de la creme for interim. Maybe if we'd got Guardiola e.g. when Di Matteo was sacked then your point would have made sense.

History remembers winners more than the losers. Are people going to remember Arsenal's defence up to the CL final, no they're going to remember Barca winning the competition. Are people going to remember Leverkusen missing out on the treble in 2002, no they're going to remember Zidanes volley. Same with Arsenal's last decade. They'll remember the early years of Wengers reign.

When people talk of Brian Clough, they don't remember his relegation with Forest, they remember his 2 european cups and winning the league as a newly promoted team.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 8426
Original post by Bound 2
Taking this thread into politics will only hide from the truth of the day - that Zurich is a blind as a bat and his defense mechanism in any discussion is to flip things back on whichever club the other person supports. If it's Liverpool its 'oh but Liverpool are ****e' and if it's Chelsea it's 'oh but you're plastic'. The guy has no response to any rationality, as butty said earlier. edit: would like to point out that it's not just Zurich who this could apply to

Even if butty is not an Arsenal fan, his posts on this thread are subject to the same rights that everyone else's are, so give it a ****ing rest about which club he supports.


This is done in every thread though :dontknow:
Reply 8427
Original post by jam278
We sacked a manager mid season, we didn't have time to get a long term manager so got Hiddink as interim, he'd have stayed on potentially.

History remembers winners more than the losers. Are people going to remember Arsenal's defence up to the CL final, no they're going to remember Barca winning the competition. Are people going to remember Leverkusen missing out on the treble in 2002, no they're going to remember Zidanes volley. Same with Arsenal's last decade. They'll remember the early years of Wengers reign.

When people talk of Brian Clough, they don't remember his relegation with Forest, they remember his 2 european cups and winning the league as a newly promoted team.


Can tell you didn't read the post.

That Leverkusen is remembered very fondly.
Original post by 419
This is done in every thread though :dontknow:

Come to our thread and see if anyone tries to pull this ****? It's general football fan behaviour but that doesn't mean it's desirable.

And why delete your other post? What's the point in deleting it after having spent years writing out those two paragraphs haha
Original post by 419
Can tell you didn't read the post.

That Leverkusen is remembered very fondly.

The losers are remembered, but nowhere near as much as the winners, doesn't matter who played the better football or who had the better decorations in their stadium.

Tell me, how many people talk about Cloughs relegation with Forest compared to winning two ECs in a row?
Reply 8430
Original post by Bound 2
Come to our thread and see if anyone tries to pull this ****? It's general football fan behaviour but that doesn't mean it's desirable.

And why delete your other post? What's the point in deleting it after having spent years writing out those two paragraphs haha


It's been done and yeah I agree.

Didn't delete anything.
Reply 8431
Original post by jam278
The losers are remembered, but nowhere near as much as the winners, doesn't matter who played the better football or who had the better decorations in their stadium.

Tell me, how many people talk about Cloughs relegation with Forest compared to winning two ECs in a row?


Where did I say that. Jheeze, lets argue for argument sakes.
Original post by 419
That Leverkusen is remembered very fondly.


Seeing as I know sweet fa about German football I can't really comment, but does anyone remember Avram Grant's Chelsea, who came so close in 3/4 competitions too?

Original post by 419
It's been done and yeah I agree.

Didn't delete anything.


To address it anyway: there are, admittedly, certain exclusive criteria for non-winning memorable teams. Underdog stories, sometimes. Revolutionary playing styles yeah. Memorable rivalries or specific incidents. It's an open list.

Arsenal of the last decade don't fit into any of the criteria though, and success IS the main reason why teams are remembered.

edit: Relating back to the original point (this argument wasn't with you): downplaying your own lack of success on the basis that Chelsea's is plastic is short termist and hollow. And the argument just doesn't swing.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Bound 2
Seeing as I know sweet fa about German football I can't really comment, but does anyone remember Avram Grant's Chelsea, who came so close in 3/4 competitions too?

We're only remembered because our captain slipped on the last pen and our striker got sent off ffs.

It's like what you said about specific incidents.

Otherwise nobody gives a damn about Avrams Chelsea.
Original post by jam278
We're only remembered because our captain slipped on the last pen and our striker got sent off ffs.

It's like what you said about specific incidents.

Otherwise nobody gives a damn about Avrams Chelsea.

It's not a positive memory, in any case.
Original post by jam278
x


You quoted me but it seems to have been deleted?
Original post by jam278
Paradox.

Did you know a thing about Aurier outside of Football manager until this season?

Coleman has been good for the past two seasons tbh and his assist and goal stats are exactly what Arsenal need. I don't think Everton will sell for cheap though.


I know that fact that he captains his team at 21. I dont need to know about him when he was 19/20. We dont need goals coming from RB imo. If we buy a striker such as Balo and a class winger we will be fine.
Fully fit Ramsey = 20 goals, Giroud = 20 goals, Walcott = 20 goals and another striker = 20+? Goals from RB is a bonus
Original post by manchesterunited15
You quoted me but it seems to have been deleted?

Mods running a shift today.

Inb4 this post is deleted
Come on sr, sort it out
Original post by LilDurk
I know that fact that he captains his team at 21. I dont need to know about him when he was 19/20. We dont need goals coming from RB imo. If we buy a striker such as Balo and a class winger we will be fine.
Fully fit Ramsey = 20 goals, Giroud = 20 goals, Walcott = 20 goals and another striker = 20+? Goals from RB is a bonus

I get that. Just saying that Coleman is effective attacking wise. A problem with Arsenal last season was that teams just pushed up the park and narrowed down which made it impossible for you to play, you used to circumvent that by having quality attacking fullbacks, if there's no pace in the team again(Walcott and Chamberlain injured) then you'll have to rely on the fullbacks again on the overlap for some width.

Coleman therefore is better as he's more suited to the league and his assist stats show that he gets into good positions and can lay the ball/cross it to a player with good accuracy, their goals conceded isn't too high either so it's not like he's a potential suspect in the team. Aurier is cheaper and younger though but is it worth the development phase?

Latest