3 to Arsenal's Caballeros

Winning is getting to be tedious for the Arsenal, isn't it?  A simple stroll in the park and suddenly the anti-Arsenal faction in the media are scrambling to remind everyone that City were nowhere near full strength, this isn't a real match, the Community Shield isn't a real trophy, and didn't United prove last season that winning this match means less than nothing?

Not considering that Arsenal started the match without Mertesacker, Ozil, Giroud, and Walcott, or played half the match with a teenaged right back and a less than convincing left back at the heart of their defence, were the sides really that far apart in class? City have bought and bought and bought so much that journos seem to be numb to the size and quality of the Blues' squad.

One of my Yank friends who is somewhat new to the Arsenal fold issued a complaint this morning as to why "everyone" in the media needed to diminish what happened yesterday. I reminded her that English writers and TV commentators/pundits all essentially were raised to hate Arsenal and love either Liverpool or MUFC. There's no need to hide one's loyalties in the UK--writers openly profess how they feel or to whom they pledge allegiance. So just expect no respect and you'll be fine.

(Amy Lawrence and Philippe Auclair, we salute you.)

As for the match, I was pleased with much of what was on display. Sanchez ran and ran and made beautiful passes and threatened with intent. He is wonderful to watch and it makes you wonder what kind of role Poldi can actually find at Arsenal this season.

Santi Cazorla loves playing centrally, doesn't he?  I can't fathom why Sanogo (more on him later) wasn't offside on Santi's goal, but irrelevant to the outcome, it was a typical and wonderful finish from the wee Spaniard. Again, hard to decipher where he will play when Ozil is back and fit, maybe the German genius gets his winter break and Santi fills that role during the holidays or January.

He won't play on the left once Walcott is healthy because you would assume Sanchez will be moved to that side, and with Ramsey and Wilshere and Ox and...well, you get the idea. I think Santi is vital to the Arsenal attack when he plays more in the central role.  On the left? He drifts inside anyway, making Arsenal far too narrow and crowding an area loaded with central mids. It's a good problem to have, I suppose.

Ramsey is so confident right now that the things he does look routine despite their brilliance. His goal makes you realise yet again that he is the most important player at the club right now and he must stay healthy if Arsenal are to succeed. Players who do what he can do in a calm, routine manner are indispensable--but this season he can't be overplayed. He simply has to be healthy for the entire campaign.

Jack Wilshere, sitting deeper than usual and certainly deeper than a no. 10 normally would, was efffective. Interestingly, he got kicked far less back there than he usually does when he's more involved in the attack. He is a focal point for the opposition, partly because of his massive talent but mostly because of his temperament.  People used to attempt to wind up Patrick Vieira because of those reasons. I don't know if Jack's future lies in that part of the pitch or not, but his eye for the pass that unlocks defences is very keen.

Sanogo seems to have as much understanding of the offside rule at times as does former Spuds manager Ted Lasso. Bless his heart, he makes Kanu look like a champion ballroom dancer, yet somehow, in true Charlie Day fashion, Arsenal's very own wild card manages to influence the match to the positive. I can't tell if he's Zelig or Forrest Gump or the 20 year old man who looks like he's climbing out a window when he's doing his thing, or really, what even his thing is. Yet there's no denying that he has some sort of talent and Arsenal play well when he's out there.

Does this mean he should start every match? With so many goal scoring options, maybe he should. Maybe he is the wild card among a squad of sublime professionals. His movement and strength are a massive plus, and ultimately his strangeness makes him fun to watch.

"But what about Giroud?" you are screaming. You know how I feel about him. I think yesterday was a perfect example of how Giroud can be used. Bring him on when others are tired and suddenly he looks fast and lively! It was a nice goal in a friendly match against a team playing a bizarre combo at the back. I assume this means nobody can say anything critical of the man, correct?

Chambers and Debuchy were both very good. Debuchy plays both attack and defence with skill and confidence and looks to be a very solid purchase and more than able replacement for that bloke at City. Chambers--other than that insane back "pass" to Szcz early in the match which I assume he will never try ever again ever--gives me no fears if he is called upon to fill in for Per. I say for Per because ARSENE NEEDS TO BUY A LEFT-FOOTED CENTRAL DEFENDER NOW to back up Koz.

It's not as though Gibbo has ever stayed healthy, so what happens when he and Koz are both crocked? You play Nacho at centre half and bring Flamini in to play left back?  Oy.

So that's it, then. A friend asked me yesterday what was "the meaning" of this match. I said, "It's always better to win than to lose." That sums it up for me. Pray for Koz's Achilles tendon, please.

Adios, caballeros.

Tasty Manhattan leftovers, New Jersey Mosquitoes, Comings & Goings

Arsenal supporters took Manhattan over the weekend. Took it, you see, claimed it for their own, swarmed over the island in a red, white, yellow, and blue infestation. Everywhere I went, there was an Arsenal shirt, or hat, or socks, or probably some pants that I didn't see.

I'm certain that, as I proposed prior to the match, there were more supporters in the five boroughs (well, four at least, who really goes to Staten Island?) than there were tickets. Considering that there were still a large number of NYC Red Bulls supporters in the stands, along with some twatbiscuits in Chelsea shirts (what the hell, I mean really?  You wouldn't catch me anywhere near a Chelsea match ever in my life, ever, I would rather wager my entire fortune on England winning a penalty shoot out than go to a Chelsea match), there had to be more than 20,000 Gooners in New York.

The club and those behind the visit to the USA seemed to hedge their bets and didn't plan for large crowds "just to be safe," and didn't want to be embarrassed by planning for tens of thousands of supporters who have waited years to see their blessed club. The Puma/FA Cup display at Grand Central Station was so crowded that the police began turning people away. The pubs on 14th street on Friday night were overwhelmed and I'm sure that numerous fire codes were violated trying to accommodate the masses.

Sigh.

Arsene began to make noises during the trip about how annoying he found it, and how it was interfering with his pre-season plans, and how this would stop Arsenal from winning, and how it was a bad idea, etc. etc. etc. Oh well, it was nice while it lasted.

(I know he said positive things too. I'm not saying he ONLY said negative things, but he DID say pre-season tours interfere with season preparation. I'm tired of hearing this. Every big team does it, and then some of them go on to win things, because those are big teams. He hasn't won the league since 2004 and he had plenty of pre-seasons sequestered up in Austria with no tours to interfere with his plans, so maybe it's better to say nothing at all than leave oneself open for ridicule when Man City win the league after going on yet another sojourn around the planet.)

A message to Yank Gooners: The "Tottenham-Shit" chant gets old after the 30th time you do it in 2 hours. Yes, the Spuds are shit, yes, we hate them, but continually focusing on them makes them far more important than they should be. They're a small club in a swamp. Learn some new chants.

Nino's Pizza and Restaurant in Harrison, NJ, quite near the Red Bulls Arena is a delicious and affordable place to have a pre-match meal. If you're ever around the area, please pay them a visit. Every bar and other venue was packed beyond belief, but Nino's seated us immediately and was able to easily take care of our party of 6 with no trouble.

That was my first meal in New Jersey, a much maligned state, and I have to say it was quite good. If an English person tells you to get stuffed, tell him you will, you're going to Nino's!!! (Also, the stadium security allowed me to bring in half of my giant Italian sandwich rather than have it go to waste, so nicely done, Red Bulls.)

Our post-match beverages were consumed at a strange place called El Pastor across the river. Apparently it's a Red Bulls bar/restaurant/place, but it was overwhelmed by Gooners. This place is weird. Outside it has a noisy patio and looks like a university fraternity bar. Inside, there's a Mexican diner festooned with Portugal flags. Beyond that, there's a formal dining restaurant where the waiters wear ties. I have no idea what was going on there. 

The match itself was forgettable, other than I can now say that I've attended an Arsenal game in person, saw some of my favourite players, saw the King, and tried to get ANYONE to do the "Wright Wright Wright!" chant after Bradley's goal and realised that since I'd been following Arsenal longer than everyone around me, none of them knew what the hell I was talking about and looked at me like I was a mentalist.

Tim Cahill kicked Jack Wilshere all over the pitch and then joked about it on twitter. Cunt, still. Go back to Millwall. Jack played pretty well. Arsenal can't play a flat 5 with no striker. There's your expert analysis. 

It was nice to see Diaby. Chuba played well. That's Chuba Akpom, not Afobe, or Aneke. It's too bad all three of them didn't make the senior squad, what fun we could have had, calling them the "Three A-migos" or something. Whatever.  Hayden played very, very well. I don't know if what we saw on Saturday translates into being a senior centre half at Arsenal or not, but he was calm, and he made all the right decisions. Compared with poor Miquel he looked like Sol Campbell. Miquel, I think his time has come and gone.

The lesson from this weekend is that Arsenal support in the USA is massive. I met people from thousands of miles away who simply wanted to see their club. Not all of us can afford a flight across the Atlantic and a hotel in London and a ticket to Ashburton Grove. Thank you for thinking of those of us who love Arsenal FC, no matter how much it pained the gaffer to make the voyage.

Regarding the Chambers business and the loan of Jenko to some place, I'm a bit surprised and a bit saddened if this means that Carl is now out of favour. He's not only a Gunner, he's a Gooner. He's "one of us," as his goal celebration v. Norwich showed last season.  I don't think he's the finished product, either. What it means for his career could be construed as either positive (accelerating his development) or a pat on the back as he leaves the fold.

I can't say much about Chambers other than he held his own last season and the obvious thought that he can play multiple positions, which is a distinct advantage for a squad that can't spend an oil sheikh's cash. He's also English, so if the departure of TV5 actually happens, he has double the value.  But Jenko played well when Sagna was out injured and put in an impressive shift against Bayern at the Allianz. He's can run fast and he crosses the ball well. Right?

Four players in, that is approaching Wenger's accepted limit of incorporating new bodies into the squad without unsettling it. I'd be surprised if there's another. Chambers gives him cover at 3 positions that were needed this summer. He reminds me of the "versatile" players that MUFC have bought over the last few seasons, which means he'll probably see time at all 3.

As always, I'm happy to be proven wrong.

The Arsenal Season: 2013-2014

Rather than a statistical analysis or match by match recounting, I thought I would post impressions of the season in some kind of random way that reflects discussions I've had with other Gooners since the FA Cup final victory over Hull City.

THE GOOD

My player of the season for Arsenal had to be Per Mertesacker. Ramsey burned brighter but you can't miss 14 weeks of the season and be named footballer of the year.  BFG's interventions became so routine that they were expected, and I can't count how many times he would do the simplest thing that caused an opposing attack to break down. That's what I loved about Per this season: the simple toe-poke to dispossess someone, the simple pass from the back to the open midfielder, the clearance that snubbed out a threat; it was minimalist, Philip Glass-esque defending and that's what we needed. I don't hate his goals, either, few though they may be, they seem to always be of vital importance.

His partner in the centre of defence would be option 1a in the POS voting. Koscielny, the man with the big pockets, the man who scores the falling-down-iest goals in the squad used his considerable athleticism to chase the ball down when Wenger employed the much-lamented high line and I shudder to think what things may have been without him. Many was the time the opposition would break up the pitch and Kos would be the one at the touchline harassing the ball until reinforcements could arrive.

Aaron Ramsey...what mysterious ailment kept him out so long?  We'll never know. But what we do know is that the cheeky look-off that he gave Podolski at the end of the 2012-2013 campaign before he smashed home a goal from a ridiculous angle was just a preview. He had displayed his tireless running and tackling during that season's run-in, but the goal scoring...it leaves one speechless. It didn't even seem as though it took effort, it just seemed to occur and then keep occurring every time it was needed. He was everywhere, he was industrious, he was classy, he was inspirational. Teams that want to win have to plan for injuries, but with only one striker Arsenal couldn't compensate for Ramsey's absence. And of course, he scored THAT goal.

THINGS I LOVED

Rozza's goals versus Spuds, especially picking off the ball from Danny Effing Rose, finally helping put to rest that ghost from season's past.

Wilshere's goal versus Norwich. Everybody likes that one, don't they?

Ozil versus Napoli at Ashburton Grove. More like that, please. The man is so good it's just ridiculous sometimes.

Carl Jenkinson's goal versus Norwich, and the joy he showed following it.

Wilshere giving the middles to the MCFC supporters. Never surrender!

Theo giving the scoreline to the swamp people, then being pelted with missiles which the FA did absolutely nothing to punish, and rather made the story about TW14 "inciting the crowd." Tremendous leadership and showed absolutely NO anti-Arsenal bias there.

Szcz's selfie. Anyone who was churlish over this needs to seriously grow a sense of humour.

Mertesacker and Cazorla's "unclassic" commentary video.

Anything involving Gunnersaurus.

Opponents running away scared from Bacary Sagna on the pitch when he got in their faces. 

Flamini doing needed business against those who had it coming to them.

Wilshere doing the "Tottenham-Shit" cheer at the FA Cup celebration. Well done, lad.

Nicky Bendtner's goal versus Cardiff City whilst I was in the process of nearly shitting myself in angst. 

All of Podolski's 8 league goals.

And my goal of the season, Aaron Ramsey's blast versus Liverpool. I hate Liverpool. That's why.

(All the fun stuff that happened during the FA Cup final is different unto itself, and since it was finally a trophy you could probably pick every moment in that game that was good as a highlight.)

THINGS I DIDN'T NECESSARILY LOVE ALL THAT MUCH

Losing at home to Villa on opening day following a summer of (to that point) transfer inactivity. It was not a pretty sight anywhere amongst the Gooners of the world.

Losing away to Stoke City and Manchester United without scoring a goal.

Drawing to Swansea, Everton, and Southampton.

"Those heavy defeats." I've said enough about that elsewhere.

The way they played at Napoli. 

Arjen Robben, Chelsea Football Club, Stoke City supporters, Yanks pretending to like Liverpool, Juan Kincaid jinxing the Arsenal. 

Arsene Wenger shirtless after the FA Cup final. Still better than seeing Steve Bruce shirtless ever, but not something I'd anticipated.

Starting Big Luke in the FA Cup final. What's done is done, but I thought that was not a very good choice by the manager.

People talking about the number of goals Olivier Giroud scored as 22, when he only scored 16 in the league, which is still not good enough.

I HAVE NO CLEVER SUMMATION FOR THIS POST

It was another decent 4th place finish for the Arsenal and it was great to win the FA Cup. Here's to a summer of smashing transfers that will push the club on to winning the Premier League. Heh heh.

Bad credit? No credit? No problem!

As one contemplates the "modern" history of the Arsenal Football Club, one cannot help but look at the period of 1971-1989 as a sort of wandering in the wilderness, punctuated by the losses to Ipswich Town in 1978 and West Ham United in 1980 in FA Cup finals, the victory in the "Five Minute Final" over Manchester United in 1979, and the supposed boost of the league cup victory in 1987 over Liverpool. That's how I look at it, anyway.

Arsenal were drifting during that 18 year period. The first division became dominated by Liverpool before George Graham arrived at Arsenal. David O'Leary went from a schoolboy to having over 500 appearances for the club. He played with some of the heroes of '71 all the way through to Rocky and Thomas and then Ian Wright. Arsenal apparently couldn't win the league so they became cup specialists of a sort.

I've learned that saying a club are "cup specialists" is about as complimentary as saying someone is a "Sunday player."  Arsenal right now don't seem much like they want to expend the resources necessary to win the league, so if you look at their record over the past 9 seasons, they might have become "cup specialists" again. FA Cup winners 2005, Champions League final 2006, League Cup final 2007, League Cup final 2011, FA Cup winners 2014. No real sniff of the league title in that time. 

So it's not to say that Arsenal have been dismal during the past 9 seasons.  There have been 2 FA Cups in that time, and the chance at 3 more trophies. Maybe it does remind me of that 71-79 period. But if that's the case, does that mean 9 more years (or more) before Arsenal can claim to be the best in the league again? Are we really back to wandering in the wilderness?

I was prompted to write this because of the celebrations of Arsenal supporters after yesterday's FA Cup final victory over Hull City. So many people I know outside of England have only been following or supporting Arsenal for a few years. I asked my Yank friends on Friday, "Have any of you ever seen Arsenal lift a trophy?" Of a group of 20 or so, only 2 besides myself could make that claim, and one of them said it was the 2005 FA Cup.  They have come to Arsenal after Wenger's glorious early years when one could take it for granted that being a supporter meant crowns of glory. For them, this trophy means something. They have adopted "she wore a yellow ribbon" and chants about "Wemberley" as though they grew up in Islington. I understand their feelings about yesterday's victory.

But what about those folk I saw on telly back in Blighty who were going mad at the final whistle? The red and white shirted supporters who lined the parade route?

I believe it was a colossal "Eff you!" to everyone who blathered on about "years without a trophy." It wasn't that we think that the FA Cup is a substitute for winning the league or winning Europe, because it isn't. And it wasn't just relief, exhaling, a release of tension. No, I sincerely think it was a giant middle finger to everyone who has felt it necessary to use NOT winning as a cudgel with which to beat Arsenal about the face and skull.

You must write a new narrative, scribes, about the Arsenal Football Club. Perhaps now you can reshape it to say "Arsenal have not won the league in more than a decade" if you like. That would be more damning than "trophyless" because it puts Arsenal in the same company as those people from the other end of Seven Sisters Road and as Jack Wilshere can tell you, there's nothing worse than that.

Arsenal have won the FA Cup 11 times, on par with Manchester United. Wenger sides have won the trophy 5 times, on par with Sir Alex Ferguson. So give him--and the players--credit, please. It wasn't perfect, but it answered so many of Arsenal's and the manager's critics. Arsenal won away from the the Grove on a big occasion. Arsenal overcame a poor start. Arsenal won a trophy. Is this a story worth commemorating with a book, or even a short story? I say no. But for those who have made "not winning anything" a means by which they can flog the manager and the players, surely this is enough?

Credit where it's due--to Santi Cazorla's brilliant strike, to the ever-ready Laurent Koscielny for his typically grubby falling-down goal, to Kieran Gibbs' heart-stopping intervention, and to the combination of the always frustrating Olivier Giroud and the sent-from-heaven Aaron Ramsey for that priceless winner. Credit to Yaya Sanogo for what is becoming a habit of running on and opening up the game like a proper striker.

And credit most of all to Arsene Wenger, who did in fact lead Arsenal to a winning performance at Wembley in a cup final. You forget that he did manage it in 1998, and in Cardiff on 3 other occasions. Or perhaps you didn't forget it because you'd never seen him win anything in your time as an Arsenal supporter. I don't care how churlish I feel on the inside, I was overjoyed to see the man hoist a trophy again, to smile, to be tossed in the air and doused with champagne. He has been a frustrating, at times infuriating figure at the club but only the hardest of hearts would begrudge him yesterday.

I will be back to perform a proper autopsy on the season and this cup final, but for now, let us just give credit where it is due. Arsenal told all the critics in the world to get stuffed, and I couldn't ask for anything more.

On Width and Yanks Loving Liverpool

I don't have a florid beginning to this entry, no historical lead in or seemingly unrelated topic that is brought back at the very end to give an extra bit of meaning to the whole thing.  Let's just get right to it.

Since the FA Cup Semi-final I've engaged in a series of discussions and one round of nearly handbags on twitter about Arsenal's continued use of the 4-3-3 or nominal 4-5-1 when defending and how that formation has its problems. The reason I've been pondering it is that it seemed that opposing sides had sussed how to deal with the formation and how its lack of width save from the fullbacks had left Arsenal open to counter attacks, especially when Arsenal play that ridiculous high defensive line that sees the centre backs across midfield and the fullbacks in the opposing penalty area.

Much was made post-Wigan about how less-turgid Arsenal looked when both Giroud and Sanogo (I can't type his name without thinking of De La Soul) were deployed up top of the formation. I think it could be called a 4-1-2-1-2?  It wasn't a 4-4-2, not in the Tim (Gooner) Sherwood or Roy Hodgson sense, but it was something a bit different.

Much has since been made about Lukas Podolski's role or lack thereof at Arsenal after back-to-back braces against West Ham and Hull City AFC.  After he was substituted against Wigan, he was in a bit of a strop, and every ITK Arsenal blogger said something similar to this: "We can't play him, he doesn't defend! We LITERALLY cannot play him! He makes it too difficult for the fullbacks!"

That's tremendous, isn't it?  You have a player who, unlike all other available Arsenal forwards, actually SCORES GOALS but he CAN'T play because he doesn't DEFEND.  I guess a similar argument should be made for Sagna. He defends but he doesn't score! He puts too much pressure on the forwards by not scoring! Yes, we know he's a defender, but here at the Arsenal we expect goal scorers to play like Jaap Stam and our defenders to score like Gerd Muller! TOTAL FOOTBALL!

Conventional wisdom has forced tremendous backtracking from Arsenal supporters over the years. The most recent example would be "Aaron Ramsey is shit; oops, I mean he's Welsh Jesus." After the Wigan match, conventional wisdom was all about Poldi's defending.  Then four goals in two games and everyone's saying "Hmm, can a team starved for goals from the forward position afford NOT to play him?"

I have a question: Why are the fullbacks Arsenal's only option for providing wide attacking play?  It's not a rule. It's not in the Bible or the Koran or the Torah or even the Talmud, to the best of my knowledge.  My near spat on twitter (with one of my favourite Arsenal bloggers, no less) seemed to suggest that playing Podolski automatically means that whoever is at left back will run himself to death with no cover and will decide to leave the club and Arsenal will have to re-sign Traore because nobody will want to play for Arsenal under those conditions, or something to that effect.

This question ties into what appeared to be a two striker formation in the Wigan match. I heard no comments that suddenly Arsenal were horribly exposed down the left even though it was not put upon either of the forwards to cover the opponent's right wing.

The lovely fellows at Tuesday Club made a very clear and rational argument for more flexibility in the formation choice in their most recent podcast. You can listen to it if you like, it's quite entertaining. My biggest issue with the 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 is that the way Arsene deploys it, the 3 midfielders are all centrally deployed playmakers or pivot players or destroyers and the other two are dying to be central strikers unless Rozza starts at the top of the second 3. The Ox can offer some width but again he likes to attack from the inside.

Nobody anywhere has ever said that only the top 2 wide players should defend the flanks in this formation, but I think that it's clear that the personnel that make up Arsenal's midfield don't have the capacity nor the inclination to play wide in a 4-4-2 or 4-1-2-1-2. Arsenal are built to be narrow and attack through the middle right now, and the only attacking width comes from pushing the fullbacks so high up the pitch that a misplaced cross or loss of possession against a good team will mean punishment at the other end.

Yet there is Poldi, "all he does is score goals."  I've never seen people chastise Dzeko for not being a conscientious defender, but this received wisdom that Podolski has no value because he doesn't defend has become an unshakeable truth among Arsenal supporters.   I'm tired of seeing Giroud miss chance after chance (yes I know he does other things, yes I know he scored a great goal against WHU) and wail in Gallic frustration. Poor Sanogo isn't yet ready to lead the line and score much or at all. And yes, I know that Ramsey is now back and scored against Hull and he plays perfectly off of Giroud but again, there is a question of width when facing teams that pack the box and play tightly and try to hit Arsenal on the counter.

Even if Wenger did want to "experiment" with a two-striker formation (experiment?  How many titles did the man win playing two?!!), he hasn't bought the players to make such a shift. There's no flexibility in the squad sheet so there really can be no flexibility in the tactics.  The away loss to Stoke comes to mind when I think of a match where some tactical freshening could've helped.

The oddest thing about all this is that Wenger played midfielders who really did attack down the flanks on the tiny pitch at Highbury, and has eschewed this option at the Grove. There's a logic in there somewhere, I'm sure I'll find it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In light of Liverpool's early coronation as champions, many Yanks are donning red shirts and professing love for all things Scouse, Stevie G, the tactical genius of Brendan Rodgers, the tragedy of Hillsborough, the Beatles, and a lot of shit about which they really know nothing. With this being NBC's first season broadcasting or streaming every match, this is for many of us an introduction to English football and there seems to be some bizarre romanticisation of Liverpool by the novice.

Yanks don't understand the loud-mouthed, know-it-all, "we invented the game, Shankley, Paisley, Alan Hansen was the fastest player in the history of football, what do you know about football you idiot Yank?, John Barnes was the greatest player ever, Ian Rush was the greatest player ever, King Kenny, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah" Liverpool fans. Christ they never fucking shut up. I'd rather listen to Teddy Sheringham read Glenn Hoddle's autobiography than have a discussion--or rather ATTEMPT to have a discussion--about football with a goddamned Scouser. Yanks have no idea, this was the most hated club in English football long before United started running the rule over the top flight.

The worst thing about it is the horrible pro-Liverpool bias among the English press and media. These people have this romantic memory of the greatness of Liverpool and how it will never be that good again and they spend column after column verbally wanking over a team led by a bitey racist and a serial diver. (No, they're not one and the same.)

You don't understand it, Yanks. They don't want your support. They don't like you. They think you're stupid. They think you don't know anything about the game. And on that point, they may be right.

Liverpool winning the league is bad for football. Arsenal haven't won the league in over a decade (and haven't played in the States in 25 years) and yet the number of Arsenal supporters routinely outnumbers all other clubs. This says that nobody becomes an Arsenal supporter because they're glory-hunting day-trippers. The number of Liverpool supporters in the USA will swell like rats from an abandoned house and will be just as annoying and vile and obnoxious.

You don't know what you're doing, Yanks. You simply don't know what you're doing.

What was that thing I wanted?

That thing, do you remember that thing?  I said I wanted it, and now I don't have it and I can't remember what it was, only that I don't have it now.

Arsenal have won another match.  This one was not much to think about, it was more of the same but less so. Much less so, in fact, because the pragmatism was absent.  This was a match played under what was perceived to be pressure on both sides, but in fact was played with one side sprinkled in faery dust and one side still unsure just what it is.

Arsenal won this match versus Wigan because Wigan ran out of steam, or maybe Wigan ran out of coal to make the steam, or possibly it was simply that the people shoveling the coal into the engine became so tired that they stopped shoveling at a pace rapid enough to keep the water boiling and the steam stopped being formed and then the whole machine powered by steam just stopped.

Wigan had about an hours worth of steam/coal/effort in them, and after that, it was over.  They really did fight well, Mike Dean really did his usual panto (I'm sickened unto death with match officials who think they are given some right to become part of the story), Arsenal may have conceded a silly foul in a dangerous area (according to the magistrate).  Then Wigan scored an equalising goal and Arsenal reverted to type.

For the record, I don't subscribe to magical thinking. A professor I admired at university once said "The history machine doesn't have an 'If...' button." So while it's fair to say that something almost happened, the truth is that it did not happen. Wigan did not score the go-ahead goal in the first 15 minutes of the second half, so you can stuff your almosts and nearlys and go on about your business.  You can't magically factor in the goal that didn't happen and then go on about Arsenal being lucky or Wigan being unlucky. Watch enough football, and you just eventually learn that shit is ultimately shit, except for Anderson, who somehow has managed to keep his job in Manchester despite being shit.

That was it, really. Wigan didn't score whilst giving maximum effort, then it looked like they grew weary, and then Arsenal scored 3 times in roughly 8 minutes, and it was fare thee well, Wigan. Quite literally, as then discussions almost immediately turned to relegation, money, money, money, and money. You won the FA Cup, Wigan, you put the whores of Eastlands to the sword, you helped the oil moneymen find a reason to send silly scarf man packing, but the reality is, you're pathetic and that doesn't matter.

I'll be excused from that conversation because I think Wigan can be proud of what they accomplished, and can be proud of not pissing away the chance to have a glorious day out at Wembley and for giving their supporters a wonderful memory. Relegation doesn't have to be a death sentence--unfortunately you only need look as far as the Humber to see that. Well played, Wigan. One word of advice to whomever ends up managing Wigan should they gain promotion soon--you might want to try surrendering fewer goals next time around. Cheers, that advice was completely free!

So that is why I am not one of those people (you know, THOSE people) who are tonight saying "Alas, poor Wigan, such stylish and properly played football, and poor Bobby MAH-tinez, what a good bloke, did you hear he's a good bloke?"  Hold the mirror up to Wigan and you see an absolutely wretched defence that has allowed 71 goals in 37 matches. 71 goals, sweet perforated bollox of San Sebastian that is really ridiculously horrible, just so profligate that can you really pity them? 

At some point a football club becomes like a person and must make a choice between artful death and pragmatic survival.  Wigan and Arsenal could be cousins if one takes that kind of choice into account. Arsenal chose pragmatic survival to avoid being relegated from the top four which is a league unto itself. Wigan chose glory--the wonderful Cup glory--and openness and an attempt at something more than the banality of pragmatism and paid for that choice with relegation.

What is better?  To drive the machine to its maximum until it explodes, extracting every moment of performance and excitement from it no matter the end, or to drive it practically, so that it survives and survives and survives?  Is it better to be Leeds United in the early 2000s or Stoke City now?  (Trick question, obviously it is better to be a blind deaf mute than be either one.)   Of the three sides relegated this season, only Wigan were attempting something that really exists for its own sake--giving something to the supporters that they could savour for years.  I will not pity them. But neither will I praise them. It was a fair result.

Arsenal, however, live to fight another day. Arsenal have chosen survival over artistry when relegation seemed not only possible but rather likely.  How strange that a man born of a fusion of French and German philosophies would exhibit such an English characteristic.  At the moment that it all seemed hopeless, Arsene Wenger instructed his side to simply dig in, keep your head down and soldier on.  Wigan have now paid for their reach.  Arsenal may well be paid for their pragmatism. Who would have thought such a fanciful thing were even possible?

"Please sir, could I have some more?"

When you're starving, even gruel satisfies the craving and does so to the extent that you will ask for another helping. Eat the weevils, they're rich in protein!  And dysentery is a smashing weight-loss programme, so dig right in.

This is what Arsenal are serving up in an end-of-season slog toward whatever fate awaits them: A runny, watery, gruel that is doing just enough to sustain the hopes of supporters and the squad's own desire to play in the big cup next season. 

And yet...and yet the form table says "Hang on a minute--this is quite different than last season's trip-stumble-fall across the finish line."  Instead of defeating our wee sisters from up the road, launching a brilliant run, then repeatedly punching themselves in the face until the final day of the season, this year's model has used a loss to that lot as a cold splash of water to bring back some missing vitality.

It's a complete reversal, but the result is still the same. It will come down to the final day of the season, and an away match against a side that may or may not offer up the comical defending that has come to reflect its manager's silly personality.

Waking up in the middle of a long winter, one of those mornings where your bones are so cold that your body rightly aches from being clenched up all night, you saw that Arsenal had taken just five points from five January matches.  After an unbeaten December that had supposedly righted the ship's course, the season had seemed to have completely crumbled. Rage and resignation battled for control of the Arsenal supporter's mind. An acceptance of fate seemed reasonable to me as I had so little energy left for rage anymore.

Two seasons in a row I've gone ahead and made peace with the idea that Arsenal would neither finish ahead of the Chickenballs nor qualify for the qualifying for the Champions League proper. That's not a load of fun when those things have seemed to be a given, even as challenging for the league has become a fading memory. But then Arsenal began to do what Arsenal are wont to do and the form table cannot lie: The Gunners have earned 29 points since the beginning of February, and dropped only 7.

What the hammer, what the change?  "Why so pragmatic, Arsene?"  Suddenly, and I mean literally from one match to the next, Arsenal went from being free-wheeling, devil-take-defence chokers to stuck in, grinding gears hard men content to win in the manner of George Graham's most turgid sides. Comic concession was replaced by 8-man walls of resistance.  The captain--the man doing mock acrobatic routines and giving giving away free kicks like they were lollies at the doctor's office--was benched. One Pole was sacrificed for another that was long-since forgotten. 

I looked at Wenger and said, "Who are you?  What have they done with the real Arsene?  SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE! POSSIBLY EVEN MADE UP OF THE REMAINS OF ALEXANDER HLEB!"  Benching players for crap performances?  A steely resolve?  Winning ugly? 

The world has gone mad. Camus and Sartre have become chorus boys.

After the draw with United, I was "over it." I was bored with the classic Arsene feint, thrust, and parry. I was bent out of shape over Sagna's moment of madness.  I was saddened that losing a player like Giroud could actually have a negative impact on a side. United had clearly fallen arse over tit after winning the league and yet the Gunners could do little to trouble them.  "Meh," I said, with full shoulder-shrug included.

So...why did the 1-0 over QPR leave me both full and satisfied?  Content, even?  It's because of the result. The result is all that matters. The result is god. Worship the result. I would rather that result than another result. That was better than a 6-0 thrashing.

Why?

Because this squad is no longer deserving of handing out 6-0 thrashings.  Sorry, I hate to say it (no, I don't) but that would only be papering over the cracks in a house that needs much restoration. A hiding given to QPR would hurt more than help.  It would distract this bunch. It would have Theodore asking for more wages.  It would serve to inflate an opinion of a side that deserves nothing more than a bitter, give it all and then give it more struggle to achieve anything resembling a reward. 

That's the sort of effort that, if this team had approached every match with that mindset this season, would have the team at worst in second place at the moment. You don't need to get to February to discover the true nature of your side. You ought to know exactly what you have after you win 5 matches from your first 14.

A one-nil win over a relegated side full of overpaid mercenaries who are stepping out the door already is EXACTLY what this Arsenal team OUGHT to be doing every week. I don't need to channel basketball genius Rick Pitino to tell you that Bob Pires isn't walkin' through that door. You already know it. You know what this team is compared to its rivals.

1-0 over QPR was extremely satisfying. I'm not in the mood for beauty, for a fleeting glimpse of "what this team could be."  This team can't be anything more than what it is: Gallic flair sacrificed for Teutonic pragmatism. The two players who have come to symbolise this "new old" Arsenal?  Ha ha, it's Aaron Ramsey and Per Mertesacker.  It's the all-energy running and effort of the Welshman and the rather dour, "it's Pear not Pair" German that have served as the example for the others. In Ramsey they see an unwillingness to give less than the maximum, and in BFG they have organisation, calm, a sense of purpose and devotion to the grubby work of defending.  Neither player brings artistry to the match in his kit bag.

Arsene's earlier Arsenal sides featured a balance between the pretty and the ugly, between attack and defence, between goals scored and goals not conceded. I think this is what most bloggers are talking about these days when they say this version is unbalanced. It could never be both.  Not this lot. Rebalancing the side is what lies ahead in the summer--either that, or a willingness to admit that next season, the entire season, will need to look a lot more like the 1-0 over QPR Arsenal than any of us would like to see. Boring, boring?  One-nil to the...

When the pictures are hidden...

This weekend, the Arsenal Football Club will play at Stoke City.

I operate under the assumption that Aaron Ramsey, Arsenal midfielder, will be among the substitutes--only because I also assume that the club's captain, Cesc Fabregas, will be counted among the first XI.

I have terrible mixed emotions about this trip. Part of me wishes to see Aaron on the pitch, scoring a goal and then removing his kit and taking a massive, pent-up sh*t all over Ryan Shawc*nt. (For those of you who don't know, Shawc*nt is the original "He's not that kind of player," or as Arsenal supporters have come to know it, "HNTKOP." His repeated inability to tackle correctly has caused serious injury to 3 players so far in a just a few years of first team football. But remember, he's not that kind of player.)

Part of me, however, remains in a pained limbo over the whole thing. I didn't see last season's match live. I saw a delayed replay the same day, and knew it was coming--"it" being that flying stomp by the great ape Shawc*nt on Aaron's leg--and it still horrified and sickened me so much that I was reduced to tears. Aaron had become a focal point for the progress of Arsene's youth project, a player who symbolised the way a bright young talent could slowly work his way into the first team, and his contributions last season were growing in importance. In contrast to the energetic, possession-keeping, tackling and hustling Jack Wilshere, Aaron was an attacking midfielder who was always driving things forward and moving upfield.

I've never seen the stomp since then. I can't imagine seeing it. I can't even want to watch the end of the match when Arsenal gathered themselves and fought back, when Big Sol stood and roared and the Captain told an interviewer, "For me, it is no good."

So seeing Aaron back on that pitch against Tony Putrid's lab experiments gone wrong, it would almost be too much to stomach. I don't know if I need that kind of closure as a supporter. I think that happened last weekend with Aaron's goal against the Rags.

I don't want people to forget what happened--ever. The shame of what that idiot did to Aaron can't be forgotten, nor should anyone forget what kind of player he was becoming before his career was so crudely interrupted. It's a more simple prospect for me--I just can't stand the thought of seeing something so horrific again. I've seen it 3 times in recent years happen to Arsenal players and I don't care to witness such a thing ever again. I think I don't even want to see it happen to John Terry. That's how horrible I think it is.

Most instructive about the vomit-inducing nature of the "tackle" was that most of the highlights programmes refused to show it or its aftermath. I believe that MOTD said plainly that it was too disgusting to show and while I know many people claimed that this was merely an attempt to diminish the violence in English football, I can't see the conspiracy there. It was in my mind a simple case of "Here, do you really want to see something this bloody disgusting again?"

The best kind of closure that could happen this weekend? A sound thrashing of Stoke City and a straight red for Shawc*nt--before the match. Just for being a big, stupid, smelly twat.