We are in a great position to win the league and I am saying we will win and I get labelled arrogant.

:d



Edited by busbybabe: 8/4/2011 04:44:16 PM

They would be if they were true.

I'm so sick of reading you say this. I'll say again: He was your THIRD choice between the sticks this season. Both Fabianski and Almunia got chances before him this season. If your third choice keeper at the start of the season is why you don't look to sign an adequate replacement or first team keeper than Wenger is a fucking fruitcake.

A fruitcake that most clubs would kill to have as their manager.

And TBF to him he was proven right in not buying a keeper for most of the season until we were left with basically none left and had to play Almunia.

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 8/4/2011 05:19:40 PM

Yeah...because he went from Almunia as first choice for August and September and then Fabianski from October through January...and then turning to Szczesny. Yeah....he got it right going through keepers like tissues.

Yeah that wasn't at all because of injuries right :roll:

#-o #-o

You sound like those Arsenal fans who say it's all Wengers fault that Almunia is in goal now.

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 8/4/2011 05:39:27 PM

When you lose a keeper to injury, you usually turn to your second choice, and then return to your first choice keeper at his return of fitness, not switch to your third choice keeper.

Almunia was first choice, got injured so Fabianski came in. He got injured and was put out for the rest of the season, Almunia was still injured so Szczesny came in, performed well so kept his place until he was injured. If Almunia was fit when Fabianski was injured then he would have been back in the team.

Now because of Fabianski and Szczesny performing well when given the chance they are out #1 and #2 when fit and Almunia #3. Szczesny was only #3 at the start of the season because he hadn't been given a chance yet.

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 8/4/2011 06:26:08 PM

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 8/4/2011 06:35:12 PM

I could have sworn that Almunia was fit again by the time Szczesny got called upon.

Sure enough, he returned to training in the 7th of November before re-injuring himself on the 15th of December. He made No first team appearances in this time.

Since when does returning to training suddenly mean he's fit again. If that was the case Vermaelan would have returned months ago.

Point is from when Almunia supposedly returned to training to when he re-injured himself he wasn't on the bench for one game in that period so obviously wasn't fit.

Like I said, if Almunia was fit when Fabianski injured himself he would have been back into the team, but he wasn't and Szczesny came in and performed well enough to warrant keeping his place. So Wenger should have dropped Szczesny, no matter how well he was playing, just because he was 3rd choice at the start of the season?

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 8/4/2011 06:44:22 PM

There's over a month there. Clearly he's either not fit to be playing at this level at all. Or he should have been back and Wenger has persisted with Fabianski.

Wenger kept with Fabianski either because Almunia was a) not fit and b) Even if he was fit there was no reason to drop Fabianski when he was playing well.

Some injury news ahead of the Blackpool game.

Cesc is fit to start, Song is definitely out and Walcott and Sagna apparently to have a late fitness test.

Peter Hill-Wood, please for the love of God get the fuck out of our club you pathetic cunt.

Whats up?

Ok, well the Arsenal supporters Trust came out with a report saying that the fans aren't happy with the lack of success lately and all that. So Wenger came out fighting at his presser yesterday talkinb about how well we've done compared to how little we've spent.

Then today that oaf Hill-Wood comes out saying that the supporters are stupid and silly and basically once again proving just how much of a moron he is. He's only there because of his father and really is just so out of touch it's not funny.

Like seriously, I may not agree with some fans views but they are entitled to their opinion and don't deserve to be insulted by their own clubs chairman.

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 9/4/2011 08:14:24 PM

Yeah... makes sense... but also I am glad we didnt spend 50 mil on a striker who can't score... There had to be a balance...

Someone had to buy him :P

How else could Liverpool grosely overspend on Andy Carroll if nobody bought Torres.

Superb spelling in your attempted sledge as always.

Link

Only one of that lot I'd be sad to see leave is Eboue. Almunia, Denilson, Arshavin and Rosicky should all be shipped out asap. Clichy should be sold if the deal is right, I would still rather Gibbs at LB if he could stay injury free. And Bendtner probably needs to move somewhere to get regular football, JET is probably an ample replacement.

Of the replacement list, I can't see Wenger signing Neuer or Baines due to the cost, and potentially Jones aswell. Another holding midfielder and Hazard to replace Arshavin should be the top priorities. With Ramsey and Vermaelen becoming match fit next season we don't need to bolster too much, just replace whichever players leave with superior players, which isn't hard in the case of Denilson & Almunia.

I honestly don't know why they even link us with Neuer when we won't even be looking at a keeper unless one of Szczesny or Fabianski dies before next season.

Clichy I'd sell if he doesn't sign this new contract so we don't lose him for free. Baines he won't buy because he'll wanna push Gibbs into the first XI with Traore as back up.

Denilson, please just fuck off. I'm just worried we won't be able to convince a club to take him :lol:

Arshavin, well it's easy to say he's lost his scoring form, but he's still got the 2nd most assists in the league this season. I'd only sell him if we can get an adequate replacement. Either Ashley Young or Eden Hazard would go alright.

Almunia and Rosicky will be off.

Bendtner I get the feeling will stay, but I'd sell him

And Eboue will be off next summer not this summer.

[size=8]FUCKING LOL[/size]

Ok, funniest transfer story of the season goes to Man City. Apparently they are lining up a "sensational" bid of 40m for Jack Wilshere in the summer. Seriously they could offer 100m and we might maybe just maybe answer their phone call.

:? As if you wouldn't take 40m?

I wouldn't sell him for anything, and I don't think Man City would be willing to offer what it would take for thew club to listen.

Not to mention that he wouldn't wanna leave anyway.

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 10/4/2011 07:55:14 PM

I'd take 40 mill for Wilshere. Could potentially get a nice player with a swap plus cash.

If Wilshere wasn't 19 with a massive future ahead of him I'd take 40m. But if we really wanted to sell him we could get a lot more than 40m in a few years.

I think the fact that he's an Arsenal product is kind of the reason I wouldn't take 40m :lol:

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 10/4/2011 08:15:11 PM

Just noticed something in that article I posted. Come near Emilio Izaguirre and I will cut you good.