Geordie Ahmed

Martinelli is roasting TAA here

Just lacking the final pass/shot

Saka has turned into Havertz in this half

2 minutes ago, NSG said:

All gone a bit quiet on him. Think his timescales were mid to late January for a return when he had his op. Maybe one of the ones Howe was referring to for being back after the winter break?

Happened in early November and I think 3 months was mentioned so hopefully back by early next month

Liverpool have upped their tempo and are creating chances now

Arsenal will regret missing all those chances in the first half

2 minutes ago, Adam said:

A draw here so they both have to play an extra fixture would be best. Havertz and Nunez missing a few more chances as well please.

I'd rather Arsenal win because if this goes to Anfield then Liverpool will win it

Havertz is useless

Just now, Sean said:

Liverpool look shit against everyone apart from us don't they 

No Salah/VVD makes a big difference to their side 

1 minute ago, leffe186 said:

How are Arsenal not winning?

Havertz playing as striker doesn't help

Combined with Liverpool being blessed with an insane amount of luck

Havertz is such a donkey

Insane that Arsenal paid £65m for him

Arsenal should be in the lead, Liverpool so jammy

Nelson should pass it once he went that wide

27 minutes ago, CPL said:

Anyone answer this earlier? Can't seem to find anything on it. 

It's based on the made up twitter nonsense of him cheating on his wife with a 16 year old

It's utter bollocks but that didn't stop them chanting it at him, which tbf Trippier didn't let it get to him

It's all ironic as this is the same fanbase that lauded Adam Johnson, even after it was legitimately reported what he had done

2 hours ago, Hovagod said:

The rule changed didn’t it? If it continues into the box it’s a penalty. 

The rule has always been like that, I say always but certainly since I've been watching football (90's onwards)

It should have been a penalty and a red card as there was no genuine attempt to play the ball

However I'm now glad it wasn't given, the narrative would have then been spin that with eleven on the pitch they'd have given us a game 

I actually thought Bellingham looked quite tidy but definitely very raw

16 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

We do have a 2 week break before it at least. (I think we do anyway)

That's right

City (H) 13th

Fourth round 27th/28th

Villa (a) 30th

Luton (H) 3rd 

Then it's pretty much 1 game per week unless we are in the 5th round which is midweek 28th Feb 

1 minute ago, SUPERTOON said:

When is the 4th round played ?

27th Jan

We have Villa away on 30th Jan so could do with a nice, easy home tie 

Which means it will be City/Spurs/Arsenal away

Miggy was brilliant today, especially out of possession

In the grand scheme of things it doesn't mean a great deal, unless we are playing Sunderland level opposition week in week out

I wanted this draw to happen, was excited it happened but now I'm  kicking off with myself for wanting it

Absolutely bricking it now, not felt like this in a long, long time

2 hours ago, r0cafella said:

To clarify in not asking we go down the route of legally challenging it, it’s politically not feasible for us to do so imo. 
 

What I’ve been referring to is the amount of low hanging fruit we haven’t taken advantage of. I’m all for us boxing clever but we should have given ourselves more leeway, instead we hear about the FFP limitations constantly whilst we don’t do what we can within the rules that exist. 

Apologies, probably would have helped if I read the earlier posts.

On the training ground/stadium sponsor I get the feeling they're leaving these as last resorts. Sponsoring the stadium will cause ructions, from outside and even within the fanbase, so why make such a move if you are still increasing your revenue in other areas.

I do agree with you there is scope to do more but I don't see it as them being unwilling, just rather they want to make it look more organic and therefore it attracts less attention. 

That's just how I see it, could be totally wrong but think 3-5 years we'll have done a lot more in this area.

4 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

Bro, I appreciate the response and agree to an extent. My point is we can and should have done much more as I’ve outlined in other posts. 
 

if we are to achieve the aims stated publicly we will require a lot of Investment and quickly. 

I hear you but I just feel going down the route of challenging FFP is a long winded and murky road

I'm not necessarily against that approach as I can see how decent lawyers highlight the flaws

I just prefer the approach we are taking, it's gradual and more organic (just to clarify, it at least feels more organic, I'm not naive to why we ha e Sela/Noon)

What's crazy is the ref had a brilliant view of it, made the correct call, gets told to look at the replays, which confirm it was the correct decision and he then changes his mind

I can only assume the moment a referee is told to take a look the doubt starts to creep in and they must feel that they have messed up and that they have to change their mind, it's madness

VAR could be amazing but it's being operated by morons 

2 hours ago, r0cafella said:

In totally going off in the wrong thread here but w/e. 
 

final point on this subject from is for a club which loves to talk about FFP and how hamstrung we are by it we’ve don remarkably little to either challenge it or ease the situation. I wrote a post a few days ago in the PIF thread echoing similar sentiments but now I think about the sponsor side in no detail and consider how every transfer window FFP is brought up on a scale never seen before it really has me scratching my head wondering. 

I think it's brought up to downplay the idea we have a huge budget, never a good thing to tell other clubs you are flash with cash and also it's a reality and something we have to adhere to

FFP exists and as a result we have to play by the rules

As for doing something about it? I disagree that we haven't done anything. The Sela sponsorship, the noon sponsorship, the multiple official partners, the Adidas deal etc is all part of doing something about

Very basic calculations but that's probably an increase of £60m in revenue and no doubt we'll continue drive that revenue up. That's the sensible approach rather than just going to court (this should always be a final resort) 

34 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

It’s such a short term move and a bad use of money. He’s 27 having one hot streak in a league renowned for poor defending. We have way less games lumped together in the second half of the season. 
 

Are you convinced we can get our money back for him if he comes in and flops? If so go for it. 

I get the doubts about the league but 27 is hardly old, we signed Wilson when he was 29

If we think he can do a job in this league then it's a no brainer for me, even if we get 2-3 seasons out of him

The reality is Wilson will not stay fit for the remainder of the season and so far we are seeing the increased workload on Isak doesn't end up well either, so another striker would be more than welcome 

According to The Times we are favourites to sign Guirassy, who has a £15m release clause

Would be a no brainer at that price 

27 minutes ago, Dava1892 said:

Protesting tonight now, F-ing hilarious this whole shambles of a club

We all know that they will do absolutely nothing

They talk a good game but can't be arsed and want others to do it for them, whether that is protesting or with their flag attempts