Erikse

We could do with a little more creativity in the midfield though. Our excellent attack is kind of making up for it at the moment. Maybe Tonali can bring that?

Yeah, which is why it's hard to break into the status quo long term, as this is what the spending limit is heavily based on. Our owners have to run the club way better than yours is run for a very long time consecutively, for us to have any hope of being a top 4 regular. Unless sponsorship deals gets us there eventually. Leicester broke into the status quo and then got relegated later.

Spent less than Man United since takeover (as much as 80 mill euros less in the last 2 seasons), while also starting out with a squad worth half of yours, and a wage bill probably also being half of yours. It's hard to become a top 4 regular when every signing has to be this good. If we've spent heavily when spending 80 mill less than you in the last 2 seasons, what does that make your spending?

He took over when we had like 7 points in 14 games. In the last half of the season (last 19 games) we were 3rd that season. With a very mediocre squad. The impact of the managers mentioned is so huge that it would kind of be like Man United winning the league in Ten Hags first season.

Nothing like Howe, Emery or Alonso. I guess that yous have low expecations in general by now, but taking Man United (!) from 6th to 3rd is different from taking teams from 18 to perform like a top 4 team in short time. And in the second year, Man Utd have gone backwards, while the other managers kept the momentum going to do even bigger things.

Howe was a similar story. Xabi Alonso even more extreme: Some managers use the patience argument after 2 seasons (Ten Hag). Others has a huge impact during that time.

I agree more on this. Despite their fans whining for ages about referree decisions and such on social media, I kind of wanted Arsenal to take this one. Just because City makes it all so boring to me. Atleast the Arsenal team is somewhat exciting and fun to watch. I used to like Liverpool in their prime under Klopp, but they haven't been the same since they missed out on the quadruple. I don't particularly like them anymore.

I would rather have 3 different teams winning the title between them than 1 team winning it 90% of the time, I'd say 3 or 4 teams back and forth is more variance than 1. But, ofcours, the ideal situation would be more variance than 3 or 4 teams winning it between them.

If Man City winning every year will push through a change that will see other teams be able to compete aswell, then I agree, I'm all for it. But watching the league title be this predictable is quite boring I'd say. I hated Man Utd for the same reason, as mentioned.

It's a bit strange to wish for the same team to win every season because you want more variance. Don't you see the irony in that? I think this is mostly just about you disliking the fans of the red ones.

Okay, now there's one more in the mix. One who wins every season. One who gets around 95 points a season Better? Not really.

Liverpool has 1. How many does Arsenal have? Man City are going to have 4 in a row, 5 out of 6. That's more in the last 4 years than Arsenal and Liverpool combined in the entire PL history. I think? Liverpool winning once in 30 years vs Man City setting a record with 4 in a row.. What's worse? The only comparable is Man Utd under Ferguson. I hated that too for the very same reason.

115 charges wins another one. Well done PL. A great look.

Trying to cope.

How long until Diaz scores?

He would just be injured all the time.

Palace GK looks terrified when he gets a backpass.. I have a feeling he's going to mess something up.

This guy allways have new excuses up his sleeve. Just accept it, you've been doing really poorly with this squad, which is very deep btw. And with less games.

Gotta feel for the guy though. Imagine how many minutes he would've played during our crisis if it wasn't for that freak injury.

I agree that he wouldn't be my first choice of selling. As I said, I won't be annoyed at all if he stays. But I don't see him performing like a 120k a week player again next season imo. I would be surprised. If Tino is first choice (which I kind of hope he will be tbh), it's an expensive player to have on the bench. But at the same time, if we don't get anyone in who can cover there, maybe we would be too short if we sell assuming we're playing in europe. Most of our main defence (Schar, Burn, Tripps) is getting really old though, we kind of have to replace it bit by bit.

Another worry with older players is the fact that they get injured more often, and each injury can impact their abilities more than it will with a younger player. Look at De Bruyne for example, compared to last season. If we keep Trippier, he may not be able to play with our intensity many games in a row overt time. It will at the very least be harder for him for each passing year.

Did noone say it in january? You can have a different opinion, that's fine.

I know that. But if you can show me an examples of games where a team with less that 30% possession had more than 4 times higher xG than their opponent, then I'd like to see it (or have an xG above 3). You will struggle to find it. It's still very very rare that it happens to this extent. Not that it matters for anything, it's just a crazy stat.

It's still bizarre numbers. How often is a team with 27% possession this dominant.

According to Arsenal fans we would sell him for the same as we bought him for.