United vs Arsenal

[Shinboners]

Manchester United 6 (pr0n King 3, Solksjaer, Keane, Sheringham)
Arsenal 1

United now 16 points clear, need 15 more points in 10 games to retain the championship. Again.

Dutchy, I am still stunned by the result...what happened?

 

[Darky]

****!!! Yet they lose to West Ham HA HA HA HA HA!

 

[Dan26]

It was 5-1 at half time, sadly.

What a terrible match. I was going to watch the whole game, but I went to bed at half time (1:00AM) when it was 5-1.

 

[ant]

Sensational game, Yorke had a hat trick after 20 minutes!! Arsenal are supposed to be the second best side in the premiership and we creamed them by 5 goals. Brilliant stuff by Man Utd. and what a piss poor effort by Arsenal.

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by ant:
Sensational game, Yorke had a hat trick after 20 minutes!! Arsenal are supposed to be the second best side in the premiership and we creamed them by 5 goals. Brilliant stuff by Man Utd. and what a piss poor effort by Arsenal.

Arsenal still are the second best side in the premiership. It was a freak result, but it underlines the daylight between us the rest of the premiership.

Loved Fergie's insistence that the premiership isn't over yet.

 

[carb70]

Sorry SB and Ant but I have to disagree with you. Liverpool is the second best team in the league not Arsenal. We are 5 points behind Arsenal with 2 games in hand. We also beat them 4-0 last time we played them and that victory came one week after we beat Man Utd 1-0.

 

[Bloodstained Angel]

English soccer needs a salary cap mechanism as a matter of urgency.

Otherwise ManU will continue to turn this, er, 'competition' into a laughing stock - if it isn't already.

cheers

 

[Shinboners]

Carb70

Liverpool still have to win those games, but I concede the point, if they win both, then they are the second best. But in the meantime, Arsenal are second best.

BSA

Manchester United have actually spent less on transfer fees and on player payments than Arsenal, Newcastle, Liverpool, Leeds, and Chelsea, so success does not necessarily result from how much money you spend. Sir Alex Ferguson isn't even the best paid manager in the Premier League.

[This message has been edited by Shinboners (edited 26 February 2001).]

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by Shinboners:
Carb70

Liverpool still have to win those games, but I concede the point, if they win both, then they are the second best. But in the meantime, Arsenal are second best.

Does this mean North were the second best side in 1999? Be careful not to contradict yourself in your response.

 

[Shinboners]

Different competitions Dim. In England, they rank the teams after 38 games. In the AFL, we rank them after the finals series. No contradictions there, just different methods.

 

[Dan26]

Originally posted by Shinboners:
Different competitions Dim. In England, they rank the teams after 38 games. In the AFL, we rank them after the finals series. No contradictions there, just different methods.

I know we rank them after the finals series. But that doesn't mean North (and various other examples in history, eg Essendon 1965) were the best. It just means they won the premiership.

What if ManU had to play Arsenal in a 1v2 match at the end of the season, where the winner was premiers (even though ManU were 16 points clear). If Arsenal won that, would you consider them the best team in the country? I sure as hell wouldn't.


[This message has been edited by Dan24 (edited 26 February 2001).]

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by Bloodstained Angel:
English soccer needs a salary cap mechanism as a matter of urgency.

Otherwise ManU will continue to turn this, er, 'competition' into a laughing stock - if it isn't already.

cheers

BA I can see how u would come to that conclusion but u have to remember that Man Utd have been the best supported club in England for a long time now & as a consequence the richest but that did not stop Liverpool dominating for much of the 70's & all of the 80's whilst Man U didn't win the title once during this period.Obviously their wealth gives them advantages but if u compare their spending power to teams in Europe there r a number who can & do spend more on players ie Real Madrid,Barceolona,Inter Milan,AC Milan,Roma,Lazio, I would suggest that their dominance is based on a manager who is one of the greatest ever & who has not lost his hunger & a youth set up that has provided a number of top class players who have cost bugger all & who all have a deep rooted loyalty & love for the club.When Ferguson goes they won't neccessarily crumble but I am pretty sure that they will not dominate to the extent that they have been.

#PS If a salary cap came in then all the top players would move to Europe leaving all the English clubs with a bunch of 2nd rate players

 

[Shinboners]

Originally posted by Dan24:

I know we rank them after the finals series. But that doesn't mean North (and various other examples in history, eg Essendon 1965) were the best. It just means they won the premiership.

What if ManU had to play Arsenal in a 1v2 match at the end of the season, where the winner was premiers (even though ManU were 16 points clear). If Arsenal won that, would you consider them the best team in the country? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Um, how did this topic which started off as a discussion on the Manchester United vs Arsenal game turn into something about your pet topic?

Everyone knows your views, most people know mine, so, let's just give it a rest, okay?

 

[QT]

You must adit though, thierry henry's goal was brilliant team work!

------------------
"I came here to win, I am a winner" - Denzel Washington , Remember The Titans ; 2000