Arsenal Banter Archive May 06 2017

06 May 2017 23:11:10
So maureen doesn't want to see wenger sacked or leave arsenal, he's even going to put out a weak team against him. Ah bless. He has got a heart or is his reasons more sinister.

07 May 2017 08:51:14
Him and every other player, manager and fan of every club up and down the country.

07 May 2017 10:06:23
I'm sure it's mind games. But even if not why is it becoming a shock our manager is widely respected in football. Outside of the emirates that is.

06 May 2017 09:37:12
{Ed's Note - We have posted a new article entitled, My All Time Premier League Eleven

06 May 2017 10:54:09
Nice read and hard to argue with your choices as you back up dropping Henry for Shearer and explain why. You gave Pires a great shout out but no Adams or Seaman mentioned?
That would have been a hell of a side to play against and watch. Makes you appreciate the quality of football that the premiership money has brought to the UK and how lucky we are sometimes - even though people pay the crazy football shirt prices, season ticket prices and damn sky to get more money into the sport.
Thanks for the read and reflection.

{Ed001's Note - I never rated Seaman, always thought he was lucky to play behind such an amazing back four. Adams was a tough one and should have been mentioned, my mistake. He was the main opposition to Terry really but I couldn't remember how much of his career carried over to the Prem and how much predated it. I didn't trust my memory enough to give him the nod.}

06 May 2017 11:36:08
Thanks Ed, I thoroughly enjoyed the read
:)

{Ed001's Note - cheers mate, glad you enjoyed.}

06 May 2017 14:33:08
Very good 11 indeed. Agree with your comments on seamen and would even put cech above him (Chelsea days ) and the fact he has the record for clean sheets but overall agree on your pick. I also accept your reasoning behind shearer over Henry because of longevity and also been all time top scorer as it is an all time 11, but by that logic I have to go with scholes over alonso as I don't see one been better than the other overall but scholes did it for longer. The only other difference for me is it has to be Garry Neville, again understand your reasoning but have to go with Neville. Very difficult to pick that 11 but hard to argue with your 11. On a note about Bruce Rioch Ian wright said that the signing of bergkamp had nothing to do with Bruce rioch although it could be sour grapes as their rift was well documented which ultimately led to Bruce rioch been replaced. Top read mate.

{Ed001's Note - you are right on Scholes, but there were so many Man Utd players I wanted to at least have one of my fave players in! I never thought Neville was good enough, he had a great understanding with Beckham but lacked ability in my opinion. He was not good enough defensively, which is why he got moved from being a centre back. He was also not quite good enough on the ball, which is why he got moved to fullback. Having said that, he was a vital part of a dominant team, but I just think he was the weak link of the first choice team. He was one of the best right backs of the Prem era, but not the best or close to it. I would have taken Finnan over him all day long, for instance. Kelly was better than people give him credit for I think.}

06 May 2017 14:44:18
It's same with me very hard to put united players in but considering they dominated most of the premier league era it's hard to omit most of them. Again with Neville it's hard to put a good assessment on someone in such a dominant team and I couldn't have but Dixon or sagna in lol.

{Ed001's Note - it was so hard to do. I mean you could easily end up with eleven United players, which obviously is a bit pointless.}

06 May 2017 15:11:49
I think the only 2 positions that you would find it extremely difficult to make a case for any united player getting is the two occupied by shearer and bergkamp and there would be other players infront of the best united could offer in my opinion.

{Ed001's Note - you are probably right there.}

06 May 2017 15:22:57
Just thinking on! It's actually difficult not to make a case for lampard because of the insane amount of goals he scored from his possition. Personally there are others I prefer infront of him and one of them is my all time favourite non arsenal player is stevie g. It's very hard to be objective when it comes to football.

{Ed001's Note - there is so many. You should have seen the lists of players in the Prem for each position that I started with. That's why I had to try and decide some criteria to cut it down a bit.}

06 May 2017 15:33:15
And obviously there are players that you just love as well. My dads a Liverpool fan and one of his favourites is Robert pires.

{Ed001's Note - yeah spot on, Bergkamp for me is an example.}

06 May 2017 16:08:37
If we are going on longevity for picking shearer over henry. Surely scholes is in overthe alonso.

Scholes andandhenry henry walk in to my team.

{Ed001's Note - yes but I had so many Man Utd players and I just wanted my favourite player in of the Prem era, so Alonso had to be in.}

06 May 2017 17:59:47
Hi Ed,

Can't argue with any of that and really would only have Henry instead of Shearer but that's probably because I'm a gooner as loved Shearer in an England shirt.

Question though, of all the managers available to you from all those who have managed in the Premier League who would you have as the manager and why?

{Ed001's Note - if I am going on the same criteria, it would have to be Fergie, as he built competitive team after competitive team. Much as it leaves a nasty taste in my mouth, there really is no one who can truly compare in the Premier League era.}

06 May 2017 18:46:26
True eds. i'd have lampard in over bergkamp to. If no scholes give me Roy keane.

06 May 2017 19:58:54
Under the criteria I guess he is the only candidate, being an old git my favourite manager was actually Bob Paisley.

Better than any other.

{Ed001's Note - Paisley is, in my opinion, the best British manager of all time, but he was retired by the time of the Prem. Probably for the best, as he would have hated it. I absolutely loved Paisley. What he did in his short time at Liverpool Fergie took 20 years to accomplish with almost unlimited funds. Even then, he was nowhere near matching the European record of Sir Bob.}

06 May 2017 20:54:57
Who's bob paisley? Lol . Yep the reason that Liverpool is still considered by many as the greatest team overall in the history of British football especially for the European exploits. If those exploits came in the 90,s like uniteds spell if dominance then things would be different. Mind you you could argue the same about arsenal in the 30's. Great manager even though it was before my time I got it rammed down my throat By my old man.

06 May 2017 22:01:59
shearer over henry really? Shearer was only a good finisher, he wasn't technically that great. Forget about henry, van nistelrooy was a better striker than shearer. That is why England never wins anything. Their players are overrated. The only english player i thought was pure class was scholes. Even the so called gerrard and lampard are overrated. How do gerrard and lampard match up to the likes of xavi, iniesta, pirlo, zidane?

06 May 2017 22:38:26
100% ed, he was head and shoulders the best.

{Ed001's Note - agreed Stoner, and he was a genuinely nice guy, so long as you didn't cross him!

punani, you might want to take a better look at Shearer, yes he was a thug of a goalscorer but he was much better than you make him out to be. Clearly you have not got a clue if you think he wasn't very good technically. What made him such a good goalscorer and penalty taker was his technique, it was almost always a clean strike when he hit the ball so it would be on target. He just preferred to use his physicality because he knew defenders were scared of him. He was a nasty bugger off the pitch as well. The reason Liverpool never signed him from Southampton's youth sides is because of the trouble he caused along with Ruddock, who was already at the club. No one wanted those two reunited!}