Crystal Palace vs. Arsenal match thread

Both teams not at full strength on account of impending Cup Finals accordingly the match was a non-event.
Jolly well done to Rio Cardines.
A real concern for me is Adam Wharton who looked in discomfort, was substituted and headed straight for the dressing room which is never a positive sign.
Brennan Johnson was spared the ignominy of being introduced from the bench and facing the derision of the Arsenal supporters !
 
PatrickA said:
Surely one of the great mysteries along with who shot Kennedy.
How have Arsenal achieved this with their rough house tactics and persistent fouling and cheating?

View attachment 3488
Click to expand...
A few people have asked this today. I think it's to do with the nature of modern football. Arteta didn't invent shithouse football, but he is the industry leader in deploying it to exploit the blindspots and skewed priorities of modern refereeing, including VAR.

Hence, he will permit very little in the way of forceful tackling but encourage systematic niggling, trips, and clips, especially to stymy counter attacks (see Lewis Skelley today).

He recognises that VAR is desperate to give free kicks and penalties for any little thing it can find, but is never bothered about play acting and gross exaggeration of tiny contacts. Hence his team generally stand their ground when defending set plays but try all sorts when attacking them. Throwing yourself at the floor is encouraged (see the penalty they did get and the other one they wanted away to Ath Madrid). Holding your face and rolling around is encouraged, because you have something to gain and very little to lose.

He recognises that refs never clamp down on the conduct of big club managers and so does all he can to exert pressure by jumping around screaming like a c*** for every decision.

Arsenal get away with what they've identified they can get away with. Not much new there, but they and their manager have taken a cold reliance on data and analysis and a generally logical, unromantic approach and made it their religion. It has not only led them to sell a goalie who was doing very well and replace him with one that seemed no better at all at first, or to introduce taller players and to focus more on set plays than flowing football, but also to hone their cheating and shittiness down to a fine art in a way few have managed before. They are poor champions in lots of ways, but in other ways they are fitting ones in that they embody the era they are playing in. They are a direct response to modern football.

The irony is that none of this is necessary to win. I've no time for Man City, funded by highly dubious sportwashing money that they all just overlook, rule breaking, tedious football. But at least they play the game properly. And they do ok.
 
Last edited:
TheBigToePunt said:
A few people have asked this today. I think it's to do with the nature of modern football. Arteta didn't invent shithouse football, but he is the industry leader in deploying it to exploit the blindspots and skewed priorities of modern refereeing, including VAR.

Hence, he will permit very little in the way of forceful tackling but encourage systematic niggling, trips, and clips, especially to stymy counter attacks (see Lewis Skelley today).

He recognises that VAR is desperate to give free kicks and penalties for any little thing it can find, but is never bothered about play acting and gross exaggeration of tiny contacts. Hence his team generally stand their ground when defending set plays but try all sorts when attacking them. Throwing yourself at the floor is encouraged (see the penalty they did get and the other one they wanted away to Ath Madrid). Holding your face and rolling around is encouraged, because you have something to gain and very little to lose.

He recognises that refs never clamp down on the conduct of big club managers and so does all he can to exert pressure by jumping around screaming like a c*** for every decision.

Arsenal get away with what they've identified they can get away with. Not much new there, but they and their manager have taken a cold reliance on data and analysis and a generally logical, unromantic approach and made it their religion. It has not only led them to sell a goalie who was doing very well and replace him with one that seemed no better at all at first, or to introduce taller players and to focus more on set plays than flowing football, but also to hone their cheating and shittiness down to a fine art in a way few have managed before. They are poor champions in lots of ways, but in other ways they are fitting ones in that they embody the era they are playing in. They are a direct response to modern football.

The irony is that none of this is necessary to win. I've no time for Man City, funded by highly dubious sportwashing money that they all just overlook, rule breaking, tedious football. But at least they play the game properly. And they do ok.
Click to expand...
Good summary, and I agree with the conclusion that Arsenal don’t need to play this way to win.
Arteta would probably disagree and point to his early spell at the club when most of the play was directed through Saka and Odegard and they looked to cut through teams in open play. They played good football, but you could get at them and they would lose games that on paper they should not be losing.
Hence the win at all costs approach which now infects their game.

Probably only Willo and I am old enough to remember the Leeds team of the 1970s which took a similar approach to winning games.
They too pushed boundaries on set pieces with Jack Charlton stationed on corners to obstruct the opposing keepers and would employ rotational fouling, provocation and intimidation in games.
They had very good players, but that team was never loved because their success was tainted by their antics.
I wonder if Arsenal will share a similar fate.
Gabriel would have been very at home in the Leeds team of the 1970s.
 
PatrickA said:
Good summary, and I agree with the conclusion that Arsenal don’t need to play this way to win.
Arteta would probably disagree and point to his early spell at the club when most of the play was directed through Saka and Odegard and they looked to cut through teams in open play. They played good football, but you could get at them and they would lose games that on paper they should not be losing.
Hence the win at all costs approach which now infects their game.

Probably only Willo and I am old enough to remember the Leeds team of the 1970s which took a similar approach to winning games.
They too pushed boundaries on set pieces with Jack Charlton stationed on corners to obstruct the opposing keepers and would employ rotational fouling, provocation and intimidation in games.
They had very good players, but that team was never loved because their success was tainted by their antics.
I wonder if Arsenal will share a similar fate.
Gabriel would have been very at home in the Leeds team of the 1970s.
Click to expand...
You would be surprised how many of us are old gits 🤣 difference between that team and arse , leeds was all thugs , nothing girlie in there pushing and shoving it was elbows punchs racking of the ankles and so on , big difference was plays then didn't go down like they have been shot , not like today's players if you look at them in a funny way they fall over
 
mtp1958 said:
You would be surprised how many of us are old gits 🤣 difference between that team and arse , leeds was all thugs , nothing girlie in there pushing and shoving it was elbows punchs racking of the ankles and so on , big difference was plays then didn't go down like they have been shot , not like today's players if you look at them in a funny way they fall over
Click to expand...
And not an Alice band or ‘Man bun’ in sight then either ! Bremner would’ve pulled their heads off not their pony tails 🤪😂
 
A dead rubber if ever there was one.

More about not getting injured for the key players than football, pretty much as most of us expected. Personally I wouldn't have had Sarr anywhere near that game. Not sure what happened to Wharton certainly hope its nothing.

Piss poor defending though they repeatedly got through our lines.

Arsenal? doing what they do best, managing the referee rather than playing Palace, same approach as Liverpool, rolling around when touched etc. The refs need to wise up to this, possibly a better use for VAR.

The main plus part of that for me was Cardines performance, looks like a promising wing back even beat a couple of players.
 
PatrickA said:
Good summary, and I agree with the conclusion that Arsenal don’t need to play this way to win.
Arteta would probably disagree and point to his early spell at the club when most of the play was directed through Saka and Odegard and they looked to cut through teams in open play. They played good football, but you could get at them and they would lose games that on paper they should not be losing.
Hence the win at all costs approach which now infects their game.

Probably only Willo and I am old enough to remember the Leeds team of the 1970s which took a similar approach to winning games.
They too pushed boundaries on set pieces with Jack Charlton stationed on corners to obstruct the opposing keepers and would employ rotational fouling, provocation and intimidation in games.
They had very good players, but that team was never loved because their success was tainted by their antics.
I wonder if Arsenal will share a similar fate.
Gabriel would have been very at home in the Leeds team of the 1970s.
Click to expand...
Pretty much every poster on here remembers Dirty Leeds!
 
TheBigToePunt said:
A few people have asked this today. I think it's to do with the nature of modern football. Arteta didn't invent shithouse football, but he is the industry leader in deploying it to exploit the blindspots and skewed priorities of modern refereeing, including VAR.

Hence, he will permit very little in the way of forceful tackling but encourage systematic niggling, trips, and clips, especially to stymy counter attacks (see Lewis Skelley today).

He recognises that VAR is desperate to give free kicks and penalties for any little thing it can find, but is never bothered about play acting and gross exaggeration of tiny contacts. Hence his team generally stand their ground when defending set plays but try all sorts when attacking them. Throwing yourself at the floor is encouraged (see the penalty they did get and the other one they wanted away to Ath Madrid). Holding your face and rolling around is encouraged, because you have something to gain and very little to lose.

He recognises that refs never clamp down on the conduct of big club managers and so does all he can to exert pressure by jumping around screaming like a c*** for every decision.

Arsenal get away with what they've identified they can get away with. Not much new there, but they and their manager have taken a cold reliance on data and analysis and a generally logical, unromantic approach and made it their religion. It has not only led them to sell a goalie who was doing very well and replace him with one that seemed no better at all at first, or to introduce taller players and to focus more on set plays than flowing football, but also to hone their cheating and shittiness down to a fine art in a way few have managed before. They are poor champions in lots of ways, but in other ways they are fitting ones in that they embody the era they are playing in. They are a direct response to modern football.

The irony is that none of this is necessary to win. I've no time for Man City, funded by highly dubious sportwashing money that they all just overlook, rule breaking, tedious football. But at least they play the game properly. And they do ok.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with much of this but it misses out an important point. Arsenal are also really good. They didn't slice through a good palace defence repeatedly by play acting and niggly fouls. And we barely laid a glove on them till the end when their attention waned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top