Man Utd vs Arsenal(scores)

NightStrike

I know Arsenal fans defend him, but I think Lehmann is a liability and should be sold soon and replaced with someone better such as Frey who was linked and is a quality keeper.

Hes not the best, I know his record states he is but Arsenal's defence hasn't been as strong as it is now in years imo. Hes got involved in a lot of petty ****e this year such as the Ronaldo thing (wouldn't mind he was only after throwing the ball to Clichy!), Kevin Phillips etc plus hes cost goals like v Chelsea (ok its one out of how many games but its also the most crucial game).

Also for Scholes' goal he looked like he was a drunk swaggering out of the way .

Hes a good keeper but just like Barthez at Utd, not good enough for a club of the size imo

Gangsta

Originally posted by NightStrike
I couldn't see a way back for Arsenal after Scholes scored. Arsenal aren't good losers and it showed in a way today by the way they got a bit thick and started diving a lot. Probably should have had a penalty but I guess that evens the score on last week.

I'm really glad to see that people actually got to see what Fletcher is really like (a really decent player) when he played in his proper central midfield position today.

Utd aren't great losers either. Last week wasn't a peno, it was outside the box:p
One good performance and u think fletcher is good? pah he's crap. It isn't hard to get motivated for a game like that

doozerjack

Jank
it only took him 2 years to win a domestic double while it took fergie the best part of 8 and dont forget the financial gap between the 2 teams.


Right, and while Ferguson took over a team in the relegation zone, Wenger took over a bunch of players who'd already won the league, among other trophies.
They're the top 2 managers around, no question, but Wenger's got a way to go. He's learning from Ferguson, he learnt a big one last year as his new-found humility has shown.
Re financial gap, you're the same guy who'll tell us Ferguson blows his money on crap buys, so I guess its the Youth players he continually develops that has been winning those trophies down the years. And Arsenal have hardly been paupers, Wenger's bought his whole bloody team - he doesnt know how to nurture one!
Still, if you want to compare trophy stats to call it, then wait a couple of years and see if Wenger pulls off the elusive treble, or even back-back titles, nevermind three-in-a-row. He's good, but 2nd best.

He's a better sulk though, I'll give him that, the way he skulked off the pitch and turned into his old self again whining about the injustices of the world against Arsenal. Whatever about the players, there's got to be a question over how / whether Wenger will bounce back from the defeat in time to get through Chelsea, Newc, Lpool. His whiney attitude is bound to rub off the players. I reckon its perfect timing for Chelsea to face them, I think they'll break that run tonight.

The Muppet

Originally posted by doozerjack

Re financial gap, you're the same guy who'll tell us Ferguson blows his money on crap buys, so I guess its the Youth players he continually develops that has been winning those trophies down the years. And Arsenal have hardly been paupers, Wenger's bought his whole bloody team - he doesnt know how to nurture one!

Very Good Point which prompted me to have alook at the cost of Uniteds winning team from last weekend.

Big spending United

Carrol 2.5 million
Gary neville free
Wes brown free
Sylvestre 4 million
OShea free
Ronaldo 5 million (to date figure from United Annual Financial report)
Fletcher free
Keane 3.75 million
Giggs free
Scholes free
Ole 1.5 million

Total= 16.75 Million

Which dispels the myth of big spending United as the complete starting 11 that put an end to arsenals treble hopes on saturday cost less to date than Reyes will eventually cost The Gunners.

NightStrike

Originally posted by Gangsta

One good performance and u think fletcher is good? pah he's crap. It isn't hard to get motivated for a game like that

It wasn't just one good performance. I've seen him a fair bit in central midfield and he has really impressed me. When hes played there for the first team before hes done well like vs Fulham in the FA Cup. Hes not a winger but its a way for Ferguson to bed him in and get him experience, plus hes better in a defensive way than Ronaldo would be on the right. People don't rate him so highly for nothing, and if you were basing it on his performances on the right he'd be 1st division standard.

Pepe LeFrits

Originally posted by The Muppet
Very Good Point which prompted me to have alook at the cost of Uniteds winning team from last weekend.



Which dispels the myth of big spending United as the complete starting 11 that put an end to arsenals treble hopes on saturday cost less to date than Reyes will eventually cost The Gunners.

That's a pretty happy slant to put on it. They stopped the Gunners in the cup, but where is this budget squad in the league?

Their squad which has cost roughly £107m (quite a lot when you consider how many players Utd have from their youth system) is 12 points adrift of an Arsenal squad that cost £74m. Of course United won the title last season with a vaguely similar team, albeit with the £28m bargain Veron

The Muppet

Originally posted by kaids
That's a pretty happy slant to put on it. They stopped the Gunners in the cup, but where is this budget squad in the league?

Ahead of teams that have spent a lot more

Originally posted by kaids
Their squad which has cost roughly £107m (quite a lot when you consider how many players Utd have from their youth system) is 12 points adrift of an Arsenal squad that cost £74m. Of course United won the title last season with a vaguely similar team, albeit with the £28m bargain Veron [/B]

But not a lot when a full strength united is virtually guarenteed to win the League and have a good run in Europe with all the financial benfits involved. Uniteds succ3ess has been built on the clubs youth policy with more than half the first team consisting of players brought throug the clubs youth system. What other successful club can make this claim ? How many or Arsenals last weekend were home grown?

BTw United recouped over 20 million of the money they invested in Veron. Hindsight is a wonderful thing

vorbis

20 million euro recouped for Veron but he cost about 40 million euro. Also why do you say Reyes's eventual price and record Ronaldo at 5 million??
Van Nistelrooy is hardly a budget striker as well. The key thing for me is that Utd have not recouped much of the money spent on transfer fees. Beckham is the only the deal they made significant profit from. The likes of Barthez, Yorke and Veron were all sold on at substantial losses.

The Muppet

Originally posted by vorbis
20 million euro recouped for Veron but he cost about 40 million euro.

Actually its more than 20 m euro when you take into consideration the salary savings over the remainder of his contract.

Originally posted by vorbis
Also why do you say Reyes's eventual price and record Ronaldo at 5 million??

I sad that to support my point and because its factually accurate.

Originally posted by vorbis
Van Nistelrooy is hardly a budget striker as well. The key thing for me is that Utd have not recouped much of the money spent on transfer fees. Beckham is the only the deal they made significant profit from. The likes of Barthez, Yorke and Veron were all sold on at substantial losses. [/B]

Bartez hasn,t been sold, obviously as players get older their value diminishes. IMO United got good value out of both Yorke and Cole and then sold them on when they were no longer at their best , I saw that as good business supported by the fact Blackburn are trying to shift them on again now .

Veron is the only one that united lost substantial money on to date and I remember at the time of his signing everyone saying what a great player he was and how he would make united into an even better team, That didn't happen but as i said hindsight is a wonderful gift.

Anyway nobody can challenge my initial argument that the whole united starting 11 at the weekend cost less than one of Arsenal substitutes. While I agree United will spend big on a player or two they really want the evidence does not supports the opinion that United are a big buying club as expressed.

Pacifico

Originally posted by The Muppet

Anyway nobody can challenge my initial argument that the whole united starting 11 at teh weekend cost less than one of Arsenal subtitutes. While I agree United will spend big on a player or two they really want the evidence does not supports the opinion that United are a big buying club as expressed.

Reyes? 7 million? "to date figure from Arsenal Annual Financial report"

Pepe LeFrits

I tallied up a few premiership team's player costs:

Chelsea: £162m
Man Utd: £107m
Liverpool: £81m
Arsenal: £74m
Newcastle: £45m
Tottenham: £38m
Man City: £30m
Leeds: £26m

Given United's history of incorporating players from their youth system how can you say that they aren't big spenders. Considering they've already got a fair few positions in their squad for free essentially, £107m is a lot of money to spend on a squad. Hell, its a lot of money to spend on a squad regardless of who is already there.

You can go on about home grown players til the cows come home, but Man Utd's title campaign all but collapsed once the Ferdinand ban kicked in. Ferdinand (a defender no less) cost Man Utd £30m, a sum which no other team in the premiership (bar Chel$ki) could afford (or likely would even try and afford).

Draupnir

Only for the 30 million for Ferdinand the cost of United and Arsenals squad is very similar. Good move by Wenger in getting Toure. Bad move by Alex buying Rio for such an outlandish amount.

The Muppet

Originally posted by kaids
I tallied up a few premiership team's player costs:


Arsenal: £74m

Thats an interesting Valuation . Could you give a breakdown on that as I would be particularly Interest in the Value Of Lehman Edu and Toure as I understand their transfer details were undisclosed. In factaccording to my source Arsenal have spent 75 million on players not including 4 players for undisclosed amounts and 7 others involving no fee.



Unfortunately United were not lucky enough to secure the likes of Campbell on a free so If Arsenal had to pay his market value when he walked out on tottenham the figures would be very similar. Which again proves United are no more big spenders than their nearest rivals.



BTW LIverpool = 81 million LOL;)

woosaysdan

BTW LIverpool = 81 million LOL

and they are still crap!!!

elbow316

Lehmann was 1.5 million, Edu was 5.5 while Toure was only half a million!

Jivin Turkey

Originally posted by The Muppet
Unfortunately United were not lucky enough to secure the likes of Campbell on a free so If Arsenal had to pay his market value when he walked out on tottenham the figures would be very similar. Which again proves United are no more big spenders than their nearest rivals. [/B]

Lol, so please tell me how this proves that united are no more big spenders than arsenal? Arsenal payed zero for campbell, whos to say they would have bought him had they had to pay a fee? Apparently because he was worth more it means that he actually cost more.

I also want to put Shelbourne in the same bracket because IF they had bought Ronaldo for 100million they would have spent the same as united.

The Muppet

Originally posted by Jivin Turkey
Lol, so please tell me how this proves that united are no more big spenders than arsenal? Arsenal payed zero for campbell, whos to say they would have bought him had they had to pay a fee? Apparently because he was worth more it means that he actually cost more.

I.ll explain it for you. If arsenal had paid the market Value for campbell they would have spent more on their current squad than united did which proves that the arsenal supporter who said there is a huge financial gap between United and Arsenal is talking out of his orifice.

Thanx 4 The Fish

/\Orifice speaking of the highest order /\

Arsenal spent less than United, as was already said if Campbell had been 30 mill then there is no guarantee that Arsenal would have bought him. If you want to use players who arrived on a free to make your point valid on the one hand surely it also be that the market value of Scholes, Brown, O Shea etc must be factored into the computation as if they had been at a different club and United bought them then they would have spent more than they have :rolleyes:

Jivin Turkey

Originally posted by The Muppet
I.ll explain it for you. If arsenal had paid the market Value for campbell they would have spent more on their current squad than united did which proves that the arsenal supporter who said there is a huge financial gap between United and Arsenal is talking out of his orifice.

But arsenal didnt pay anything for campbell, which Im sure was a huge reason why they bought him. Who is to say they would have paid €30million for him?

If united had paid €100million for Djemba Djemba they would have spent more than Real Madrid, BUT THEY DIDNT. Hence your point proves nothing apart from your own ignorance.

ZENER

But arsenal didnt pay anything for campbell, which Im sure was a huge reason why they bought him.

OK ???

Hence your point proves nothing apart from your own ignorance.

And perhaps your stupidity !!!! The current United squad is built around a core of home grown talent like Scholes - Giggs - O Shae - et al. Even Liverpool has a core of homegrown talent. Arsenal seems to br shoving their home talent out as they buy in more and more french and mid European players. Look at the results of this method, ateam that chokes under pressure !!

Tinky

Jivin Turkey

Originally posted by tinky
OK ???



And perhaps your stupidity !!!! The current United squad is built around a core of home grown talent like Scholes - Giggs - O Shae - et al. Even Liverpool has a core of homegrown talent. Arsenal seems to br shoving their home talent out as they buy in more and more french and mid European players. Look at the results of this method, ateam that chokes under pressure !!

Tinky

Where did I say that uniteds team was not home grown? Or indeed succesful? I pointed out the muppets ignorance because he claimed that Arsenal have spent as much as United, because Sol Campbell was worth more than Arsenal paid for him. So why am I stupid again?

Pepe LeFrits

O'Shea is homegrown? er...

The Muppet

Originally posted by Jivin Turkey
Where did I say that uniteds team was not home grown? Or indeed succesful?

Funny how you get annoyed about someone misquoting your posts and yet you do exactly the same.

Originally posted by Jivin Turkey

I pointed out the muppets ignorance because he claimed that Arsenal have spent as much as United, because Sol Campbell was worth more than Arsenal paid for him. So why am I stupid again?

Where did I make this claim. I was just pointing out that IF Arsenal had paid the market value for Campbell they would have spent as much as United on Their Squad.




Kaids still has not given the breakdown of his valuation for Arsenal.
Were The 3 First team players I named included in his valuation of arsenal at 74 million. His reluctance to answer my question leads me to believe that he was not including the whole arsenal squad in his post. How a about addressing this point Kaids
.

Thanx 4 The Fish

You're back, so how about putting some valuations on the cost of the homegrown players to United and then using some complex series of numbers involving how much they earn and what they are worth, come up with a value for these players. Stick those values in there and see how much United would have had to pay if they paid full market value for them and then it surpasses (by a long way i'd imagine) the amount that Arsenal and possibly even Chelsea have spent.

Now that does not make any sense does it because you cannot say if Arsenal had paid full market value for Campbell they would be up around Uniteds spending as nobody knows whether they would have bought him if he were that expensive. Just as you cannot say that if United paid full market value for Scholes, Beckham, the Nevilles and Giggs etc that they would have spent more. The reason that you cannot do this is because firstly you are assuming a value for Campbel and secondly, you are assuming no value for the homegrown lads and at the end of the day it is all guesswork.

What you can go on is the published values for these lads and since that is all that is available that will have to do and guesses at values of players and how much they would have cost and could have cost etc. are of no value.

The Muppet

Originally posted by Thanx 4 The Fish
You're back, .

Where was I?

Originally posted by Thanx 4 The Fish
Now that does not make any sense does it because you cannot say if Arsenal had paid full market value for Campbell they would be up around Uniteds spending as nobody knows whether they would have bought him if he were that expensive. Just as you cannot say that if United paid full market value for Scholes, Beckham, the Nevilles and Giggs etc that they would have spent more. The reason that you cannot do this is because firstly you are assuming a value for Campbel and secondly, you are assuming no value for the homegrown lads and at the end of the day it is all guesswork..[/B]

True but that is irrelevant to my point that United have not spent that much more than Arsenal on their squad which is the core point to this discussion.

Originally posted by Thanx 4 The Fish
What you can go on is the published values for these lads and since that is all that is available that will have to do and guesses at values of players and how much they would have cost and could have cost etc. are of no value. [/B]

Exactly and it appears that Arsenals valuation of 74 Million as quoted by Kaids does not Include 4 squad players whose Transfer fees were never disclosed. Three of these four players are first team regulars Edu, Lehman,and Toure. I suspect it also only includes what has been paid to date for Reyes and so theres Likely to be another 10 million or so to add on. If we are to compare Money spent on squads its only fair to include all Players at the price paid.

NightStrike

Who cares? What has this got to do with the match and who cares if they cost 5 million, 50 million or 500 million they're still together and they still have to go out and win

Thanx 4 The Fish

True NS and with Henry poss out with a strain and the wind knocked out of Arsenal by Chelsea, I think that Liverpool have a chance to do themselves and chelsea a favour on Friday.

doozerjack

True, didnt think I'd be saying this this decade, but I fancy Liverpool to beat Arsenal on Fri, given the present state of things. They are on a roll, so to speak, and will fancy their chances. Arsenal already had the wind knocked out of them before that Chelsea game, I cant see them bouncing back this week.

doozerjack

By the way NightStrike, that was one astute call yday:

"I know Arsenal fans defend him, but I think Lehmann is a liability"

I think Ambrosio (?) deserves a lot of credit for his performances, considering nobody gave him much credit before the tie.

JippoKelly

Friday's match is tough to call. Either Arsenal will take out their disappointment on Liverpool or they'll crumble and the Pool will sneak a victory. I doubt it will be a draw anyway.

I'm really scared Liverpool are gonna suffer the backlash of Arsenal and get stuffed though.

Pepe LeFrits

Sorry, i thought it elbow answered it for me. My initial valuation was off, bringing it to the £80m mark.

And your point about Campbell is ridiculous, frankly.

NightStrike

By the way NightStrike, that was one astute call yday:

"I know Arsenal fans defend him, but I think Lehmann is a liability"

Its nothing I haven't being saying since Day 1 because I'd seen him play a lot before in Germany. When its mattered hes been a liability. The first goal for Chelsea in the first leg was his fault. He should've either held or put Makelele's shot out for a corner and he was desperate for the Scholes goal on Saturday when he looked like he was after having 25 pints

The Muppet

Originally posted by kaids
Sorry, i thought it elbow answered it for me. My initial valuation was off, bringing it to the £80m mark



And your point about Campbell is ridiculous, frankly.

Ah so you were discounting 3 first team players in your valuation of the squad.
Does elbow have a source for his figures as they seem pretty low for todays market and my understanding is that they were never disclosed.

what I said about campbell was just an observation on the different squadsand is relevant to the discussion.

Who cares? What has this got to do with the match and who cares if they cost 5 million, 50 million or 500 million they're still together and they still have to go out and win

I didn't care until someone said

wenger imo is a better manager. it only took him 2 years to win a domestic double while it took fergie the best part of 8 and dont forget the financial gap between the 2 teams."

which every Unite fans knows is a myth and ignores the work Fergi did with the youth setup at United when he took charge . Work which United have benefited from over the past decade. Now that the myth is dispelled and the figure show there is little difference in spending between both clubs those that backed up the initial claim dont care.:D

NightStrike

wenger imo is a better manager. it only took him 2 years to win a domestic double while it took fergie the best part of 8 and dont forget the financial gap between the 2 teams."

I'm not going to make a judgement on who the better manager is (although Ferguson's record suggests he is) but ferguson inherited a very poor Utd team whereas Wenger inherited a team with a solid back four that just needed a bit of attacking flair. He was three good signings away from a championship imo when he arrived

johnor

I think that is a bit unfair, Wenger has done very well in replacing that back line gradually. He has brought in Campbell, Cole and Lauren; who are all doing well imo, and of course this season toure. I think its defo harder to replace an aging back line like the won Arsene Wenger inherited. Im not saying he is a better manager, I think ferguson is streaks ahead, but wenger has done well in rebuilding the defence that was so solid under Graham except replacing Seaman, Lehmann will loose the rag sooner or later, this is the keeper that got sent off for punching one of his own teammates.

NightStrike

Undoubtedly he has done a good job. But look at the facts. He took over around 1998 yeah? Won the double in 2000 and 2002 (think i'm right on those dates).

Which meant he waited 2 years for success, won something, won nothing for a year, won something and won nothing for a year (in terms of the league I mean).

Now this is a similar transition for Utd and they are still 3 points better off than they were last season and look to have finally kick started their season. Utd will probably win nothing (in terms of the league) this season, but if they then go on to win it the following year they have done the same as Wenger. Won nothing, then won something. So until that happens you can't judge.

Jivin Turkey

Yes but Ferguson has been in charge almost 2 decades. It took him 8 years to win the league, sure Houllier MIGHT even win it if he is given that much time.

The Muppet

QUOTE]Originally posted by Jivin Turkey
Yes but Ferguson has been in charge almost 2 decades. It took him 8 years to win the league, sure Houllier MIGHT even win it if he is given that much time. [/QUOTE]

Ferguson inherited a club where a lot of the players were not good enough , unfit and more interested in going on the tear than playing football. The formenr management had no interest in developing a youth policy and there was not one youth player on their books that was good enought to make it at the highest level. Other clubs were attracting the best young talent by offering better terms and condition . (Giggs was training at Man City wearing a United jersey under his City one)

Ferguson changed all that by getting rid of the drinking culture of the players even thought it cost hime some of his better players. He chaged the training schedule so that united players would be the fittest in the league and developing a youth policy that has been the foundation of the clubs success. Of course this was not achieved overnight and so it took him a while to achieve his goals but the board could see that the groundwork was there for the success that followed and stuck by him and the rest as they say is history.

Houlier and Wenger both inherited teams that had reasonably recently won the league and were not in the same poor state as United. However as has been demonstrated if the board see genuine improvement behind the scenes at liverpool and fell he is not far off his goals maybe they would be right to stand by their manager.

elbow316

Undoubtedly he has done a good job. But look at the facts. He took over around 1998 yeah? Won the double in 2000 and 2002 (think i'm right on those dates).

Took over in 1996, won the double in 1998 and 2002.

Jivin Turkey

Originally posted by The Muppet
QUOTE]Originally posted by Jivin Turkey
Yes but Ferguson has been in charge almost 2 decades. It took him 8 years to win the league, sure Houllier MIGHT even win it if he is given that much time.

Ferguson inherited a club where a lot of the players were not good enough , unfit and more interested in going on the tear than playing football. The formenr management had no interest in developing a youth policy and there was not one youth player on their books that was good enought to make it at the highest level. Other clubs were attracting the best young talent by offering better terms and condition . (Giggs was training at Man City wearing a United jersey under his City one)

Ferguson changed all that by getting rid of the drinking culture of the players even thought it cost hime some of his better players. He chaged the training schedule so that united players would be the fittest in the league and developing a youth policy that has been the foundation of the clubs success. Of course this was not achieved overnight and so it took him a while to achieve his goals but the board could see that the groundwork was there for the success that followed and stuck by him and the rest as they say is history.

Houlier and Wenger both inherited teams that had reasonably recently won the league and were not in the same poor state as United. However as has been demonstrated if the board see genuine improvement behind the scenes at liverpool and fell he is not far off his goals maybe they would be right to stand by their manager. [/QUOTE]

Im not disputing Fergusons abillity, he is a legend, but he had 20 years. He hardly inherited a crap team. Correct me if Im wrong Robson, Whiteside, Moran, McGrath, were hardly crap players. Yes they liked a drink but still, you could make similar comparisons to Houillier, but every united fan isnt exactly slow to point out how crap he is.

The youth system he helped to build is second to none, but it was somewhat down to luck as well, how often do a group of players like Scholes, Beckham, Butt, and the Nevilles come along at once? Who has come through the ranks since? Fletcher, Brown and O'Shea? Not nearly in the same bracket as the names previously mentioned.

If Wenger were to stay at Arsenal for as long as Ferguson he would win as much as Fergie did.

NightStrike

Utd won Youth Cup last season so I'd expect 1 or 2 more to come through in a year or 2

Jivin Turkey

You would expect at least 1 or 2 to break into the first team of any club with a successful youth policy.

NightStrike

Originally posted by Jivin Turkey
You would expect at least 1 or 2 to break into the first team of any club with a successful youth policy.

True, but I don't consider that a fact in terms of the top clubs. Ashley Cole is only one in Arsenal first 11 that came through their youth system.

Terry in Chelseas

jank

Houlier and Wenger both inherited teams that had reasonably recently won the league and were not in the same poor state as United. However as has been demonstrated if the board see genuine improvement behind the scenes at liverpool and fell he is not far off his goals maybe they would be right to stand by their manager

liverpool last won the league in 1990 when did GH take over??

arsenal before wenger 1991 wenger took over 1996 so a five year gap aint recent by any means
true they had a great back four, ageing but great how many of them are there now?keown is retireing this summer i think and so far arse nal have the best defence is the prem

NightStrike

Yeah they had a five year gap, not that long when you consider Utds 23 year gap, or Chelseas 40/50 year gap.

That defence allowed him to stabilise the rest of the team while he worked on the other part of the team, the attack. People mention the players Fergie had at his disposal such as Robson, Whiteside, Moran, McGrath but Robson is the only one who stuck around after he came. Whiteside had injury problems fair enough but they were gone pretty much from day one.

Credit still has to go to Wenger for what he has achieved with them but anyone who thinks it was easy for Ferguson is very much mistaken