Love your blog — found it through Yogi, who proved once again why he is smarter than the average blogger.

You are so right about Chelsea and City. However, you do not go far enough. Equally important, it seems to me, are having a good manager, and having one with continuity. Look at Chelsea — this team hasn’t won either of the main competitions since Jose left, and how many managers have they had? Murinho, Hiddink and Capello at Real show that without the right manager, a blank-check approach simply does not work. Hughes showed his limits, too. And now, Roman may be thinking that his second manager was the second-best manager he’s had, and he shouldn’t have thrown him out. Big player egos — and a team full of superstars has that — require a special manager: not just anyone can do it.

The flip side is the idea that Wenger doesn’t buy — Look at the current squad — TV, Nasri, Sagna, Rosicky, Eduardo, Arshavin, Gallas — without the players acquired as teenagers who are growing up with the squad, this is not a shabby list of top acquisitions, and not one many managers could match.

I think part of the problem with pundits today is the 24×7 instant analysis requirement of the internet age. Even were they inclined to do so, when would they have a chance to reflect on matters, rather than just repeat the first — often erroneous — thing that popped into their heads.

However, you should not be surprised at the pundits, especially the ex-players. Many of them were instinctive players, especially those who were great. They did it, without thinking. And that frames their entire approach to the game, as well as their mistrust of managers who do think, or use statistics to elicit meaningful distinctions between players, etc.

Thank you for your fine work.

Step forward Phil Brown. Other recently unemployed managers include that old footballing maestro, Fat Sam.

You couldn’t make it up.

Even if they are sent for trainning they are probably too thick-skulled to learn anything.

The concept of intelligence amongst ex-players is a misnomer in the general sense. I think this is best summed up by looking at Graham Le Saux. Ostracised in the dressing room because he preferred to read a braodsheet newspaper rather than a tabloid and subsequently labelled as gay by his fellow ‘professionals’ for doing so.

So being an intelligent footballer is a bit of a drawback really………………..unless, of course, you want to be a tv expert!

We should also distinguish between 2 different kinds of corruptive influences in football. There’s the likes of Real Madrid & Manchester United, who are big clubs in their own right, who retain at the top by “spending big”. But then there are the likes of Real Betis, Chelsea or Man City who try to buy status and success.

I think the 2nd phenomenon is the more dangerous one, because they threaten to shake the natural order of things, and require many clubs to “spend big” so as not to be overtaken.

Real Madrid can spend £220M on players, but it doesn’t pressure Real Oviedo. If Valladolid did the same, many clubs would react.

The problem is that football is already out of touch with economic fundamentals. Transfer prices are too high. Wages of some players make no sense.

The danger is inflationary pressures in an already inflated market.

Arsenal’s success provides a strong counterpoint to the likes of Chelsea; but then then likes of Wolfsburg in Chelsea, Sevilla in Spain, Valencia in Spain, FC Twente in Holland, have recently won titles without breaking the bank.

For some reason the football media prefers to pretend it can’t be done, or it’s a delusion to think you can do it.

In that respect, if Arsenal do win league or European Cup, it will be a high-profile rebuttal to the nonsense that you can only buy success, or the short-termism is the only logic of football.

Two instances stick in my mind
1. Martin O’neill losing his rag when the reporter paraphrased what Arsene Wenger said. That gave a field day to lazy hacks who repeated that diatribe everywhere.
2. Tony Pulis being told that Arsene Wenger has condemned that tackle. He lost his rag then and is still moaning about it. Funnily enough, Pulis himself had admitted that it was a bad tackle a minute before that.

Arsenal are not whitest of white, but they are such a stark contrast to everybody else. Their footballing and business philosophy brings out the ugliness of British football to the fore and I think that makes some people very uncomfortable.

The likes of Cascarino, Collymore and even Hansen get exposed as good for nothing cloggers. Hence, their gritted teeth reaction to every good we do and instant condemnation over lapses however small.

Thank you for the compliment and I’m glad that you enjoy the content on Stone Cold Arsenal. We will always strive to bring you something special and unique.
Don’t forget to spread the word.

Electrolex.

I beg to differ. I think what you suggest is a symptom of the problem where trophies are seen as the only measure of success. On the contrary, the teams that have spend ridiculous money in transfer fees and wages – money that they don’t have and they haven’t justified the investment because clearly, winning the few trophies they’ve done is not good value for money.

If there’s one thing that is a rarity these days is the patience to work at things. People want success here and now, and they want it faster than you can churn out a fast food combo meal at a KFC drive through.

What Arsenal has achieved in the last 5 years if you take into acount the constraints we’ve had to operate within is nothing short of remarkable, and to suggest that all of this hasn’t been successful is just short sighted.

Matt – I blame the 24 hour ‘give me news now’ culture, where an editor or producers worst nightmare is filling the columns and air waves.

Inevitably, we’re bound to get faecal matter served up as headline and breaking news.