Tweet
Is there a strange metamorphosis taking place at the top of English football? Have Manchester United, despite bursting to the front of the Premier League pack with their accustomed post-Christmas momentum, and looking a good bet to claim their third straight title, somehow morphed into George Graham's Arsenal, the team that, in the early 1990s, made a virtue of minimalist football based on an impregnable defence and encapsulated in the refrain, 'One-nil to the Arsenal'?
That team was ritually panned by media, pundits and most opposition fans for the supposed pragmatism and functionality of its football, spawning the epithet 'Boring, boring Arsenal' - which although adopted with sarcastic relish by Gooners as a defiant badge of pride, was hardly conceived as a compliment.
Given Manchester United's heritage of full-blooded attacking football, it may seem perverse even to pose the question of whether the Red Devils are becoming boring. Indeed, love them or loathe them, United have been standard-bearers of a brand of footballing panache under Sir Alex Ferguson that only (ironically) Arsene Wenger's Gunners have been able to match. Despite the adversarial nature of their rivalry over the last dozen seasons, both Ferguson and Wenger have consistently championed flair. For United in particular, the mantra has been: if you score three, we'll beat you by scoring four.
In fact 4-3 to United was the score back on November 1 when, remarkably, unfazed Hull City nearly achieved a mighty upset. Apart from that aberration, though, scoring three against United in the League this season has become football's equivalent of scaling Everest in a pair of trainers: on the outer limits of probability. Conversely, United appear - at least on paper - to have reined in their attacking ambitions, content to do just enough to win. Accordingly, their current record-breaking sequence of 13 consecutive Premier League clean-sheets has featured no fewer than eight 1-0 victories. So has Fergie become George Graham's heir, and are United becoming boring?
Like most stereotypes, the perception that Graham's Arsenal were boring was somewhat unjustified - especially in the early part of his reign. True, he built his team on the platform of an outstanding defence in which Lee Dixon, Tony Adams, Steve Bould and Nigel Winterburn were exceptional in front of David Seaman. But the team that won the old First Division title in 1988-89 and 1990-91 boasted flair players like Paul Merson, David Rocastle and Anders Limpar. In the latter of those two title triumphs, Arsenal lost just once, and conceded a measly 18 goals. Seaman kept 24 clean sheets, yet only five games ended with the iconic 1-0 scoreline. But in the last two-and-a-half years of Graham's tenure, there was reason enough to label the Gunners boring. They had become one-dimensional, relying over-much on the exceptional predatory instincts of striker Ian Wright and largely by-passing a midfield of limited artisans woefully short on creativity.
Even their harshest critics would not recognise that as a description of the current Manchester United side. Yes, they have produced some stilted performances this season en route to the summit; but mostly their games have been compelling spectacles.
It is not so much United's attacking philosophy that has changed, as the context of the Premier League, whose margins for error are now extremely tight. The first season in which Roman Abramovich owned Chelsea, his Blues finished runners-up under Claudio Ranieri with a points total that would have been enough to win the title in three earlier Premier League campaigns. But they trailed behind Arsenal, who didn't lose a single match. The next season, Jose Mourinho steered the Blues to the title with only one defeat. Since then, the title winners have suffered no more than five defeats, with the fear of losing heaping pressure - and caution - onto the top teams. Several of the Chelsea v Liverpool clashes in recent seasons, particularly when Rafa Benitez was up against Mourinho, were often unbearably tense, but dull from a pure footballing perspective.
At the same time, the bulk of the Premier League outside the 'Big Four' (or Five) are learning how to frustrate the habitual Champions League representatives. Parking the bus, to borrow one of Mourinho's phrases, is becoming an art-form among some of the Premier League's mid- to lower-table denizens. Managers of such teams are devising ways to thwart, or at least restrict, their more illustrious opponents. They may be inferior technically, so they play to their strengths and try to suffocate space by working harder off the ball, particularly when entering the lions' den away from home.
A look at results for the top clubs this season tends to confirm this: Liverpool may only have lost once so far, but they have been held to nine draws, including five at Anfield. Chelsea (four defeats) have drawn seven, including five at Stamford Bridge. Aston Villa have won five and drawn six at Villa Park. Arsenal (five defeats) have been held to eight draws, three at the Emirates. Moreover, each of those four teams have scored more goals on their travels than at home. Bucking the trend are United, who remain more prolific at Old Trafford. But where others are being held to draws, United are nicking narrow victories. They have evolved a near-watertight defence this season, though they are not playing defensive football. They are still going forward instinctively, seeking goals; but they are meeting sterner resistance. Every so often, they break through with a vengeance - 5-0 v Stoke City and West Bromwich Albion; 3-0 v Fulham and Chelsea. On other occasions, they must rely more on perseverance, and eventually get their reward: hence the rash of 1-0 victories.
It could be argued that the Premier League as a whole is becoming tighter, and possibly more negative; but United's rise back to the top since Christmas has reflected determination and a very strong squad, rather than a new caution. Ferguson has the sort of bench that can change games, and has the experience to utilise it effectively. Is it boring? 76,000 at Old Trafford every home game suggests that it isn't.
Graham Lister, Goal.com
http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slu...goal&type=lgns
That team was ritually panned by media, pundits and most opposition fans for the supposed pragmatism and functionality of its football, spawning the epithet 'Boring, boring Arsenal' - which although adopted with sarcastic relish by Gooners as a defiant badge of pride, was hardly conceived as a compliment.
Given Manchester United's heritage of full-blooded attacking football, it may seem perverse even to pose the question of whether the Red Devils are becoming boring. Indeed, love them or loathe them, United have been standard-bearers of a brand of footballing panache under Sir Alex Ferguson that only (ironically) Arsene Wenger's Gunners have been able to match. Despite the adversarial nature of their rivalry over the last dozen seasons, both Ferguson and Wenger have consistently championed flair. For United in particular, the mantra has been: if you score three, we'll beat you by scoring four.
In fact 4-3 to United was the score back on November 1 when, remarkably, unfazed Hull City nearly achieved a mighty upset. Apart from that aberration, though, scoring three against United in the League this season has become football's equivalent of scaling Everest in a pair of trainers: on the outer limits of probability. Conversely, United appear - at least on paper - to have reined in their attacking ambitions, content to do just enough to win. Accordingly, their current record-breaking sequence of 13 consecutive Premier League clean-sheets has featured no fewer than eight 1-0 victories. So has Fergie become George Graham's heir, and are United becoming boring?
Like most stereotypes, the perception that Graham's Arsenal were boring was somewhat unjustified - especially in the early part of his reign. True, he built his team on the platform of an outstanding defence in which Lee Dixon, Tony Adams, Steve Bould and Nigel Winterburn were exceptional in front of David Seaman. But the team that won the old First Division title in 1988-89 and 1990-91 boasted flair players like Paul Merson, David Rocastle and Anders Limpar. In the latter of those two title triumphs, Arsenal lost just once, and conceded a measly 18 goals. Seaman kept 24 clean sheets, yet only five games ended with the iconic 1-0 scoreline. But in the last two-and-a-half years of Graham's tenure, there was reason enough to label the Gunners boring. They had become one-dimensional, relying over-much on the exceptional predatory instincts of striker Ian Wright and largely by-passing a midfield of limited artisans woefully short on creativity.
Even their harshest critics would not recognise that as a description of the current Manchester United side. Yes, they have produced some stilted performances this season en route to the summit; but mostly their games have been compelling spectacles.
It is not so much United's attacking philosophy that has changed, as the context of the Premier League, whose margins for error are now extremely tight. The first season in which Roman Abramovich owned Chelsea, his Blues finished runners-up under Claudio Ranieri with a points total that would have been enough to win the title in three earlier Premier League campaigns. But they trailed behind Arsenal, who didn't lose a single match. The next season, Jose Mourinho steered the Blues to the title with only one defeat. Since then, the title winners have suffered no more than five defeats, with the fear of losing heaping pressure - and caution - onto the top teams. Several of the Chelsea v Liverpool clashes in recent seasons, particularly when Rafa Benitez was up against Mourinho, were often unbearably tense, but dull from a pure footballing perspective.
At the same time, the bulk of the Premier League outside the 'Big Four' (or Five) are learning how to frustrate the habitual Champions League representatives. Parking the bus, to borrow one of Mourinho's phrases, is becoming an art-form among some of the Premier League's mid- to lower-table denizens. Managers of such teams are devising ways to thwart, or at least restrict, their more illustrious opponents. They may be inferior technically, so they play to their strengths and try to suffocate space by working harder off the ball, particularly when entering the lions' den away from home.
A look at results for the top clubs this season tends to confirm this: Liverpool may only have lost once so far, but they have been held to nine draws, including five at Anfield. Chelsea (four defeats) have drawn seven, including five at Stamford Bridge. Aston Villa have won five and drawn six at Villa Park. Arsenal (five defeats) have been held to eight draws, three at the Emirates. Moreover, each of those four teams have scored more goals on their travels than at home. Bucking the trend are United, who remain more prolific at Old Trafford. But where others are being held to draws, United are nicking narrow victories. They have evolved a near-watertight defence this season, though they are not playing defensive football. They are still going forward instinctively, seeking goals; but they are meeting sterner resistance. Every so often, they break through with a vengeance - 5-0 v Stoke City and West Bromwich Albion; 3-0 v Fulham and Chelsea. On other occasions, they must rely more on perseverance, and eventually get their reward: hence the rash of 1-0 victories.
It could be argued that the Premier League as a whole is becoming tighter, and possibly more negative; but United's rise back to the top since Christmas has reflected determination and a very strong squad, rather than a new caution. Ferguson has the sort of bench that can change games, and has the experience to utilise it effectively. Is it boring? 76,000 at Old Trafford every home game suggests that it isn't.
Graham Lister, Goal.com
http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slu...goal&type=lgns
...what a hell it would be if this set of GUNNERS wins the Champions League this year? 
Paul Marin -19 is one thing, 20 is a whole other matter. It gets even worse if they win the UCL. *groan*. 
05/18/2011.MU fans naah cough, but all a unuh a vomit?-Lazie 1/11/2015
Comment