Obviously a lot of people are angry and frustrated after Tuesday's Champion's League exit, however in my mind this does excuse some of the slightly reactionary responses from a minority of Arsenal fans. The margins between success and failure are very small, a refereeing decision or the width of a post can be the difference between success and failure, between tactical genius and ineptitude. It is tempting to lash out and make a few easy scapegoats for our failure, but that it not something that I choose to do.It seems to be widely acknowledged by fans that we need to strengthen the squad in the summer and that we need more penetration and goals from the wide midfield. However I don't think many would argue that this season hasn't been a significant improvement upon the last couple, with it being the first team that we've sustained a title challenge almost until the very death. The criticism that Emmanuel Adebayor has come in for has been over the top, the man has scored at a rate of over 2 in 3 in the league with many coming away from home. While Emmanuel Eboue has become the convenient scapegoat for all our failings, his performances and end product have been rather poor this season, but a little perspective wouldn't go amiss. Ironically although he brought a tear to some peoples' eyes on Tuesday, he didn't have that bad a game.
It appears that some Arsenal fans see things in ultra black and white, you're either completely happy with this season's results or you must join in with their chorus of discontent, there is no middle ground:
"Can you imagine a real Arsenal fan being happy with this season and no silverware, I have a theory, I don’t think they are real fans, I think they’re spuds pretending to be gooners, or other blogs, I know two of them are, that’s a fact."
I'm not happy that we've won nothing, but on the other hand in the cold light of day I can see than improvements have been made, the team is growing and that with the right additions, next year may have great potential. But one can never guarantee success in football, despite what some may say, even when the jig saw is perfectly assembled it may be wrecked by a run of serious injuries or a few bad pieces of luck.
It appears that some people cannot deal with those who disagree with their opinion and then express this difference politely. Apparently my input was threatening the happiness of this particular blog, strange that, go and have a read yourselves, as I can only see one side dishing out the offensive abuse rather than politely engaging in the Arsenal debate. As the owner of Le Grove says, we don't reside in Stalin's Soviet Union; so why do they then censor comments on their blog when they are neither rude or offensive, but simply expressing an opinion that Le Grove does not agree with? I sense a small amount of inconsistency creeping into their argument, criticism is a one way street for them, they can dish it out but they can't take it themselves:
"Difference of opinion fine, arguing not fine."
Effectively 'arguing' is only defined as arguing by Le Grove when it is something that disagrees with their stance, however it is called a 'difference of opinion' when they argue their line. It's a great shame as I agree with a lot of their stuff, I just cannot see why they feel the need to shut off debate in this way. Apparently it was threatening of me to say that I would reproduce some comments here that I had censored on Le Grove, so here they are, as I have now been banned without any adequate explanation:
"I wouldn't say I've taken the high ground, I just haven't resorted to abusive language as some have, personally I find the abusive language more offensive than remaining polite.
Basically it's fine for those who agree with your opinion to be argumentative as they say what you want to hear, but anyone who disagrees with your opinion cannot even do this politely, I think this is unfair.
Obviously you are perfectly entitled to keep your blog to the people that you want to keep it to, however if you treat different opinion like this, when politely expressed, then you are just going to become a very reactionary group who have closed themselves off from criticism. You see it as your right to criticise Arsene, how can you justify that you should be exempt from politely expressed reasoned criticism?
Jimbo and myself have just been expressing our opinion in a very calm and sensible way, and we've taken a lot of abuse on the chin without reacting to it.
I don't think myself and Jimbo are the problem. Perhaps the problem is a little closer to home.
I am very happy to minimise my future input, but I would appreciate it if you would post this, otherwise it may be reproduced elsewhere."
Basically it's fine for those who agree with your opinion to be argumentative as they say what you want to hear, but anyone who disagrees with your opinion cannot even do this politely, I think this is unfair.
Obviously you are perfectly entitled to keep your blog to the people that you want to keep it to, however if you treat different opinion like this, when politely expressed, then you are just going to become a very reactionary group who have closed themselves off from criticism. You see it as your right to criticise Arsene, how can you justify that you should be exempt from politely expressed reasoned criticism?
Jimbo and myself have just been expressing our opinion in a very calm and sensible way, and we've taken a lot of abuse on the chin without reacting to it.
I don't think myself and Jimbo are the problem. Perhaps the problem is a little closer to home.
I am very happy to minimise my future input, but I would appreciate it if you would post this, otherwise it may be reproduced elsewhere."
If anyone wants to respond of comment on any of the above, then feel free, you won't be censored or barred for choosing to disagree with my opinion. Everyone is entitled to express their opinion, provided that it remains within the limits of decency, and I don't mind being called an argumentative twat occasionally.
