Carabao Cup 2026: Semi-Finals

Funny how I no longer envy how other teams attack or their options in attack.

Our front four don’t do any of that endless possession crap. Each one of them gets the ball and looks forward, take speculative shots and take the ball into dangerous areas.
 
LordSpud said:
Are Arsenal actually dark horses for a quadruple? Worrying what they've become
Click to expand...
I think they've a chance. 50% of winning the Carabao Cup. 90% chance of the league. They've a big squad. Be a strain on the squad to win the FA Cup and Champions League. They might be the only team in Europe with a top defense which could take them a long way. I'd say they'll win 2 or 3.
 
Liverpool put in a better effort against Villa a few years ago and they were on a bloody plane at the time.
 
LordSpud said:
Are Arsenal actually dark horses for a quadruple? Worrying what they've become
Click to expand...
Not playing like that.

Not every team in Europe will have such a shit attack, a BTec coach and can’t count… because the only way to make sense of Chelseas lack of attacking intent (especially at the end) is they thought 2 was more than 3.
 
LordSpud said:
Are Arsenal actually dark horses for a quadruple? Worrying what they've become
Click to expand...
Its crazy. I think they'll do it while being one of the weaker Pl champions (better than Leicester 2016 and us in 2013)
 
ron86 said:
Its crazy. I think they'll do it while being one of the weaker Pl champions (better than Leicester 2016 and us in 2013)
Click to expand...

How do you define what a weak Premier League champion is?
 
GoonerBear said:
How do you define what a weak Premier League champion is?
Click to expand...
I agree with him, probably the weakest 3 champions I can remember. They all had weak competition and still didn't play great.
 
Robertd0803 said:
That was an utterly bizarre approach by Chelsea. Someone should have told them they were the ones chasing a goal.
Click to expand...
I have no idea why people are mad at Arsenal for playing the way they did tonight. The onus was on Chelsea to score, not Arsenal and the former wasted an entire first half with little intent to score a goal. You're trying to reach a final while being one goal down, at some point you have to take risks to score a goal. Arsenal on the other hand, were more than happy just slowing the game down and inviting Chelsea's players to make a decision. They didn't need to score unless Chelsea did...why bother?
 
Hammondo said:
I agree with him, probably the weakest 3 champions I can remember. They all had weak competition and still didn't play great.
Click to expand...

What about teams that won the league without breaking 80 points? Were they weak or strong? How do you judge their competition?
 
That was terrible but Arsenal are one of the most impressive defensive units I have seen in a while. I do wonder sometimes if that is because of how poor striking quality is nowadays though.
 
ron86 said:
Its crazy. I think they'll do it while being one of the weaker Pl champions (better than Leicester 2016 and us in 2013)
Click to expand...
Us in 2011 was worse than 2013 in my opinion. At least we had a world class striker in 2013. Rooney was off the boil for most of the 10/11 season.

Arsenal will definitely be in the top 5 worst champions in my memory.
 
GoonerBear said:
What about teams that won the league without breaking 80 points? Were they weak or strong?l, how do you judge their competition?
Click to expand...
A stark comparison that springs to mind is our treble winning season. We finished on 79 points in 98/99, but we also had an incredibly difficult Champions League and FA Cup run, which explains why we dropped some points in the league. Playing Barca and Bayern Munich home and away in a 4 team Champions League group stage is a lot tougher than Kairat and Club Brugge in this current group stage format.
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
I have no idea why people are mad at Arsenal for playing the way they did tonight. The onus was on Chelsea to score, not Arsenal and the former wasted an entire first half with little intent to score a goal. You're trying to reach a final while being one goal down, at some point you have to take risks to score a goal. Arsenal on the other hand, were more than happy just slowing the game down and inviting Chelsea's players to make a decision. They didn't need to score unless Chelsea did...why bother?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Cant fault Arsenal at all. They basically had a 45 minute training session in the first half.
 
GoonerBear said:
What about teams that won the league without breaking 80 points? Were they weak or strong? How do you judge their competition?
Click to expand...
I don't thikn its about points, its about when the league in general is weak that season, and they still dont stand out well.
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
I have no idea why people are mad at Arsenal for playing the way they did tonight. The onus was on Chelsea to score, not Arsenal and the former wasted an entire first half with little intent to score a goal. You're trying to reach a final while being one goal down, at some point you have to take risks to score a goal. Arsenal on the other hand, were more than happy just slowing the game down and inviting Chelsea's players to make a decision. They didn't need to score unless Chelsea did...why bother?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's just about today though. People are harsh on Arsenal because they are still projecting on them the level Pep's City and Klopp's Liverpool were at. It's very recent in the memory just how good those two teams were. They dominated and created chances against everyone, including the best in Europe. This Arsenal side so far at least, is clearly not on that level.

Having said that, I think that's really a harsh judgment as I think people forget that the two aforementioned teams were heads and shoulders above many other champions. People forget that some of the Chelsea sides or United sides that won it were also similar to Arsenal's, as in solid, tough to beat and organised while having the ability to find a winning goal or contribution through a Van Persie, Hazard or Salah like last year. This Arsenal side are not on the level of the best Pep's teams or our 2 CL winning teams or maybe even their own invincibles but I'd say they should be comfortably the tier below that.
 
Il Prete Rosso said:
I have no idea why people are mad at Arsenal for playing the way they did tonight. The onus was on Chelsea to score, not Arsenal and the former wasted an entire first half with little intent to score a goal. You're trying to reach a final while being one goal down, at some point you have to take risks to score a goal. Arsenal on the other hand, were more than happy just slowing the game down and inviting Chelsea's players to make a decision. They didn't need to score unless Chelsea did...why bother?
Click to expand...

Because like most 75% of footballing opinions, it is not based on actually watching a team and using their own thoughts and logic. It's regurgitated from the loudest voices on social media.

Are we boring to the neutral? Maybe, but it's very silly to suggest we should change because some people on a forum are bored. Ange's Tottenham were anything but boring but I don't want us to play like that. Wenger's Arsenal would have played wonderful free flowing football tonight and probably lost 4-1. We're through to the final so Arsenal fans are happy, why should we care if 'the neutrals' are bored?

As the poster above said we're not as good as the 100 point City and Liverpool teams. So we have to play to our strengths and we do that well for the most part.
 
findBenji said:
Because like most 75% of footballing opinions, it is not based on actually watching a team and using their own thoughts and logic. It's regurgitated from the loudest voices on social media.

Are we boring to the neutral? Maybe, but it's very silly to suggest we should change because some people on a forum are bored. Ange's Tottenham were anything but boring but I don't want us to play like that. Wenger's Arsenal would have played wonderful free flowing football tonight and probably lost 4-1. We're through to the final so Arsenal fans are happy, why should we care if 'the neutrals' are bored?

As the poster above said we're not as good as the 100 point City and Liverpool teams. So we have to play to our strengths and we do that well for the most part.
Click to expand...
You definitely shouldn't. All that matters is you win. It will only be a problem if you stop winning games.

Neutrals are going to complain and you just have to ignore them.
 
GoonerBear said:
How do you define what a weak Premier League champion is?
Click to expand...
Its obviously all subjective however I just rate a lot of winners higher. I also think your style of play and manager doesn't help how you're judged. But let's be fair, none of that really matters honestly your names on the trophy
 
Gabriel Djemba-Bebe said:
Us in 2011 was worse than 2013 in my opinion. At least we had a world class striker in 2013. Rooney was off the boil for most of the 10/11 season.

Arsenal will definitely be in the top 5 worst champions in my memory.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree with that tbf
 
Hammondo said:
I don't thikn its about points, its about when the league in general is weak that season, and they still dont stand out well.
Click to expand...

But I'm trying to figure out how to judge when a league is weak. If it's not points total, is it when there's no real challenger, is it gap to challengers, is it how they challengers are performing outwith the competition?

For example, I could put an argument that Arsenal were Champions League semi finalists last season, are 8 from 8 this season so far, and that 5 Premier League teams finished in the top 8 of the league stage, with the 6th team finishing 12th.

Also that the new World Champions who beat the Champions League winners to win that trophy are currently only 5th, that the Europa League finalists were both from England and finished 17th and 15th in the league and are currently 14th and 4th.
 
GoonerBear said:
But I'm trying to figure out how to judge when a league is weak. If it's not points total, is it when there's no real challenger, is it gap to challengers, is it how they challengers are performing outwith the competition?

For example, I could put an argument that Arsenal were Champions League semi finalists last season, are 8 from 8 this season so far, and that 5 Premier League teams finished in the top 8 of the league stage, with the 6th team finishing 12th.

Also that the new World Champions who beat the Champions League winners to win that trophy are currently only 5th, that the Europa League finalists were both from England and finished 17th and 15th in the league and are currently 14th and 4th.
Click to expand...
They would be good arguments, I think generally world football is in a slump. La liga are pretty poor at the moment, Italy are pretty poor, Germany have Bayern but I'm not sure how good they actually are.
 
GoonerBear said:
But I'm trying to figure out how to judge when a league is weak. If it's not points total, is it when there's no real challenger, is it gap to challengers, is it how they challengers are performing outwith the competition?

For example, I could put an argument that Arsenal were Champions League semi finalists last season, are 8 from 8 this season so far, and that 5 Premier League teams finished in the top 8 of the league stage, with the 6th team finishing 12th.

Also that the new World Champions who beat the Champions League winners to win that trophy are currently only 5th, that the Europa League finalists were both from England and finished 17th and 15th in the league and are currently 14th and 4th.
Click to expand...

This isn't complicated. The only teams who would consistently challenge English teams (Barca and Madrid) are about as poor as they have been in a very long time. This coincides with a drop off from PSG (recent addition to potential CL winners) and we end up with the PL dominating Europe. It really doesn't take much for this to happen. The PL has been stronger than all but a very small pool of non-CL teams, going back years. And if the quality of half of that small pool of teams falls off a cilff we end up where we are this season.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
This isn't complicated. The only teams who would consistently challenge English teams (Barca and Madrid) are about as poor as they have been in a very long time. This coincides with a drop off from PSG (recent addition to potential CL winners) and we end up with the PL dominating Europe. It really doesn't take much for this to happen. The PL has been stronger than all but a very small pool of non-CL teams, going back years. And if the quality of half of that small pool of teams falls off a cilff we end up where we are this season.
Click to expand...

I mean it is complicated, because if you are saying the EPL is a poor league, and the European leagues are a poor level, you are basically saying that all of football is at a poor level at the moment.

But as I have asked before, what is seen as a 'strong level'? When teams like Man City and Liverpool can get to near 100 points when 3rd place is 25 points behind? When 3 out the 4 English teams are Champions League finalists? When league winners can't get to 80 points? How do you judge the quality of teams like Barca, Real and Bayern in relation to their league, and in relation to the Premier League?
 
GoonerBear said:
I mean it is complicated, because if you are saying the EPL is a poor league, and the European leagues are a poor level, you are basically saying that all of football is at a poor level at the moment.

But as I have asked before, what is seen as a 'strong level'? When teams like Man City and Liverpool can get to near 100 points when 3rd place is 25 points behind? When 3 out the 4 English teams are Champions League finalists? When league winners can't get to 80 points? How do you judge the quality of teams like Barca, Real and Bayern in relation to their league, and in relation to the Premier League?
Click to expand...
We are judging on the team performances, not on points. This season in the PL, very competitive, very brutal, but nothing amazing. The league is very well organized, teams are hard to break down, but no team is performing that well. La liga is the weakest I have seen in my life, Germany also, Italy are always up and down. Same as last season.
 
GoonerBear said:
I mean it is complicated, because if you are saying the EPL is a poor league, and the European leagues are a poor level, you are basically saying that all of football is at a poor level at the moment.

But as I have asked before, what is seen as a 'strong level'? When teams like Man City and Liverpool can get to near 100 points when 3rd place is 25 points behind? When 3 out the 4 English teams are Champions League finalists? When league winners can't get to 80 points? How do you judge the quality of teams like Barca, Real and Bayern in relation to their league, and in relation to the Premier League?
Click to expand...
It’s when a team like Liverpool can go winless for 10 games and still be 5th in the League, or when a historically bad United is 4th after winning 3 games in a row.

Add to that the level of games which is subjectively pretty poor, and your best scorers are on like 6 goals.

You are subjectively dire to watch for neutrals. But it’s not your job to entertain neutrals, and if it gets you silverware, kudos. But let’s not pretend the rest of the PL and Europe is not playing very bad football as well. You’re the best of a bad bunch basically, but then you can only beat what’s in front of you
 
GoonerBear said:
I mean it is complicated, because if you are saying the EPL is a poor league, and the European leagues are a poor level, you are basically saying that all of football is at a poor level at the moment.

But as I have asked before, what is seen as a 'strong level'? When teams like Man City and Liverpool can get to near 100 points when 3rd place is 25 points behind? When 3 out the 4 English teams are Champions League finalists? When league winners can't get to 80 points? How do you judge the quality of teams like Barca, Real and Bayern in relation to their league, and in relation to the Premier League?
Click to expand...

Are these rhetorical questions? Because the answer to both of them is yes, obviously (although I don’t know how 3 teams can all be CL finalists, so assume you mean semifinals)

As for judging Barca and Real, look at their results vs back when they used to be good. It’s that simple.
 
Zed is not dead said:
It’s when a team like Liverpool can go winless for 10 games and still be 5th in the League, or when a historically bad United is 4th after winning 3 games in a row.

Add to that the level of games which is subjectively pretty poor, and your best scorers are on like 6 goals.

You are subjectively dire to watch for neutrals. But it’s not your job to entertain neutrals, and if it gets you silverware, kudos. But let’s not pretend the rest of the PL and Europe is not playing very bad football as well. You’re the best of a bad bunch basically, but then you can only beat what’s in front of you
Click to expand...

Pogue Mahone said:
Are these rhetorical questions? Because the answer to both of them is yes, obviously (although I don’t know how 3 teams can all be CL finalists, so assume you mean semifinals)

As for judging Barca and Real, look at their results vs back when they used to be good. It’s that simple.
Click to expand...

My point is that a lot of these points can be conflicting, or certainly there's an argument to be had that they can be.

For instance, is a league stronger when a team can dominate every other and get to 100 points, or is a league stronger when teams are struggling to run away with it & it's more condensed because anyone can beat anyone on any given day?

And if 3 out the 4 Champions League semi finalists (thanks for pointing out my error Pogue), does that mean in turn the other top teams in Europe are poor?

This isn't about Arsenal, it's more how things are perceived in general currently. Someone mentioned the '99 Utd team earlier.
Won the League, FA Cup & Champions League. Fantastic achievement, we all agree.
They won the league with 79 points. Arsenal, who only finished a point behind them, only scored 59 goals in the league that season.
Barca & Real, likewise only had 79 & 68 points that season. Utd knocked Barca out the group stage of the Champions League, Kiev knocked Real Madrid out at the quarter finals.
Inter & Juve, who Utd beat in the Quarter & Semi finals, finished 8th & 7th, with 46 & 54 points respectively.

I think the Utd achievement was utterly fantastic, but using the criteria that's been mentioned on this thread, people would argue quality in the EPL & Champions League was poor that season? I'd find that ridiculously harsh myself.
 
Zed is not dead said:
But let’s not pretend the rest of the PL and Europe is not playing very bad football as well. You’re the best of a bad bunch basically, but then you can only beat what’s in front of you
Click to expand...
So there isn’t a good football team on the planet anymore? Arsenal sure are a lucky bunch aren’t they because I don’t think that has ever happened before. As for PL teams obviously city and pool have dropped a level but I’d say the mid table and bottom teams are also getting more competitive year on year which most people tend to ignore. And the CL table seems to hint towards this as well considering how much better English teams seem to be doing in Europe than on home ground. I think that’s a trend that’s not going to go away either because of the ridiculous amounts of money PL clubs now have available to them.
 
gold said:
So there isn’t a good football team on the planet anymore? Arsenal sure are a lucky bunch aren’t they because I don’t think that has ever happened before. As for PL teams obviously city and pool have dropped a level but I’d say the mid table and bottom teams are also getting more competitive year on year which most people tend to ignore. And the CL table seems to hint towards this as well considering how much better English teams seem to be doing in Europe than on home ground. I think that’s a trend that’s not going to go away either because of the ridiculous amounts of money PL clubs now have available to them.
Click to expand...
If you have been able to enjoy football lately, it’s great for you.

But la Liga has become dire to watch, Serie A As well, Ligue 1 is a mixed bag, and the level of football in the PL is also very low.

it has nothing to do with points or qualifying for CL and so on, but everything to do with how me, as someone passionate about football, is hardly entertained by football this year.
 
Zed is not dead said:
It’s when a team like Liverpool can go winless for 10 games and still be 5th in the League, or when a historically bad United is 4th after winning 3 games in a row.

Add to that the level of games which is subjectively pretty poor, and your best scorers are on like 6 goals.

You are subjectively dire to watch for neutrals. But it’s not your job to entertain neutrals, and if it gets you silverware, kudos. But let’s not pretend the rest of the PL and Europe is not playing very bad football as well. You’re the best of a bad bunch basically, but then you can only beat what’s in front of you
Click to expand...

It all depends what you mean by bad. Football today in the PL is less entertaining because it has become so tactically complicated and regimented and physically intense. In that sense, I agree its bad football and subjectively a bad watch.

At the same time, its become tactically complicated and regimented and physically intense for a reason, which is that these changes make teams better at winning football matches. In that sense, I wouldn't say the best teams today are bad. If you put any of Wenger's title winners in a time machine and transported them into the present, today's Arsenal would completely bury them.

Football will always keep evolving so we'll see what's next. I just think its currently in a phase where the strategies leading to the best results are not the strategies that make the most attractive watch, sort of like how basketball has evolved into a three point shooting contest or the phase in tennis in the 1990s when it was all about who had the biggest and most unstoppable serve.
 
Newcastle going into this game accepting defeat. Barnes should be starting. Big threat for them
 
These League Cup semi finals should really be one game at a neutral ground, would capture the magic of the old FA cup semi finals at Villa Park etc
 
City really living up to the emptihad theme, dont care if they're winning that amount of empty seats is a joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.