Worthy winners?

Arsenal, I would say, came out as worthy but dull winners of the Premier League title this year. 

And I'm not at all an Arsenal 'hater'. In fact, I have quite a soft spot for the club - primarily because they often played such lovely football during the peak Wenger era. I suspect that a large part of the widespread antipathy - or at least, lack of enthusiasm - for Arsenal's win this year stems from the starkness of that contrast. Arsenal suffered a long period without major 'success' in Wenger's later years; but they still played some of the most attractive football in the Premier League. This year they've returned to the top of the heap - without entertaining anyone. Compared to the great Wenger teams - heck, even compared to this team two or three years ago - this year's Arsenal were often just painful to watch.

And also, frankly, they did win the title somewhat by default. Their final total of 85 points is the lowest for the champions since Leicester's surprise everyone-else-was-crap-that-year win in 2016; in some recent years that might not even have been good enough for second place. And their haul of just 71 goals - barely two-thirds of the record total City set in 2018 - is really pitiful. All of their expected rivals - City, Liverpool, and Chelsea - had severely disappointing seasons; that was a huge factor in their success.

These are introvertible facts. But I don't want to be completely dismissive of their achievement. They have deserved their success. They have shown tremendous organisation, determination, team spirit. It has been impressive to see how often they were able to doggedly grind out results, even in games where they hadn't played that well; that kind of resilience is a true hallmark of champions. (And they did often seem to play much brighter, more adventurous football in their Champions League games!)

But there have been a lot of negative aspects to the way Arsenal have played this season, which have alienated most neutral football fans from them, and rather taken the gloss off their triumph. For me, it's not the over-reliance on mauling at set-pieces (or the undue tolerance referees have been showing them in regard to this), or the numerous other 'dark arts' they've cultivated to try to eat time off the clock, or the fact that in general the officiating breaks seem to have been almost all going their way this year - irksome as these things have been, I do not think these are most people's main 'problem' with the Arsenal title win; they're not my main gripe, anyway. Rather, it's the general style of play, the Arteta philosophy that's so unsatisfying about this year's Arsenal - the excessive prioritization of 'control' which seems to stifle individual creativity. 

Odegaard - when he has played - has increasingly been getting stick from his own fans for passing the ball sideways too often and not producing as many attacking contributions as in the past; but that's obviously how he's been told to play. Saka has suffered the same sort of drop-off in his attacking output; and when he, or Trossard or Eze or Martinelli, do occasionally cut inside and have a pop at goal from around the edge of the box,.... you sense that they're impulsively 'going off script', and that Mikel doesn't really like it,... even if it's saved him the game.

It is alarming to me, too, that the Champions tend to set the zeitgeist that will mould the rest of the league's attitudes in coming seasons. In a year in which defences have mostly been decisively on top, and attacking returns constrained (it didn't help that so many of the best creative talents were missing for most of the season), almost every club has moved more towards prioritizing set-piece routines as the likeliest source of goals; and, with PGMOL being so lax about curbing the amount of wrestling that this leads to in and around the six-yard box, most of them have lapsed into this sort of cheating and thuggery on occasion too. All this isn't entirely Arsenal's fault; but it is to a significant extent - they have set the tone, set the example, and they've now proven that it can be a key to success. There is now a danger that we will see even more of this sort of thing next season, as a result. These misgivings about the possible future impact of the manner of Arsenal's title win has rather tarnished the achievement. 

I hope that these issues can be sorted out next season. We need a few more players like Cherki (and Palmer and Wirtz... and Eze!) to prove that defence-defence-defence is not the way forward, to open our game up again to more end-to-end attacking play. [The problem with the primacy of defensive play at the moment is threefold. First, teams have got so good at implementing 'hybrid marking' systems, and defending in a low block around the edge of their own penalty areas that it is very difficult for opponents who enjoy a lot of possession to create open-play chances against them. Second, this is leading many teams to almost 'give up' on pursuing traditional creativity, and to cultivate long-ball football and set-piece shenanigans as the likelier route to goals. And third, some of the more dominant teams may be tempted to follow Arsenal's example and give more priority to 'defending with the ball', concentrating on not making mistakes and hanging on to possession for long periods - rather than attacking.]

Arsenal have shown formidable tenacity, consistency, and defensive solidity this year - and that's what won them the title. But they won it with a notable lack of flair. And the possible legacy of this win, in terms of how it may shape Premier League football over the next year or two, is a cause for concern.

 That is why, Arsenal fans, the majority of neutral supporters feel unable to join in your celebrations; it's not because we hate you, it's because we love football.

The year's predictions - reviewed

                     1st  Arsenal         3rd    2nd 2nd +1

    2nd Manchester City         4th 1st 1st -1

    3rd Manchester United         14th 13th 3rd =

    4th Aston Villa         16th 9th 6th +2

    5th Liverpool         2nd 6th 5th =

    6th Bournemouth         7th 4th 8th +2

    7th Sunderland         17th 10th 10th +3

    8th Brighton         13th 8th 14th +6

    9th Brentford         12th 12th 7th -2

    10th Chelsea         1st 3rd 4th -6

    11th Fulham         15th 15th 11th =

    12th Newcastle         6th 7th 9th -3

    13th Everton         8th 16th 12th -1

    14th Leeds         20th 19th 15th +1

    15th Crystal Palace         10th 5th 13th -2

    16th Nottingham Forest         9th 14th 17th +1

    17th Tottenham Hotspur         5th 11th 16th -1

    18th West Ham         19th 18th 18th =

    19th Burnley         18th 17th 19th =

                           20th Wolves         11th 19th 20th  =

So, this is a summary of the predictions I made over the course of this season as to where everybody would end up. The first batch were made in mid-September, four weeks into the new season. My second attempt to see the future was made at the one-third point, just as we entered December. And the final version was undertaken at the two-thirds point, straight after Gameweek 26 in early February. [The final figure in red shows how far the actual final position differed from my last forecast in February.]

As you can see, by February, things had settled down somewhat, and it was becoming easier to see, in most cases, where teams were going to end up (despite the extreme closeness of the mid-table battle throughout most of the season - which meant that some teams could still have risen or fallen quite some distance even on the final weekend). The great majority of my predictions then were within 1 or 2 places of the team's actual league finish, and I got Manchester United, Liverpool, and - strangely - Fulham exactly right, as well as the bottom three. But of course, that didn't take much doing... My initial predictions at the start of the season, and even at the beginning of December were wildly off in many cases!

At the beginning of the year, I'd thought Manchester City might struggle with their 'rebuild' even more than Liverpool (and that looked quite prescient for a while, as they did get off to a pretty rocky start). But as they started to get their shit together around the middle of the season, and we started to see the potential of Doku and Cherki more regularly, I remained cautiously optimistic that they had the quality to overhaul Arsenal's significant points-lead on them. (I counselled at the turn of the year that it was likely to remain a very close race until the end of the season, and that it would be rash to assume that either of the two front-runners was a clear favourite [although, just five or six weeks later, I was forced to concede that Arsenal may have got decisively on top...]; ultimately, it was City faltering at the death rather than Arsenal finishing especially strongly [well, that, and the unfortunate VAR farce in the final minute at West Ham in GW36!] which clinched the championship.) I maintained that optimism - though with decreasing confidence! - until the last weeks, and ultimately proved to be wrong.

I had begun the year by anticipating that United, under the disastrous Ruben Amorim, could well finish down in the bottom third again; and I think that might well have been the case, if they'd stuck with that failing manager any longer. But the Carrick transformation in January was immediate and dramatic, and I'm pleased that I was so quick to appreciate that, and to start backing them for a much higher finish.

Liverpool, despite their 'rebuild' difficulties, I had expected to be almost as good as last year, and to probably be somewhere in the title conversation again; but I fairly quickly assessed their true level, as the season quickly unravelled for them. (Perspective is important: they had a terrible season, by their high standards - and still finished 5th!!)

I suppose Chelsea was my most embarrassing misjudgement. After their superb performance in last summer's Club World Cup, I was prepared to back them - admittedly somewhat optimistically - as possible title-winners. That fell apart immediately, with long-term injuries for Colwill and Palmer, and Maresca losing his way with his tactics in the Premier League. But there were signs of a possible resurgence initially under Liam Rosenior (remember when everyone was bringing Joao Pedro into their FPL squads around the turn of the year - and the likes of Enzo Fernandez, Cole Palmer, and Marc Cucurella too?); alas, that all fell apart very quickly as well, and Chelsea ended up having nearly as bad a season as Spurs. Now, Spurs were another team I got all wrong. I had quite liked some of their signings. I thought the strength of their backline was a solid foundation for a strong campaign. I thought Frank might suit them better than Postecoglou. I thought Maddison and Simons and Solanke and Richarlison might have big seasons. But everyone got injured - and Thomas Frank proved to be an utter disaster: they ended up doing even worse than last year, and only escaped relegation by the skin of their teeth. I had recognised how much trouble they were in by mid-season, but even in February, I didn't anticipate that they'd plunge right down into the relegation places.

Villa were the other team I got badly wrong at the start of the year: I thought they'd over-performed the previous season, and that without any major new signings over the summer, they were likely to have a big struggle this year. I wasn't entirely wrong; they did have some major fluctuations in form, and Ollie Watkins failed to find his scoring boots for most of the season; but Emery again proved shrewd at wringing the most out of his limited resources. Having rather harshly suggested at the start that Villa might plunge into the bottom third, I progressively revised my expectations for them upward - but even late on, I didn't anticipate them getting up into 4th place. Sunderland were the other team who most strongly out-performed my original expectations for them: I had thought they would struggle to escape relegation, but I soon saw that they were much the best of this year's promoted sides and would probably survive quite comfortably, even rising into the mid-table - though I never foresaw that they would claw their way as high as 7th by the end.

The Three B's, Bournemouth, Brentford, and Brighton, all had somewhat up-and-down seasons which made it particularly difficult for anyone to guess where they might end up - although my predictions homed in on them pretty well. Bournemouth ended up slightly over-performing my expectations, and Brentford slightly under-performing them. But Brighton had such a yo-yo year, they kept catching me out: they had looked so bad in mid-season, I was imagining a bottom-third finish - but they managed to rally again. The same went for Fulham and Newcastle and Everton: a lack of consistency made it impossible to pin down a confident final prediction for them, but I ended up not too far off. Fulham ended up doing rather better than I'd initially expected - mainly thanks to that superb run of form Harry Wilson went on from around the middle of the season. Everton failed to capitalise on their strong start, but ended up doing not too badly - largely thanks to another superb season from Jordan Pickford (who seems to be hogging all of this year's 'Most Spectacular Saves' roundups, again). And I kept thinking that Eddie Howe was going to pull off the mid-season rally that he'd managed with Newcastle the previous year, and that Anthony Gordon was finally going to rediscover his form of the previous year - but somehow, it just never quite happened: another one of my big misses in these predictions!

Leeds I had initially expected to be possibly the weakest of the promoted sides, and they didn't do much to dispel that assessment in the early part of the season; and indeed, their great revival didn't start until December, just after I'd made the second of these sets of predictions; however, by February, I could appreciate the difference in them and was feeling confident they'd now stay up fairly comfortably.

Palace and Forest and Wolves were three teams I'd expected much better from; not surprisingly, after the way they'd finished the previous season. Wolves seemed to have such a good rapport with Vitor Pereira that I thought they'd be strong again this year, despite having lost some big players (they're a selling club: they lose their best players every year, and they've always seemed to be able to bounce back); I couldn't understand quite how they'd unravelled so badly - but as soon as that unravelling became apparent, I accepted the inevitable, that the start of the season had been so bad, they were effectively relegated before Christmas. Forest were undone by a shortage of new signings last summer to help them with their European campaign, some unfortunate injury problems (notably the loss of their talismanic striker, Chris Wood), and of course their owner's perverse decision to sack the manager who'd done so well with them the year before.... and to replace him with the disastrous Postecoglou... and then to have to replace him as well. At least they rallied well again at the end of the season. Palace I'd fancied to be able to withstand the loss of Eze, and to be able to finish comfortably mid-table again; and indeed they started so brightly that. a few months in, I was starting to think they could even nip into the last Champions League spot; but, alas, things progressively fell apart for them after that, with a raft of injuries and the mid-season departure of Guehi to City. Again, I had the measure of them by the start of February.

Burnley I had pegged as plucky-but-doomed, right from the get-go. West Ham too: I felt they'd only luckily, undeservedly escaped relegation in the last few years, and hadn't done anything to strengthen their squad this time; surely, at least one of the promoted sides would this time be good enough to put them in jeopardy - and so it proved.

So, not perfect crystal ball work, by any means - but not too bad. I am reasonably happy with these pronouncements. Let's see if I can do even better next season!

[And sorry, I have no idea what's gone wrong with the formatting up above. It displays as all neatly aligned in Blogger's supposedly WYSIWYG 'compose' screen, but keeps on getting scrambled when posted. Aaarrgh....]

The nuclear option

 

I mentioned in my weekly review of the last gameweek how very unsatisfying the end of the West Ham v Arsenal game had been - for all true lovers of football, even Arsenal fans.

It is unsatisfying that any game should be interrupted for such a painfully protracted delay, while the VAR process grinds slowly on. It is unsatisfying that a foul on the goalkeeper should be arbitrarily deemed to outweigh 4 or 5 penalty fouls being committed against the attacking team. And, whether that decision was technically 'right' or 'wrong', it is unsatisfying - intolerable - that such a remote intervention might have decided the two most important issues of the season, the destination of the title and the last relegation place.

But we only find ourselves in this vexing situation because PGMOL has so signally failed all season to get to grips with the epidemic of wrestling in the penalty area at every set-piece. When there are this many fouls, or potential fouls, now happening multiple times in the game, the on-pitch referee is naturally overwhelmed and unable to cope with the decision-making being asked of him; but so now too is the VAR team - when there are this many bits of grappling going on simultaneously, it becomes impossible for the back-room team (or at least, impractically time-consuming for them) to fairly and consistently adjudicate which incidents are 'consequential' and which are not, and which should 'take priority' in a final decision.

When former referee Darren Cann appeared as a guest on Sunday's 'Match of the Day' on the BBC, he revealed that the 'solution' under discussion was to bar attacking players in the six-yard box at set-pieces next season.

I fear that entirely misses the point. Well, it would eliminate crowding of the keeper, at least initially; although with the wall of grappling players now moved to the edge of the six-yard box, that might still be difficult/impossible for the keeper to barge his way through. And with the likelihood that more attacking players will be attempting to enter the six-yard box from deeper positions, at speed, I fear there would be an increased risk of collisions and serious injuries. Plus, you know, that's now a whole extra layer of fine-margin decision-making for the officials to deal with, determining if an attacking player has entered the six-yard box prematurely or not. It seems to me that this would just be a horrible mess.

The key problem we've created for ourselves is the amount of wrestling going on in the penalty area - every time the ball comes in from a corner or a free-kick or a long throw-in. The frequent mobbing of the goalkeeper is only one facet of that. And Cann's suggested rule revision wouldn't address that problem at all; it would just shift the ugly ruck slightly further back from the goal-line - probably, in fact, making the melee around the edge of the six-yard box even denser and more difficult to police.

I'm quite happy for the Laws of the Game to remain as they are in relation to access to the six-yard box. We just need to see the Laws we have being more stringently enforced.

But one small change that I think would help enormously with that would be to abolish the absurd notion that you can't commit a foul when the ball is out of play. There are already exceptions to this: obviously, serious violent conduct can't be tolerated at any time, on or off the pitch, whether the ball is dead or not: if you tug an opponent's hair, or stomp on their instep, or throw a punch at them - you're going to get a red card. (At least, that's how I assume things stand. It surely can't be otherwise??)  And I see no reason why it should be any different for other categories of offence. Holding offences at a set-piece, as the ball is about to come into play, can obviously impede a player from reaching the ball when it is in play - the consequences of the improper action continue into the period when the ball has become live. And, in commonsense terms, that kind of thing clearly ought to be a foul.

So, I propose that referees should be able to immediately issue yellow cards for any such infractions they notice - rather than being restricted, as at present, to merely issuing ineffectual 'warnings';... and then things getting too messy for them to sort out once the ball finally enters play.

Further, I'd like to see the definitions of this type of offence tightened up - so that simply putting hands on an opponent in this situation (without the need for any additional shirt-tugging or shoving or grappling) should earn a yellow card.

I would even suggest that we can extend the 'denial of a goalscoring opportunity' rule to make red cards an option, if an attacking player is brought to ground by such an interaction (at least in a 'danger zone' in front of the goal - perhaps a 20-yd x 12-yd area defined by the edges of the six-yard box and the line of the penalty spot). The ball coming into the penalty area from a corner - or a free-kick or a throw-in - is a highly chaotic and unpredictable situation, but one which usually presents a very high chance of a goalscoring opportunity resulting for someone. One can't predict exactly how a ball might break in front of the goal, or how an attacking player might have been able to move towards the ball if not wrestled to the ground. So, it seems to me perfectly reasonable to be somewhat generous in defining a 'goalscoring opportunity' in this circumstance, and to send a defending player off for a major foul of this type.

Yes, I know, this is a 'nuclear option' - it could produce major carnage in the opening weeks of the season. 

Hopefully, most teams and players would be able to take note of the new rules implementation and - mostly - restrain themselves from indulging in the kind of grappling which has so marred the current season. But probably, some of them wouldn't. And we might see 6 or 8 or 10 yellow cards at the first corner of the new season. And perhaps in the first corner of every game of the opening weekend. And perhaps even a handful of red cards too (for second yellow-card offences, if not straight reds).

So be it. After that, everyone would quickly adapt, and cards for these offences would soon become a rarity - because the offence had been effectively stamped out.

Ah, a man can dream....

It shouldn't take rule changes or a major revision in implementation policy to address an issue like this. If PGMOL had acted more promptly and decisively, within the framework of the existing rules, early in the season, we could have stifled this phenomenon already. But now.... it's got completely out of hand; and it needs a more drastic intervention to remedy it. (And it's already ruined the title race...)

What's up with Erling?

 

I like The Athletic's print content, but their video output on Youtube has often been a bit all-over-the-place. Their flagship 'The Week in Football' programme has degenerated this season into a self-indulgently podcasty ramble around half a dozen or more different topics that takes far too long,... and often says little of any real insight. Their best shows were always the more in-depth analyses from JJ Bull and Jon MacKenzie, especially when hosted by the amusing Joe Devine (who now seems to be fully occupied in doing the voiceover for their Tifo sub-channel, the one reliably entertaining bit of their output at the moment), but those seem to have become more and more rare.

However, at the start of the long break in Premier League football we've just suffered, the weekly ramble did return to something like its previous, more focused format, with a single topic - the alarming decline in Erling Haaland's goal output since December - and close analysis from Mackenzie and Alex Barker.

While the discussion does highlight how dramatic the fall-off in The Viking's effectiveness has been in the last few months, I think overall there is much to take comfort from. Haaland doesn't actually seem to have any serious underlying injury issue, or to have some problem of 'confidence' or attitude; he's still working hard for the team, getting into lots of good positions, looking monstrously hungry for goals. The problem has chiefly been that City's current style of play hasn't been suiting him so well. And that shift has largely been necessitated by a number of key injuries, particularly to the wingers. Now that Doku appears to be back to his best, and Savinho may soon be back too, and Semenyo and even Cherki have recently demonstrated that they can also be dangerous in a wider attacking role down the right side, I think we could see the service to Haaland start to pick up again.

In the FPL context, with so few premium players this year, and so few regular big producers in midfield at any price, there's really no pressure on budget at the moment. So, there's really no motive to drop Haaland to try to 'upgrade' in multiple other positions (most people already have pretty much exactly the squad they want, as well as Haaland - without having had to make any great economies). So, the only reason to drop Haaland would be because you think there are at least three other forwards with better points-prospects than him over the run-in. And, frankly, nobody else has been in consistently impressive form lately: in fact, the only forward scraping into the Top 20 points producers over the last handful of games is Beto!!! And I don't see anyone dropping Haaland for Beto....

So,.... scary and potentially disappointing as it is, I think we probably have to stick with Haaland,... and hope that he's going to assume a central role in a brave City charge for the title over this next six weeks. 

The essence of FPL is assessing the potential of players. Haaland's potential is always far higher than just about anyone else's - he is a 'generational talent', one of the greatest goalscorers the game's ever seen; and he plays for one of of the highest-performing, most consistently creative and dangerous sides in world football. His potential is enormous; but, unfortunately, for multiple, complex reasons,... he doesn't always fulfill his potential.

I still think he's worth having a bet on for the last 7 gameweeks.

Evil genius??

The estimable Adam Clery quickly produced a video explaining exactly how Pep Guardiola managed to control Arsenal so thoroughly in Sunday's League Cup Final, and win the game so comfortably.

Watching that, it occurred to me that, if the great man had indeed figured out such an insuperable masterplan for thwarting his closest English rivals,.... had he not perhaps revealed it too early??  The League Cup is a nothing trophy; this kind of tactical dominance would have been far more valuable if deployed as a deadly surpriise in the crucial Premier League clash between the two clubs looming on the 19th of April. These tactics aren't likely to work so well - or at all - a second time, particularly as Arsenal have four weeks to work out a response.

But then I thought.... perhaps the wily old fox also knows how Arteta is likely to respond, and he already has a second, even more cunning masterplan worked out for that crunch game at The Etihad??

I wouldn't put it past him.

But then again, perhaps the great advantage of deploying this masterstroke now was showing everyone else how to beat Arsenal? If Arteta can't work out good solutions quickly, a lot of the games he faces in the league run-in period could suddenly be a lot more challenging than he'd anticipated.

Or perhaps...., well, perhaps Pep's major concern was not with any of this, but purely with the potential psychological impact of achieving such a dominant win over his arch-rival two months from the end of the season. Even if the manner of this victory is probably going to be unrepeatable, for City or anyone else, it will have spooked the shit out of Arsenal - and maybe that's enough. They had been starting to look dauntingly self-confident; that self-belief has now been dented.

We've always known that Pep is on a higher plane than most in his perception of the game, and his ability to mould revisions in tactics for particular games, particular opponents. But does that mental acuity also extend to the longer term, to being able to plan out a succession of matches, the course of an entire league campaign??  We may be about to find out.

Most people these days use the terms 'tactics' and 'strategy' completely interchangeably; but in the military context, there is a clear and important distinction. I recall an old college buddy of mine, who rose to quite a senior rank in the British Army, once summed it up like this: "Tactics is how you lose a battle. Strategy is how you lose a war."

Has our Pep just revealed himself to be not merely a tactical genius but a strategic one also?? And if this grand ploy truly is strategic - will it end in failure or success? Time will tell. There's still a fair bit of life in this title race.

This time, IT MATTERS

 

My scorn for the League Cup knows no bounds. 

I have always - always; ever since I was a child - felt that a second domestic cup competition is otiose, and ridiculous. I am rarely even aware of the earlier rounds being played, and I seldom bother to watch the Final (except in that one glorious year, back in the 1980s, when second-tier Oxford United managed to win it - one of the great small-club triumphs in English football history; just a pity it wasn't in the proper cup...). 

The tournament's flimsy credibility hasn't been helped by having a succession of unlikely sponsors insist on splashing their name on the trophy - a somewhat contemptible one in the gambling company Littlewoods, along with simply ludicrous ones like its current backer - the energy drink that isn't Red Bull; and, back in the day, the Milk Marketing Board supported it for a long while: calling it the 'Milk Cup' made it sound like some sort of confectionary...). 

My feeling is that the competition could become more useful and relevant - and less of a strain on an already dangerously overstuffed top-flight schedule - if it were restricted to clubs outside the Premier League.

However, we do have an unusually significant match-up in this Sunday's Final: Arsenal and Manchester City, the two teams vying for this year's Premier League title. And the game happens to come at a particularly crucial moment in that title race, as City's challenge seems to be evaporating after they tamely dropped points in their last two games - to allow the leaders to pull out a rather daunting 9-point gap.

I have an inkling, therefore, that this year's League Cup might actually decide the League title as well. City, I think, really, really, really need to win this game - to lay down a marker that they're not giving up the challenge yet, to try to put a bit of a dent in Arsenal's growing self-confidence. They still have a game in hand over their rivals, and they are slated to play them at home in Gameweek 33. If they could win both of those, Arsenal would be facing a very nervy run-in.

But if Arsenal can beat them on Sunday, they'll go to The Etihad in a month's time with no fear - and they'll probably win again there. City NEED to win this game - not for the worthless 'consolation prize' trophy, but to keep the title-chase alive.

So,... I might actually watch the game this year!  [Well, I'll try. Since the UK coverage is on the dreaded ITVX, I very much doubt if I'll be able to get a viable stream.]

[Well, what do you know? ITV seems to have upped its game - at last. It has been so notorious for so long for not having sufficient server capacity to maintain a stable stream on popular live events that I've largely given up even bothering to try it over the last few years. But it worked a treat last night! (Maybe only because comparatively few people are interested in watching the League Cup Final, even when it is between the two best teams in the country??)

I confess, I am pleased to see Arsenal 'wobble' a bit, and City re-energise their title challenge. Arsenal fans should probably be a little worried by the manner of the defeat: their team was completely dominated in the second-half, and had no response. It was a performance so lacking that it suggests they might struggle in a number of the remaining games, not just the crunch match at The Etihad. It is uncertain, though, whether the long wait before they play in the league again will amplify or diminish the psychological impact of this result.

Of course, my man Adam Clery has already put out an excellent video examining how City were able to control the game so emphatically.]