The internet is awash with bloggers pod-casters and tweeters quickly changing tack and realigning themselves behind Arsene.

Gone are the days when someone was brave enough to voice their wholehearted and unequivocal support for the great man. Now you can’t mention his name without someone trying to praise him above and beyond the level of praise you express.

Twitter is full of the few remaining WOBs duking it out with former WOBs.

Most of those that were respectfully asking for Arsene to go have climbed onto the fence and are willing to let him stay (Bloody decent of them, eh?). You can hear them with their “I’m softening towards him” or “I will wait and see if the improvement continues“, some even begrudgingly concede “I might have been harsh on Arsene“.

Those who previously had splinters in their backsides, from sitting on the fence, are shuffling into the “I support the manager” camp and looking for a place to pitch their very portable tents.

Of course there are still some WOBs remaining. These though are looking more and more like Ishmael , clinging to a coffin that is bobbing among the wreckage of their sunken arguments. And why not? What is their alternative? Admitting they were wrong in the most disrespectful and ignorant manner? I think not!

Now this sounds like I am complaining. That it shouldn’t be happening. That I don’t like it or want it. Wrong.  It’s great that more and more fans are appreciating the stellar work of the manager, staff and board are doing. I love it. Climb on board. The more is the merrier.

But let’s be honest here. They are not changing for any other reason than the team is improving and things are being won. They have not been educated to this new level of support. A few bad results will likely see them once again slipping their stilettos into the backs of people who have consistently been transforming the club for years.

People that have seen the light, should be asking themselves why they have been sitting in the dark for so long? There is nothing happening that could not have been foreseen by anyone willing to look.

Players were sold – the reasons were obvious.

Great players were not bought – the reasons were obvious.

We were not winning trophies – the reasons were obvious.

We couldn’t beat the best teams – the reasons were obvious.

The priority was CL qualification – the reasons were………….. you guessed it………….obvious.

Everything the club was working towards was obvious.

They had a plan………………….obvious.

They were smart enough and resolute enough to stick to it………………..obvious.

The plan was way beyond the comprehension of many fans, yes, but that didn’t mean there was no plan.

I always found it ridiculous that the most ambitious club in the country should be labeled by many of its own fans as unambitious.

Even now though we see fans trying to justify their previous stance with claims of “Arsene has changed“.  The alternative is them owning up to being wrong, stupid and uninformed.

Arsene has not changed. All that has changed is his credit limit. His philosophies have not changed one little bit. What has changed is the standard of the players he now has to put them into practice.

People begrudgingly admit the plan is working, while still thinking that they had a plan that would have worked better and quicker.

Unlike the doubters and disbelievers, there were some people, a precious few to be fair, who for years predicted exactly what is happening right now. Not because they are seers and prophets, but because they understood the plan was sensible and it was being implemented by experts, not the least of which is Arsene Wenger.

So, if you are someone who is either overtly or covertly changing you position, please just hold your hand up and accept you seem to have been wrong, rather than trying to justify your previous stance. Because, as they say Ignorance is no defense.

A guest post from @foreverheady

Just for a moment I want to imagine what it must feel like to be Morgan Schneiderlin. Or rather, to imagine how he views his career and its likely progression. I should think he feels pretty good about things: another great season at Southampton, on the fringes of his national team and ready now to make a career defining move. A move that is perhaps the most important one he will ever make. Certainly the dogs are barking his name, and he is seen as the perfect fit for any one of a number of clubs, with Manchester United and Arsenal the most obviously touted by those who profess to know about these things. Premier league tried and tested, it is surely only a matter of time before he is seduced by the kind of fame and fortune that only the very top clubs can offer and virtually guarantee.

Except of course there are no guarantees in top level sport, and especially not in the cut-throat world of football.When Schneiderlin considers his options he will need to think about wages and length and terms of contract, and he must also think about the type of club he wants to represent. He must feel he can trust the manager, and that he will develop and grow under his tutelage. But above all he must feel absolutely certain that he will be a star at the club, and that he will pretty much be the first name on the team sheet. And that of course is the problem for players like him, because he wouldn’t necessarily be sure that he would be automatic first choice for any of the top four clubs. Make no mistake, he is a very fine player, but is he that much better than the options those clubs already have? James Milner is a prime example of this: he was an outstanding servant to Manchester City, but he knew that he wasn’t that high on the pecking order, and was likely to be displaced if any of the much-touted galactico signings take place as promised and as seem likely, given the apparent relaxation of FFP. Fed up with forever playing the Swiss Army Knife role Milner wanted to be a real star at his next club, and his move to Liverpool makes perfect sense. He will likely become a crowd favourite, and it is easy to imagine him really thriving: the move ticks all the boxes. But if Milner had wanted to play at United, or Chelsea, or the Arsenal, he would have faced pretty much the same situation as he did at City. It looks to me as if Schneiderlin is in a similar positon, and that is why I suspect he would not want to sign for The Arsenal, however much fans and pundits suggest he should.

Please understand, I am not suggesting that he is not good enough for The Arsenal, for his regular performances over the last couple of years suggest he would fit in easily at The Emirates. He would, I suspect, be very good indeed. But would he be good enough to command a regular starting role? Would he automatically push Coquelin out of the starting line-up, or Jack Wilshere, or Aaron Ramsey? I am not so sure he would, and I expect he is not that certain either. He would have looked at the starting XI in the Cup Final, and looked at the bench, and he would have come to his own conclusions. Does he really want to leave Southampton to become a squad player at the highest level, or does he want to wait until he can find a Milner type solution, the type of solution he has already found at Southampton. Much will depend on money, of course, but much will also depend on the extent of his playing ambitions, and how much he needs to be playing each week. Very good players demand huge wages if they know they are only going to be part of a squad and not the main man.

And that of course is the problem that faces The Arsenal as they attempt to make the most difficult step forward of all, the step from good to great. The club already has a very good squad, and doesn’t need to be adding costly extra players just to provide even more depth. It perhaps does need to add a player or two who would be better that what it already has. But they are few and far between, and they are highly prized and they tend to be even more highly priced. We have seen the difference that first Ozil and then Alexis made to the team, and I have no doubt that Arsene Wenger is keenly aware that another such signing would be very nice indeed; I suspect he is most actively pursuing a couple of players but he will be doing so discreetly and with customary stealth. He is unlikely to buy anyone for the sake of buying someone, and I would suggest he will not pay £25m for a Schneiderlin when he already has a Coquelin, unless he feels that he would actually be an upgrade, in which case he will already be actively persuading young Morgan, as one Strasbourgian to another, that he is top, top quality.

We will see and I find this summer a fascinating one. We have a great squad, and we have some amazing players. Should we have any luck at all with injuries we will be competitive next season whether we sign anyone or not, and that is a great –and also an unusual- situation to be in. It is the sort of situation that only arises though astonishing wealth, or luck, or meticulous and inspired planning. But I cannot believe for one moment that the club is satisfied to just be here, nor that it is as unambitious and limited as those who merely parrot the populist cry for a new spine, whatever that actually means in a dynamic and fluid game. The next moves will be exciting ones, and I suspect they will also be surprising, given that money for the highest quality is now very much there, as is the magnetic appeal of the likes of Ramsey, Ozil and Alexis.

How often do we see Arsenal dominate a game, play the best football and not win? Too often, I hear you say.

Why does it happen, or appear to happen, more often to us than others? When it happens we hear the same old rhetoric and soundbites ” same old same old” or ” Tactical naivety ” or some other such crap.

So today I want to offer some ideas as to why this is, or at least why I think it might be.

What tends to happen is that we play the better football, dominate the play , don’t score (or don’t score enough) from the many chances we make, then the opposition either manage to get a fluky goal, we make a silly mistake or on the odd occasion they score a screamer.

Before this can come about something has to happen, we have to be the better team. And we are, on almost every occasion. We lost two games at home this year, MUFC and Swansea. We were all over both teams . Three or four nil at half time would not have been an unfair reflection of both of those games. But we weren’t. Somehow, through a combination of resolute defending and /or, poor finishing they managed to take it to the point where a late goal grabbed them the points. In the case of MUFC it took the referee missing a foul , where Marouane Fellaini pushed Gibbs (who was in mid-air at the time) into Szczesny , causing them both to hit the deck. Then a lucky deflection off Gibbs (while still on the floor following the assault) and that was that. Swansea ? I mean it was all one way trafffic and a catalogue of individual errors saw a weak header sneak over the line, just……. But make no mistake , we battered both teams.

But it keeps happening ! I hear you.

Well yes. And it will as long as we keep playing better football than the rest,  they will set up to frustrate, they will commit rotational fouls, they will hope to ride their luck, they will sometimes score goals against the run of play, they will occasionally get away with it and win. Because they have little choice, Arsenal play better football. They are maximising their chances of winning. Why would they not?

In the vast majority of occasions though, it won’t succeed and doesn’t work. We still win. Its nothing new or clever, most teams do it. Not only do they do it when we are at home, but most of them do it when they are at home. The sad reality is that sometimes it works for them.

It happens to us more that it happens to other teams because we have to play against it more often than other teams. Even Chelsea set up like that home and away against us.

Now I’m not talking about the times we play poorly, Stoke away first half, the big reverses at Chelsea, Everton and Liverpool last season. On those occasions they attacked us and we were found wanting for one reason or another. No, I’m talking about the vast majority of games where we face teams that have accepted we play better football and they don’t want a game. I don’t blame them either, what else can they do? But also, what else can we do?

We want to dominate?  Right !  We want to play better football than them ?   Right ! We want to create chances?  Right!!

Well sometimes we do all of these things and don’t score. Sometimes we can play the same way, to the same level and win easily. But once in a while we either won’t win, or even (very occasionally) lose. My contention is that it happens more to us because the circumstances are repeated more often.

I watched West Brom have 20% possession at United, ride their luck and win. I saw Barca, against Celtic, have 89% possession, about 45 attempts on goal and lose to a single goal, from a corner, Celtic’s only attempt on goal. It happens a lot. But it only hurts when it happens to us.

Monaco was the perfect example of this. Revisionist thinking has us playing awful and getting spanked. But it took a combination of the worst finishing we have seen in years, from normally efficient scorers, and Per flicking a speculative nothing of a shot, into the top corner before the madness at the end of the game. Yes we made some utterly daft plays, but the set up and tactics had created enough chances for us to be out of sight .

Now just imagine that Theo hit the defender in front of him rather that the little gap between that defender and the post, then Alexis hit the bar full on rather than the underside, despite playing one of the best games we have seen, we would have been one stroke of luck on Villa’s part away from a nightmare and cries of tactical incompetence and we never learn.

I am not ignoring that on occasions we seem to go into melt down. I’m not saying we have bad luck. I’m not saying that we can’t cut down on how often it happens. I’m just saying it happens to us more because we face teams accepting it must be a backs to the wall war of attrition before a ball is kicked.

So that is where we are, and the obstacles we face in converting quality and footballing dominance into three points every week. Is there a solution though – the magic bullet ?

Pedantic George ( AKA @Blackburngeorge )

Guest Post by @shotta_gooner

Before I go into anything today, please understand that this article is not a defence of Arsene Wenger. It has nothing to do with him, nothing ! OK?

I am going to lay out, in the most simple of terms, why Arsenal should not be expected to win the PL and ECL, and using very basic figures and analogies.

First off, no one is yet to give me one logical reason why the fourth richest club in England should be beating the three that are, even now, considerably richer.

There have been studies done that show an 85% direct correlation between spend and success, across all major leagues. This isn’t my opinion, it is fact. It may be a sad fact and one we wish didn’t exist, but a fact it is and being a fact, we have to acknowledge it and until it changes, accept it. In simple terms that leaves you a 15% chance of beating the odds. So yes, it can be done. Again I ask though, not why Arsenal ‘could’ be the team to do it, but why they ‘should’ be the club to do it?

People will point to Atlético Madrid as an example of how it can be done. Yes, but they are the 3rd biggest club in Spain and have done it once in 20 years. That is 5% of the time and within the previously mentioned 15% window.However that simply proves the maths, it does not mean they (or anyone else) should be expected to do it. Just that its possible. No one is saying its impossible.

But what about MUFC this year ? They had the most expensive squad and the highest wages, and we finished above them, I hear people say. Again, this is true, but lets consider why. They have had to pay massively inflated transfer fees and wages to attract players. So their wages are not actually a true reflection of the worth of their players. Lets say £250 k pw each for Falcao and RVP. That distorts things considerably. However, as a rule, given half decent management, the wages are a reflection of quality. MCFC came into huge funds and wanted to join the party. In order to attract better players they had to massively over pay, in terms of fees and wages, in order to attract better players like Ade (coughs). So for that period the spend was not a true reflection of quality. And yet once they were in the ECL they bought truly top class players, their spend became a reflection of quality and they won the title, twice.

Chelsea in the early days went on the biggest spending spree (in real terms) that football has ever seen. Their spend became a reflection of their quality and they won the league twice. Then they stopped spending at those levels , the team got older and the wages were no longer a real reflection. What happened is they came 5th. What happens next?  Yes, they went on another spending spree and they won it again. That they finished above MUFC and MCFC with a slightly lower wage bill is because of where they are in the buying cycle. City are heading towards the point where Chelsea were before the second spending spree. Make no mistake, another spree is coming.

The ECL is even more of a challenge. Not only do we have to try and overcome the odds against the three  other richer English clubs, but there is Barca, Real, Bayern and PSG. Its no coincidence that in Europe the winners are also the biggest spending clubs.

That’s the bad news. The good news is the 15%. That means winning is a possibility.We should be doing everything we can to get nearer the spending of these clubs and exploit the advantages Arsenal have. Like stability and a long term plan. We should hope to overcome the odds. But when hope and desire become expectations and demands that is when logic flies out the window. That is when we become unreasonable entitled halfwits.

We have to accept the reality of the new football world. Despite the additional income from the stadium,we are not one of the elite clubs. We are getting there, but as of yet we are the level below. Since the move was planned Oil money and revenue from TV and commercial deals have reduced the advantage we could have expected when the plan was hatched. Its sad for Arsenal , but the fact is the landscape has changed. What we were doing in the early part of the century is as irrelevant  as what Liverpool were doing in the eighties. But just imagine where we would have been without the move?

We have to hope that Arsene and the club can and do find a way to overcome the odds (and I do) but it will be against the  odds. If we do it , it will be an incredible achievement. Its not something we should expect or demand.

Tomorrow I might write a blog on why I believe we will challenge and the reasons I believe we can, but it would be from a position of understanding the difficulties and accepting the realities. If I back a ten to one shot in a race, I do so because I hope and think it can win, but I understand that its ten to one for a reason. I won’t call the jockey and the trainer useless if it doesn’t come in.

The other day I was chatting on twitter to Peter Wood from  Le Grove. He pointed out to me that it didn’t matter that I had proven him wrong because football was about “opinions“.That was the fun of football. Talking about it and having “opinions”.

In fact, he told me I was boring for refusing to preach about things I was not qualified to preach about. Then it hit me. He was right. Well right for a great number of people these days he was right. In the past we had to go down to the pub, get a bit pissed, before we started to talk like experts on subjects that we had at best a basic understanding of. But not now. Now we can get up in the morning, log into twitter or our blogs, and start playing a huge world wide game of fantasy football manager. Like any role play fantasy game, it’s better the more people that join in and play. There is no point us dressing up as Luke Skywalker unless someone is being Darth Vader. You certainly don’t want someone like me telling you its not a real light sabre and you and your pals are mad. Why? Because you are having fun. So people want to play this game. The game where fans with a basic knowledge of football, all chat and pretend that they are experts.

The reality is that most people reading this will be a little upset right now. Why? Because almost everyone thinks they have more than a basic knowledge of football. It never ceases to amaze me how so many people feel their one area of expertise in life is football. People will insist they “know their stuff” because they have watched football for X years. Well, my Mum has watched snooker for 40 years, and I can tell you she is not an expert. When we play a game (in this case fantasy football manager ) we usually like to play with people of a like-mind and similar standard. This mean that idiots will read a blog written by an idiot and agree. What is inconvenient to people playing fantasy manager is logic, reason and facts. They want to believe their thinking is right, and inevitably these three elements make that difficult if not impossible. So they ignore them and claim that it is their opinion and they are entitled to it. And that is true, everyone has the right to be stupid.

Most of us know, or at least know of, @GeoffArsenal . I like him, I like what he says. But most of all I like his default reaction to people playing fantasy manager, he says “but you don’t know that, you are guessing”  Geoff also guesses, but he says when he is guessing, he does not pass it off as fact. Many people don’t like Geoff and I suggest it is because he deals in far too many facts, uses logic and reasons why things cannot be as simple as simpletons think they are. In short, he is not playing their game. Our mate Peter however is great at playing the game. He is happy to jump to conclusions and proffer his speculation as fact at the drop of a hat. Not only does he play the game, but he has set up a playground where others can join in and play. And that, for those that want to play, is a good thing.

A Guest Post from Muppet ( @MuppetGooner )

Perhaps we should be concerned with more pressing matters, but I couldn’t ignore when a 1st world problem appeared on  Twitter. The assertion that Wenger had changed was made by a well known blogger, and therefore all was well. Well, nice to  hear, given that this particular blogger has spent the best part of the last 9 years squealing like a stuck pig. Let’s be  fair here, and assume he could be right. Did Wenger change ? Did he ? What does he mean ? Well, I’m guessing this is all about old accusations and concerns. We are familiar with them. We had no DM, the manager is stubborn, We had too many injuries. There was no plan B. We never spent money. You get the gist. The blogger’s presumed opinion is that all of these situations have now been resolved to a degree of satisfaction, and therefore Wenger has changed.

Unfortunately it is difficult to react to this assertion without some degree of mirth. As the natural reaction, being positive about what AW has done anyway in the last 10 years, is to dismiss this out of hand. Moreover, it would be natural to say that the last 2 years have been not a result of Wenger changing, more, the effect of Wenger’s actions, and indeed the club. But to say that would be just to appear ingenuous.

It would be better I thought to examine these points and ask if the composition of the squad, the training, investment, tactics, the team play is that different in the last 2 years than the period, say, from 2006 to 2013. And also  include some those bug bears expressed over the years.

The DM

The revisionist argument is that now we have Coquelin (apparently a lucky break by AW), it is one facet of change, as Coquelin is seen as a specialist DM.

The players seen to occupy this position were Gilberto Silva, who left in 2008, then Denilson, until 2011, then Alex Song in the 2011 to 2012 season, then Arteta from 2012.

Does this point to a change in direction ? It is true that out of all of these players, Coquelin may represent the one who is the most defensive in his style, strengths and what he is asked to do. The other midfielders, especially Arteta and Song, have played more box to box. Denilson too, more attacking than coquelin, and seen as a lot weaker in the defensive respect.

It could point to a change in direction. On the other hand, we don’t know how much AW will persist with Coquelin. The clamour, from the critics of Wengerball, is that a specialist DM, in the Makelele role was always required. The evidence up to now, is that Wenger has always eschewed that solution. He prefers mobile, ball playing midfielders, who can even go box to box if necessary. Indeed, in games where we have been chasing the game note how quickly Coquelin is sacrificed for an attacking player after 60 or 70 minutes. Not always, but notable.

There is no discernable difference in quality in all the players. Gilberto was the most high profile, a brazilian world cup winner. The differentiating factor is that Coquelin is seemingly exclusively deployed in a defensive role.

Change in the gung ho approach ?

I’m guessing the default position now is that we appear to have changed our tactics so that we are less gung ho, more cautious and more respectful of the opposition.

Is this just perception ? Or do the facts back this up ? Statistics can be made to twist anything, so I don’t want to present too many stats. If you look at our results against big teams from 2013-2014, we got hammered at Chelsea, City and Liverpool. From 2014-2015, we did not. The worst result against the big teams, was 2-0 away to Chelsea. But 2006 to 2013 ? Were we gung ho, and neglected the defence the whole time ? The stats against the 2 biggest teams from that period:

2006-2007

Arsenal 1 Chelsea 1, Chelsea 2 Arsenal 1
Arsenal 2 Manchester United 1, Manchester United 0 Arsenal 1

2007-2008

Arsenal 1 Chelsea 0, Chelsea 2  Arsenal 1
Arsenal 2 Manchester United 2, Manchester United 4 Arsenal 0

2008-2009

Arsenal 0 Chelsea 3, Chelsea 1 Arsenal 2
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 3, Manchester United 0 Arsenal 0

2009-2010

Arsenal 0 Chelsea 3, Chelsea 2 Arsenal 0
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 3, Manchester United 2 Arsenal 1

2010-2011

Arsenal 3 Chelsea 1, Chelsea 2 Arsenal 0
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 0, Manchester United 1 Arsenal 0

2011-2012

Arsenal 0 Chelsea 0, Chelsea 3 – Arsenal 5
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 2, Manchester United 8 Arsenal 2

2012-2013

Arsenal 1 Chelsea 2, Chelsea 2 – Arsenal 1
Arsenal 1 Manchester United 1, Manchester United 2 Arsenal 1

It is clear from these games that Chelsea and Manchester United have had the better of us.

We have to concede also that there have been some drubbings in this period.

On the other hand, there have been some years where the results have not been too bad, and were arguably more impressive then this season’s, against a stronger Chelsea and Manchester United team back then. In the 2010-2011 season we beat the champions, Manchester United at home. In the 2006-2007 season, we also beat the champions, Manchester United away from home. Chelsea were runners up in 2010-2011, and we beat them at home.

It occurs to me that looking at these results, it is also true that the adage that we can’t beat the big teams was only a recent phenomena. There are 6 premiership wins out of a possible 28 matches here, which although deemed a failure, seem to be commendable in my view, given the relative financial position of the 3 clubs during this period.

There were also champions league games where we slipped goals. Notably the QF in 2007 v Liverpool. But the result can be compared with the Monaco R16 match, where we conceded 3 goals at home this season. There may be a perception of a change of tactics, but the result was still an exit from the competition.

Transfers

The assertion here is that AW has been inflexible in the transfer market. He has not signed marquee players because of a philosophical preference to promoting from within, and baulking at the transfer fee, even though, allegedly, we have had the money.

If you define a marquee transfer as being over £30m, then on face value this is true.

Between 2006 and 2013 our biggest transfer was Arshavin. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arsenal_F.C._records_and_statistics, Arshavin arrived for £12m + 3m + add ons, in Feb 2009. Jut prior to this Nasri was signed for £15m from Marseille in 2008.

When we go back to between 1997-2005, the largest transfers here are in 2000, when Sylvain Wiltord arrived for £13m, Henry in 1999 for £10m, Reyes in 2004 for £10.5m. Interestingly, Hleb was signed for £11.5m from Stuttgart in 2005.

In 2011-2012, a season where we hadn’t yet starting signing big players, we spent £48.2m, bringing in Ox, Arteta, Mertesacker, Gervinho (the so called supermarket sweep).

The arrival in 2013 of Ozil for £42m signalled a significant change to the amount of money that was spent on an individual player. It broke the transfer record. This was followed by Sanchez for £31m. Interestingly, the spend on players overall in 2011-2012 was the same as 2012-2013, around £42m. But in 2014-2015 it doubled to 92m.

Final Thoughts

The assertion in some quarters is that Wenger didn’t do tactics at all, and is now doing tactics. The “in game management” was poor, the subs were a joke, and there was never any shape.

The narrative is that the penny has dropped. Along with transfers and Coquelin, Wenger has seen the light. The Bould effect is also attributed. The recent success of Borussia Dortmund and Juventus point to examples of teams who punch above their weight finacially, yet can take on big teams, and reach champions league finals.

One can argue that on today’s valuations, because of inflation, and the market, all the players signed in the period 1997-2005 would have cost double today. The money spent on Ozil and Sanchez also coincide with an increase in Arsenal’s turnover. The figures from 2011-2014 are £257m, £243m, £280.4m, £301.9m.

If the accusation was, that AW did not sign marquee players because he preferred a development policy, then the arrival of Ozil and Sanchez has disproved that. If  the accusation, that Wenger does not spend at all, then that does not seem to be backed up by the facts either. The total spent on players in the last 4 years is around £220 million.

With respect to tactics, and the attitudes towards defence, it seems curious to me that despite achieving a net spend in the period of 2006 to 2013, or in other words, having virtually no extra cash for transfers, we were able to reach top 4 qualification and still reach the quarter final of the CL in 2007-2008 and 2009-2010, and the semi final in 2008-2009. The argument could be that tactics would have improved this position, had we been less defensively naive. This is the default position of some bloggers. On the other hand, at least we got that far in the competition. None of the premiership teams got that far this season, and their squads are stuffed with players valued at far more than our squad from 2006 to 2010.

So for me there are two points to make here. One, your defence cannot be that bad if you do reach top 4 qualification every year. Two, that AW is an attacking coach. He has never taken the Mourinho or Benitez approach, and parking the bus. I think this is an observation of fact. I am not supportive of it, either way. If you want to argue, as some do, that in big games, this has hampered us, and we’ve not been able to progress in big competitions, then feel free. My only reply to this is to say  that if this were the case, then wouldn’t every good team just adopt a defensive approach, and therefore reach the latter stages of all the big competitions ? Certainly not Chelsea this year, or last. My belief is that an attacking philosophy has meant that we always gamble for 3 points, and this has been useful, but it’s about balance. Sure, we did need to tighten up on defence at times, but we also needed better players. And ultimately, the biggest factor for me was being blown out of the transfer market from 2006-2013. It is a fallacy, in my view, to suggest that defensive tinkering would have improved us significantly. We just simply did not have the ingredients. But the absurdity is, that we actually did better than the punditry gave us credit for. We had 2 very good league campaigns, from 2007-2008 and 2009-2010, with the aforementioned CL runs between 2007 to 2010. If Wenger has changed, I hope not too much.