Jump to content

Recommended Posts



Mike - sorry I just can't agree with that at all. In an age when clubs discard managers (to no great effect) at the drop of a hat it is to Arsenal's credit they are taking the long view


Now - it may well be that Wenger has peaked and that a decline is inevitable but for now I'm happy to concede that some events of our own making (budget) and some not (extensive injuries) have put us in a bad spot. But people have short memories. Just a few years ago fans were calling for Ferguson's head as Mourinhio was winning. What if Man U had caved in and appointed someone else. Would they be they force they are now?

matthew123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If Wenger had done in his first 4 years what he

> has done in his last 4 years at Arsenal, he'd have

> been ruthlesslessly sacked like Bruce Rioch.

> Wenger is running down his credit and I think two

> more years of this and he will get the axe.



Using that as bench mark, no premiership manager would last more than 2 seasons at best. So where would all the replacements come from? There aren't many high calibre managers out there, which is we we have hung on to Wenger.

There is no denying that since Wenger has come to England he has been head and shoulders the best manager in the Premiership - the best football, turned good players into great players and has done it without spending too much money.


The point I am making is that it's only because of his track record that his medium term future is secure at Arsenal - they are presuming/hoping he can reproduce the old magic rather than basing it on potential of current team who look light years away from being competitive..


How many more years do you think Arsenal would wish to keep Wenger as Manager if they continue to flirt with 4th spot every season?

matthew123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is no denying that since Wenger has come to

> England he has been head and shoulders the best

> manager in the Premiership - the best football,

> turned good players into great players and has

> done it without spending too much money.


How do you work that out? I see no European Cups, three league titles and four FA Cups and an unbeaten season but let's face it four seasons with nothing (if you count this season which looks more than likely) and I can't see how he can be head and shoulders above anyone. Even Benitez got lucky and won a European Cup. ;-)

I still wish Spurs had stuck with Martin Jol. In the time that Arsene Wenger has been at Arsenal Spurs have probably gone through at least half a dozen managers and have never finished in the top four and are still light years away from doing so. Wenger (Mad myopic professor or not) is top class.

The Gooners it pains me to admit have been a trifle unlucky with injuries this season. Cecs Fabregas (their best player by far) has been a major loss because everything goes through him. If they can get him back and the likes of Eduardo fully fit and playing regularly the goals and more success will eventually come.

Sandperson Wrote:

England he has been head and shoulders the best > manager in the Premiership - the best football, turned good players into great players and has done it without spending too much money.


Isn't there a bloke in Manchester somewhere who, apparently, has Won a few things lately (lately being the last 10 ears)..is it 24 Trophies??....might just be a contender on the "long" list for "Best Manager"..

I've no problem with saying that Ferguson is a top class manager but I believe to go 49 games unbeaten is a greater achievement that winning the Champs League, which is a knock out cup competition and can throw up all sorts of surprise. Sure I'd like us to win the Champs League. Having said that, to play 49 games and not be beaten is some feat. But that is more about teams rather than managers.

Sorry, I don't get your point Matthew.


I think it's a bit much to blame injuries too. We've lost players over the seasons to injuries long and short term and have usually had decent cover. Look at Park, Hargreaves, Giggs with his hamstring etc. etc. Surely it's the manager's job to make sure that if you lose a player like Fabregas or Eduardo there's enough depth in the squad to replace him? Arsenal aren't short of money. Is it a case of lack of success being to blame? If you go to a club like United you know there's a decent chance of success and therefore are prepared to sit out games on the bench to try and get inot the side at some point rather than thinking srew this I'm off to a club where I'll get more games?


This is not a dig at Arsenal, I know they play some wonderful football and I think that Wenger has a real skill for spotting talent and they are a great side.

If you mean aggressive as in Bolton, then I' glad we aren't. Bolton under Allardyce were the epitome with everything that is wrong with the English game, and the failure at grass roots to teach skills, technique, and vision. For too many years the ethic instilled in youg kids if graft aand aggression, and looked where we are internationally speaking at the moment. Our premier league is only the envoy of the world because of the influx and influence of foreign players, mangers, coaching methods, diet, and culture.

Sandperson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry, I don't get your point Matthew.


Sorry, that was my fault as I left out the first word "In" before England and it changed the whole context of what I wrote, which Matthew picked up on.

This 'going unbeaten' thing is a bit misleading. Great if you actually win something during an unbeaten run like L'Arse did. But in theory you could go unbeaten in a season and still get relegated i.e 38 draws = 38 points. Look at 'pool, only one defeat yet potentially 10 points behind Utd who have lost one more game. The best thing the FA have implemented is the 3 points for a win rule, ensuring that mediocrity comes second best, give me a Treble anyday...

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This 'going unbeaten' thing is a bit misleading.

> Great if you actually win something during an

> unbeaten run like L'Arse did. But in theory you

> could go unbeaten in a season and still get

> relegated i.e 38 draws = 38 points. Look at 'pool,

> only one defeat yet potentially 10 points behind

> Utd who have lost one more game. The best thing

> the FA have implemented is the 3 points for a win

> rule, ensuring that mediocrity comes second best,

> give me a Treble anyday...



Load of Ballacks, 49 unbeaten was feat and a half, won't be topped by Man U or anbody else for that matter.

I think the unbeaten season and the treble are on an par. (I think RD did say if you don't win anything then it means nothing but Arsenal did win something and even I admit it was a great shame they didn't win the European Cup that year as they were such a fantastic advert for the game.)


I also think that you are a bit unfair on Bolton and Allardyce Atila. I don't like the guy, he tries to run teams with computer software but I think a team plays to it's strengths and Bolton's strength under him was aggressive tactics. It phased Wenger and the Arsenal team (and therefore worked) and since then there's been no love lost but I think that they didn't play unfairly.

I didn't say that tactic was wrong, or unfair but it is the embodiment of what is wrong with the way we coach the game in this country, until we get of the mind set that sets great store by physicality and aggression at the expense of everything else, then we are in trouble, and will win FA!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...