ARSENAL OR LIVERPOOL WHO ARE MORE OF UNDERACHIEVERS?

Posted on by Danny

A wonderful evening to y’all. This is Sports Tackle on Danny world. Tonight, we’ve got two debaters [Dolapo Vs Christopher] going head to head on a quite interesting discourse. Our motion for today is, Arsenal or Liverpool, who are more of underachievers? There has been a lot of argument as regards who has been the better team in the last 10 seasons.

Is it Arsenal who always want to finish in top 4 just to qualify for the champions league? Or Liverpool, who has got a lot of quality but haven’t won the league in more than two decades? Follow our contestants today as they trade tackles on the discourse and drop your thoughts on the topic as well. Follow using the link

First, we have Dolapo.

Arsenal are more of underachievers than Liverpool are because:
1. They’ve stuck with the same manager who hasn’t moved the club forward within that period.

  1. We all say their players lack ambition and mental strength, but asides that, I still think that the players themselves are not good enough to play at a big club like Arsenal.

  1. Mediocre team with just 1 or 2 world class players in their team.

And now we have Christopher.

In the past 10 years, Liverpool have underachieved more than Arsenal..

Liverpool had the funds to be competitive, but they didn’t make adequate use of it. We have seen what “having a lot of funds” can do to a club e.g Manchester United, Manchester City etc even though Liverpool didn’t have funds like those two, but still the funds where sufficient enough to be competitive.

WHILE for Arsenal they had the task of paying for the “Emirates stadium” constructed in 2006/2007, this affected their spending power, and because they had to balance the books they had to sell some of their top players for huge sums of money which you can say contributed to some underachievement on their part.

Players like Thierry Henry, Hleb, etc were sold without a fight because Arsenal needed the money (as most people know Arsenal always celebrated finishing 4th in the League as this meant they were going to the UCL, Why? Because they needed the juicy cash from the UCL to aid in paying of the stadium debt.

Even with the funds Liverpool had they were only close to winning the EPL in the past 10 years on only two occasions (2009, & 2014)

Another aspect they have unachievable in the past 10 years is failure to win enough trophies, Arsenal were lacking also as they went 9 years without winning a trophy. But recently they have won the Fa cup 3 times in the past 4 years, Meanwhile Liverpool have won only 1 trophy in the last 10 years that is a solitary League cup won over Cardiff city in 2012 via penalty shootout. That’s a high level of underachievement for a big club with such history as Liverpool.

Another aspect Liverpool has underachieved is their failure to consistently qualify for the UCL competition, there are no excuses that’s the minimum achievement at least but they were found wanting. Meanwhile, Arsenal have qualified for every UCL competition only failing to qualify for the first time in 20 years this year (2017).

In summary, Liverpool had the funds, they were not restricted to spend, they were not under pressure to sell their players to garner funds, they had the players, but they still couldn’t win trophies, they couldn’t consistently qualify for the UCL, and also they didn’t compete adequately for the EPL title with all that funds.

Let the tackle begin!

7 thoughts on “ARSENAL OR LIVERPOOL WHO ARE MORE OF UNDERACHIEVERS?”

  1. Winning the FA cup 3 times in 4 years is good, but not good enough for a club like Arsenal, putting into consideration the fact that they didn’t do any good in Europe and even in the league, except for the fact that they qualified for the Champions League for several years consecutively. Talk about a team qualifying for Europe’s most competitive competition and getting battered in the round of 16 by either Bayern or Barca everytime, then tell me if qualifying is worth it at the end.
    However, Liverpool have not had it easy qualifying for Europe over the past few seasons but you can still say that they did quite well some of the few times they’ve been in there. 2007, got to the final, only to lose to a great team like AC Milan. 2015, got to the final of the Europa league and lost to Sevilla (you may make a case for them because it had been long they got to Europe before that season).

    Like

    Reply

  2. Liverpool have underachieved in last 10 years
    Winning just 1 title and just a League cup at that is appalling for a club of that stature… People rightly castigate Arsenal but even they have won 3 titles in that same time span.

    And we know winning of titles is the yardstick for measuring how successful a club are.
    A big club that doesn’t win trophies can’t claim to be successful!!
    Arsenal didn’t win a trophy for 9 years and people hammered them for underachieving but recently they have changed that by winning the FA cup 3 times in the last 4 years (they are the holders) now they are aiming to win EPL(even if it’s a long shot), but still it’s a step forward, MEANWHILE Liverpool just need to win anything even winning a Carabao cup now will be considered a success. The same cannot be said of Arsenal
    You can agree that Arsenal have achieved better in the last 10 years than Liverpool!!!

    If you want to win a competition, you have to qualify first!!! And we all know that UCL is the biggest club competition out there, so qualifying for it in itself is a massive achievement never mind the club and Arsenal have done that consistently in the last 10 years
    Liverpool haven’t managed to do that consistently over the last 10 years, Is that something to be proud of??

    Imagine Liverpool with players like Suarez, Torres, Gerrard, Countiho, and other worldclass players have won only 1 league title in the last 10 years (carling cup) but Arsenal won the FA cup title with fewer worldclass players Alexis, Ozil, have won the the FA CUP 3 times in the last 10 years

    Liverpool with those worldclass players couldn’t qualify consistently for the champions league but Arsenal has always qualified except for this year.

    Liverpool have totally unachieved!!

    Like

    Reply

  3. It’s said Arsenal always goes out in the round of 16, that’s true! They haven’t been good enough, still they gave themselves a chance by qualifying for it in the last 10 years
    Liverpool don’t qualify consistently so obviously in that aspect taking into consideration the past 10 years, Arsenal have performed better than Liverpool

    Like

    Reply

  4. The truth of the matter is that it is better not to qualify for the Champions League if you know you’ll be battered at some stage. Just imagine whenever the UCL knockout stages draw is to be made and EVERY team is always happy to play Arsenal, it makes absolutely no sense. On Liverpool’s part, it’s quite difficult to know because you don’t know what Liverpool side will turn up. But for Arsenal, you more or less know how (it can’t be less than a 5-1 bashing obviously) and when (you guessed right) their European adventure ends.
    The major worry is even a clueless manager that’s seated on the bench for them. How would a manager perform so woefully almost every season and he still remains in the dugout for a team? That definitely shows both the board and the manager’s lack of ambition to take the club forward.

    Like

    Reply

  5. Wow! It’s better not to qualify for the champions league? Do you know what many teams will do just to qualify for the group stage of the UCL? They don’t mind going out in the group stage!
    Do you know the money involved in the champions league? Most teams are happy to qualify for the UCL just cause of the money. And sincerely Arsenal were in their group cause they needed the cash and qualifying consistently helped them in paying of the stadium debts quickly
    I do wonder how Liverpool would have managed to get a new stadium and pay for it with them qualifying for the UCL every season, put simply it won’t have been possible!!!!

    Do you think it’s everyteam that starts the UCL season that really has a genuine chance of winning the UCL?
    Let’s be sincere in the last 10 years(2007-2017),if Arsenal had won the UCL with the squad they had, it means they would have punched above their weight!!!
    Now I’m not making excuses for arsenal going out in the round of 16 almost every time, but the bottom line is they earned the RIGHT to be there!!!! They always qualified ahead of Liverpool and yet you say Liverpool have performed better in the last 10 years? That’s funny
    The premier league is one of the toughest league if not the toughest with 4-6 teams with genuine chances of qualifying for the UCL yet Arsenal has always found a way to qualify, and you are downgrading that??? Arsenal were always qualifying While some of the best and richest teams in England were struggling to qualify.. Man U didn’t qualify for some years, Chelsea only qualified 2013 because they were holders, Man city with their riches didn’t qualify in the first season. Guess who was always qualifying? ARSENAL!!!, If that’s not a massive achievement in that aspect, then there is an issue.. Now to Liverpool, we know they have the history in the UCL obviously, but History doesn’t qualify you for the UCL!!!! It’s what you do on the pitch that matters and in that aspect Liverpool have been found wanting!!!
    Real Madrid are the most successful club in the UCL, so if they fail to qualify in a season will Uefa now find way for them to enter because they are the most successful team? Big fat NO!….. So my friend, Liverpool with the UCL history doesn’t count when it comes to qualifying for the UCL
    Since when did going out in the round of 16 be a reason for you to say they have unachieved? The teams they face are always high quality(Bayern, Barca,) , hence beating them both legs was always going to be difficult, Arsenal has proved also that on their day they could beat any team in the world(beating bayern 2:0, Barcelona 2:1, AC Milan 3:0, Real Madrid 1:0), they weren’t just good enough doing it over 2 legs
    You are saying it’s better not to qualify and go out in the round of 16 abi? Shey Liverpool plan to win it by not qualifying? Laughable!

    I pointed out trophies over the last 10 years (Arsenal have won 3 FA cups, MEANWHILE Liverpool have only won 1 carling cup)
    It’s abundantly clear Arsenal have achieved better than Liverpool!!!!!
    Saying otherwise is staggering!!!

    Like

    Reply

  6. You called Arsene Wenger a clueless manager??
    I have to admit too, you have a point… Some of the decisions he takes beggars belief….
    BUT you can’t take anything away from him, he’s earned his spot in the game, he’s been a brilliant manager!!! No one can say otherwise
    If you say Arsenal have no ambition because they retained him after failing to win trophies for a period (by the way, the decision was justified because he later won 3 FA cups in the last 4 years), to some extent you are right!… BUT the issue is with that lack of ambition per say have they underachieved more than Liverpool? No!

    In the last 10 years Liverpool with the ambition😂 have always had half baked coaches(except for the brilliant Rafael Benitez) coaches who can’t/won’t manage the top teams in the world, coaches that couldn’t qualify them for the UCL, coaches that combined won only 1 carling cup in 10 years!!
    If that’s the ambition you want, have at it bro….

    Arsene wenger did a marvelous job for arsenal during the trying period of paying off the debts of the stadium, I mean, he rook players like (Diaby, Denilson, Silvestre, Djourou, senderos, Almunia, bentdner, Aliadiere, etc, that’s just a few) and was always qualifying for the UCL ahead of Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool…. In as much as he has his faults (a lot), he achieved something unique there!!…

    So take nothing away from him and give him the respect he deserves…

    STILL I’m struggling to see how Liverpool have achieved more than Arsenal over the last 10 years

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment