₦airaland Forum

@Guapo.

I apologize for the statement of dishonesty. I have since removed it.

AirborneLacer: Yes I'd agree with you to an extent that Carlo gave some lads the chance to play (Cameo roles). But the truth is this, Ancelotti was sacked after finishing second and all while attempting to bring through several youth team products, the next manager comes along and all that trust earned under the previous regime counts for nothing. The new manager realises that finishing second is not enough and concludes, rightfully, that relying on established players is perhaps a better call to achieve his goals.
It all boils down to the Club insatiable urge to keep winning - not Jose's problem.
What has happened to McEachran since is a mirror image of Kakuta’s Chelsea career. Young early promise, a manager who explicitly believed in him and then a circle of endless loans that have done nothing but demoralise the player, do you have to blame the Club for such or Jose who is just stepping in as the new gaffer?

Sometimes I believe that we over-state a manager's mindset in their desire to win at Chelsea. They are not like you and I who quake in our shoes at the mention of 'sack' at our jobs. Carlo Ancellotii for instance walked away with £8m. AVB with almost £12m. Then they walk into another high-paying job.

What this means is that the Chelsea managers are perhaps not thinking "5h1t! if I don't win a trophy this season, I am gone" but more like "If I get fired for not winning a trophy, the payoff will be fantastic". I say this because I know that if JM is fired this morning, there will be 20 managers lining up to be next to be fired. Despite being fully aware of the high rate of redunancy.

My point is these guys are fully aware of the nature of the job and that the much talked about "pressure" is largely exaggerated and that what these managers have is rather the 'CARE' about being fired than the "FEAR" of being fired.


This "CARE" is defined by their differing personalities and primarily, their attitude towards the game. So while some managers care about building a dynasty and conquering the world through the development of young players into stars and then winning in style, others "CARE" about nothing else than WINNING, no matter what.

Now when the inevtibale firing occurs, I believe they care more about what they were unable to achieve governed by their attitude towards the game. This attitude is what defines how likely a manager is to field a young player. So managers like Van Gaal, Brendan Rogers, Guardiola no matter the "pressure" on the job, will at some point use a lot of youth players while managers like JM are less likely to.

Now I agree that this issue is further compounded by the club's farming out of players to loan clubs but the more likely scenario is that largely, managers "AT CHELSEA" will use as many young players as fits their personal goals, governed by their attitude towards the game and very less likely because of the 'pressure' or the 'fear' of being fired.


But of course, this is just my opinion and very open to criticism.

AirborneLacer: I'm really surprised that Nateevs is branding dead rubber games and 2mins-to-go apps as youth integration.

No that's not what he is saying. He is saying that dead rubber minutes is usually the first step towards youth integration . And I think you will find that my argument and your interpretation are two different things. I quite like how you seem to be taking the convenient route out.

You are trying to create a situation that blames the clubs exclusively for the lack of integration of young players. I turn around and say, unless the kids are Messi, to include young players, largely, you begin by giving meaningless minutes here and there. Especially cinsidering managers who are fresh, never worked with the Chelsea youth set-up and do not know the history of the youth players. Expecting them to shove a couple in as established members is fanatasy. It will not happen. Therefore, they will start by giving dead-rubber minutes. What is crucial is how many more minutes they then go on and give. Facts show that previous managers followed and established this trend of more minutes a lot better than JM.

You are saying that the fact they didn't establish any players in the first team is proof of your point. But how could they when largely they only had pre-season to evaluate these young players and whem some of them (managers) didn't last more than a few months? It's impossible.

What is proven though is, finding out that as the season went by, those managers who got lengthy time on the job, depsite the pressure to win laurels, went on and gave more minutes to the kids. And I have even proven that the kids got minutes in very crucial games and more starts. And here we are still arguing the facts?


And this is all on the back of having a smaller and less talented pool to choose from. JM has spent 3 and a half seasons and is now manager in arguably our most talented era of young players, yet no single youth player has started two back to back dead rubber games or got 90 dead rubber minutes and you blame the club "solely" for this?

I asked what you think the club will say if Jose insists that he wants Lukaku and Kalas as permanent members of the first team for dead rubber minutes. You haven't answered that yet. Will the club say, No Jose, the Gods have decided, they go on loan?

If after everything I have said, we will not find some common ground on this matter, then I can no longer participate in the argument. I have provided data to back it up.

Nihilist: I completely disagree with your hypothesis of game minutes adding up and being very important etc...
Sporadic appearances in meaningless games don't really improve youth players. These dead rubber games are only used as to showcase the array of talent the club has behind the scenes. A preview. A taster. A trailer. Nothing more.
Youth improvement only comes from sustained exposure to 1st team football. We are talking about the prolonged runs in the 1st team that led to Beckham,Scholes, Butt, and the Nevilles forming the spine of a Manyoo team when conventional wisdom in Alan Hansen claimed that "You can't win anything with kids"
Arsenal are renowned for their youth project....I mean Fabregas was club captain at 19. That's what Guapo and Mithel refer to.
Muller and Kroos at Bayern were given sustained runs.
Ditto Xavi, Iniesta, Puyol and co at Barca. In fact, Guardiola got rid of Ronaldinho who was one of the world's best footballer at the time to build a squad around a teenage Messi.
That is the kind of integration that we are talkin about Nateevs, and Chelsea just doesn't do that.
Asides promoting to the 1st team, the only other way, which also seems to be the CFC preferred model, is to develop talent is to send them out on loan and let other clubs develop them for us.
This is what we are all bemoaning, as we think that some players are good enough to make the jump from reserve to 1st team squaddie playing guaranteed regular 1st team football.
Appearances in a dead rubber game means nothing. I'm surprised you don't know that

To begin with, you will never be able to convince me that dead rubber minutes do nothing to improve youngsters. That will always remain debatable. If what you meant to say is that in the long term process of a possible youth integration "AT CHELSEA", dead rubber minutes bear no consequence, then I agree.

To however be confident to say that it doesn't really improve a youngster, then we are on different planes of opinions and we cannot find common ground.


Secondly, you will also never be able to convince me that dead rubber minutes do nothing to the process of integration. There is unlimited data to back this up. Gael Clichy. 12 apps here, 15 apps there, another 7 and then bang, 27 apps in 06/07 after Cole left. Then 38 season after.

7 years ago Toni Kroos made 20 apps for BM. Only 6 were starts. There rest were largely, dead rubber minutes and proven by the fact that the next season, he went back to the reserves. He did come back to the first team the 3rd season but he made only 9 apps in the first half of the season and was shipped out in January 09 on loan for one and a half seasons. Only then did he come back to be a regular. You can say he took his chances or perhaps he was good enough to take his chances (that will be an argument for another day), the fact remains that those dead rubber minutes exposed him, improved him and made him what he is now. It's ironical that you would then try to use him as an example to dispel my argument when he actually exemplifies it.


Many times, these guys didn't just pop out of nowhere because of some club policy thingy. Club policy apart, the point I am making here is that if JM was manager of Bayern at the time Kroos emerged, Kroos probably will be playing for Plataeu United now. He (Jose) would have sanctioned a move for Makalele and Essien instead. And I am very sure Bayern fans will back me on this.




Thridly, in tackling the argument I should have initially, the dead rubber argument only came into the picture because you guys started it. Somehow you have managed to, without proof, conclude that the appearances I quoted of Romeu, Josh, Kakuta, Ake, Bertrand were largely dead rubber minutes and essentially meaningless. In fact Romeu had 11 PL starts in the 2011/12 season and 5 sub apps. I remember him almost establishing himself as a starter before the Barcelona buy-back rumours surfaced. How these minutes can called dead-rubber minutes is beyond me. The same goes for Bertrand. 14 starts in the 2012/13 season. How did we manage to find 14 dead rubber games for Bertrand and 11 in the case of Romeu?

I agree that I stretched the argument further by trying to explain how the seemingly meaningless minutes is a step forward in the process of integration. the main crux of the argument though remains, did any other manager(s) give youth chances more than JM? and the irrefutable answer is a resounding YES.

Dhelake: ^^^ Bertrand played UCL final because we wanted to park the boss and nothing more, we didn't have our full squad available then as well, If using them in Big games is what matters, Kalas also played against Liverpool, did Kakuta ever impress at Chelsea or anywhere else he went on loan?? The reason why everyone is making a case for Lukaku is because he did well the two times he went on loan, Every fan would love to see youth integrated, but everyone remembers what happened to those managers you listed above, only one of them managed for two seasons, I honestly think it's the club problem and i don't see it changing soon because even clubs like barca are no longer giving their academy boys chances any longer

You are saying Bertrand playing in the final was because we didn't have our full squad but you don't mention that he didn't play in defense and that he was substitued in the 73rd minute for Malouda. So yes, there was a player who could have played but didn't start because RDM "believed" he could do a job. Very different from the case of Kalas playing against Liverpool where every single defender who could possible play was either injured or suspended.

So Kalas played tremendously that day, kept a clean sheet against the best attack in the PL and should have got a goal. Before then, I ran many reports here of how well Kalas was doing in Vitesse. Guess where Kalas is now? On loan to FC Koln. It may be a club thing but are you saying the club will defy JM if he said, YES I want Kalas in my team? Aha! There's your answer.

My argument is that in a JM led team, rather than Ryan Bertrand playing ahead of Malouda in a CL final, lack of options or not, he will play Ferreira. Afterall, we were parking the bus.



--------

Let it be known that I don't disagree that pressure plays a big part. What is indisputable at the same time is that, in that pressurized environment, previous managers still managed to give more minutes to young players than JM did. What those managers knew was that winning only the Carling Cup never prevented you from a sack. So they played youth. JM knows that winning only the Carling Cup doesn't prevent him from getting the sack but you know he will turn up with Fabregas, Matic and Oscar in midfield against Accrington Stanley.

Nihilist: I'm not exactly sure what Nateevs is driving at really...

Guapo and Mithel have been referring to a more organic integration of youth prospects developed in-house and purchased assets, similar to what you see at Bayern, Barca, Arsenal, Manyoo etc...

The fact that Romeu had only 22 league(according to Nateevs) appearances out a possible 76 proves that he wasn't an integral part of the jigsaw at CFC. Btw Romeu was signed from Barca sef and not developed in house per se.

Sturridge was played out of position to accomodate the 50 million pound flop. He too was not an an academy product

Bertrand was only used for cup runouts and backup for when Mr Cole was injured.

So I'm not exactly sure what your point is....

Are you saying that previous managers have given the youth a chance, but the youth haven't taken it?

Are you saying that the youth were integral to the squad strength pre-Jose?

Or are you just being pedantic and pointing out that some youth players made appearances pre-Jose?

Because I don't see how you countered Guapo's point...

But no one here is arguing on the subject of 'organic integration of youth prospects developed in-house and purchased assets, similar to what you see at Bayern, Barca, Arsenal, Manyoo etc'.... Everyone here accepts this has never happened at Chelsea yet.


That said, the crux of the discussion is that on the road to the inevitable integration of youth players, however 'unconventional' the method, it is a fact that previous managers have given more chances to youth than JM ever has.

Whether dead rubber games, Carling Cup appearances, last few minutes, when it comes to youth football, they are very important minutes. I am saying that Carlo Ancellotti selected Josh McEachran and Ryan Bertrand to start Carling Cup games while we all know that JM is more likely to field his strongest 11 in the same games.

I am saying that Nathan Ake is selected in DM to start a Europa League 'QUARTER FINAL' game against Rubin Kazan and play 90 mins despite Mikel being on the bench.

I am saying it doesn't matter than Oriol came from Barcelona. He was 19 when he arrived and largely considered youth. I am saying it doesn't matter that Sturridge was played out of position, chances offered to youth, however irrelevant it seems, count.

I am saying 53 appearances for Ryan Bertrand, dead rubber or not, before JM, completely blows this argument out when compared to the same player racking up only 3 after JM arrives. I am saying that JM will not select Ryan Bertrand in the final of the CL.


I am saying that the likes of Barca, United, Arsenal have managed this intergation by first, giving 100s of 'seemingly meaningless appearances' to hundreds of kids before the ones who can cut it come through. Then the integration occurs. It's not magic and they don't have a youth success measuring device. This is how youth football works.

So when you attempt to throw my argument out by saying Bertrand was only used in place of the injured Ashley Cole, I am saying well, how else should he be used? He's a youth player. The questions are, in the absence of Ashley, will JM use Bertrand? In the absence of Filipe, will JM use Bertrand in a CL final? Will Oriol at 19 get 22 meaningless appearances under JM? Will Lewis Baker? Under JM, will Nathan Ake be selected as the single DM in a quarter-final of a Europa league game despite having Mikel on the bench?


I am saying that the combination of 'meaningless' apperances of youth players pre-JM are in the hundreds and that it is a fact. That it is only in units or low tens with JM. I am saying that we are in a far more talented era re:youth football than ever before (winning the youth cup 3 times in four years) and that those meaningless appearances should be on the up and not completely disappear.


And finally I am saying I really am surprised that there are Chelsea who don't already know this.

ElGuapo: Bro you're defining ''beasty'' the other way round. That strikeforce looks beasty in the sense that it would be difficult for any defence line to handle their intimidating presence in a game.

It's a known fact that Jose's history with the youth is laughable but then how many of our past managers ever considered the integration of the youth players into the first team?

The influx of laurels has always and would always matter most at the bridge, so it's not even a Jose problem, It's the Club's problem.

Most top teams in Europe are paying a minimal attention to the youth lately, laurels would always stand as the primary objective and this isn't just about gaining some bragging rights, it goes to enhance the club's reputation, attract sponsors, provide funds from the prize cash won and most importantly save the manager's job.

That said, I still hope Mou would get to change his philosophy and that of the club by promoting some youngsters into the first team, starting with Lewis Baker.

You and Mithel keep reguritating this stuff without researching if is actually true.

Ancellotti, AVB and RDM played more young players than JM ever did. Ancellotti gave match minutes to Josh McEachran and Gael Kakuta. AVB gave many minutes to Danny Sturridge and Romeu. Infact, Oriol Romeu has 33 appearances in a Chelsea shirt. 22 of those in the league over 2 seasons. Josh has 22 apperances in a Chelsea shirt. 11 of those over the two seasons Ancellotti was manager. Gael Kakuta had 16 appearances in a Chelsea shirt.

And before JM, Bertand has 53 appearances in a Chelsea shirt. After JM arrived, 3 appearances.


Do you guys even try to back this up with facts?

ElGuapo: Drogba's transfer
back to the bridge on one-year deal is just days away.

The Idea of having the triumvirate of Costa, Lukaku and Drogba in a single team looks beasty OR does Mou have plans to use mainly Costa and Drog who are well versed in his direct style of football with Nando providing him with a different option?

Altogether, I just love the idea of Didier staying with us for a year.

He's a free agent and we wouldn't have to spend much in this, it's a win-win situation for both Didier and Chelsea.

It doesn't look beasty. It's stupid. This is confirmation that Jose has no interest in developing youth at Chelsea. He is here to win and at any cost. While winning trophies is good for bragging rights, those bragging rights only last if you stay relevant. The reason Jose can fund big money transfers over the last two seasons is because some poeple did a good job signing players who struck the balance of youth, good resale value and ability to keep us competitve. Give Jose full control over transfers and the team will be filled with Filipes, Drogbas, Eto'os and Muntaris.

What is Drogba going to offer at 36 that cannot be handed to Lukaku? What does Lukaku have to do to be in this team?


I hope this is a genius plot to get Bamford out on loan in a PL side so he can come back and hold down a shirt. I really do. However based on historical Jose, my gut feeling says NO. We cannot go on like this. At this moment, there is Piazon, Moses, Josh, Traore, Atsu, Thorgan, Cuevas, Kalas, Wallace, PVA, Kakuta, Omeruo, Bertrand, Davilla all on loan and nowhere near the team. This is just a few. Yes a few of them are rubbish. Perhaps all are rubbish. But if they are, why not sell them all off? What's the point keeping them around and at the same time employing a manager who has little history of fostering youth and following through?

diggz: Abeg who saw the game yestday ? Wud like to know how van ginkel n romelu(especially) faired ? Heard the baker boi was something though..

I saw the game. I couldn't get more posts on here because of their yeye autospam bot that refused me access until this moment. Rubbish stuff.

Anyways, it's only preseason and taking performances with a pinch of salt is the right attitude. For me though, that excludes the young players. Van Ginkel was very ordinary. Nothing to report.

As all world cup participants are still away, Lukaku did not play.

Bamford did though and largely was not effective. This I believe was due to the huge imbalance in the team (John Swift a CM playing on the left) and Salah just being Salah. For his pace, he should be a really dangerous player but he is just rubbish. He lacks control of his pace and his decision making, very poor. (I am keeping an eye on him and I am sorry to say that at this moment he is just an Arabian SWP)

Baker showed why he should be considered for the first team. Setting up all three goals. Isaiah Brown was another one that distinguished himself in his position. Jay DaSilva did okay. The others did not do too well.

One wonders though if Jose has any plans for using these kids. There is no need raising their hopes if there is nothing concrete at the end of the process. For instance, this time last year Bertrand Traore was head and shoulders above all the youth players that featured in the pre-season games. His work permit issues I believe have since been sorted out after he couldn't be involved in the first team. This season he is nowhere near pre-season. And I seriously believe he is better than Salah.

Is there a point in Jose fielding all these young players in pre-season? Is Jose going to promote youngsters to the first team? History shows this is a waste of time.

Ibime: Bros leave that matter. There is no iota of comparism between them. Kroos is a dynasty builder, Pogba is just another decent midfielder.
The first thing to understand is that Kroos is a game controller whilst Pogba is one of the controlled.
No be today we done dey argue midfield. My eye is better than yours in that position.

I fully understand Kroos' abilities. They are indisputable. I just worry if how it fits into a Chelsea style and the PL at large.
Re: Pogba. He's only 21 and there isn't more than one season to go by in his support but in time, this discussion will be reviewed.



Re: Oriol Romeu. He has suffered a third knee injury. Contract extension may not be a good move.

If you ask me, I will say the fundamental difference in both players in their ability to play in the prem. This is what defines my choice. For all of the talents of Kroos, I still see him as a player that requires the space for execution. When given the space he's lethal. I have seen him being nullified a few times against Dortmund.

This is what the PL is about. Denying that space. Pogba is tailor-made for this. Pogba will engage in the thick of the action. He will create space through sheer ability or bully his way through by brute force. And he's only 21.

I am not defining the better player; just who I feel is more suited to our style and the PL.

mikeywise: personally, i think we have had enough signings for this window.
we already have a team and only need 2 or 3 additions.
we should all remember what happened to Spurs last season.

We don't. Like I say, we have numbers but we don't have produtcive numbers.
Take Willian, Salah, Moses Hazard and Schurrle for instance. Only Hazard can guarantee you assists and goals in double figures of the lot.

In midfield, only Fab can guarantee assists and goals in double figures. If these two players are injured we will be as tootlhess as we were last season. With Costa only adjusting in his first season, it could fast become a disaster. There will be a lot of players running around like they are doing something and we will find ourselves drawing with the likes of Crytstal Palace, Aston Villa et all all over again.


You need productive players from all departments of play and you need them in depth.

Conte's gone. Let's go get Popgba. That's one player take will totally elevate our mifield. Kroos to Madrid is done. Not that I would have preferred him to Pogba anyway. Pogba is young, fresh, dynamic, super talented, is a bit of a ckunt and sits in a very special place of being transferred in frm Europe yet being home grown. .

Fab, Matic, Pogba, Oscar, Tiago, Van Ginkel, Baker, Chalobah. Midfield complete for me. All others can go on loan.


This news with Greizmann? Now that's one ninja I will go drive down myself. I have always believed with need an upgrade on one of the flanks. For all of Willian's hardwork, productivity is meh. 3 assists in the PL leaves a lot to be desired. You can expect assists and goals in double figures from the likes of Griemann, Hazard, Fab, Pogba. A massive upgrade on last year where Hazard basically carried the team.

Ah! Finally my restriction has been lifted. Wahali dem no gree me post for like forever now.

nitlad: Wetin be dis nah. . . We get sense so?

£20M for a 28-year old LB. . .

To trust our own na abomination?

It will be the most disappointing signing were it to happen.

[quote author=Nairaland=info]I tell u i did not leave my sit throughout the duration of tha match...best match ever in this tourney & for those that missed it, BIG-SORRY.
Gave my support 2 the US but Belgium truly deserved it.
From what i saw, without controversy, i make bold to say #Origi has a presence of a striker than Lukaku/Benteke.[/quote]I felt slightly that way for 90 mins until Lukaku came in, made one goal and scored one and only had four attempts. then I didn't know what to think. One can say the Americans were already tired and Lukaku was fresh,. Origi has infinitely better technique than Lukaku but I don't believe that for now, he has more presence than Lukaku.

They both have presence. The understanding of the application of their attributes is what will stand each player out in the future.

That said,. Isn't it fabulous to have Benteke, Lukaku and Origi from the same country? The Belgians have some serious talent coming through. Chelsea's Carlie Musaonda and Throgan Hazard, Youri Tielemans and the numerous ones I don't know yet.

This is the best game I have seen so far in this world cup.

ItGeek: There are positives from the game. The referee was on a mission to send us out. Keshi shot himself in the foot with his team to the worldcup. No quality on bench to change the game. Mikel (no comments). Stopped watching the match when Onazi went off. At that point we were screwed. Were do we find a manager who will remove sentiments and take our best players to a worldcup.

Your last statement is the real issue. I want to ask for Keshi to stay but I also know that a European manager would not have played Mikel beyond the first 45mins of this competition. Keshi needed to stop Mikel, had numerous chances to do so but didn't. We someone with the balls to ask anyone to phuck off irrespective of status.

Is this where we call Siasia?


Kudos to Ibime. He's called the dude out as an actor for years. I feel embarrassed for ever calling Mikel a footballer.

Enyeama fall my hand o. You got there alright, just punch it.

lalalefriday: Seriously what does Matuidi have to do to get sent off?

I reckon he could stab up someone on the pitch and not even get a booking

The way he is going, he will bite someone and still not get sent off.
The guy is getting away with everything.

Good lord! Our only midfielder is out.

CFCfan: ^^
Emenike's goal should have stood! He was not offside by much. Such decisions are usually given in favor of the attacking player.

I agree Mikel has been awful, but there is no Igiebor in the side

I mean I don't rate Azeez but I believe his desire to work will close down all French fronts and allow us to go forward. Keshi should also take out Moses for Ameobi (and I can't stand Ameobi) and play Emenike on the right.

The goal was not offside. Should have stood. BBC cannot manage their expectations. They cannot believe that Nigeria, except for a few French chances have been the better team on average. They all predicted France to go through easily. They won't even discuss anything Nigeria apart from our disallowed goal. The rest of the time, they discussed Pogba and how the French are being 'held'. It's ridiculous.

Honestly take out Mikel and Moses and field anyone at all and we win this. Mikel is not helping Onazi at all. Moses is the synonym for lethargy. Officiating is shocking. The commentators and the BBC crew are so ridiculous, it's annoying.

jimmy4x: with what Oscar played in the first match against Croatia, I was thinking if we paired Oscar and Matic in CM, with fabregas in front behind Costa....Oscar can go forward and track back to defend, isn't that what we need Pogba for

Oscar and Fab in the same midfield is a light weight midfield. When we come up against the likes of City or PSG, they will run through us like hot knife through butter.

Ibime: Hmmmm. . . Finally remembered my password.
You can't criticize a business on it's own premises.
Seun has a business to protect, hence the information management. Mukina must be working overtime to keep a lid on the dissension.
But. . . a responsible business should be telling us the nature of the data breach ie are our email addresses in the wrong hands etc before worrying about the business reputation.

No doubt. Instead what they like to see is the multitude of uninformed users on the politics threads, invoking the blood of Jesus and "praying" that God will punish the hackers.

CFCfan: Yobo is set to be the first Nigerian player to reach 100 caps, and the first to play in 10 world cup matches

Interesting fact. I would not guyess that. Who keeps the figures, you sure the PDP is not involved?

[quote author=da-whizkid]I don't see how our Central Midfield is "filled up". Matic is the only Decent player there. Mikel is slow and not creative enough, Van Ginkel is inexperienced, Ramires is a dud. I think Pogba is overpriced, but he fits in. Young, Slightly experienced, and creative. He can add to the team immediately and can still become better. If we can get him for £40-45, I will say let's get him![/quote]I whole-heartedly agree with this. Pogba, though expensive and may come with his drama, is an insane asset to have. He fits the bill. He's young, insanely talented, good on the ball, astute passer of the ball and is home-grown. A midfield of Matic, Pogba and Fabregas is formidable.

Then we can in dead rubber games, give the likes of Van Ginkel, RLC and Chalobah a chance.


I wonder if Jose is looking into possibility of keeping one of Atsu, Thorgan or Traore as a fringe player. All these dudes have the rudiments to be top pros. They can do a job.

So posts criticising the management of the site have been removed. Nice!

So what happened, did Arsenal win a trophy?