Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
PorcupineorPineapple
14 May 18 06:22
Joined:
Date Joined: 03 Dec 15
| Topic/replies: 11,828 | Blogger: PorcupineorPineapple's blog
What's the better achievement?
Pause Switch to Standard View 100 pts vs going unbeaten
Show More
Loading...
Report SontaranStratagem May 14, 2018 7:41 AM BST
Aresnal despite the unbeaten run would have still been 10 points behind this City team so for me the 100 points wins it, taking nothing away from the unbeaten run though.
Report jon b May 14, 2018 11:14 AM BST
To go thru a whole season unbeaten was an amazing effort at the time, yes some luck would of been involved but that can be said of the 100pt target hit by City too, it was 98 pts on 93 mins just in this last game. Arsenal did it against much bigger spending teams and the run lasted 48 plus games, no mean feat, City are the biggest spenders in the league atm, unlimited funds we know, Arseanl did it under a structured financial approach as they,ve always been so that achievement holds sway for me
Report donny osmond May 14, 2018 12:29 PM BST
arsenal seemed happy with a point at sjp when going unbeaten, whereas citeh seemed
to come to win...

the two are both great but with different targets for the clubs at the time
almost impossible to say which is better


citys points total is the best ever, whereas preston did the double and were undefeated
albeit playing fewer games
Report mesmerised May 14, 2018 12:32 PM BST
Easy to win points when you've won the title with a few games to go, Arsenal were under pressure  right til the very last game to remain undefeated for the season, even went behind in the last match and came back. 

This is also the weakest ever PL season so doesn't really say much.
Report PorcupineorPineapple May 14, 2018 12:45 PM BST
So that's 2 Arsenal fans saying Arsenal's achievement is betterHappy
Report chathamjack May 14, 2018 12:55 PM BST
It's a great achievement by City no doubt, but it'll always be pointed out they have the most expensive squad and the biggest bankroll, it feels as significant as PSG or Bayern doing something simliar, particularly when United come second and are considered mediocre at best even by their own fans.

You can point out that Arsenal side drew a lot of games, but I'll never forget that season, like Leciester winning the league, Fergie chasing down Keegan's Newcastle, or their Treble, I think those are the moments that stand the test of time, even Aguero's last minute goal will last longer in the memory than them hitting 100 points,

If City go on to dominate the next 4-5 years, maybe win a Champions League, then it'll be seen as the watershed moment and when they started to really dominate,

But I remember Liverpool doing them over three times in sigificant games more than any other result they've had this season at this moment, even now, and particularly if Liverpool beat Madrid, the media won't be speculating can City dominate, it'll be all about how good can this Liverpool side be next season, and are they the ones to topple them,

They have to play the pantomime villian role, the more they achieve, the more notoriety the team which eventually beat them will have.
Report asparagus May 14, 2018 1:45 PM BST
Obviously City's achievement is better. You set out to gain as many points as possible and win trophies. Remaining unbeaten is of much less importance. City go out to win matches. Utd's treble is of course the best achievement in the Premier League era but in pure league terms this is by far the greatest achievement. Most points, most goals, most entertainment.
Report themover May 14, 2018 1:46 PM BST
Arsenal drew against Bolton, Charlton, Everton, Leicester, Man Utd (twice), Newcastle, Portsmouth (twice), Spurs, Birmingham and Fulham that season. City drew with Everton, Huddersfield, Burnley and Palace and lost to Liverpool and Manchester United. City's season edges it for me but I might be a bit biased as a City fan Laugh
Report leazes67 May 14, 2018 2:04 PM BST
In theory you can go unbeaten and be relegated,so City for me.
Report mesmerised May 14, 2018 2:53 PM BST
But they went unbeaten and won the title instead.
Report JC1326 May 14, 2018 4:35 PM BST

May 14, 2018 -- 7:46AM, themover wrote:


Arsenal drew against Bolton, Charlton, Everton, Leicester, Man Utd (twice), Newcastle, Portsmouth (twice), Spurs, Birmingham and Fulham that season. City drew with Everton, Huddersfield, Burnley and Palace and lost to Liverpool and Manchester United. City's season edges it for me but I might be a bit biased as a City fan


I would say that bar the Everton match, all those losses came when the league was done and dusted too

Report REDUNDANT PUNTER May 14, 2018 9:13 PM BST
Had Liverpool not beaten them when hey did I think they could have gone the season unbeaten  imo
Report morpteh mackem May 14, 2018 9:19 PM BST
100 points easily better , can go through unbeaten just park the bus every game and get 38 points .
Report everyone's a winner May 14, 2018 9:22 PM BST
it's not comparing like-for-like and both are phenomenal achievements but i actually think, given the respective competition and money being pumped into the team at the time, maybe arsenal's achievement edges it. and i am not a gunners fan in any way, shape or form, to coin a phrase. however, what's the criterion / criteria for judging this by? managerial ability?
Report asparagus May 15, 2018 7:52 AM BST
I find it weird that this debate has got people on both sides. In a competition to get the most points one team got 100 points and the other got 90 points. It's quite clear which is the better achievement. If it was 100 and 98/99 you might put up an argument to consider an unbeaten record as better, but it's 10 points difference. It's not even close.
Report REDUNDANT PUNTER May 15, 2018 8:09 AM BST
It's the notion that over a full season no one could beat you it's not the points reward its the fact u haven t been beaten

Not sure how many times it's been accomplished in how many leagues but it takes some doing
Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 8:20 AM BST
Let me sum this up.

Arsenal were not trying to win 100 points, they were trying to win a league title, they won the league title and were unbeatable.

Man City were trying to win 100 points along with the title, that was their aim, did you see Mythiola celebrate the goal at Southampton as if that was actually the title clincher - it was won several week earlier, he is an ego maniac and wanted records - but as proven, his team were beatable and should have lost 3 games in all if Milivojević had of scored that 92nd minute penalty in the 0-0 draw.

That's because the bald headed leach doesn't have a Plan B, the Invincibles knew when to shut up shop.

Buys defenders for 50/60 million a pop, a 35 mil Goalkeeper, a 45 mil bench warmer in Silva and 40 mil wingers and people are queuing up to praise himLaugh

Give the same money to all managers and see how far he gets.


At the beginning of the 2003/04 season, Arsenal spent a grand total of £7.25 million, 2002/2003 £6.6 million, 2001/2002 £14.7 mil
Man City in the last 3 seasons have spent £600 Million, (Six Hundred Million pounds Sterling)

The invincibles was put together on a shoe string. City bought 100 points.

Kind Regards.
Report PorcupineorPineapple May 15, 2018 8:24 AM BST
But Arsenal lost several games that season. They were pretty far from invincible really. If you use the same logic, the team winning the FA Cup can claim they're invincible because they're unbeaten IN THAT ONE COMPETITION.
Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 8:27 AM BST
er, we're talking about the league nothing else, not cup competitions. Otherwise why would ask to compare 100 points to going unbeaten which was in the league, otherwise you're shifting the goalposts. They were invincible in the league. We all know they lost cup matches.
Report PorcupineorPineapple May 15, 2018 8:54 AM BST
I know. I think the point about motivations is moot. Both teams had the title wrapped up with plenty to spare and then moved on to secondary targets. City's was the points record, Arsenal's was to stay unbeaten, drawing 5 out of their final 8 games. Maybe if they hadn't been worried about remaining unbeaten they'd have been more gung ho, won those extra 5 games and would have been the first to 100 points. Maybe. But each team had their own motivation and went and got it. I'd actually say Arsenal's desire to remain unbeaten had a far bigger impact on their latter performances than City's desire to keep on winning and get the points.

As for the money spent that doesn't matter. The game is dominated by spending now and City are hardly alone. Their neighbours are a cautionary tale for the muppets who say any manager would be successful given unlimited funds. It's far, far more difficult than that.



For what it's worth, I'd say going unbeaten is probably the bigger achievement. Certainly the one I'd want more I think. Just think it's an interesting comparison and the comments (excluding the obvious ones by Arsenal and City fans) have been good to read.
Report enpassant May 15, 2018 9:22 AM BST
100 points can be bettered - unbeaten is unbeaten
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 9:28 AM BST
Pretty pointless argument, but for my money Arsenal's unbeaten season is the greater achievement for precisely the reason enpassant gives.

Both teams are still fresh enough in everyone's mind for the more pertinent question to be asked: If the Arsenal team of 2003-4 and the City team of 2017-8 were to play each other, who would win? There is no doubt in my mind that the Arsenal team would win, and win well.
Report REDUNDANT PUNTER May 15, 2018 9:40 AM BST
Can T see the merit in guessing who would win in a head to head as it's conjecture

Lie me saying Liverpool of this seasoned beat both although that has more substance as they have already beaten one of them three times this season
Report asparagus May 15, 2018 10:07 AM BST
Feels like some people don't understand that when you go out on the pitch in a  match the priority is to win the game and gain 3 points, not to make sure you don't get beat. And let's not try and pretend Arsenal could have got 100 points that season. It's ridiculous.
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 10:11 AM BST
I think the opposition - and the strength in depth of the League itself - are factors, although again it is impossible to be too bullish about one's opinion. I would say that the opposition to Arsenal, both at the top end of the table and lower down the League, was stronger - I don't have the information for that season to hand, but this season all three promoted sides stayed up which tells you something about the quality of teams already present in the top flight when they were promoted.
Report Poppydog. May 15, 2018 10:25 AM BST
Still don't get this buying the title matter.

Last 5 years Man City, Man Utd and Chelsea are in the same ballpark in Gross Spending (within about 12% of each other),
with Liverpool not that far behind.

With regard to Net Spending Man City and Man Utd are virtually the same, with Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and ...err Palace some way behind.

Maybe it's just mind-beaten into football supporters that Man City are not historically credible.

Nevertheless, the Arsenal achievement of unbeaten is more appreciated by me, though I'm also pleased to see a split opinion,
with several decent points.
Report anxious May 15, 2018 10:33 AM BST
Manchester United Treble team of 99 were better than both
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:35 AM BST

May 14, 2018 -- 6:32AM, mesmerised wrote:


Easy to win points when you've won the title with a few games to go, Arsenal were under pressure  right til the very last game to remain undefeated for the season, even went behind in the last match and came back.  This is also the weakest ever PL season so doesn't really say much.


You're talking sh*t again... If the premiership was that weak Liverpool wouldnt be in the champions league final - a team city finished Christ knows how many points ahead of. City have made it look weak. The Spanish league is comfortably the best league but to defend your arsenal teams achievement as better because " its the weakest ever premiership season" shows how clueless you are. If a team draws every game it equals Arsenals invincible record but ends up relegated or near relegation to the championship on 38 points, how the hell is that a greater achievement ? Draws don't illustrate how good a team is , wins do which is why this current city teams achievement beats the 03/04 arsenal side of being unbeaten.

Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:39 AM BST

May 15, 2018 -- 2:20AM, mesmerised wrote:


Let me sum this up.Arsenal were not trying to win 100 points, they were trying to win a league title, they won the league title and were unbeatable.Man City were trying to win 100 points along with the title, that was their aim, did you see Mythiola celebrate the goal at Southampton as if that was actually the title clincher - it was won several week earlier, he is an ego maniac and wanted records - but as proven, his team were beatable and should have lost 3 games in all if Milivojević had of scored that 92nd minute penalty in the 0-0 draw.That's because the bald headed leach doesn't have a Plan B, the Invincibles knew when to shut up shop.Buys defenders for 50/60 million a pop, a 35 mil Goalkeeper, a 45 mil bench warmer in Silva and 40 mil wingers and people are queuing up to praise himGive the same money to all managers and see how far he gets.At the beginning of the 2003/04 season, Arsenal spent a grand total of £7.25 million, 2002/2003 £6.6 million, 2001/2002 £14.7 milMan City in the last 3 seasons have spent £600 Million, (Six Hundred Million pounds Sterling)The invincibles was put together on a shoe string. City bought 100 points.Kind Regards.


You say the invincibles "knew how to shut up shop " pity they couldnt manage that when they were pumped by united in the FA cup and chelsea in the champions league .. more rubbish

Report enpassant May 15, 2018 10:43 AM BST
"I was in the side that got 100 points" or " I was one in the side that was undefeated"

What would you prefer ?
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 10:44 AM BST
The Cups have nothing to do with this argument, because if they did you'd have a hard job talking City's season up too much when they've lost a cup game to a League one side.
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:46 AM BST
It's irrelevant what I'd prefer, the debate is which is the better team. City have scored 106 goals this season, Arsenal scored 73 in 03/04 - City conceded 27 goals this season compared to arsenal conceding 26 in their invincible year. By every reasonable comparison of the two teams, the city side was vastly superior to the Arsenal one regardless of the fancy invincible tag. If the two teams played each other at a neutral venue, city would start as clear favourites.
Report Poppydog. May 15, 2018 10:46 AM BST
Mildly interesting that of Arsenal's invincible season, 10 of the other 19 clubs aren't even in this year's Premier Lge.

Add to that relegated Southampton and yo-yo Newcastle and the fact that Spurs, Everton and Man City finished in the bottom 7
Report REDUNDANT PUNTER May 15, 2018 10:47 AM BST
I guess the only true defining answer would be of it was done by two team's in the same season

Whoever took the title would be the winner
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:48 AM BST
Incidentally I prefer Arsenal as a club to city , but people implying the Arsenal team of 03/04 is better with the statistics as they are look through rose coloured glasses back in the mists of time utterly deluded
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 10:49 AM BST
Maybe City would start as favourites, but Arsenal would win easily.
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 10:50 AM BST
And they would win easily for the simple reason that they had better players all over the pitch.
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:54 AM BST

May 15, 2018 -- 4:44AM, jed.davison wrote:


The Cups have nothing to do with this argument, because if they did you'd have a hard job talking City's season up too much when they've lost a cup game to a League one side.


I suppose Arsenal being battered home and away in the league cup is conveniently forgotten then. Most people including bookies use goals in determining the relative strengths of respective teams.. city have a goal difference of 79 this season compared to Arsenals goal difference of 47. If anyone thinks the latter is evidence of a superior team, they need their heads tested and to call it a day betting on anything vaguely football related

Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:55 AM BST
Why did this great team lose home and away to Middlesbrough, or are we just counting citys cup woes and forgetting arsenals?
Report Poppydog. May 15, 2018 10:58 AM BST
OPs question was which is the better achievement

Yet posters are constantly confusing this, with which is/was the better team.... (?)
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 10:59 AM BST
A squad of players is paid to win matches and collect as many points as possible so citys achievement is better although Arsenals is more " notable "
Report PorcupineorPineapple May 15, 2018 11:00 AM BST
Indeed poppy.

I think the City team would win and win fairly well really. But I think Arsenal's is the achievement I'd most want Liverpool to repeat.
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 11:01 AM BST
Thierry henry still the best striker Ive seen ever play in the premiership tho
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 11:04 AM BST
I never mentioned Cup matches, you sought to belittle Arsenal's achievements in the League by bringing their record in the Cup that year into the equation.
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 11:07 AM BST
You referred to city losing to wigan as evidence that" you would have a hard job talking citys season up"
Report jed.davison May 15, 2018 11:12 AM BST
Only after you brought up the Cup defeat to United and the COL defeat to Chelsea.Do keep up mate.
Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 11:23 AM BST
I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what Baby Wolf is saying because he is blocked as he knows, so hope he is not stupid enough to even be quoting me - lol. Maybe his Portuguese team Wolves will bring this pit of misery some joy - lol.


Poppy, not sure if Net spending is that relevant when it comes to buying titles, they let go a lot of dead wood such as Iheanacho, Bony, Dzeko, Jovetic etc who were surplus to requirements.

When you go out and out bid the competition with silly money such as 57 mil for Laporte or 35 mil for a Keeper, you are buying silverware.

City spent around 140 million more than United in the last 2 seasons, and it shows in the 19 point difference.
Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 11:23 AM BST
Net spend.
Report loui May 15, 2018 11:28 AM BST
Out of cup by Wigan?
Report DirkDiggler May 15, 2018 1:25 PM BST
This is also the weakest ever PL season so doesn't really say much.


Not as weak as when Leicester won it. Though fully deserved by Leicester that was a terribly weak league.
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 2:00 PM BST

May 15, 2018 -- 5:23AM, mesmerised wrote:


I have absolutely no idea whatsoever what Baby Wolf is saying because he is blocked as he knows, so hope he is not stupid enough to even be quoting me - lol. Maybe his Portuguese team Wolves will bring this pit of misery some joy - lol.Poppy, not sure if Net spending is that relevant when it comes to buying titles, they let go a lot of dead wood such as Iheanacho, Bony, Dzeko, Jovetic etc who were surplus to requirements.When you go out and out bid the competition with silly money such as 57 mil for Laporte or 35 mil for a Keeper, you are buying silverware.City spent around 140 million more than United in the last 2 seasons, and it shows in the 19 point difference.


YEAH forget the 120 million arsenal spent on lacazette and aubameyang Grin not buying success there at all or trying to lol

Report mafeking May 15, 2018 2:03 PM BST
yes the sides from 7th down as a collective are very poor mainly cos the mid table sides the likes of everton, saints, west ham and stoke are all is weak as they've been in 5 years at least but arguably and certainly this season's CL results would indicate that 5 of the top 10 clubs in europe are in the prem at the moment. they'd all start favourites against virtually anyone except the big 3 and possibly juventus and psg
Report wolf3011 May 15, 2018 2:04 PM BST

May 15, 2018 -- 7:25AM, DirkDiggler wrote:


This is also the weakest ever PL season so doesn't really say much.Not as weak as when Leicester won it. Though fully deserved by Leicester that was a terribly weak league.


Absolutely , when you consider 5 English teams were in the knockout stages ( last 16) it just points to it being anything other than " the weakest ever " but this comes from a poster who tipped Arsenal to beat Atletico so no great shock

Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 2:28 PM BST
PSG are another example of a team that buys success. Maybe even more so than City.
Report ufcdan May 15, 2018 3:23 PM BST
Both great achievements ! However 100 points beats 90 for me plus I haven't abused or been abused by mesmerized in ages ExcitedLaughWink
Report mesmerised May 15, 2018 3:31 PM BST
moi? abuse for having an opinion, never, though just remember pbk my opinion is more important than yoursWink
Report themover May 15, 2018 5:01 PM BST

May 15, 2018 -- 8:28AM, mesmerised wrote:


PSG are another example of a team that buys success. Maybe even more so than City.


who's your £390 million stadium doing (at 2006 prices) ?

Report themover May 15, 2018 5:03 PM BST
how's
Report themover May 15, 2018 5:44 PM BST
Here's a list of the Man City players that Arsenal could have bought with the £390m they spent on a stadium since 2006 :

David Silva £26m
Aguero £38m
Fernandinho £30m
Sterling £44m
Otamendi £28m
De Bruyne £55m
Gundogan £20m
Jesus £27m
Sane £37m
Walker £45m
Ederson £35m

and had a few million in change Laugh
Report ufcdan May 15, 2018 9:49 PM BST
moi? abuse for having an opinion, never, though just remember pbk my opinion is more important than yoursWink


OR opinions are like ar$eholes..........everyones got one Wink
Report roache May 15, 2018 9:59 PM BST
100 points and still a million miles away from winning the champions league despite the unlimited funds.
Report themover May 15, 2018 11:12 PM BST
might have unlimited funds but being allowed to spend them is another matter
Report themover May 15, 2018 11:16 PM BST
Most City fans aren't too bothered by the Champions League, even those that go give the anthem a good boo before kick-off. Would be nice to win it just so others can stop going on about it though Grin This seasons final being contested by two teams well off the pace in their own domestic league just about sums it up.
Report donny osmond May 15, 2018 11:37 PM BST
both teams went down the route of what they could do at end of season and both achieved their targets

and preston were undefeated and won cup too

and man utd won treble

all great teams with remarkable records

pleased to have seen 3 of the 4
Report REDUNDANT PUNTER May 16, 2018 7:27 AM BST
Most city fans probably aren't bothered by the cl as they don't understand the concept

Like joining in the london marathon  at the the 22 mile stage and wondering what a the fuss is about
Report enpassant May 16, 2018 8:11 AM BST
wolf3011 • May 15, 2018 10:46 AM BST
It's irrelevant what I'd prefer, the debate is which is the better team.



I think you will find that is not the OP's question : "What's the better achievement? "
Report mesmerised May 16, 2018 8:58 AM BST
Joined: 25 Apr 03 | Topic/replies: 49,541 | Blogger: themover's blog
Most City fans aren't too bothered by the Champions League,


Small club mentality Wink

I think you will find that is not the OP's question : "What's the better achievement? "

This guy Baby Wolf would struggle to find his own backside with both hands.
Report Can't Catch Me May 16, 2018 11:00 AM BST
Initially I would have plumped for City. But then when asked this question:

enpassant 15 May 18 10:43 Joined: 03 Jun 15 | Topic/replies: 3,737 | Blogger: enpassant's blog
"I was in the side that got 100 points" or " I was one in the side that was undefeated"

What would you prefer ?


Obviously the Gooners achievement sounds better.
Report Mikael D'Haguenet May 16, 2018 12:53 PM BST
Both great seasons, splitting hairs really. That said, if someone gave you a choice for next season over whether you were to go unbeaten or win 100 points, surely you take the 100pts.
Report PorcupineorPineapple May 16, 2018 1:08 PM BST
I think I'd take going unbeaten Mikael personally. That's why on balance I'd consider it the better achievement. That said, the way the top teams are now you could probably go unbeaten and not win the league so maybe not. At least 100 points will definitely mean the title.
Report rommel May 16, 2018 1:28 PM BST
mourinho could go unbeaten all season,every fckn season,surely its the ave points youre picking up per game
Report rommel May 16, 2018 1:29 PM BST
not knocking the unbeaten record-its a great achievemnt
Report gibmark May 16, 2018 1:48 PM BST
if the question was draw every game v 100pts , then 100 points of course , but that's not the question ...for me its Arsenal going unbeaten
Report Mikael D'Haguenet December 16, 2018 9:03 AM GMT
Thread a little different to how I remembered it, even though it's only a few months old.

Would love to see an unbeaten season result in no title. That should settle it.
Report FredRescue December 16, 2018 11:00 AM GMT
It is known as "doing a Perugia"

But even if Liverpool manage that this year it won't nearly be as impressive as Perugia who managed it when it was 2 points for a win Surprised
Report pushkin99 December 16, 2018 11:20 AM GMT
IMHO 100 points is the better achievement. Dropping only 14 points in an entire season is amazing.
Report darren_discombobulates_sports December 16, 2018 11:46 AM GMT
There's 2 reasons why going unbeaten is a better achievement than winning 100 points

1. The 100 points record can be broken, going a whole season unbeaten can only be matched never bettered, such a rarity that I think it broke a 116 year old record in England, going back to Preston in 1888?

2. Man City were cruising to the title at the half way stage, literally after the 19th game had been played they were 15 points / 5 games ahead of second place, meaning there's was no real pressure to win, they could take a lot more risks and know even if they started losing games they'd win the league given the distance to second place, whereas with Arseanal, there was pressure right to the very end not to lose a match, City had won the league with 5/6 matches left.

If you had to chose which side you would want to be in/remembed in, I would want to be in an unbeaten side, the 100 points team can be beaten, one team is called the invicibles, the other doesn't have a tag.


both great acheivements though!
Report Mikael D'Haguenet January 12, 2020 8:31 PM GMT
Bump
Report spyker January 13, 2020 10:33 AM GMT
This is very simple - these 2 scenarios can happen in the same season so which fans would be more satisfied and which team regarded as better if team' A' go unbeaten and get 90 points, team 'b' loses 3 games and gets 99 points (or 101!) and wins the league? No one would even mention 'the invincibles' again....other than the odd Arse fan........
Report Charlton2005 January 13, 2020 4:46 PM GMT
you could go unbeaten and get relegated so evidently means f@ck all.
Report lurka January 13, 2020 4:54 PM GMT
They wouldn't be called the Invincibles if they went unbeaten and got relegated or didn't win the league. It's not just going unbeaten, it's being unbeaten champions
Report Charlton2005 January 13, 2020 4:56 PM GMT
and therein lies the BS of being tagged unbeaten
Report lurka January 13, 2020 4:58 PM GMT
Likewise with 100 points. Highly unlikely to not win it with a total of 100 points but it nearly happened last season. Liverpool got 97 and it meant sweet FA
Report themover January 13, 2020 4:59 PM GMT
https://www.sportsbreak.com/soccer/
16-european-soccer-teams-to-go-unbeaten-in-a-season/
Report Can't Catch Me January 13, 2020 5:17 PM GMT
Good to see the mighty reds decided to take this argument out of the equation. Just get more than 100 points AND go unbeaten. And thus become the greatest ever side in the English top flight.

Simples.
Report themover January 13, 2020 5:30 PM GMT
You'd have to do the domestic treble for that honour imho Wink
Report lfc1971 January 13, 2020 8:40 PM GMT
Obviously winning the title is the first priority . That being the case going unbeaten is the greater achievement
Report lfc1971 January 13, 2020 8:43 PM GMT
Don’t forget if a team beats you it is possible they are a better team .
Report tobermory January 13, 2020 9:28 PM GMT
I think points totals are subject to luck.

Man City were lucky to get 100. Arsenal 2004 were unlucky to only get 90.

Without even going back and checking I recall 4 games where City were drawing with bottom half fodder with a few minutes left and got a goal out of nowhere. An absurd deflection against Bournemouth and one that rebounded off Raheem Sterling's face against Huddersfield are the 2 stand out examples.

With 2003/04 Arsenal it was more the reverse. Game changing, Out of the blue, late goals, almost always went against them. I can't recall any injury time winners. The luckiest game for Arsenal I suppose was the 1-1 home draw with Portsmouth where Pires dived for the penalty that became the equalizer. But even without that gift it would only have been 0-1 at HT and a comeback would have been expected still.
Report tobermory January 13, 2020 9:32 PM GMT

May 15, 2018 -- 4:55AM, wolf3011 wrote:


Why did this great team lose home and away to Middlesbrough, or are we just counting citys cup woes and forgetting arsenals?


The Arsenal Invincibles never played in that season's League Cup. It was fringe squad players like Cygan/Keown and youth players. Even in the semis it was Aliadiere up front, not Henry.

Report Charlton2005 January 19, 2020 11:02 PM GMT
"Invincibles"

walofs Grin
Report SontaranStratagem January 20, 2020 1:09 AM GMT
Liverpool got 97 last season and if not for the choke around the time they played City they'd have got 100 points and won the title

This Liverpool side are on for 200 points in two seasons combined, that is absolutely insane when you think about. 1 defeat over 1 and a half seasons (spread across 2 seasons) this point in the piece and that in itself is bonkers, not to mention over a year unbeaten now.

This Liverpool side will be up there with the invisibles there's not denying that
Report Crisp77 January 20, 2020 8:29 AM GMT
You won't see the likes of these invisibles again.
Report Coachbuster January 20, 2020 1:30 PM GMT
100 points


an unbeaten record is merely a statistic
Report Coachbuster January 20, 2020 1:32 PM GMT
as charlton 2005 points out you can go 38 unbeaten and still get relegated
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com