Would Arsenal double put Arteta ahead of Klopp in manager ranking? | OneFootball

Will Mikel Arteta surpass Jurgen Klopp in a Premier League manager ranking if Arsenal win the double?

This is a belting Mailbox taking in Liverpool, Xabi Alonso, Tottenham, VAR and more. Send your own thoughts to theeditor@football365.com

Will double put Arteta ahead of Klopp?

If Arsenal were to win the continental double, it would be a good moment to reflect on who the better manager actually is: Arteta or Klopp. Let’s do a breakdown to determine a winner.

League Cup: Klopp 2-0 Arteta

Here Klopp is the clear winner with 2 League Cups to Arteta’s none. No complaints.

Winner: Klopp

PL Titles: Klopp 1-1 Arteta

The gold standard measuring stick. Here Arteta and Klopp would be tied one apiece. Klopp’s title, while undeniably impressive, will always carry the unique distinction of being won in front of empty stadiums with no fan pressure or atmosphere. For a club synonymous with “You’ll Never Walk Alone”, Klopp’s Liverpool arguably produced their finest football when everyone was, in fact, alone. Covid football often resembled one long pre-season tournament, though to be fair Klopp still ended a 30-year wait for a weary fanbase who at least got excellent value from their TV subscriptions that year.

As a tie breaker, we can look at league performance overall. Both managers finished 8th in their first seasons and both have also finished outside the top four twice. Klopp’s later drop-offs perhaps shouldn’t count too heavily against him given the success he delivered beforehand. Second-place finishes are probably the fairest metric to separate them.

Liverpool’s points totals in those runner-up seasons were undeniably impressive, but with three second-place finishes overall, it becomes difficult to ignore Arteta’s consistency with their potential title winning season played under normal football conditions with full stadiums and fully engaged opposition teams.

Winner: Arteta (theoretically)

FA Cups: Klopp 1-1 Arteta

Again there are striking parallels here. Both managers won the FA Cup in seasons where they also finished 8th, and both knocked out Man City and Chelsea en route to lifting the trophy. Liverpool did require penalties in the final rather than winning outright in normal time, though fairness dictates that a trophy is a trophy, even if technically achieved via drawing.

The only sensible way to split them is by analysing the route to Wembley. Here Klopp’s Liverpool enjoyed significant home comforts, with three of their four pre-semi-final ties coming at Anfield against the likes of Shrewsbury and Cardiff. Arsenal meanwhile had to navigate difficult PL encounters like Bournemouth away.

On balance, and I think Liverpool fans would agree with me, the edge has to go to Arteta.

Winner: Arteta

Champions League: Klopp 1-1 Arteta

If Arteta were to emerge victorious in Budapest, it would place him level with Klopp in terms of CL titles. Looking closer, there are once again interesting similarities between their runs. Both sides defeated Bayern Munich and Portuguese opposition in earlier stages of the tournament, while also overcoming major Spanish clubs in Atletico Madrid and Barcelona in their respective semi finals.

PSG, whatever people think of them, represent one of the defining superclubs of the modern era and would be formidable opposition for any finalist. Klopp meanwhile secured his only Champions League title against Tottenham.

That inevitably matters.

It is also worth noting that Klopp’s winning campaign included a 3-0 semi-final first-leg defeat, whereas Arteta’s Arsenal will arrive in Budapest having conceded only six goals in the entire competition. The contrast in control and defensive authority is difficult if not impossible to ignore.

Winner: Arteta (theoretically)

UEFA Super Cup and FIFA Club World Cup

Klopp has won both, although notably without managing to beat either opponent inside 90 minutes – a recurring theme of his (successful) final appearances. Still, these are recognised honours and deserve to be acknowledged properly.

Arteta, of course, has not yet had the opportunity to compete for them.

Winner: Tie

So if Arteta were to win both the Premier League and Champions League this season, I think there would be a very serious conversation to be had about whether he has already surpassed Klopp both as a manager and as a cultural figure within modern football. What do Liverpool fans think? Would you agree? Harry, AFC, Dublin

If Alonso goes to Chelsea, I’m out of Liverpool

I didn’t think we could stoop any lower.

First we let this fraud come in and drive Trent out of the club.

Then he’s driven Mo out, with his lack of man management skills driving a wedge between Mo and the club.

He’s treated Rio like rubbish, seemingly unwilling to let him prove himself for whatever reason.

And worst of all, loyal Servants like Virgil, Robbo etc are being cast aside – this is not what we as a club stand for!!

Now, the icing on the cake, are we going to keep the fraud, while Chelsea come and take Xabi Alonso back to English football. If this happens, and Edwards et al don’t act immediately to sack the fraud, and bring him home – I’m out. I’ve never liked Chelsea but if Alonso is their manager on September 1st, and Slot is still in Anfield, I’m becoming a Chelsea fan, as much as that makes me sick.

Do the right thing lads

YNWA Darren, LFC (for now)

Why Arne Slot doesn’t ‘deserve’ anything

There’s a great line in the Western Unforgiven, where Gene Hackman, about to be shooted to death by Clint Eastwood, says “I don’t deserve to die like this, I was building a house” and Clint replies “deserves got nothing to do with it” and kills him.

I was thinking about it when I read Nick’s defence of Arne Slot in Tuesday morning’s mailbox. I think everyone would agree that a lot of the issues that Liverpool have faced this season have, to some extent been out of Arne’s control: the lopsided squad, the massive drop-off in Mo Salah, and to a lesser extent Virgil Van Dijk’s form, the loss of Trent Alexander-Arnold, the massive injury list in key positions, and, of course, the tragic death of Diogo, which has hung over the club and whose impact none of us can really understand. BUT, like I say “deserves got nothing to do with it.”

Whether we like it or not, Arne has lost a lot of the match going supporters; the booing when he substituted Rio Ngumoah for Alexander Isak is a salutary example of that.

Once a manager hits that point, it’s very difficult for them to return from it, WHETHER OR NOT IT’S FAIR. Maybe Arne can, but it’s less likely than him not doing so. Which means that the discussion about his future will kick in immediately Liverpool lose a couple of games, or even one humiliating reverse in a cup competition or derby. Do you want that hanging over the club all summer?

And, frankly, while Arne has been dealt a poor hand, he’s also played it badly. For example, Calvin Ramsay has been named in 17 Liverpool match-day squads this PL season. Arne Slot has made it clear, however, that he thinks Calvin Ramsay is a bit shit. Only one of those things should be true. Every club has players a manager doesn’t fancy (and I think it’s fair to say that Calvin Ramsay probably isn’t a Premier League right-back) but outright saying it in a press conference is probably sub-optimal. The WFH two days a week is a bit eesh as well; I know that people have families and those families shouldn’t be uprooted at a football club’s whim, but it’s legitimate to ask why a club should commit to a manager who essentially refuses to move to Liverpool! And this is even before we get to the fact that he’s lost more games pro rata this season than Hodgson, and it’s just not a particularly enjoyable experience watching them.

But I digress. The question Nick should be asking isn’t “Does Arne Slot deserve the chance to turn things around?” It’s “If the Liverpool manager position were vacant, would Arne Slot be the ideal candidate for the role?” And there are pros and cons to each side.

Pros: He’s won Leagues in two countries, he’s a calm and unflappable figure, he (with the exception of this season) has shown really good in-game management.

Cons: the poor performance this season (for which there is mitigation,) the tendency to alienate players, the unwillingness to trust squad players or youth, and, you know, it not being an enormous amount of fun.

This is the decision faced by FSG at the end of the season, in the inevitable review. A review that should include Hughes and Edwards, because their performance in their roles has not been ideal.

With regard to Nick’s other point about ticket prices; I’m sure lots of other people WOULD pay more for their season tickets. But would they make banners? Do they know all the songs? Are they noisy? In the modern footballing era, match-going supporters aren’t a football club’s customers. They’re their product. And a big part of Liverpool’s USP is their (actually slightly overstated, because TV-watching fans might only see the big games where the fans are up for it!) passionate and noisy fans. It would be very much against FSG’s interest to replace the current cohort of supporters with a likely wealthier, likely older, likely not-from-the-city-or-environs cohort in order to earn enough extra money to cover Wataru Endo’s salary for a year. It’s real “tearing the drum apart to check what makes it go bang” stuff. Dara O’Reilly, London

I think you’re giving Slot far too much credit while excusing failures that are ultimately his responsibility.

Yes, he won the league in his first season, but let’s not rewrite history. He inherited a title-ready squad built by someone else, full of experienced winners who already knew how to compete at the highest level. The real test of a manager is what happens after that initial bounce, and that’s where Slot has fallen short.

You mention injuries and transition, but every top club deals with those. What concerns me more is how quickly standards and intensity have dropped. We’ve seen too many flat performances, too many games where the team looks mentally checked out, and too many senior players regressing badly. Salah is the clearest example. Whether through tactics, motivation, or management, Slot has failed to get the best out of one of the greatest forwards in club history.

You also say the squad has limitations, but Slot has played a major role in creating them. He failed to convince key players to stay, and his recruitment and selection decisions have been questionable throughout the season. Persisting with underperforming players while better options sit unused isn’t “transition.” It’s bad management.

And on Alonso, it’s strange to dismiss him as some fantasy option while ignoring what he actually achieved. Going unbeaten in the Bundesliga with Leverkusen was extraordinary and far beyond anything Slot has achieved in his career so far. Alonso took a team with no history of winning titles and turned them into invincibles. Slot inherited a squad that had already won the Premier League and Champions League.

The Alonso comparison exists because fans can see a coach imposing identity, energy, and improvement on his squad. Right now, Liverpool look confused and reactive far too often. That isn’t bad luck. It reflects the manager.

Nobody expects perfection overnight, but asking serious questions about Slot after a season of regression isn’t “living in the past.” It’s recognising that the warning signs are already there. Oliver, London

Slot should stay but nothing to do with VAR

Nick’s email on Liverpool started off ok. Having watched Arsenal stand by their manager for 5/6 years and a bucketload of money, we might be about to win our first big title (or two) in 20 years. So I was supportive of his argument.

Then he says “Arsenal have spent a billion over five years to finally look competitive (with a fair bit of VAR assistance)”

With a fair bit of VAR Assistance? What on earth are you talking about? If you think Arsenal came second for 3 seasons and have reached the quarter, semi and now final of the Champions League because they had “a fair bit of VAR assistance”, what are you smoking? Or did you just add that last bit to be topical (yawn)

The Premier League is 38 games long a season. You get decisions for you and against you in every single game and we have been the second best team in the Premier League for 3 seasons now. One var reviewed clear foul in Raya doesn’t diminish the previous 36 games of effort from the team. Sigh

This has nothing to do with VAR and everything to do with a very good manager given lots of time and money. Then you said it isn’t a one year project and I got back on-board with your mail….

“We don’t have state-funded oil money. If we want to compete for elite talent, the revenue has to come from everywhere”

Oh for f*** sakes. Liverpools had the 4th, 2nd, 3rd, 2nd and 2nd biggest wage bill in the last 6 years. The “we’re so poor argument” goes nowhere when you have one of the most expensive squads in the league.

Shame, he had some really sound points about Liverpool and how they should give Slot another season. He will be gone by December though… Rob A (this week, I am The Eagles) AFC

Man Utd hitting par under Michael Carrick

There’s an eternal clamour to sensationalise a manager and team’s performance, but is it possible that Carrick/United are not over- or under-performing, they are just performing ‘as expected’?

They’ve beaten teams in the big 6 since Carrick’s appointment, but performing well on a big occasion, or against big opposition, is nothing new for Manchester United in the post-Fergie years. They have struggled against opposition they would expect to have beaten; again, nothing new for this team. There is the faintest whiff of consistency about the team, but that should be expected given they’re playing so little football and the starting lineup is only tweaked rather than overhauled game by game.

Carrick has put players into positions that they are comfortable in, in a formation that is tried and tested in the league. As such, the team is achieving what should realistically be expected of them, given both the quality and limitations of the players available. The team may not be pulling up trees, but it has still achieved the best-case scenario for this season, due in part to the awful performances of their cohort.

Should Carrick keep the job? Yes, no, maybe… he would probably do OK and pound for pound (or point per pound), he would probably perform better than most other available options. John

World Cup predictor time

With the spot-on success of my earlier Champions League prediction as published in these hallowed pages, I thought I’d give it another go now that the World Cup is only 30 days away.

When researching past winners, a very interesting pattern emerged. Unlike the Champions League where a teams’ form in the previous campaign was a very good indicator, there was no such pattern to be found for the World Cup. Success in the previous tournament had almost zero influence in the following one. This most likely has to do with the high churn of players and managers from one edition to the next, and also because of the long 4 year gap between tournaments where form and fitness can fluctuate.

A better indicator of potential success was a teams’ form in their final continental tournament before the World Cup itself (EURO/Copa). Going all the way back to Italy ‘90, in the last 9 World Cups, 6 of the eventual winners had reached at least the semi-finals of their continental tournaments beforehand – 5 from Europe and 1 from South America (plus 2 more losing World Cup finalists).

Europe:

West Germany (WC ’90 winner / EURO ’88 semi)

France (WC ’98 winner / EURO ’96 semi)

Spain (WC ’10 winner / EURO ’08 winner)

Germany (WC ’14 winner / EURO ’12 semi)

France (WC ’18 winner / EURO ’16 finalist)

Argentina (WC ’22 winner / Copa ’21 winner)

*Brazil (WC ’98 finalist / Copa ’97 winner)

*Argentina (WC ’90 finalist / Copa ’89 3rd place)

This pattern has become especially prevalent when predicting the last 4 World Cup winners – Spain ‘10, Germany ‘14, France ‘18 and Argentina ‘22. Using this data, we can predict that the winners this time around could come from the following pool of teams:

EURO ’24 semi-finalists: Spain, France, Netherlands, England (55.55% chance based on 5/9 past winners)

Copa ’24 semi-finalists: Argentina, Canada, Uruguay, Colombia (11.11% chance based on 1/9 past winners)

Based on being the holders, we can put Argentina alongside the 4 European teams as serious threats to win it. From these 5 teams then, we could safely assume that 3 of them would make the semi-finals.

Potential semi-finalists (pick 3): Argentina, Spain, France, England, Netherlands (66.66% chance)

You could probably rule out the Netherlands due to their lack of elite-level forward and England as they’ve historically done poorly in the heat.

So, why only 3 teams?

This is because another thing to consider is that with the exception of Brazil ’14, in the last 40 years, every time the tournament has been held outside of Europe, we have gotten an unexpected semi-finalist – Belgium (Mexico ’86), Sweden & Bulgaria (USA ’94), Turkey & South Korea (Korea/Japan ’02), Uruguay (South Africa ’10) and Morocco (Qatar ’22).

For potential semi-final dark-horses, we can include Canada, Uruguay and Colombia from the Copa group above. We could also look at the semi-finalists from AFCON ’25 (Senegal, Morocco & Egypt) and the Asian Cup ’23 (South Korea, Jordan, Iran, Qatar). What could decide which of these teams goes deep is having an elite-level forward. Unfortunately for Asia, that rules out 3 teams, with the only recognized elite forward being Son Heung-min.

Dark-horse semi-finalists (pick 1): South Korea (Son Heung-min), Canada (Jonathan David), Uruguay (Darwin Nunez), Colombia (Luis Diaz), Morocco (Brahim Diaz), Egypt (Mo Salah & Omar Marmoush), Senegal (Sadio Mane, Ismaila Sarr & Nicolas Jackson).

Based on elite-level forwards, you could probably rule out Canada, Uruguay and Morocco, while South Korea’s Son might be a bit too old, turning 34 during the tournament. Same goes for Egypt’s Mo Salah (34), while his partner Marmoush isn’t close to that level yet. Colombia has Luis Diaz, but unfortunately also one of the worst defenses, conceding 18 goals in 18 qualifying matches. That leaves us with Senegal as the dark-horse of choice. While Mane (34) is similar in age to Son and Salah, he is ably backed by Sarr and Jackson so Senegal should do well not having to depend on a single player. Sanjit (Looking forward to 2 weeks in Monterrey, Mexico!) Randhawa, Kuala Lumpur

How to fix VAR

Again on Monday night we had a game effectively re‑refereed by VAR. I’m sure all those West Ham fans screaming bias towards the top six clubs after the “inconsistency” of the referee correctly giving Arsenal a penalty for a foul on the goalkeeper will be delighted to remember that a mere 234 days ago Arsenal scored from a corner where the goalkeeper was also impeded — and far less so than the foul from the West Ham keeper.

Let’s ignore the 16 other goals Arsenal have scored from corners since, and the hundreds of other matches where fouls on goalkeepers have been given. Also let’s overlook the fact that Arsenal haven’t scored a goal from a corner into the box for a couple of months. It’s almost as if referees have tightened up on giving fouls in favour of goalkeepers as the season has gone on.

But I digress.

My actual point is that the issue isn’t VAR; the issue is the rule itself. This summer’s World Cup, if it isn’t already ruined by the narcissistic orange man, will be ruined by VAR penalties.

The problem isn’t even penalties per se, but the fact that any infringement in the box leads to a penalty. In a low‑scoring sport like football, this means that if you can get the opposition to commit even the slightest error, even by accident (a ball struck at a hand, or an attacker leaning into an already high boot) you can win a match.

So how about this: penalties should only be given for fouls that stop a genuine goalscoring opportunity. Any other infringement in the box becomes a direct free‑kick.

So if there’s a handball on the line that stops a goal (a la Suarez for Uruguay vs Ghana in the 2010 World Cup), or a defender wipes out a player who is clean through and bearing down on goal, then yes penalty.

But if, like Monday night, an attacking player leans into a high boot, or like the Maddison penalty claim where the foul is on a player on the edge of the box, potentially cutting in but still faced with several defenders, then it should be a direct free‑kick.

We’d have to work out where the direct free‑kick is taken from. It might not be practical to take them inside the six‑yard box. Maybe all such free‑kicks are taken from the edge of the area. Maybe, like a free shot in pool, the attacking team can choose where outside the box the free‑kick is taken from.

What do we think? I believe this should be called the PK rule.

Cheers, Paul K, London

How to fix the Cornerpocalypse in the Premier League

1) Stop conceding corners, defenders should stop blindly kicking the ball off for corners. Duh.

2) Introduce corner VAR in the championship so that bad habits don’t form in lower levels of play. Introduce corner VAR in the academy games so that players don’t get into the habit of mugging the goalkeeper and rise above their actual skill level through brute methods any longer. It’s easy to have video playback in 2026. At lower levels retroactive discipline for fouls not caught in real time. The higher level of the game will thus have fewer thugs habitually getting away with doing jujitsu at corners. Actual skill is encouraged, bad players filtered away.

3) Do a field hockey style corner where the defending team start on the goal line the attackers are on the top of the box and the corner comes in from the intersection of the penalty box line and the goal line. Anything kicked out within the width of the penalty box. Corners become fast and controlled indirect free kicks in essence. Defenders will be desperate to keep the ball in play rather than risk this kind of short corner set piece. More goals with virtually zero wrestling. Dan McG LFC

Grasping at Tottenham straws

Very little in the mailbox referencing the Spurs vs Leeds game (which, to be fair, wasn’t spectacularly good, despite one mind-bending save, but was otherwise blighted by more VAR nonsense. Probably the right decisions, killed the joy of the game, etc…)

But at the business end of the season, the results matter than performances so here’s my take on the result.

While walking to the pub to watch the match, I spent some time bracing myself psychologically for another 90-odd minutes of Spurs making me furiously curse Gazza for causing me to fall for the club 36 years ago. And in a moment of curious – and surprisingly sober – mental dexterity, I managed to convince myself that a win for Spurs would have been the worst possible result for the club in their relegation battle. Okay, maybe not worse than an actual loss, but potentially trickier than a draw.

I think the ‘logic’ still holds and best of all is absolutely completely impossible to disprove without performing a ctr-alt-del game restart on reality to replay the match to a different outcome as if were all NPCs in a Championship Manager save. The rationale involves a little bit of cod-psychology, so bear with me.

Had Tottenham won, I think several things would have happened at the respective relegation-threatened clubs.

1) Spurs, with 3 of the crucial points needed to give themselves every chance of staying up, would have slipped straight into a ‘job done’ mind set. As this bunch of clowns has shown repeatedly this season, they need little invitation or excuse to absolutely phone it in so we become faced with the very plausible scenario of them coasting through the last two league games, arrogantly assuming West Ham would bollocks things up enough to save their skin. Two defeats would inevitably follow against Chelsea (Spurs never beat Chelsea, so I hold little confidence even against *this* Chelsea) and Europe-chasing Everton. It’s also the funniest and therefore Spursiest outcome – to claw themselves back to within touching distance of safety, only to cock it up at the very last. And we all know that the Spursiest outcome is always the most likely because Spurs.

2) A Spurs win would also have changed the mindset at West Ham. Suddenly, their last game against a truly shamed Leeds becomes an absolute home banker. ‘Even Spurs can beat this lot’ becomes the mantra and so, rather than two cup finals to save their season, they’ve now only got to throw the kitchen sink at Newcastle and then follow up with a routine victory over a demoralised Leeds to give themselves every change to sneak past the Lilywhites into 17th place.

A draw from Monday night’s match – the optimal result, clearly – maintains the tension and imminent threat of Big-6-relegation-shame, which I think that’s the only thing keeping the Tottenham players focused on being actual footballers rather than spending their time trying to engineer an escape route to another, less ridiculous football club, understandable though that priority is. A draw keeps Leeds’ tails up and, god knows, the WHL faithful need Leeds to do them a massive favour in a couple of weeks. The Hammers no longer have absolute certainty about the job at hand. They know that one win from their two remaining games might be enough rather than a certainty that two wins is their only salvation. Lastly, Spurs’ route to relegation is no longer on the Spursiest possible track, so won’t be as funny as it could have been. Surely that’s the best reason for hope.

Officially clutching at straws. Chris Bridgeman, Kingston upon Thames

Midweek Champions League nights…

As Arsenal made it to the Champions League final – their first since 2005, it made me realise that it’s moved from midweek to Saturdays. I’ve got two great midweek CL final memories.

1) Arsenal vs Barcelona 2005. In a pub with mates, who seemed to think that Sol Campbell would score first. I offer them a reasonable 25/1, they both have £1 each on it. Sure enough, he scores and I’m £50 down before I know it. Barcelona hit back and the gunners lose.

2) Liverpool vs Milan 2004. In a small basement pub in Birmingham, as I was working there. As it was a 9:45pm kick off, we asked them to get BBC1 on, so we could watch The Apprentice (series 1). It was the final and pretty entertaining. Followed by the epic CL final. Finished after midnight UK time, following day was a challenging work day for sure.

Also, to those Arsenal fans asking if we’d take England playing their style of football if we won. Yeah, of course we would. Have you been watching England in the last few tournaments tho? 1970s Brazil we are not. Laboured to two finals and then lost convincingly. We’ve played crap football and lost. Then knighted the manager.