The criticism of Arsenal right now says more about other fans than it does about the team- Opinion

People are currently saying “they’re not playing good football,” “they rely on set pieces,” or “they’re ugly to watch.”

But that criticism only seems to appear when Arsenal are actually competing for the title. When teams win leagues through defensive solidity, physicality, or dead-ball efficiency, it’s usually called “pragmatic,” “clinical,” or “championship mentality.” Suddenly, when Arsenal do it, it’s labelled negative.

The reality is that winning the Premier League has never required playing beautiful football every week. Teams win titles by being effective, by maximising every advantage, and by finding ways to win games when things aren’t perfect. Set pieces are a legitimate weapon. Organisation is a strength. Grinding out results is exactly what champions do.

What really drives the criticism is something more uncomfortable for rival fans. Many of those fans support clubs that haven’t won the league in years. For them, Arsenal finally getting over the line after finishing second multiple times forces an awkward question: if Arsenal can rebuild, compete, and eventually win it… why hasn’t my club?

That’s not an easy thought to sit with.

So instead, the narrative shifts. Arsenal must be “lucky.” Arsenal must be “boring.” Arsenal must be “doing it the wrong way.” Anything to diminish what it would mean if they actually lift the trophy.

But football history doesn’t remember how pretty a title win looked. It remembers who won it.

And if Arsenal win the league after pushing for years, adapting their style, and becoming more ruthless, that isn’t ugly football nor will they're be an asterisk next to their name.

That’s the evolution of a champion