Griping about Tuchel’s handbrake or Arteta’s bus makes the bantersphere tick | Max Rushden

What the world needs now is one last hot take on Arsenal and the Champions League final before we are all brought together in beautiful symbiotic harmony by the World Cup. Key questions such as: was it a good game? Was this the perfect way to take on the best midfield and attack in world football or the ultimate illustration of footballing cowardice? Why didn’t all the people in the UK want Arsenal to win? Why did some Arsenal fans find that annoying? Could it possibly be that people are different and want different things from football matches they consume in very different ways? The big question is about Arsenal’s approach to the final. I am not totally comfortable saying the words “game state” out loud, but it is clear Mikel Arteta had a decision to make once Arsenal went 1-0 up after six minutes. A decision, we presume, he had made a long time before Kai Havertz roofed it over Matvey Safonov and into the Paris Saint-Germain goal. Does he keep attacking or does he take the best defence in the world, who have won the Premier League by being defensively brilliant, and see whether PSG can break them down? It seems the most sensible decision he could make at that time. It is not without risks. Not having the ball is physically and mentally exhausting. PSG, despite not creating a clear chance in the first half, were so close with quite a few final balls. …