I'm agreeing with you here, Letters.

We are all disappointed with Sunday's result, and I suspect that even Arsenal optimists fear another collapse - and accept that we won't win the league from here. I would agree that if we do collapse, and don't show some fight to run Citeh closer, then this could be deemed 'unacceptable' and evidence of a lack of progress from last season.

Where I disagree is the characterisation of the Villa and Bayern results to date 'unacceptable'. It's not 'unacceptable' fight back to a draw against Bayern full stop. As for Villa - we lost a football match. It happens to everyone. Even Citeh. That's the nature of football. I agree that very poor performances can be unacceptable, but taking the Villa game as a whole, this was not the case on Sunday. The result was not good enough to make a title likely, but the fact is that given Citeh's relentlessness anything less than absolute perfection would likely not have won the title.

And this is my issue with labeling a poor result 'unacceptable'. It's measuring our team by a standard of absolute perfection, when the reality is that this is essentially a unicorn standard. We all know that our team is not perfect, so while we can be disappointed at a poor result, IMO we do need to see things in their proper context. We neither have the strength in depth; nor the experience, nor the resources of a generational team in Citeh - the best team in the world and going for a historic second consecutive treble to become arguably the greatest club team of all time, so why is it fair to measure Arsenal by this standard?

This is not being defeatist - of course I want to see my team aspiring to be 'perfect' - but this is an aspiration, not a measure of acceptability.