ARSENE WENGER: MALADJUSTED

My article at Telegraph online on the familiar challenges facing Arsenal in the forthcoming Premier League season, and the unfortunate parallels between their manager and one of popular music's fading icons:

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/dukemedia/dukemedia_uk/93/arsene-wenger-maladjusted/

Sorry couldn't finish reading the article. Whilst I think it's great that you have a wide vocabulary and are writing in a way not usually seen in todays press, at times it was difficult to understand and rather over-complicated. From what I did read it sounds quite good.

Appreciate the feedback and criticism.

When I first read that, and in the first sentence saw Wenger compared to Morrissey, I was tempted to quit reading right there. In fairness I decided to give it a chance and continued reading.

Use of the word "avarice" in paragraph 2 should have set the alarm bells ringing but again, perhaps due to the fact that I had "partaken in an ample sufficiency of alcoholic beverage" I took it upon myself to plough on.

"dogged recalcitrence" tested my patience quite severely, and "acquiesced" was almost the final straw, by which time "nacsent" went almost unnoticed

"cukhold" (sic) raised a smile as did "efortlessly" and "innability".

"Despite this reticence- the reasons for which have shown know signs of being attended to" had me in fits and by this time I was eager to get to the end to see what other gems were awaiting. Comparing an air of inevitability to "a noxious gust" was my just reward.

From there, things went a little downhill and only the mention of "forth" place kept me going down the final furlong. Thankfully, the mention of "Moz" in the last paragraph kept my faith that the author really did have some point to make - albeit a very poor one

3/10 - stay behind after class.

I think Davie has summed it up perfectly there.

If simplicity ever needed an argument then you have just provided it with one.

Churchill wrote:Sorry couldn't finish reading the article. Whilst I think it's great that you have a wide vocabulary and are writing in a way not usually seen in todays press, at times it was difficult to understand and rather over-complicated. From what I did read it sounds quite good.

Have to agree - you seemed more concerned with your lexicon than provide insightful journalism. Precisely why I do not read The Guardian.

An interesting premise for an article, but you don't really parallel the two so much as insert Morrisey quotes in the opening and closing paragraphs.

Also, to echo previous comments, you need to simplify your writing, and edit more thoroughly. I was so overwhelmed by the denseness of your writing, I actually copy-pasted your article into Word. In your last paragraph, you have an 85 word sentence! Most writing guides state that sentences longer than 25 words are difficult to read. I would suggest it should be fewer than that for a sports article. Also, if you do use 'difficult' words, then make sure you use them correctly or it looks like you're using them to appear clever.

You do make some good points, they're just smothered by verbosity.

I don't think you make to many good points - it is wordy as has been said above - but it seems to be suggesting that Wenger has failed because he should have spent as Man C has spent, you've ignore the fact that it was impossible for Wenger to do this, or even to spend as Man U has spent this summer.

And the way you describe the Fabergas situation, while amusing, is ridiculous and mostly wild speculation and conjecture.