Arsenal 2-0 PSG (Havertz 20′, Saka 35′)

EMIRATES — This was supposed to be one of the hard ones for Arsenal.

In the revamped Champions League, where the Swiss model of randomised fixtures promises to make games more competitive than ever before, Paris Saint-Germain represented a real test of how far the Gunners have come after two years of title-chasing in the Premier League.

If ever there was a moment that it felt like they were not only vying ambitiously for a seat back at the top table of European football, but sitting firmly in place, it was this result.

PSG were unbeaten on arrival at the Emirates in a run that included six wins and one draw – with an average of three goals scored per game. They were two down in north London in 35 minutes.

Read Next

Arsenal looked organised, composed, possessing almost an inner self-belief that the result was assured provided they stuck to another of Mikel Arteta’s game plans. They were aggressive off the ball, incisive on it.

The silky slick move on in the 51st minute, a combination of clipped passes keeping the ball in the air that ended with Kai Havertz teeing the ball up for Gabriel Martinelli to volley goalwards, was not only deserving of a goal – it produced a fine save – but was indicative of a side in total control of their senses.

Bukayo Saka had fans on their feet after nine minutes, leaving their seats as he cut inside in what has become a trademark move, straining for a better a look as he curled the ball towards the far corner and narrowly missed the post.

They scored the opening goal on 20 minutes. Havertz and Leandro Trossard played as revolving centre-forwards, one dropping back, the other further forward, confusing the PSG centre-backs, Marquinhos and Willian Pacho.

The Arsenal pair combined for the goal: Trossard deeper this time, cutting inside and sending a delightful in-swinging cross into the area of nightmares for goalkeepers. Should they come? Should they wait?

The last thing a goalkeeper wants in that area is a six-foot-two forward but in galloped Havertz between the centre-backs, beating Gianluigi Donnarumma’s fist to the ball and cushioning the ball around the Italian with his head.

PSG, for their part, reminded Arsenal they were still there. Nuno Mendes hit the post and when Achraf Hakimi was slipped in behind Riccardo Calafiori the Italian struggled to catch up but David Raya saved with his legs.

Read Next

But with the home crowd going a little flat, Gabriel strongly held off Warren Zaire-Emery to earn a goal kick and spark a rise back out of them, and the second goal followed two minutes later.

From a free-kick wide on the right, Saka sent in a hopeful low in-swinging ball, finding another of those devilish areas. Three Arsenal players missed it, but so did Donnarumma, who could only flap his hands as the ball bounced him and in.

Another nightmare delivery on a nightmare of a night for the PSG goalkeeper.

And the thing is, Arsenal are probably about to get better. With Martin Odegaard out since the international break and Mikel Merino out with an injured shoulder since signing for £27.4m from Real Sociedad, they have been missing two of three key central midfielders. Merino came on in the second half, easing back in.

Even without them there is such a strong core to this side. If teams get through Declan Rice, which rarely happens, they hit a brick wall of William Saliba and Gabriel. If that fails, which it rarely does, Raya is fast becoming the finest goalkeeper in the game.

It’s becoming hard to find a weakness anywhere.

The comparison that your FT Money columnist Moira O’Neill draws between the Mafia “pizzu” and tax is inappropriate and wrong (“Should you ‘fill to the max’ on tax-free allowances?”, Opinion, FT Money, FT Weekend, September 21).

Pizzu is an illegal payment extracted by organised crime groups, through threats of violence or intimidation, in exchange for “protection”. Taxation, on the other hand, is at the core of the social contract between the state and its citizens and is based on governance and accountability.

In modern democracies, taxes are legally enforced contributions to fund public services such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, defence and social welfare. Transparency and accountability mechanisms exist to prevent misuse of tax revenues.

The level of taxation — and public expenditure — depends on voters’ preferences, and tax rates and spending are typically decided by elected representatives. Citizens can vote, engage in protest, or influence policy to change how taxes are levied or spent.

Some societies may prefer, for instance, to restrict the range of public services in exchange for a lower level of taxation and let services such as healthcare to be mostly privately funded.

Modern democracies began with the citizens’ demand to have a say on how much they pay and to no longer be burdened with taxes decided elsewhere — no more taxation without representation.

Taxes are often perceived as unfair, but drawing a comparison with the pizzu confuses purposes, context and legality — or lack of it. Above all, it overlooks the fundamental role of democracy, governance, law, and the provision of public services and collective goods that taxes support.

Paola Subacchi
Professor of Economics, Sciences Po, Paris and Essential Economics, London W1, UK

Just a small feedback on Janan Ganesh’s piece on “The end of the popular politician” (Opinion, September 26).

It may well be that a spoilt vote reflects a general dissatisfaction with politicians. But I would rather say that voters can’t be fooled so easily any more. The requirements of a politician have not changed much for at least half a century. Almost by definition, politicians of western democracies are amateurs. Even worse, politicians refuse to raise the standards of their profession.

Singapore is a pretty good example of how professional politicians can do a much better job than their western “amateur” counterparts. Or let me use a word from my German mother tongue — Fachidiot — which means a one-track specialised idiot, who is an expert in his or her field but takes a blinkered approach to multi-faceted problems, what you might call an expert idiot. That describes our politicians.

What the west needs is minimum standards for politicians, which are generally accepted for the profession. When an employer searches for a medical doctor, why would we look for qualifications fitting a carpenter?

We demand licences for drivers, lawyers, doctors and many other professions. By contrast, any idiot can be a politician!

Matthias Abold
Chumphon, Thailand

“HOW DARE YOU.”

“DISGRACEFUL.”

“Unreal.”

A fact-checking flashpoint that spiraled into a full-on mic cut at the vice presidential debate set right-wing tempers ablaze on Tuesday night, with MAGA World denizens tweeting out their gormless outrage that CBS News had had the nerve to silence J.D. Vance.

After moderator Margaret Brennan offered Vance, who’d been speaking about illegal immigration, a correction that a large swath of the Haitian community in Springfield, Ohio was in the country legally, Vance talked over her.

As the Republican nominee tried to get into the minutiae of the documentation required to come into the United States, the network cut off both candidates’ microphones.

“Gentlemen, the audience can’t hear you because your mics have been cut,” Brennan said, smiling tightly. “Thank you for explaining the legal process.”

Vance seemed miffed, scoffing that “the rules were you guys weren’t going to fact-check.” (CBS set a ground rule that the mics would be cut should the crosstalk grow too heated.)

But that was nothing compared to the nuclear meltdown that had already been triggered online.

“F you CBS – how DARE YOU,” commentator Megyn Kelly tweeted.

“The CBS moderators just MUTED JD Vance’s mic as he called them out for their lies about Kamala Harris’ open border policies,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) inveighed. “DISGRACEFUL.”

“.@JDVance putting these broads in their place over the Haitian migrants in Ohio,” hanger-on Laura Loomer remarked. “Now they are muting his mic. Unreal.”

Ann Coulter, the conservative media pundit and unwitting recipient of the harshest roast of all time, responded to journalist Mickey Kaus, who had tweeted that Vance had just missed an opportunity to trash Sen. James Lankford (R-OK)’s border bill.

“The bimbo moderators wouldn’t have let him,” she spat.

Even former President Donald Trump, live-posting through the debate over on Truth Social, got in on the fun.

“Maragret Brennan just lied again about the ILLEGAL MIGRANTS let into our Country by lyin’ Kamala Harris, and then she cut off JD’s mic to stop him from correcting her!” he wrote.

Read more at The Daily Beast.

Get the Daily Beast’s biggest scoops and scandals delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now.

Stay informed and gain unlimited access to the Daily Beast’s unmatched reporting. Subscribe now.