I like watching Sunday Supplement, though I’m not sure why.

Three journalists join Neil ‘nicking a living‘ Ashton every week to discuss football and, more often than not, it leaves me infuriated.

Sitting down this week after Arsenal won their eighth league game in a row, Arsenal were the subject of the second segment of the show and the topic began by discussing why Arsenal were so slow at the start of the season.

Not once did Ashton, Matt Law, Allyson Rudd or Neil Custis mention the huge number of serious injuries the side suffered for the first half of the season and the role that played – the injury crisis that saw us having to play fulbacks at centreback (before we ended up with only one fit senior defender), the broken leg for our main striker or the midfield crisis that meant having to recall Francis Coquelin from Charlton. Torn muscles, dislocated shoulders, cruciate knee ligament injuries were all absent from the discussion.

Towards the end of the segment they did touch on Coquelin’s recall, claiming it was because Arsenal had two players out (Ramsey and Arteta). TWO!

They also discussed Jack Wilshere’s injury problems with one of them (Law) stating that the ‘odd knock on his ankle‘ rules him out – clearly he never watched the horrendous tackle Paddy McNair put in on the Arsenal man back in November.

These are the people who are paid to have opinions on football. The money you pay for your Sky subscription goes towards their appearance fee.

The least they could do is bother to be well informed, it’s not like they are expected to know something obscure – when a top side has half its squad in the treatment room, that’s a pretty big deal.

It would be understandable if Arsenal had had as few injuries this season as Chelsea, but they didn’t. They were literally crippled. These weren’t problems that ruled players out for weeks, but for months at a time – often all at the same time.

It’s not too much to expect it to be part of any reasonable discussion.