“It is understood” …. a euphemism for “the reserve team coach’s hairdresser’s boyfriend believes that…….. ” or even more likely “this reporter is stuck for a story line and has made this up ….”.
Summer transfer rumours drive me mad. So much of what we read is pure fantasy, a product of a fertile imagination, the addition of two and two to make five. The examples are endless as seen by the rumoured transfer bar on this very site.
One may believe that these fabrications are innocent but they have a direct affect upon the poor saps who read them, and the reason I am writing this post is because I am one of those poor saps. Today I read a lengthy article on our favourite subject this summer, the will he/won’t he go to Barca saga. In this article it stated that Arsenal were sick of dealing with Laporta and had started negotiations with the incoming Barca President (Rosell) with a view to selling Cesc next summer. My first thoughts were “OK, we get another season”, my second thoughts were “how has this journalist sourced this story?”. I re-read it. No quotes from any one involved, no statement from either club, much innuendo and one “it is understood.” Who understood?
Let us look at the Joe Cole story. Apparently it is almost certain he will be playing at the Emirates next season. Who says so? Admittedly there is some logic to it, the fact Cole is a good player on a free makes him an attractive target for our parsimonious manager, but we are well blessed in his chosen position (AA, TR, Vela) and are we likely to pay €100+k a week to him? Most probably these are stories placed in the press by Cole’s agent to alert other clubs to his availability, using the Arsenal name to strengthen their negotiations. But I am a pawn in their game. I go to work thinking “How will Joe Cole fit into our current team? Who gets dropped? Where will Arshavin play if Joe signs? etc etc.” I can’t help myself!
May I take a paragraph of your time to go back in history?
Around 2500 years ago a Greek philosopher named Plato wrote “The Republic”, in which he looked at the perception/nature of justice within the individual and the State (The Greek Republic). Based upon the teachings of Socrates, he notes that one’s viewpoint is dependent upon whether one is “inside or outside,” that is, whether one has direct knowledge (inside) or one’s knowledge is second hand (outside). His point being that unless one has direct knowledge there is always a tendency towards a skewed version of the facts, and that one bases one’s opinions and perceptions based this mis-truth.
We are definitely “Outsiders” and as such base our opinions upon the fallacies produced by journalists with questionable agendas. ( I must point out that The Republic is a treatise on happiness and justice and I have used a small section of the book to make my point! ).
As I wrote in a comment a couple of weeks ago. “Until you see Mr. Wenger smiling at the camera with his shiny new player holding an Arsenal shirt, it is just bulls**t”
On a serious note, I ask myself this – “If the back pages are full of lies and fantasy, is it likely that the front pages are equally fanciful?” Now that is a frightening prospect