In the past I have, without giving it due consideration, called for some British back-bone/steel within our ranks, but I now accept this to be extremely short-sighted and too patriotically jingoistic. English footballers are flawed, limited in natural talent and their abilty to use the ball intelligently. The media are just as culpable, fawning over serial under-achievers, like Shearer, Beckham, Neville, Cole, Terry, Lampard, Carragher, Gerrard et al.

The coaching set-up isn’t much better. With all the money sloshing around in football, every major club has a foreign coach/manager, no English manager has won the title since Howard Wilkinson (who was out of his depth at international level), and still England football fans wait for the much-publicised root and branch shake-up that was promised after the shambolic 2010 WC campaign. This year’s Euro’s weren’t really much better. England’s so-called ‘golden generation’ were mostly flat-footed plodders who were severely out-played at the top level.

All of which brings me to Arsène Wenger. In a moment of sheer bloody-minded anger it is easy to pick holes in his philosophy and criticise his short-comings. It is quintessentially the English way. Put someone up on a pedestal so we can knock them off, laughing and mocking as we do so.

You get the feeling that whatever path Arsène Wenger had taken in life, his name would be familiar to us, and the more you consider his character and philosophies, the more I realise how fortunate we have been as Arsenal fans to witness that first-hand.

Herbert Chapman will always be my favourite Arsenal manager, because he revolutionised the club and put us on the footballing world map, and because when I started supporting Arsenal, Bertie Mee was manager. For me back then, seeing the likes of Charlie George and Ray Kennedy being sold was every bit as painful as seeing some of the modern-day stars go. But Arsène Wenger is a unique one-off. He would probably have been the saviour of English football.

There have been many conversations about how Arsenal play, and whether or not it is a hybrid Barcelona-style. Well…yes and no.

Firstly the two cultures are completely different, as are the footballing set-ups. Barcelona get to play their reserves in a lower division of the Spanish La Liga system, an option that has never been available for England’s major clubs. Barcelona probably have the best scouting system in the world, plus the work-permit regulations that affect us are not applicable in Spain, which is why they along with Real Madrid attract the cream of young Brazilian and Argentinian talent. Lionel Messi went to Barcelona at 13, our infra-structure is still set-up in a way that all our youngsters at the club are British, or their family have moved and settled here. Nonetheless, it still puts us at a huge disadvantage.

Secondly I think Barcelona and in particular Spain have benefited from the greatest exponent of Total Football, and the man whom Arsène Wenger draws inspiration from, Johann Cruyff. It’s fair to say that the Dutch played a brand of football during the 1970’s that was on a completely different level than had ever been seen before, and for many neutral observers would and perhaps should have justifiably been World Champions. From 1970-73, the European Cup belonged to Holland, First Feyenoord beat Celtic in 1970 before Cruyff lead Ajax to three successive victories. And it was Johann Cruyff who delivered Barcelona’s first European Cup in 1992. But like Arsene Wenger, his passion is to develop the younger players, and after winning the European Cup he took on the task of restructuring Barcelona’s youth academy.

Over the past six years the world has witnessed Cruyff’s work through Barcelona and Spain. Our model is completely different to Spain’s, Johann Cruyff stepped back from front-line management to concentrate solely on his youth project, whereas our structure and resources mean that Arsene Wenger has to do the lot, including over-seeing a stadium move as well as jousting with billionaires.

We so nearly had it all. Double98 touched on it in his Post, the combinations of Pires and Henry, Bergkamp and Ljungberg, the whole unit ticked liked a Rolex watch. Swashbuckling artistry at its best, and when it peaked there wasn’t a team across the land who could live with us. Talking of Rolex’s, it really is all about timing. Arsenal’s 2004 vintage was as close to football perfection as it gets, and even now, eight years on, I’d fancy them to beat any of Pep Guardiola’s Barcelona’s sides, Mourinho’s sides and Ferguson’s MU. Had we not been so knackered when we met Chelsea in the CL QF 2nd leg, we’d have brought home the European Cup that our football so richly deserved. So to summarise, I’d argue that ‘The Invincibles’ played a better, more effective brand of football than Barcelona. That’s why I believe he would have improved the England national team beyond recognition, and possibly even delivered a World Cup. We really should thank our lucky stars for his staunch loyalty in an age where there is far too little of it on display.

Des Kelly wrote a really good article in the Daily Mail recently stating that the only person he would trust at Arsenal to have the club’s best interests at heart, is Arsène Wenger. As I said earlier, it’s easy to find fault, but when you consider that he is the only manager ever to deliver a completely unbeaten league programme, (having been openly mocked for even daring to predict such a feat just a year too early!), you have to concede the man has a touch of genius about him.

For those demanding trophies, it is worth remembering that after Bertie Mee’s ‘Double’ winning side of 1970-71, Arsenal had to wait another eighteen years before they won the title again, in 1989, picking up a solitary FA Cup in 1979, and a League Cup in 1987. Put in that context, Arsène Wenger’s record at Arsenal is phenomenal. Never outside of the top two between 1998-2005, and in his sixteen years a top four finish every year, including serious financial restraints and fighting against billionaires for the past six years.

He has revolutionised English football, and we are richer people for being able to share that amazing journey. He undoubtedly would have been our nation’s footballing saviour, but he became ours instead, and though there have been many testing times, and more to come no doubt, from a purely selfish point of view, I’m glad he chose us.

Written by Herb

We all love doing it. I guarantee there to be at least one in every comments section of any Arsenal blog, forum or news site you can think of. The speculative lineup, it’s addictive. Why, I have know idea. There is just something so satisfying about writing the names of our beloved players down into a thoughtfully deliberated formation. Only a handful of us have a significant knowledge of tactics and almost none of us know anything substantial about the players apart from our parochial, emotion-fueled observations during games and  from their blogosphere reputations. And yet, we fancy ourselves as Arsenal managers and pick our own teams week in week out. So here we are in the pre-season, with the summer transfer window hotting up; this is the time where the phenomenon reaches its pinnacle. The debate over our team’s lineup is well and truly alive!

Something we don’t often think about is that your speculative lineup is actually a great indicator of who you are as a person and as an Arsenal fan. Think back to the lineups you’ve produced over the years (maybe even in the last few days!), and find out where you fit in the spectacular spectrum that is the whole gamut of Arsenal fans. So where do you fit?

1. Signing Obsessed

———————–Lloris————————

–Sanga–Vermaelen–Vertonghen–Baines–

———————M’Villa—————————

—————Wilshire–Gotze———————

–Dzagoev——-Girourd——Podolski——

How often do we see a lineup like this? All the players who are even remotely linked with the club are portrayed as saviours, must-buys and symbols of hope for the coming season. This type of lineup will usually be followed by a comment such as ‘Get on it Arsene!’ or ‘Make it happen Gazidis!’

2. Academy Mad

—————–Szczęsny ——————

–Yennaris—Miquel–Bartley–Gibbs–

—————-Gnarby———————–

———Wilshere–Lansbury/Eisfeld—-

—-Aneke——-Afobe——Miyachi——

A lineup like this will usually be followed by something like ‘Future Arsenal first team, 2 years away?’ If this is you, you may need an injection of reality. Explore the archives of blogs from seasons past and have a look at some of the teams suggested as ‘Arsenal’s future’. Jay Emmanuel-Thomas anyone? Jay Simpson? The fact is that – if we are lucky –  each season has only one or two academy players that have what it takes to make the step up to the first team. Last season it was Coquelin, before that it was Wilshire and Szeszney. Who will it be this season? How exciting!

3. Formation Fans

———————Szczęsny ———————–

—Koscielny—Mertesacker—Vermaelen—-

—————Song–Coquelin———————

—-Ox-Chamberlain—Rosicksy–Diaby——-

————–Podolski—-Giourd—————–

There is always someone out there telling anyone who will listen that Wenger should being deploying his team in 3-2-3-2 or 4-1-3-1-1 or 5-2-4 or God knows what else. There’s always someone who’s certain the team would be better off with Vermaelen commanding the midfield or that so-and-so should surely be unleashed in the ‘hole’. Every now and then the fan knows what they’re talking about, not often though.

4. Nickname Fans

—————World’s Number One————-

–Sanga—Verminator—BFG——-Gibbo—-

—————–Rambo——–Le Coq———–

————————–LJW————————

——–Theo—The Boy Wonder—The Ox—

Football fans must be the only people in the world to give affectionate nicknames to men we’ve never met. But although we don’t actually know our players personally, in a deeper sense, we know them very, very well. Some of the nicknames are brilliant anyway, we don’t need to justify ourselves. I cannot stand when ostensible ‘fans’ invent hurtful nicknames for members of our beloved team such as ‘Flapihandski’ or ‘Ramilson’. Here’s a mystery I’ve often pondered. Why are some players known universally by their first name and others not? We always hear about Robin, Theo and Arsene and used to talk about Cesc all the time, but we never hear a thing about Mikel, Bacary, Laurent or Kieran.

5. England Snobs

——————-Szczęsny ———————

-Jenkinson—Vermaelen-Bartley-Gibbs-

————Ramsey—–Frimpong————-

———————Wilshere———————

—Ox-Chamberlain–RVP—-Walcott——-

Some fans are extraordinarily concerned by the amount of English players in the team. Nationality is their top priority. Ramsey’s Welshness is considered acceptable. They even prefer players who are half English or aren’t really English at all such as Jenkinson and Frimpong. As more English players have developed and integrated into Wenger’s new team, these types of posts have steadily become less common.

6. Trollers and Piss Takers

—————-Almunia———————-

Djourou—–Squillaci–Silvestre–Traore

——–Denilson——-Bischoff————–

——Park—-Chamakch—–TGSTEL—–

Poor Djourou cannot play full back can he? I couldn’t even think of enough players but you get the idea.

7. Diaby lovers

——————-Szczęsny ———————

–Sanga–Vermaelen–Koscielny-Santos–

————–Song—–Arteta——————-

——————-DIABY—————————

——–Podolski—-RVP—-Walcott———-

Staunch Diabyists. They exist in their droves. But I do have this feeling like he’s gonna have an amazing season….

8. Fence sitters

—————————-Szczęsny ————————

—Sanga—Vermaelen—–Koscielny—Gibbs/Santos–

————————–Song—–Arteta/Ramsey————–

————————-Wilshere/Rosicky———————–

——–Podolski/Ox—-RVP/Giroud—-Walcott/Gervinho-

This sort of lineup is a good sign; it means the club is spoilt for choice, that we have a lot of depth and competition for places. They manifest themselves in a variety of ways: slashes, parenthesis, brackets. But it sort of defeats the point of picking a team. Alternatively some fans like to make two teams, a first team and a second team and sometimes even a third team.

So now that we’ve analyzed it, let’s indulge in the activity we love so much. How do you think we should line up next season? Remember, everyone’s an expert – except for Arsène of course.

Written by Gus

It’s said that a novelist must be prepared to “kill their babies” to produce a decent book. It’s a literary term used to describe the process for self editing that a writer must do in order to finish their story and iterate their work towards a final manuscript. I am currently in the middle of writing a book and I am pretty shocked at the things I thought initially as being vital that I have had to give up, simply to make the story work.

Put quite simply you go into a writing project with an awful lot of preconceptions, events and characters that you think are indispensible to the story. They are precious to you. The process of self editing is an examination of your vanity, your commitment to the project. As you develop the story from its premise you run into issues with your precious babies. If you aren’t prepared to set aside some of the golden haired children of your imagination you end up with a story that is contrived, convoluted or just plain muck.

You might be say, writing a love story centred on the coming of age of a teenage girl from a broken home – “Wow great premise.”

that is set against a back ground of an international vampire war – “Ok cool I’m with you so far”

And you might think that it’s a great idea to make some of the vampires “vegetarians” and the others “carnivores”. – “eh but don’t all vampires feed on human blood?”

You then might even think that it’s a good idea to introduce a love triangle element that involves a werewolf. – “The what now? aren’t werewolves cursed humans who change into beasts on a full moon and go hunting human flesh?”

And finally you might want to have a woman impregnated from a man who is dead for over 100 years. “But that’s just nonsense on so many levels… and correct me if i am wrong but isn’t it physiologically impossible?”

But why take a vampire and make him something else? Vampires are well defined, as are werewolves. There is a wealth of lore on both so why would you reconstitute them? Why change them from the inherently evil, relentless killing machines that search for blood and / or flesh to simply make them mildly inconvenienced (and let’s face it boring) teenagers with great hair and unbelievable super powers to compensate.

Kill them.

Make them truer to their nature or make them something else. Or you might end up with Twilight and sparkly bleeding sap-pires or werewimps.

Now to Arsenal. While regular readers will recognise me as a fairly vocal evangelist of Arsene Wenger, I am not a slack jawed, blind follower. I sometimes think the man himself is showing less faith in his own vision than me. Put simply he finds it hard to kill his babies, as do Arsenal fans in the main.

We have laboured for seven years trying to build a story that first of all was about a dashing young Spanish matador, who would battle orcs and mercenaries to win golden treasure for his family and friends. The problem was that our Spanish hero had a character defect. It was a fatal defect, you see he was from another story and didn’t want to be in ours. The team was built for him, but he needed it to be built around him. He needed to have faith in his team mates and a love for the fans that exceed his love for his DNA.  He never had either so we forced our affection on him and hoped that our love would be enough for both.

It wasn’t. But not only was his heart not free enough, or his conviction not strong enough, he simply didn’t fit into Arsene’s story arc.

Fabregas was not a Wenger player. He became a sap-pire.

Arsene builds teams that exploit space. Anelka, Overmars, Ljunberg and Henry where forever being launched into space by inviting through balls from midfield –they simply pulverised high defensive lines. When opponents sat deep we had Henry, Bergkamp and Pires who could make the most of the space around the D. Even when the opposing teams got their defence right, we had giants and beasts like Campbell, Vieira and  Toure in the box to hit with corners and free kicks.

It wasn’t a boring story at all. But Arsene decided to change it.

He saw the Barca model and he envied it. Possession football. Passing. Control. He could do that. He hated taking his great teams to the camp neu and losing a battle of philosophy. He wanted to beat them at their own game. In fact i think he wanted to take their ingredients and make something different and new from them.

But a leopard never changes his spots. Oh don’t get me wrong he made a go at it. He built an exciting team that he choreographed as well as Barcelona. At times they can be breathe taking.

At other times turgid and frustrating.

Why? Why doesn’t it work consistently? I think it’s because it is too choreographed. We tippy tap passes around but the movements all end with Van Persie. Stop him and you stop Arsenal.

Stop Henry and Bergkamp’d get you, or Pires or Freddie.

In Barcelona they play tikataka organically. It’s a rhythm that Iniesta, Xavi, Messi, Fabregas all grew up in. As an ethos it’s effortless for them. But it’s not effortless for Denilson, Song, Arshavin, Walcott, etc. They learn the dance steps but they move to a different rhythm. Walcott has been criticised for not living up to his potential but last season, Fabregasless, he stepped up the plate a good bit. Why? Well quite simply he needed to learn the game. Learn the role.

Fabregas was built for the game from the age of 10. Walcott learned a different game from 10 to 15 and then had to learn a new one. Hard trick with an old dog.

All these characters failed in the story of Cesc.

Bendtner has no place in a 4-3-3. Chamakh, Park, Eduardo the same. Naturally speaking neither does Walcott

Denilson, Arshavin, Vela. All played out of position. All contrived to facilitate our number 4.

You see like vampires and werewolves our players are well defined by the time they get to the first team. Hell our manager is well defined.

What I mean is; how do we take a lazy, often brilliant, central half striker like Arshavin and shove him on the wing and then tell him to help out his teenage full back?

Likewise how do we take a speedy, straight line running shot/cross merchant and expect him to dribble past players and run in broken curved lines? Lines that he can’t even see?

Theo might be adapting to the dance but he craves space,

Arshavin craves space,

Van Persie craves space.

The Barca team and Fabregas don’t need space. They press and close down space safe in the knowledge that they have the technique and instinct and faith in their team mate to move the ball in tiny channels. We can’t do that. We want space, we really don’t want possession.

We want to win the ball and score within 20 seconds.

Does anyone remember the Invincibles? What a team. They were never in danger of losing a game all season. I mean I don’t think in the whole season we were ever behind after 70-75 minutes. We’d score early and often and then defend as a team. Teams would break themselves on our defence like ships on rocks, and we would break and score late goals. Didn’t we only ever seem to concede from corners and wicked deflections.

Tikitaka is a defensive style of football. Arsene Wenger is an attacking coach. It is about dominating the football and denying the opposition the ball, space or time. Press, pass, press pass. run your opponents left and right in the midfield. make a simple pass that Messi has rehearsed receiving a million times. Tikitaka is far beyond choreography, it is second nature to them. If not first.

Wenger built a similar system, except Arsenal, in fairness, try to attack more. We also have a distinct defence, midfield and attack. Barca have 10 midfielders – and all the players on the pitch are stood in within 20 yards of the ball radius.

Van Persie was bought for the Invincibles, he wasn’t bought for the Cesc team. He was a half striker; a successor to DB10. but he never got a chance to play as that because we had started our evolution to 4-3-3 when he was breaking into the team. He is probably leaving with the wrong concept of himself. He may have been a good leading man, but he may have been an even better supporting actor.

2012 / 13 Sees an opportunity to get back on track, back to the story line– we have the players to mount a challenge. We have the coach.

I think now of Podolski, and I picture him from all those German internationals running from the left wing into an ocean of space or against a scrambling defence. Pires like, Henry like.

I can see Walcott (if he stays) running through from the right like Anelka used to, like Ljunberg used to. I see Wilshire and the Ox unleashing them from the middle, Vieira-esq, Bergkamp-esq.

I see a solid back four and an improving keeper. I see a wealth of dept on the bench.

I see Giroud as a beast in attack, a fox in the box.

Maybe a Plan B and a plan A rolled into one.

I see Arsenal as no longer a 1 man team. No longer handbraked by the tippytap delusion. Wenger may have had the scales lifted from his eyes. And for that i’d like to thank Barca and Man City – you have killed our babies for us and paid us for the pleasure.

Written by Double98

Red & White’s Open Letter, and the subsequent chatter around the internet is the reason I decided to try and write something. Trouble is, I am angry, and I don’t know if I’ll be coherent enough. Why am I angry? Because I don’t like my club being harmed. Now, some would argue that the club being harmed is exactly what makes Usmanov angry, or ‘concerned’. And that’s why he’s decided to write something like what he did. I disagree. But let’s move on from this for a while. I’ll keep referring to parts of the letter though.

The more fundamental question is..Why do people think there is something wrong at Arsenal? Usmanov refers to dressing up a bad game, and I guess the same applies here. No matter what people say, the reason for there being a perception of something being wrong, is only that we haven’t won a trophy for a while. And that is exactly what Usmanov is seeking to capitalise on.

What is a trophy? It’s something you win. Even Usmanov says “because it is the trophies which are the crowning achievement for everybody at the club.” What is the keyword in there for most people? For me, it’s ACHIEVEMENT. A trophy is not the end to be reached at all costs. It is something you earn. You earn it by playing well. You earn it by being better than others wanting to win it too. Sometimes, despite playing well enough you miss out on it due to factors outside your control that can be simplistically labelled as luck. Where is the achievement in assembling a team of the highest paid players? What is the meaning of the trophy if you are simply getting your hands on it? I could buy a trophy from some guy who won the track and field at the national athletic meet. Hell I could pump myself full of drugs, nobble him, and even race him for it and beat him. (See, I worked for it) I would then display it in my cabinet. Maybe show it off to some people who visit, who would be suitably impressed. But what do I get from it? Nothing. Nothing important anyway.

But let’s say you do. Some of you feel that the trophy IS the ultimate achievement regardless of how you come by it. What would be the collateral you would be willing to give in exchange for your trophies? What would you sacrifice for it? After all, no such thing as a free lunch. So if you’re not paying the bill for your lunch, someone else is. Who is footing that bill, and why? What do you risk owing that person in exchange for having your ephemeral desire satiated? And what do you have left after the desire is fulfilled?

Having one person owning the club is inherently risky. For every Abramovich there are tens of Shinawatras, Chainrais, Ridsdales, Whytes, Yeungs, Venkys, Tans, Romanovs (starting to get the picture yet?) And if you don’t know who they are, it’s because the media doesn’t quite give the same amount of coverage to the important problems in football, as it does to transfers and the rest of the drama. Of course, nothing like this could happen to Arsenal. Arsenal could never go bankrupt. Even if we do, there will always be someone richer and more ‘ambitious’ to rescue us and bring us more trophies. Right? You come back to the point about why someone will foot your bill. Let’s get one thing straight. Rich people do not give away money. That isn’t how they got rich in the first place. If they seem to give away money, it’s because they aim to gain something out of it. It’ll always be more money, whether directly or indirectly. It could be an advertisement, it could be as an investment, it could be to gain legitimacy. Anything. But it is never charity. Never. Eventually, they will no longer need this toy that they have. It will happen. It may not be in 1 year, or 10, or 50. But it will happen.

Now some people seem to have no problem with players switching clubs for more money. Neither do I. They do it in contravention of rules though, and that’s something we shouldn’t forget, or brush over. But ok, we’d all switch our jobs for more money. But would we switch our loyalties? Let’s say someone offered you a large sum of money to start supporting Chelsea with them (because they are all alone and they want to feel as involved with their community as we are) Would you do it? Turn your back on Arsenal? Chelsea win trophies, remember? I would think not. So it seems people have some qualms about switching loyalties for money or trophies. Yet, what people are advocating with bringing Usmanov in, is also switching loyalties.

What are we loyal to? Just the name ‘Arsenal’? Well, we were also variously named Dial Square, Woolwich Arsenal, Royal Arsenal etc. right? Didn’t our fans maintain their loyalty? Don’t we accept those names as part of our history?

What are we loyal to? The location of the club? Well, yes. But the reason for that isn’t just location itself. It’s what it represents (and I’m an overseas fan) to the people, to its traditions.

I follow Arsenal because of our ethos. Our tradition. our values. Our class. Our style of play. Our history of success.

Now. Some of those things will not last forever, and I’ll still be around supporting Arsenal. For instance, our style of play. I’ll still follow Arsenal if we play like a bunch of club footed, catenaccio loving bunch of amateurs. And of course, if we are playing like that, there will be no trophies.

But some things, are THE identity of Arsenal. Values, and traditions. CLASS.

For one moment, forget trophies, forget FFP, and talk of we can’t compete (we do compete most years) and think about it. It’s just good sense to not spend more than you have. Most of the world is finding out right now that living in and off credit is something which comes back to bite you. Usmanov’s notion of a debt free club, with a large war chest is all well and good. But isn’t that exactly what the current board are looking to achieve?

In any case, having a sugar daddy model doesn’t guarantee success. Even in today’s world. What happens when EVERYONE goes down that route. You can pump in 2billion, someone else will pump in 5, someone else 10. What guarantee do you have that any amount of money will be enough? Are there enough billionaires interested to go around? And that’s nothing to say of what it means for the state of true competition in football. Even the US, which is the most capitalist country in the world, organises its sports in a very socialistic manner with wage caps, draft system, and restrictive transfer rules, because those rules promote a more competitive environment. ManCity might be Arsenal’s rival, but if they end up destroying all competition, they end up destroying themselves. Sports are not a normal competitive business environment in that sense. There are no monopolies in sport. There is no excitement in viewing a foregone conclusion. Arsenal do things in a way which are moral, which are important, and importantly, which does have a chance of success. The chance is lower, and it is affected by being targeted at this point. But the chance is still there. They only target us, because they fear us.

And I include Usmanov in that. Usmanov wants to own the club, right? If Arsenal succeed, he doesn’t get to own Arsenal. As such, his ‘concerns’ are very much the opposite of Arsenal’s. His interests are contrary to the fans. Usmanov is selling a dream. A dream Ridsdale sold his Leeds fans, and then said that for a while, we lived it at least. To be fair, the board is selling a dream too. The worst that can happen in following that dream is that we won’t win trophies. The worst that can happen with chasing Usmanov’s dream is…well.. a LOT worse. Trophies would be the last of our worries then. Ask Portsmouth fans. Usmanov came in through paying Dein 75m for his shares. and promptly proceeded to go on a bullying spree against all the blogs who were naturally enough curious about his past. His shady past shouldn’t disqualify him, but it should make us wary of him. Usmanov is also the only one making high and mighty promises, which he knows he’ll have no need to prove until he can give us all a massive shrug with massive shoulders and say..Tough.. I lied. He’s the only one who makes opportunistic statements destabilising the club, just to try and force his way in. He’s using the fans’ concerns, presenting them as his own, and trying to use us to get his way. Kroenke was on the outside looking in too. He never made any statements harming Arsenal. Of course, Kroenke is not an angel. He is just someone who’s track record and behaviour suggests he is more trustworthy, or at least, less risky.

I would MUCH prefer not having either of these people involved with Arsenal. But only Kroenke has sports teams (and no, they are not all ‘unsuccessful’. Saying that is displaying a vast ignorance about how US sports are structured) He has NEVER sold any share in any sports team he has owned. He was initially resisted by the board, but brought in once Usmanov appeared on the scene. (which suggests they aren’t simply motivated to sell out, nor did they accept Usmanov’s higher offer)  Kronke uses his sports teams as a business. Arsenal IS a business. What does he bring to the business? He brings with him a wealth of marketing experience using sports teams. Liverpool’s owners managed to get them a bumper shirt deal through their own channels of influence. Kroenke offers us much the same. He can increase our brand value, and that in itself isn’t as simplistic as saying, if you win, your brand value goes up. Kroenke has something to offer us. His endgame is still unknown, but his record of not selling any sports team gives me confidence he’s not here to make just a quick buck.

So basically, I think this whole worrying over trophies is distracting us from the main issue. The current board need to change some aspects of their running of the club, in an ever changing situation, but what they say, and even the transfer dealings over the last 2 summers suggest they are aware of that. The desire for change, should not mean desire for complete change. We will not know whether R & W will be any better, until it’s too late to do anything about it. So far, everything Usmanov has done, has led me to grow more and more in favour of keeping him out. Much as I’d prefer Kroenke also gone, at the moment, if he’s all that’s stopping Usmanov from coming in, I’m thankful for his presence.

To end, I will make a statement that seems to go contrary to all I’ve written above. I think it is possible to maintain class, even under a billionaire model. No really, It is. A financier doesn’t HAVE to change the club’s ethos. He doesn’t have to make the club all about money. He can help the club overcome some shortcomings. But in that case, he doesn’t guarantee much more success at trophies. Once you start paying players more and more money, class invariably goes out the window. In any case, Usmanov has a distinct lack of class, and he’s shown a few times that he’s willing to harm Arsenal to serve his own interests. Hence my feelings above.

Written by Shard

I don’t know where to begin. I was so positive about this summer and the coming season. I wrote a post on here – “Van Persie, Van Mystery”- in which I admitted the fears, but espoused the hopes of the fateful meeting between Arsène, Gazidis, and van Persie..I now notice how I naturally refer to each.. Van Persie used to be Robin…not anymore.. — Gazidis.. will probably never be Ivan, but who knows (I always remind you all that I’m an open minded Gunner). Of course Arsène, that will never change, he will always be our Arsène for me, unless they find some bodies buried in his basement, and even then I’d probably forgive him. He’s just so damn magnetic !

Rather than run through all the recent confusion and possible scenarios for this summer (rampant in the press and blogosphere), I will set some reasonable goals, with just a few hypotheticals, and some things that would satisfy me as a fan.

Before the bad van Persie news this week.. I was hoping for a couple more signings after Giroud and Podolski. –  either a good quality DM or CAM. I say either, because, it would be unrealistic to expect both, and we have a couple of versatile high quality midfielders in Wilshire and Arteta who can adjust to compliment either, I believe, and I trust Arsène’s vision on where to use them, especially JW.

I do like the idea of a solid PL back up goalkeeper, and I don’t see anything in the rumours that says Arsene wants someone to replace Szczesny,( maybe a decent challenge at best ) or that we would spend a lot there.

After this, I would have considered anything more coming in as a big bonus.

I think we will move a few sellable players out. Maybe Bendtner,Chamakh, Vela, and Arshavin ( he really screwed up the Zenit plan by opening his mouth at the Euros)  We have to be honest… not everyone can be moved at their current wages.  But these few have  value. Yes, some teams like Chamakh.

Where things get a little sticky, is, any possible domino effect with Walcott and Song. I will not go into all the possible permutations of what can happen there– so i will simplify it. —- If somehow things get really ugly, I don’t want Arsenal to find out when it’s too late to do anything about it. Neither Theo or Alex would be someone to hold onto if they refuse to extend. So they need to be signed, or moved, and replaced. (maybe signed, then at a later date, sold? )Seriously. If we have another last minute debacle, we should be ashamed, and someone would have to pay, in my estimation.

On Usmanov… I know it’s hard to take the shareholder infighting, especially after RvP’s statement and it was a bit of opportunism. But I try to put myself in the rich guys shoes : I’m trying to take control of this club, probably to try and make it better. I’m willing to spend, but the current board is blocking me at every turn. I’m watching this loser Kroenke, who doesn’t care about the team personally, I’m sure. He isn’t doing anything to help, personally, yet he blocks me from trying to change things. You know he probably isn’t a football fan, except NFL. Why can’t I speak out. Everyone else can blog, or give their opinion as much as they want.

Consider this, maybe he was justifiably outraged whenever he found out, like some fans we know.

Back to me.  I don’t want a sugar daddy owner, I’m proud of how we try to do business, but there is a reasonable middle ground, with a little bit of owner investment, especially until we renew our bigger commercial deals. A moderate investment in the squad (keeping FFP in mind), and greater success, would make those new deals more lucrative, surely. It may never be a perfect ownership situation, but there is certainly a lot of room for improvement. For all we know, Wenger may be secretly hoping Usmanov gets in.

And lastly, about van Persie. I reserve the right to change my mind about this, but this is where I stand right now: I don’t want us to accept a pathetic offer. I don’t want any team to take advantage of the situation as it is, or for RvP to force his way. Either pay for the player of the year, or he stays, and helps us make a run. RvP will have to play well to prove he’s worth top salary in a year. He will have to risk under performing, and injury. But he shouldn’t mind accepting less, because it’s not about the money, right? Actually, he will do fine, because without any transfer fee next year, a couple teams will still be able to pay a big salary or signing bonus.

I want us to show anyone and everyone, that we are not desperate to take any cash we can get. We would rather have one more year with a great striker, who is moulded perfectly to our system, – to make a strong title run. —OR, If we get a strong offer, take it, and go get one more good attacker for depth. Either way, we will pick a new captain.

With so much outrage among fans and press this past week, I think my view is reasonable. Less emotional today.

Written by jnyc