I was prompted to write this following the extraordinary convulsions in the Arsenal blogosphere after the defeat to Manchester United. Chicken Licken bloggers, one of whom claimed they could manage Arsenal better than Arsene, renewed their calls for Denilson’s head, Arsene’s head, anyone’s head. (Unwise bloggers might be encouraged to read this.) It seemed so out of kilter with reality that I thought that there had to be some kind of diagnosis of a collective mentality, shared by the football media in England and the ‘doom and gloom’ Arsenal bloggers, that made them react in such a way. These are my diagnoses.
The Foreign Agenda. Arsene’s French nationality is a constant point of reference, the implication being that Arsenal is now a ‘French club’. (One blog stated that Smalling had chosen United over Arsenal ‘because he wanted to speak English in the dressing room.’) From the old references to ‘discipline’, or rather lack of it (all those red cards, symptoms of a suspect temperament) to the current accusation that Arsenal lack an ‘English spine’, fighting spirit, or physicality, Arsène’s Arsenal fall foul of a particular kind of xenophobia, in both the football media and among our own fan-base. What is unspoken is that Arsenal’s global scouting network is a necessary and far-sighted (and now much-imitated) policy that enables the club to compete, by attracting young footballing talent from a global pool: nationality is secondary to technique, temperament, ability, and athleticism. Arsenal are a post-national club, a difficult thing in a post-Imperial country.
The Logic of ‘Success’. We often read that Arsenal haven’t won anything for 5 years (and counting). The Chicken Licken mantra: ‘We must buy. The kids aren’t good enough. The club isn’t successful. The ‘youth experiment’ has failed.’ As Untold Arsenal has been exploring, finances in English football mean that we have to re-think what we understand by footballing ‘success’. What is success, and how do we measure it? In wins, in trophies, in superstars bought for multi-millions? Or, in building a stable, properly-financed, sensibly run club, which produces and develops its own players, that plays an entertaining and winning style of football, and that will continue as an institution not for 5 or 10 years but for 100?
The Blame Game. ‘Something is wrong with the club.’ ‘Wenger’s lost the plot.’ ‘He’s too stubborn.’ This line of thinking sees defeat not as a necessary component of sporting competition (think of what it would be like to ‘support’ the Harlem Globetrotters), but as a manifestation of some kind of lack on the part of the manager, or some kind of terminal decline in his thinking. When Arsenal are beaten, the assumption is not that the other team played better football on the day, but that Arsenal would beat all others handsomely if it were not for the selection, motivational and tactical deficiencies of Arsene Wenger himself. The Arse-blogosphere looks for someone to blame for disappointment, and lays it all at the door of ’Big Daddy’ (see below). The blame game is clearly linked to raised expectations created by the 1998, 2002 and especially 2004 teams, but is also tainted by ‘declinism’, a belief that the past was a better place, which is very much an English cultural malaise.
The Instant. The Arse-blogosphere is reactive, and places instantaneous reaction above reflection and thought. It also places instant digestion above slow rumination. The Chicken Licken blogs are symptoms of our ‘live’, ‘24/7’, instant access and instant comment digital culture. The culture of instantaneousness means that Arsenal are not allowed to lose, because there is no longer view of things, and a defeat means the end of the world. As the food critic Anton Ego says in Ratatouille, ‘After reading a lot of overheated puffery ... you know what I'm craving? A little perspective. That's it. I'd like some fresh, clear, well seasoned perspective. Can you suggest a good wine to go with that?’
A Sense of Entitlement. ‘We deserve better.’ Chicken Licken Arsenal bloggers and fans believe that somehow they are entitled to watch not only high-quality entertaining football, but all-conquering football. This has been reinforced by the success of Arsène’s Arsenal itself. No-one who watched Terry Neill’s Arsenal, or George Graham’s, can honestly inhabit that sense of entitlement. This sense, not that we are privileged to watch the kind of foot ball seen at the Emirates, but that we ‘deserve’ to do so, is also connected with consumerism.
The Dominance of Consumerism. It’s no great news that the contract between fan and club has changed since the advent of the Premier League, and the post-Hillsborough construction of a middle-class fan-base for top-level football. In treating the fan as a customer, however, our club has helped produce a consumption-oriented fan mentality that now manifests itself on the Arse-blogosphere. A recurrent complaint is: ‘I pay £XXXX for my season ticket, so I expect to see XXXX.’ Chicken Licken bloggers now relate to the experience of watching football as they would to a movie: they want a guaranteed level of entertainment or success, and if they don’t get it, they complain loudly. Of course, the experience of watching a live football match is not the repeatable, guaranteed experience of watching a movie: sometimes a team plays badly, sometimes they lose. Arsenal don’t lose very much, but when defeat comes...
A Culture of Complaint. In 1993, the art critic Robert Hughes published a book called The Culture of Complaint. In it, Hughes argued that ‘we create an infantilized culture of complaint, in which Big Daddy is always to blame and the expansion of rights goes on without the other half of citizenship - attachment to duties and obligations... The emphasis is on the subjective: how we feel about things, rather than what we think’. Rather than a democratic expression of fan voices, the Arse-blogosphere is largely characterised by this mode of complaint, the football-consumer rejecting the long-term ‘duties and obligations’ of supporting their club in favour of short-term gratification, and instant expressions of blame.
The Importance of Ideology. This underpins everything. The foundational motive for the bias against Arsène Wenger’s Arsenal is economics. Arsène Wenger has been pursuing an economic policy which runs diametrically against the prevailing ideological orthodoxy of ‘Football 2.0’: that financial irresponsibility (spending on transfer fees and wages at a level that cannot be sustained by the club’s business model) is the only path to success (see above). This model is of course the same one that Brownian economic policy has pursued since 1997, the inflation of a financial bubble founded on unsustainable levels of debt, that is now also falling to pieces. Wenger’s foresight is actually astounding, if only the football media and the Chicken Licken Arse-blogosphere could understand it, or perhaps stand to look at it. Wenger’s Arsenal offer a different model of financial responsibility and footballing excellence that rejects ‘borrow and spend’ irresponsibility. When the sky does indeed fall (as Untold Arsenal has demonstrated that it shall – the first drops of a hard rain are falling even now) then Arsenal will be one of the best-prepared clubs to succeed – by whatever measure – in England, and in Europe.
Saturday, 25 June 2011
Thursday, 15 January 2009
I Spy 2009
Fellow I-Spyers will be glad to hear I have spotted the first fledgling of the new year. Anyone else who can spot the 'return of injured player "X" is like a new signing' (see previous post) may award themselves 20 points.
Clue: see
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/wenger-injured-quartet-are-new-signings-
Clue: see
http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/wenger-injured-quartet-are-new-signings-
Saturday, 10 January 2009
Balance part 2
Another Saturday, another frustrating 1-0 win. It was vital to get those points, otherwise Arsenal would have been 5 points behind Villa, and only 1 ahead of Everton. It's still a possibility that Arsenal might miss out on Europe altogether next season.
That's why I scratch my head slightly at the mooted signing of Arshavin. Granted he's an excellent player on his day, and we could do with an experienced, skilful winger (in the continuing absence of Rosicky), but is it the greatest need? The central midfield area is far more in need of attention, it seems to me. Denilson, Diaby and Song, three of the 'junior' pros in the taxonomy I suggested in my last blog, are not good enough to propel Arsenal into the Champions League places this year. I like Denilson as a neat and tidy player, but he reminds me a little of the Spurs player of the 90s, Vinnie Samways - who David Pleat (even) described as a player who liked to keep the ball on a string: I give it to you, you give it back to me. This kind of player gives you high possessions stats, but lacks penetration. And today, Arsenal had 75% possession, but just scraped a 1-0 win. I won't repeat what I said about Diaby and Song previously.
What Arsenal really need is to get Flamini back on loan, or to get Veloso on loan, to get a terrier-like midfield scrapper with high energy levels to inject some dynamism into the team. They need not be a world-beater; they need not be great technically; but they need to be the motor for the team. I would settle for a John Jensen at this stage, still less a Stefan Schwartz (not to mention Ray Parlour). Surely we can find a 25-year-old John Jensen-alike, or even a 32-year-old version? A big old unit like Everton's Fellaini would be perfect - where did they find him?
Failing that, perhaps Arsenal should think of getting someone like Paddy Vieira back on loan, to provide presence, leadership, a steady hand on the tiller. Even if his knees are knacked, could we get 15 games out of Vieira? It would allow Nasri to come into the middle of the park to add creativity, without making the midfield even more worryingly flimsy. My ideal for this role in the slightly less short-term would be Marc van Bommel for a season or two, but I don't think he wants to leave Bayern until the end of this season - too late.
The other thing about Arshavin is that he isn't really a winger, not like Cristiano Ronaldo or even Albert Rieira. Arshavin is a Number 10, what the Italians call a 'fantasista', a playmaker: and in the Arsenal squad, so are Rosicky, Nasri, Wilshere, Ramsey, possibly Diaby (he'd like to think so, as would Bendtner), Bischoff, Merida. Hleb was a Number 10. Arsene has collected them over the last few seasons, but hasn't even signed a proper wide midfielder (Pires), let alone an out-and out winger (Overmars). Walcott's really a forward who is learning his trade in wide areas. The current Arsenal squad is over-burdened with these attacking midfielders - we need some water-carriers to take up the load.
That's why I scratch my head slightly at the mooted signing of Arshavin. Granted he's an excellent player on his day, and we could do with an experienced, skilful winger (in the continuing absence of Rosicky), but is it the greatest need? The central midfield area is far more in need of attention, it seems to me. Denilson, Diaby and Song, three of the 'junior' pros in the taxonomy I suggested in my last blog, are not good enough to propel Arsenal into the Champions League places this year. I like Denilson as a neat and tidy player, but he reminds me a little of the Spurs player of the 90s, Vinnie Samways - who David Pleat (even) described as a player who liked to keep the ball on a string: I give it to you, you give it back to me. This kind of player gives you high possessions stats, but lacks penetration. And today, Arsenal had 75% possession, but just scraped a 1-0 win. I won't repeat what I said about Diaby and Song previously.
What Arsenal really need is to get Flamini back on loan, or to get Veloso on loan, to get a terrier-like midfield scrapper with high energy levels to inject some dynamism into the team. They need not be a world-beater; they need not be great technically; but they need to be the motor for the team. I would settle for a John Jensen at this stage, still less a Stefan Schwartz (not to mention Ray Parlour). Surely we can find a 25-year-old John Jensen-alike, or even a 32-year-old version? A big old unit like Everton's Fellaini would be perfect - where did they find him?
Failing that, perhaps Arsenal should think of getting someone like Paddy Vieira back on loan, to provide presence, leadership, a steady hand on the tiller. Even if his knees are knacked, could we get 15 games out of Vieira? It would allow Nasri to come into the middle of the park to add creativity, without making the midfield even more worryingly flimsy. My ideal for this role in the slightly less short-term would be Marc van Bommel for a season or two, but I don't think he wants to leave Bayern until the end of this season - too late.
The other thing about Arshavin is that he isn't really a winger, not like Cristiano Ronaldo or even Albert Rieira. Arshavin is a Number 10, what the Italians call a 'fantasista', a playmaker: and in the Arsenal squad, so are Rosicky, Nasri, Wilshere, Ramsey, possibly Diaby (he'd like to think so, as would Bendtner), Bischoff, Merida. Hleb was a Number 10. Arsene has collected them over the last few seasons, but hasn't even signed a proper wide midfielder (Pires), let alone an out-and out winger (Overmars). Walcott's really a forward who is learning his trade in wide areas. The current Arsenal squad is over-burdened with these attacking midfielders - we need some water-carriers to take up the load.
Friday, 9 January 2009
A Balanced View
After reading a couple of very sensible blogs in the last week or two - one by ArsenalVision on the 'media myths' promulgated about Arsenal, the other by Untold Arsenal, who I hadn't come across before, but which is by a blogger who writes for the venerable fanzine Highbury High - I've become less pessimistic about the Arsenal. I'm still not sure whether they'll get fourth place, but I do see them improving slowly, gaining some confidence. A couple of signings (Arshavin now looks like a real story, and another central midfielder might be on the cards) and the season might start to look a lot brighter.
Something that struck me was in all the analysis of the deficiencies of Arsenal over the last months, not very much detailed attention has been given to the importance of age in the Arsenal squad. Sure, there's endless whining about depth, and lack of experience, 'you don't win nothing with kids', but no-one has really looked at the issue in detail. So I thought I'd group the Arsenal squad into four age groups - oldsters, seniors, juniors, youngsters - to try to gauge the seemingly problematic chemistry within the squad.
1. Oldsters: Gallas, Toure, Almunia, Silvestre. Sold since 2005: Vieira, Pires, Ljungberg, Lehmann, Campbell, Henry, Gilberto. This list alone shows where some of the problems have come from. In three years, Arsene has moved on seven squad members - first-teamers - who are now in their thirties. This is the problem when a team or squad is 'of an age': they grow old together, and have to be replaced together. The same happened to Liverpool at the end of the 1980s, and they have still not won a title since. The ideal, of course, is to integrate new, younger members into the team as individual players are felt to go into decline - but this isn't always possible. Contracts, the possibility of outside interest, personal issues, can all be a factor here. I would say that with only four remaining players in this category, Arsenal are very unusual; some teams, like Bolton for instance, would balance their squad the other way, with more older (cheaper) players who are on the downward part of their careers. This can lead to leadership problems if, as in Arsenal's case, there isn't a strong leader on the pitch.
2. Seniors: Fabregas, Rosicky, Eduardo (all long-term injured), Sagna, van Persie, Adebayor, Eboue. Sold since 2005: Cole, Hleb, Flamini, Diarra. These are players in the prime of their careers - Fabregas is in this group because of his very young entry into the team, despite his age. The problem here is injuries, and 2008 was a horrible year for Arsenal for long-term injuries. If Arsenal currently had all these players fit and on form, we'd be pressing for the title. It's interesting to note that of the four players who have left in their prime years, only Diarra has gone on to to show more than he did at Arsenal.
3. Juniors: Clichy, Djourou, Nasri, Walcott (long-term injured), Diaby, Denilson, Song, Bendtner, Senderos (on loan to AC Milan), Fabianski. With injuries to the senior ranks, the burden then falls onto the junior pros, and this is where the bulk of the problems lie. Clichy, Djourou and Nasri are excellent players, who show occasional inconsistency because of their age; Walcott's importance has been exposed by his absence, in terms of pace and penetration; Song and Bendtner are not quick enough mentally to be really effective playing in the Arsenal style; and we will have to wait and see whether Senderos comes back. The big problem here, I think, is Diaby, and again, this was caused by another long-term injury, inflicted in a similar way to Eduardo's. This injury has held back Diaby's development. By now, I would suggest, Arsene would have expected Diaby to have grown into the central-midfield position, to have learned tactical discipline, to have become more consistent in his effort, to concentrate and think quicker and move the ball quicker. He plays Diaby behind the strikers because Diaby hasn't developed at the rate required, and so playing him in a central midfield two is a gamble. Diaby did play there against Plymouth, with some success: I would hope that he is played there again regularly this season to allow him to become the player we all hoped he would be. For this, we may need a more defensive-minded player alongside him to provide insurance. Song does not have the speed of thought to do this effectively over a Premiership season. Denilson will learn a lot from this season and will, I think, mature into a very fine player next season.
4. Youngsters: Gibbs, Wilshere, Ramsey, Vela, Coquelin; Bischoff, Randall, Lansbury, Merida, Simpson, Traore, Barazite, Gavin Hoyte, Nordtveit (most of whom are, or have been, on loan). I think the first five named are truly excellent players who will light up Ashburton Grove for years to come. One or two of the others might come through. This is the Carling Cup side, pretty much, the best reserves, who didn't go as far as previous years, having come up against a very good Burnley team at Turf Moor. Not much can be expected in terms of full first-team games from 16 and 17 year olds, but they have all shown enough to indicate their talent.
The organisation of these four groups within a typical squad would be a bell-curve: less youngsters and oldsters at either end, more juniors and seniors in the middle. The average age of the squad would therefore be 26, or 27. This year, because of injuries and the changes in the squad, Arsenal are top-light, so to speak, or bottom-heavy, accentuating players of 21 or less, so the average age goes down to 23. Not surprising, then, that confidence is easily lost, inconsistency is the rule, and rumblings of discontent are felt among the fans. Not only is this bell-curve highly unusual: even with excellent youth scouting and development (like, say Manchester City), few managers can expect more than two or three players in any one youth generation to come through as top-class players. In Ferguson's time at Manchester United, this has happened once, with the Nevilles, Giggs, Scholes, Beckham: with the passing of time, this seems ever more conclusively a freak occurence. What Arsene is relying upon is also a freak occurence, that four or five international-class players will come through together. Considering what we have seen of the youngsters, it may well be a gamble that pays off; but it is a gamble nonetheless.
So, what we have going on at Arsenal currently can be summarised as follows: the necessary break-up of the Invincibles; serious and long-term injuries to senior players; the (predictable) inconsistency of the junior pros; and a reliance on a stellar group of young players to see Arsenal into the future.
The Untold Arsenal blog prophesies doom for many of Arsenal's rivals in the current economic climate, particularly highly-leveraged and indebted clubs like Liverpool and Manchester United (let alone West Ham). The writer suggests that Arsene is so forward-thinking that fans cannot comprehend his plan, which is based upon sustainable spending and long-term strategic success. Three years without a trophy is a mere bagatelle if the future of the club is secured and others begin to fall apart. Arsene did say recently that football still believes it is in a 'bubble', and I think a crash is quite likely in the near future, so the board should be praised, rather than vilified, for their prudence.
Mind you, a couple of astute signings, without breaking the bank, and success may come sooner than we think possible.
Something that struck me was in all the analysis of the deficiencies of Arsenal over the last months, not very much detailed attention has been given to the importance of age in the Arsenal squad. Sure, there's endless whining about depth, and lack of experience, 'you don't win nothing with kids', but no-one has really looked at the issue in detail. So I thought I'd group the Arsenal squad into four age groups - oldsters, seniors, juniors, youngsters - to try to gauge the seemingly problematic chemistry within the squad.
1. Oldsters: Gallas, Toure, Almunia, Silvestre. Sold since 2005: Vieira, Pires, Ljungberg, Lehmann, Campbell, Henry, Gilberto. This list alone shows where some of the problems have come from. In three years, Arsene has moved on seven squad members - first-teamers - who are now in their thirties. This is the problem when a team or squad is 'of an age': they grow old together, and have to be replaced together. The same happened to Liverpool at the end of the 1980s, and they have still not won a title since. The ideal, of course, is to integrate new, younger members into the team as individual players are felt to go into decline - but this isn't always possible. Contracts, the possibility of outside interest, personal issues, can all be a factor here. I would say that with only four remaining players in this category, Arsenal are very unusual; some teams, like Bolton for instance, would balance their squad the other way, with more older (cheaper) players who are on the downward part of their careers. This can lead to leadership problems if, as in Arsenal's case, there isn't a strong leader on the pitch.
2. Seniors: Fabregas, Rosicky, Eduardo (all long-term injured), Sagna, van Persie, Adebayor, Eboue. Sold since 2005: Cole, Hleb, Flamini, Diarra. These are players in the prime of their careers - Fabregas is in this group because of his very young entry into the team, despite his age. The problem here is injuries, and 2008 was a horrible year for Arsenal for long-term injuries. If Arsenal currently had all these players fit and on form, we'd be pressing for the title. It's interesting to note that of the four players who have left in their prime years, only Diarra has gone on to to show more than he did at Arsenal.
3. Juniors: Clichy, Djourou, Nasri, Walcott (long-term injured), Diaby, Denilson, Song, Bendtner, Senderos (on loan to AC Milan), Fabianski. With injuries to the senior ranks, the burden then falls onto the junior pros, and this is where the bulk of the problems lie. Clichy, Djourou and Nasri are excellent players, who show occasional inconsistency because of their age; Walcott's importance has been exposed by his absence, in terms of pace and penetration; Song and Bendtner are not quick enough mentally to be really effective playing in the Arsenal style; and we will have to wait and see whether Senderos comes back. The big problem here, I think, is Diaby, and again, this was caused by another long-term injury, inflicted in a similar way to Eduardo's. This injury has held back Diaby's development. By now, I would suggest, Arsene would have expected Diaby to have grown into the central-midfield position, to have learned tactical discipline, to have become more consistent in his effort, to concentrate and think quicker and move the ball quicker. He plays Diaby behind the strikers because Diaby hasn't developed at the rate required, and so playing him in a central midfield two is a gamble. Diaby did play there against Plymouth, with some success: I would hope that he is played there again regularly this season to allow him to become the player we all hoped he would be. For this, we may need a more defensive-minded player alongside him to provide insurance. Song does not have the speed of thought to do this effectively over a Premiership season. Denilson will learn a lot from this season and will, I think, mature into a very fine player next season.
4. Youngsters: Gibbs, Wilshere, Ramsey, Vela, Coquelin; Bischoff, Randall, Lansbury, Merida, Simpson, Traore, Barazite, Gavin Hoyte, Nordtveit (most of whom are, or have been, on loan). I think the first five named are truly excellent players who will light up Ashburton Grove for years to come. One or two of the others might come through. This is the Carling Cup side, pretty much, the best reserves, who didn't go as far as previous years, having come up against a very good Burnley team at Turf Moor. Not much can be expected in terms of full first-team games from 16 and 17 year olds, but they have all shown enough to indicate their talent.
The organisation of these four groups within a typical squad would be a bell-curve: less youngsters and oldsters at either end, more juniors and seniors in the middle. The average age of the squad would therefore be 26, or 27. This year, because of injuries and the changes in the squad, Arsenal are top-light, so to speak, or bottom-heavy, accentuating players of 21 or less, so the average age goes down to 23. Not surprising, then, that confidence is easily lost, inconsistency is the rule, and rumblings of discontent are felt among the fans. Not only is this bell-curve highly unusual: even with excellent youth scouting and development (like, say Manchester City), few managers can expect more than two or three players in any one youth generation to come through as top-class players. In Ferguson's time at Manchester United, this has happened once, with the Nevilles, Giggs, Scholes, Beckham: with the passing of time, this seems ever more conclusively a freak occurence. What Arsene is relying upon is also a freak occurence, that four or five international-class players will come through together. Considering what we have seen of the youngsters, it may well be a gamble that pays off; but it is a gamble nonetheless.
So, what we have going on at Arsenal currently can be summarised as follows: the necessary break-up of the Invincibles; serious and long-term injuries to senior players; the (predictable) inconsistency of the junior pros; and a reliance on a stellar group of young players to see Arsenal into the future.
The Untold Arsenal blog prophesies doom for many of Arsenal's rivals in the current economic climate, particularly highly-leveraged and indebted clubs like Liverpool and Manchester United (let alone West Ham). The writer suggests that Arsene is so forward-thinking that fans cannot comprehend his plan, which is based upon sustainable spending and long-term strategic success. Three years without a trophy is a mere bagatelle if the future of the club is secured and others begin to fall apart. Arsene did say recently that football still believes it is in a 'bubble', and I think a crash is quite likely in the near future, so the board should be praised, rather than vilified, for their prudence.
Mind you, a couple of astute signings, without breaking the bank, and success may come sooner than we think possible.
Sunday, 28 December 2008
For What It's Worth
I'm finding that my exasperation with Arsenal, and particular with Wenger, has led me to a kind of tired, fatalistic passivity. After the Villa equaliser, I could only nod and ruefully smile; after a scratchy win against Portsmouth, a sigh of resignation. Again, after the macth, there was all the old statements about belief and still being in the Premiership race: who believes this? Who is it for? This is currently the weakest, youngest, most inconsistent team Wenger has put together, and I don't think it will finish in the top 4. Personnel-wise, it's a mid-table team. I'm not a gambling man, but this is what I would do come January:
1. offload Bendtner for as much as could be raised.
2. send Song on loan with the proviso that he does not return.
3. buy Bullard for £7m, Upson for £8m, and Given for £5m. If, as one blog mooted today, Dacourt is being looked at, bring him in too, for peanuts.
4. get Senderos back from loan at Milan.
5. offer to take Arshavin on loan until the end of the season with the condition that he will be signed for £18m only if Arsenal finish in the Champions League places.
None of the above will happen. I'm sick and tired of Arsene, the excuses, the ludicrous rhetoric, the pointless spats, the post-game frustration and anger. This Arsenal team fails to win consistently not because of some refereeing conspiracy, nor because the team are booted off the pitch (as the 1998-2004 team were); no, it's because they aren't very good. And if Arsene can no longer see that, he should go in the summer. It's got to the point where I think my passion for Arsenal will only return when he does go. After 11 mainly brilliant years, that's a sad thing to admit.
1. offload Bendtner for as much as could be raised.
2. send Song on loan with the proviso that he does not return.
3. buy Bullard for £7m, Upson for £8m, and Given for £5m. If, as one blog mooted today, Dacourt is being looked at, bring him in too, for peanuts.
4. get Senderos back from loan at Milan.
5. offer to take Arshavin on loan until the end of the season with the condition that he will be signed for £18m only if Arsenal finish in the Champions League places.
None of the above will happen. I'm sick and tired of Arsene, the excuses, the ludicrous rhetoric, the pointless spats, the post-game frustration and anger. This Arsenal team fails to win consistently not because of some refereeing conspiracy, nor because the team are booted off the pitch (as the 1998-2004 team were); no, it's because they aren't very good. And if Arsene can no longer see that, he should go in the summer. It's got to the point where I think my passion for Arsenal will only return when he does go. After 11 mainly brilliant years, that's a sad thing to admit.
Sunday, 14 December 2008
Playing I-Spy with Arsene
Over the Christmas period, I-Spyers, award yourself the following points when you hear Arsene produce the following:
1. 'I believe in these players' (1 point)
2. 'The team showed great character' (1 point)
3. 'We were not physically sharp enough today' (2 points)
4. 'Having Eduardo and Senderos back will be like signing two new players' (20 points)
5. 'Our quality was missing today' (1 point)
6. 'Yes, we were a little unlucky' (1 point)
7. 'He is a good player, but we are not interested in him' (15 points)
8. 'We are a little disappointed in the level of our performance' (3 points)
9. 'We are not out of the title race, no' (6 points)
10. 'I feel the team is back to its best' (150 points)
Merry Christmas.
1. 'I believe in these players' (1 point)
2. 'The team showed great character' (1 point)
3. 'We were not physically sharp enough today' (2 points)
4. 'Having Eduardo and Senderos back will be like signing two new players' (20 points)
5. 'Our quality was missing today' (1 point)
6. 'Yes, we were a little unlucky' (1 point)
7. 'He is a good player, but we are not interested in him' (15 points)
8. 'We are a little disappointed in the level of our performance' (3 points)
9. 'We are not out of the title race, no' (6 points)
10. 'I feel the team is back to its best' (150 points)
Merry Christmas.
Sunday, 7 December 2008
Something Rotten
Being disappointed with the manner of Arsenal's performance is one thing. Booing a player until the manager is forced to remove him from the pitch, then cheering as he goes, is quite another. Like many another blog I'm appalled by what happened to Eboue at the Emirates yesterday. One of my favourite memories from Highbury was watching the late-80s GG side, and two or three Geezers in front of us provided a running commentary. When yet another move broke down, one stood up and shouted 'Hayes! Hayes!', then sitting back down, turned to his mates and said, 'Martin Hayes? If 'e was a horse, they'd take 'im out and shoot 'im.' Me and my friends gasped with laughter for the next few minutes. No booing, no calumny, no poison - just a few geezers who were well used to Arsenal playing poorly and reacted with a kind of resigned humour.
These malignant toads who booed Eboue yesterday - and who seem to think that paying the huge sums to attend the Emirates entitles them to boo their own players, to destroy the thing they watch - are a product of a change in footballing culture, in crowd culture, at Arsenal. No more support through thick and thin (mainly thin) - they use the analogy of the cinema or other 'entertainment', and say that if they weren't entertained, they have a right to complain. It's a long way from when Alan Durban, then Stoke manager, told critical journalists after a bore-draw at Highbury 'that if they wanted entertainment they should go and watch clowns.' The Emirates crowd are now consumers, and in all honesty, the club has encouraged them to act in this way through escalating prices and an emphasis upon the corporate spectacle. Wenger's marvellous football 1998-2007 has also spoiled this crowd; their support is now contingent upon entertainment or success. When I began to watch Arsenal at Highbury in the mid-70s, your ticket price guaranteed neither of those things (and hadn't done for a while).
A word: hubris. On the pitch and off of it, this near-train wreck of a season is being undone by long-standing fatal assumptions, from the board, from Wenger, from the crowd, for the blogosphere, about the relationship between players and supporters, between the club and the fans. The rage of the bloggers against the 'arrogance' of Bendtner is that of Caliban seeing his own face in the mirror.
I want Arsenal to fail now. I want them to fall apart and finish out of Europe. I want these so-called fans to 'do one', permanently. Only a season or two of failure will drive them out, and see the whole club return to something that I can feel happy in supporting.
A plague on all their houses.
These malignant toads who booed Eboue yesterday - and who seem to think that paying the huge sums to attend the Emirates entitles them to boo their own players, to destroy the thing they watch - are a product of a change in footballing culture, in crowd culture, at Arsenal. No more support through thick and thin (mainly thin) - they use the analogy of the cinema or other 'entertainment', and say that if they weren't entertained, they have a right to complain. It's a long way from when Alan Durban, then Stoke manager, told critical journalists after a bore-draw at Highbury 'that if they wanted entertainment they should go and watch clowns.' The Emirates crowd are now consumers, and in all honesty, the club has encouraged them to act in this way through escalating prices and an emphasis upon the corporate spectacle. Wenger's marvellous football 1998-2007 has also spoiled this crowd; their support is now contingent upon entertainment or success. When I began to watch Arsenal at Highbury in the mid-70s, your ticket price guaranteed neither of those things (and hadn't done for a while).
A word: hubris. On the pitch and off of it, this near-train wreck of a season is being undone by long-standing fatal assumptions, from the board, from Wenger, from the crowd, for the blogosphere, about the relationship between players and supporters, between the club and the fans. The rage of the bloggers against the 'arrogance' of Bendtner is that of Caliban seeing his own face in the mirror.
I want Arsenal to fail now. I want them to fall apart and finish out of Europe. I want these so-called fans to 'do one', permanently. Only a season or two of failure will drive them out, and see the whole club return to something that I can feel happy in supporting.
A plague on all their houses.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)