View Full Version : Silent Stan Speaks
Marc Overmars
30-09-2011, 09:12 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/arsenal/8797931/Arsenal-owner-Stan-Kroenke-Arsene-Wenger-is-one-of-the-greats-he-will-be-in-charge-for-as-long-as-he-wants.html
Good to hear from him at last.
Arsenal owner Stan Kroenke: Arsène Wenger is one of the greats – he will be in charge for as long as he wants
If popular myth were to be believed, the owner’s box at the St Louis Rams’ vast 67,000-seat indoor arena would be a fairly quiet place to be. Silent, even.
Yet there is nothing remotely muted about the imposing and charismatic 6ft 2in billionaire businessman stood immediately to my left.
“There it is, there it is ... WOW!” shouts Stan Kroenke as he exchanges a high five with his wife, Ann. “Now that was an unbelievable play!” The Rams have scored what turns out to be a consolation touchdown against the Baltimore Ravens and Kroenke has his arm around me.
“Do you want to know why that was a great play?” he says. “I’ll tell you why. For the quarterback to have that kind of arm strength, on the run, was unbelievable. Watch the replay ... on the run. BOOM! That’s really strong. That’s a big-time play right there.”
In between frustrated sighs and excited applause, Kroenke has been talking with similar enthusiasm about Arsenal, and especially Arsène Wenger, who today reaches the milestone of 15 years as the club’s manager.
It is the only interview that Kroenke has given about Arsenal since a share-buying spree that began in 2007 and culminated this year with him becoming majority owner in a deal that valued the club at £731 million.
Added to a portfolio that already includes leading American football, basketball, ice hockey, lacrosse and Major League Soccer teams, Kroenke has emerged as the most powerful and prolific owner in world sport.
“You know something,” he says. “Arsène is one of my favourite people I have met in the last 20 years. He is a great person and I love the way he handles himself.
"I love his focus. He is a very intelligent guy. You can talk to him about anything and, when he starts talking to people, I really love to listen to him. He should hold seminars he is so good at it. I have tremendous confidence in him. He is one of the great managers in the world.”
So could Wenger, under such scrutiny of late, have the appetite to match Sir Alex Ferguson and potentially manage for another decade?
Kroenke’s endorsement could hardly be more emphatic.
“With Arsène, it’s his decision and only he will know that,” he says. “He still maintains himself in tremendous physical shape. You have to have stamina and energy. It’s an energy business. You are coaching, training, travelling and in stadiums packed with pressure.
"It’s almost like you are training like an athlete. Arsène has great energy and that will always be his decision.” Kroenke then reveals that he has been admiring Arsenal from afar for more than a decade. “I have always been aware of Arsenal,” he says.
“I would say it was about 10 or 12 years ago that I really started following Arsenal. I followed very closely the season when Arsenal went unbeaten. It was unbelievable. I went over to see several games when Thierry Henry was still there.”
Kroenke also discloses a conversation with Billy Beane, the famous baseball coach whose life story is the subject of bestselling book Moneyball and a new Hollywood film in which Brad Pitt plays the lead role.
“Billy Beane is a very famous guy in America,” says Kroenke. “And do you know who his idol is? Arsène Wenger. No kidding. You know why? His ability to spend money and extract value. That is what it is all about to be successful in pro sports. If you can do that better than other people, you are always going to be pretty good. Billy Beane’s idol is Arsène Wenger. Check it out.”
Yet nobody at Arsenal, least of all Wenger, has been feeling particularly idolised recently. Defeat earlier this month against Blackburn made it the club’s worst start to a season for more than 50 years, while the 8-2 loss against Manchester United was their heaviest in the Premier League. Kroenke’s response is to note last Saturday’s “big win” against Bolton and apply a wider perspective.
“There are always going to be people with a point of view, particularly in this internet-laden 24-hour news cycle with the ability for anyone to say anything,” he says. “That’s just part of the game. Sure it is a challenging start to the season. I know everyone thinks it is always going to be like that [pointing upwards], but it’s not. We would all love it if it did.
“If you look at the Arsenal’s history, it has not always been that way. To finish in the top four 14 times in a row is just unbelievable.” If there is alarm at the possibility of slipping from the top four this season — and losing around £25 million of Champions League money — Kroenke is not showing it.
“A wise man was asked, ‘If you had your life to live over what would you do differently?’ He said, ‘The thing I look back on that robbed my life of the joy I had was worrying about things that never happened’. I try not to worry too much because I think that is good advice. Having said that, you are always concerned.
“You want to see people you care about achieve their potential. It’s a rocky start but what do people really expect? Cesc Fabregas is a great player who Arsène developed from the age of 16. He decided last year that he wants to leave.
“Maybe it is one of those times when we have to work our way through, maybe with some young players. Arsène has been really good at developing these guys, people like Alex Chamberlain and Jack Wilshere. There are some really good players that Arsène thinks can be special. Sometimes you go through periods like that. Arsène’s our man. As an owner, that’s who we put our confidence in.”
That confidence was also evident during the summer, when Kroenke liaised with Wenger but did not interfere in huge decisions over the futures of Fabregas and Samir Nasri.
Fabregas fulfilled an ambition to return home to Barcelona while Nasri, who would not sign a new contract, was sold to Manchester City rather than risk losing him for nothing. It has led to fears of a repeat next summer if the contacts of Robin van Persie, Thomas Vermaelen and Theo Walcott, which all expire in 2013, are not extended during this season.
So, is Kroenke confident of keeping his star players? “Yes,” he says. “They [Fabregas and Nasri] were unique situations. Arsenal is a great club. London is a great place to live. Why would you want to throw that away? I think we have a great organisation and we have Arsène there, the ultimate evaluator.”
Of the sale of Fabregas, he says: “That was between Arsène and him. I like the kid but I’m not going to change his mind. Arsène made the decision. If we wanted to be really hard about it, we could have done but Arsène believed that it was the right way to do it. We talked about it when we were in London.
“I also get it on Nasri. If we didn’t do something on Nasri people would be looking at us next summer and saying, ‘why didn’t you do this?’ We bought in a lot of resources that we can use on other players.
“I honestly didn’t make the decision on Nasri. Of course the board talks about these things but, at the end of the day, that’s for Arsène.”
While we are talking, the Rams are succumbing to a crushing 37-7 loss and it is fascinating to observe at first-hand Kroenke’s body language. He is fiercely competitive and defeat clearly hurts immensely, yet there are no individual recriminations or sweeping judgments. Kroenke’s wife, an heiress to the Wal-Mart fortune, also remains unerringly friendly and down-to-earth despite the on-field disappointment. The Rams’ head coach, Steve Spagnuolo, later tells me that he would not want any other owner during this difficult patch.
It is obvious that there is a particular focus on the longer-term picture with all of Kroenke’s sports teams. He cites the stadium, the academy, the opportunities for commercial growth and the introduction of financial fair play as reasons that Arsenal will compete with any club in the world. He also explains how his involvement with Arsenal began simply with a desire to help the Colorado Rapids, his ‘soccer’ team that are the reigning MLS champions.
“We didn’t invest to come in and control the club,” Kroenke says. “I thought that we needed a strategic alliance with one of the big clubs. We did have lots of different opportunities presented to us to invest in European football. I didn’t have the motivation to do it until Arsenal.
“It is such a great club, such an interesting club. If we are going to invest in a European football club, I wouldn’t really want to invest in any other one. I know I’m supposed to say that, but it’s the truth.
“I like the tradition of Arsenal. I love London. I have a lot of friends in the UK. I like the fact that we have such a following internationally. Arsenal helps me learn over here and I think what we have learned over here helps Arsenal. That’s what motivates me. I like that part, to think we are all growing and learning.”
What Arsenal can most obviously grow is their commercial revenues and, with the main sponsorship deals due to expire in 2014, Manchester United are the target off the pitch as well as on it. “We have definite plans for what we want to do on the business side and hopefully we will be able to do as well as Man U,” Kroenke says. “The ownership there was the most controversial but I don’t know how you can do it much better. They have built the commercial side. What the Glazers have shown is that it was way under-marketed. The revenue of the club now is huge. That gives you lots of options.
“I think Arsène historically has been able to build players better than almost anybody. If we can do that and can grow the revenue, I don’t see why the club can’t be great. I wouldn’t want to be involved if I thought we would struggle.
“Remember, five months ago, we were in a position to win everything. Everybody doesn’t need to panic. I have a lot of confidence that Arsenal can compete, stay very competitive and hopefully win championships.”
Kroenke’s respect for Manchester United prompts a discussion of various ownership models. Mindful of the deep unpopularity of United’s leveraged takeover, Kroenke has promised that his purchase will not place any debt or interest liability on the club.
His company, Kroenke Sports Enterprises, entered into a finance facility with Deutsche Bank and it is understood that the decisive share purchases this year, from the late Danny Fiszman and Lady Bracewell-Smith, are structured with payments to be spread over five years.
There have been calls for other guarantees, such as never to award dividends to shareholders. Kroenke believes that his long background in sports ownership should provide reassurance. “We have a lot invested over there,” he says. “We are going to engage with our fans’ groups. We are always going to try to protect the club, develop the club and make it a viable competitor. We are going to try to retain our flexibility just like anybody would do.”
He also points to the fact that he has been on the Arsenal board now for three years and has supported significant investment in the squad.
“We are not only developing talent, we are also spending money on players,” he says. “If you look at the total wage spend, we are up there. We have never told anyone not to spend one dime. Not here and not in London. They have been free.
“Denver have been one of the top spending sides on the NBA side and in hockey. Not always, because it isn’t always there that you can get players who will truly make a difference.
“Arsène is big on the chemistry of the club and the best people I have met are really big on that. It’s not just about throwing money at it. You bring these guys in sometimes and the locker room gets weird.”
Arsenal, of course, have another billionaire shareholder in Alisher Usmanov who, despite owning almost 30 per cent of the club, is not on the board. Usmanov reacted to Kroenke’s Arsenal takeover with a higher offer to shareholders and still appears to be a willing buyer. Kroenke simply stresses that he has never sold a share in any of his teams. “We are long term,” he says. “Look at everything we have done. There were a lot of shareholders who loved Arsenal for half a century or more, who wanted us to step up and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to keep this thing stable and protected. We did that and we did that honestly.
“Some people want their private benefactor. I don’t think it is sustainable. Maybe it is, maybe it [football] will always be the one place where there will be guys coming who are willing to pour money in. I don’t know. We have a self-sustaining model. We are committed to that model.”
Kroenke has been talking non-stop for the best part of an hour, firmly contradicting his ‘Silent Stan’ moniker. He shrugs when his reputation as some sort of recluse is mentioned, but it is clearly a source both of irritation and bemusement.
“Someone will take a point of view, someone else will emphasis it,” Kroenke says. “I haven’t said a lot, I don’t know that I need to. We have really good guys out there in London.
"Sure, people want to know what we are doing but we are not going to do anything differently than we have ever done. There is no owner with as many years or as many hours in sports as we do. I don’t think so. We have had a good amount of success. I have a lot of respect for all of the other owners. I’m not decrying their way. What I am saying is that if you look year after year at sustaining it, Arsenal has done a pretty good job. Arsène Wenger has been the real reason for that and I like our future.”
As the conversation eventually drifts away from Arsenal and back to his teams in America, Kroenke makes a point of introducing Mike Jones, a Rams legend for a match-saving tackle in the final seconds of the Super Bowl in 2000.
Kroenke recounts an incident that has gone down in American folklore as simply ‘The Tackle’ and is savouring the memory. He clearly also believes that Arsenal can experience moments of equivalent glory. “It’s much more fun when you win,” he says, “and, you know what, it’s really fun when you win the whole thing.”
Read some of it but from what I read this is bad news, we'll never get rid of Wenger, it pisses me off how Wenger can do no wrong in these people's eyes!
On a different note McLintock reckons this is the worst Arsenal team he's seen:
Frank McLintock believes this is the worst Arsenal team he’s ever seen – and claims this will be Arsene Wenger’s toughest season in charge.
The Gunners limped to a 2-1 over Olympiakos in the Champions League on Wednesday night but questions are still being raised about their lack of confidence in defence.
And former skipper McLintock has laid the boot into Arsene Wenger, claiming the Frenchman must focus on the frailties in the team.
He said: “When you look at the team overall at the moment, taking into account they’ve lost Cesc Fabregas and Samir Nasri and brought in four new players, are they going to do as well as last season or the seasons before? I honestly don’t think they will.
“I think they’re poorer this year than they ever have been. I think it’s going to be the toughest season that Wenger’s ever had at Arsenal.
“There’s some part of Arsene Wenger that doesn’t address various faults that we’ve had over the years.
“We’ve let in more goals from dead-ball situations than any other Premier League team. So you would think that somebody would sort this out and that will improve us by 20-30%, but it doesn’t seem to happen.”
Arsenal have lost a succession of top players over previous seasons and McLintock went on to claim that the Gunners board haven’t done enough to replace some of those stars.
“After watching Arsenal over the last few years they’ve always needed three really top players to become one of the best teams in the world,” the Scot added. “But they seem to have gone away from the players they had, to the squad they have now.
“I’m just getting frightened. The idea of finishing fourth would be an unbelievable achievement, but you took that as automatic in the last few years.”
http://www.talksport.co.uk/sports-news/football/premier-league/1150/59/exclusive-mclintock-worst-arsenal-team-ive-ever-seen
Read some of it but from what I read this is bad news, we'll never get rid of Wenger, it pisses me off how Wenger can do no wrong in these people's eyes!
On a different note McLintock reckons this is the worst Arsenal team he's seen:
http://www.talksport.co.uk/sports-news/football/premier-league/1150/59/exclusive-mclintock-worst-arsenal-team-ive-ever-seen
He's spot on, IMO.
dazthegooner
30-09-2011, 09:51 AM
tbh maybe the worse Arsenal team in Wengers rein but the worse his seen Mclintock does he remember the 80's? (was born in the 70's)
There goes Stan again - secretly piling the pressure on Wenger...
Oooh, what a prankster! Who does he think he's kidding?!
dazthegooner
30-09-2011, 10:19 AM
There goes Stan again - secretly piling the pressure on Wenger...
Oooh, what a prankster! Who does he think he's kidding?!
Mr Hitler (Dads army) ;)
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:21 AM
Read some of it but from what I read this is bad news, we'll never get rid of Wenger, it pisses me off how Wenger can do no wrong in these people's eyes!
It pisses me off how Wenger can do no right in some other people's eyes. :shrug:
Also, McLintock says a lot of things which make sense in that article but the worst team he's EVER seen? That's just balls. I've seen far worse Arsenal sides than this and I'm a lot younger than McLintock.
Yet nobody at Arsenal, least of all Wenger, has been feeling particularly idolised recently. Defeat earlier this month against Blackburn made it the club’s worst start to a season for more than 50 years, while the 8-2 loss against Manchester United was their heaviest in the Premier League. Kroenke’s response is to note last Saturday’s “big win” against Bolton and apply a wider perspective.
So ignore the 8-2 and focus on a game we won against the bottom side...interesting
While we are talking, the Rams are succumbing to a crushing 37-7 loss and it is fascinating to observe at first-hand Kroenke’s body language. He is fiercely competitive and defeat clearly hurts immensely, yet there are no individual recriminations or sweeping judgments. Kroenke’s wife, an heiress to the Wal-Mart fortune, also remains unerringly friendly and down-to-earth despite the on-field disappointment. The Rams’ head coach, Steve Spagnuolo, later tells me that he would not want any other owner during this difficult patch.
Hmm, another big defeat and the coach wouldn't want any other owner in charge, probably cos he knows there's no chance of losing his job under Kroenke.
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:26 AM
So ignore the 8-2 and focus on a game we won against the bottom side...interesting
This from the poster who CONSTANTLY shifts goalposts, twists facts and just plain ignores anything which doesn't fit in with what he's already decided to be the case about players or the team.
It pisses me off how Wenger can do no right in some other people's eyes. :shrug:
Also, McLintock says a lot of things which make sense in that article but the worst team he's EVER seen? That's just balls. I've seen far worse Arsenal sides than this and I'm a lot younger than McLintock.
He doesn't do a lot right to be honest, the wrongs far far outweigh the rights in the last 6 years.
He's had plenty of credit for his achievements and rightly so, but right now he's doing a sh*t job and is ruining the club IMO.
As for McLintock, that's his opinion, defensively this is the worst side I've seen us ever have and offensively we're not all that great these days either, there's also a lack of leaders and you could argue top quality players, even in the Graham bad times we still had some top players like Seaman, Adams, Merson, Wright etc etc they at least had character and could potenitally upset the odds.
This from the poster who CONSTANTLY shifts goalposts, twists facts and just plain ignores anything which doesn't fit in with what he's already decided to be the case about players or the team.
Nice one but nonsense, fact is I've been right about AW, what's happening now was very predictable having said that.
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:28 AM
He doesn't do a lot right to be honest, the wrongs far far outweigh the rights in the last 6 years.
You think a manager who has done far more wrong that right and is doing a 'shit job' could have kept us top 4 in the spend, spend, spend climate? Really?
Top 4 looks very difficult this year and this looks to be the weakest side under Wenger but ever? That's just nonsense. But yes, he's entitled to his opinion.
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:29 AM
Nice one but nonsense, fact is I've been right about AW.
Ah. Declaring yourself right. Can't argue with that.
Ah. Declaring yourself right. Can't argue with that.
Well yeah because the way you portray me is plain wrong, some posters never give me any credit :lol:
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:33 AM
Plenty of posters have picked you up on your goalpost moving and fact twisting.
For example, you use stats when it suits your arguement (you did it recently when talking about Henry) and say they're irrelevant when they don't.
You think a manager who has done far more wrong that right and is doing a 'shit job' could have kept us top 4 in the spend, spend, spend climate? Really?
Top 4 looks very difficult this year and this looks to be the weakest side under Wenger but ever? That's just nonsense. But yes, he's entitled to his opinion.
Let me be clear, top 4 is a nothing achievement and will never be seen as anything special by anyone other than shareholders looking to make money, why should the fans give a toss about that tell me....is it because we get into the CL league and make more money before being outclassed and outfought eventually?
He's sacrificed everything for a top 4 place, something other clubs don't do, we ditch the FA and League cups in favour of this and we do have more resources than most of the other clubs we're competing for a top 4 place with.
It's an OK achievement, but if you look at the overall picture, the mistakes, the poor tactics, the blind faith, the lack of defence etc I don't think he's covered himself in glory, far from it.
Plenty of posters have picked you up on your goalpost moving and fact twisting.
For example, you use stats when it suits your arguement (you did it recently when talking about Henry) and say they're irrelevant when they don't.
It wasn't a stat on it's own though was it, it wasn't just 26 goals, it was also what he did on the pitch which was much more than score goals (I didn't really need to expand on this with Henry everyone knows what he did). The 26 goals just showed he wasn't learning how to play as striker.
You're an intelligent guy but you're thinking is very simplistic and too focussed on one aspect sometimes and you'll pick on one thing and bring it up repeatedly.
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:40 AM
If 4th place is just an "OK achievement" then why have clubs like Liverpool and Spurs spent so much money trying (and failing, consistently) to achieve it? I agree that it should not be the limit of our ambition but ultimately the league tells you where you are as a club and we've consistently been one of the best 4 clubs in the country over the past 6 years. Some people act like any idiot could have kept us top 4 when other clubs failure to get and stay there (without spending utterly ridiculous sums of money) should show that it's not as easy as some on here indicate.
All that said, given that we've been up there our failure to land a trophy is damning. That is where Wenger has failed.
If 4th place is just an "OK achievement" then why have clubs like Liverpool and Spurs spent so much money trying (and failing, consistently) to achieve it? I agree that it should not be the limit of our ambition but ultimately the league tells you where you are as a club and we've consistently been one of the best 4 clubs in the country over the past 6 years. Some people act like any idiot could have kept us top 4 when other clubs failure to get and stay there (without spending utterly ridiculous sums of money) should show that it's not as easy as some on here indicate.
All that said, given that we've been up there our failure to land a trophy is damning. That is where Wenger has failed.
I don't think they have, they have spent money to try and win things including maybe the PL...it's not just money spent to be in the top 4, unlike ourselves.
For us top 4 is hailed as some major trophy, for other clubs whilst they are very happy to get into the top 4, they then set their goals higher once achieved, that's not to say they achieve them but at least they try.
A top 4 place is seen as a stepping stone.
Letters
30-09-2011, 10:58 AM
I'm talking about clubs like Spurs and Liverpool who have spent shitloads trying and failing to get into the top 4. They've both achieved it here and there but not consistently. Of course City are going for the title but they have effectively infinite resources and can aim higher. And maybe they'll achieve it but you could do it with any club given those resources (the fact they started in mid-table shows that) so it's not much of an achievement.
Top 4 should NOT be the limit of our ambitions, I certainly agree with that. But I think some people are underestimating how hard it is to consistently finish in the top 4 in the PL.
21_GOONER_SALUTE
30-09-2011, 12:02 PM
Ah. Declaring yourself right. Can't argue with that.
TBF you can count on one hand the amount of times Zimm is proven wrong- and with the deluge of unbelievably unpopular opinions he actually starts off with, that is quite remarkable. /n
TBF you can count on one hand the amount of times Zimm is proven wrong- and with the deluge of unbelievably unpopular opinions he actually starts off with, that is quite remarkable. /n
:lol:
21_GOONER_SALUTE
30-09-2011, 12:16 PM
As for Stan, it's quite clear he knows little about european footballing culture nor does he understand what really makes Arsenal tick. /n/n We're going to have a hard few years ahead of us.
Cripps_orig
30-09-2011, 12:33 PM
TBF you can count on one hand the amount of times Zimm is proven wrong- and with the deluge of unbelievably unpopular opinions he actually starts off with, that is quite remarkable. /nZimms spot on about Wenger. I've admitted that but come on, Ade, Reyes, Aliadiere, Theo, Gilberto, Bendtner, Diaby, Ashley Young etc he's been woefully wrong about. That's more than a hand tbh. Depends on how big the hand is.
Letters
30-09-2011, 12:50 PM
:lol:
:gp:
:lol:
Zimms spot on about Wenger. I've admitted that but come on, Ade, Reyes, Aliadiere, Theo, Gilberto, Bendtner, Diaby, Ashley Young etc he's been woefully wrong about. That's more than a hand tbh. Depends on how big the hand is.
If it's one of fakeyanks missus', defo on one hand. Tbf.
Its obvious to 99.9% whats wrong with the team.
Some choose to live with their heads in the sand and some dont.
Its obvious to 99.9% whats wrong with the team.
Some choose to live with their heads in the sand and some dont.
Well of course.
a) Wenger - Defence / Tactics / Softy / Stubborn / French
b) The Board - Greedy / Out of touch / Eton / American
But, there are very few managers with Asrene's pedigree who can satisfy the ultimate power at the club, which are the board.
Blaming Wenger for everything is dumb. Especially when goal posts are moved, credit is not given for good things, and you give no thought to other points of view. Just as stubborn as AW tbh.
Niall_Quinn
30-09-2011, 04:56 PM
Fuck off Kroenke.
fakeyank
30-09-2011, 05:14 PM
Stan the man has finally spoken :bow:
Yanks :bow:
AW getting a vote of confidence :upset:
:ilt:
Xhaka Can’t
30-09-2011, 05:28 PM
If it's one of fakeyanks missus', defo on one hand. Tbf.
:lol:
Joker
30-09-2011, 05:59 PM
Of course the twat Kroenke will want Wenger in charge for a long period of time. What shareholder would want to get rid of a manager who's making him a lot of money? Wenger is a capitalist's dream.
Globalgunner
30-09-2011, 06:13 PM
Instead of pontificating off to the press, Why dosent Stan hold a public forum with the fans or the AST. maybe then he would hear what the fans feelings are, rather than of those who mistook a sporting franchise for a fortune 500 blue chip company. The mugs who are making these easily satisfied investors the money are us fans. we should hit them where it hurts, Stay way from the terraces and watch the game from home. Then we`ll see if the club is heading is the right direction. it convenient that top 4 is seen as a psuedo trophy, what happens if the EPL loses a place as as happened recently with serie A. I guess then the Europa cup will be seen as a great target and top 6 will be the new top 4. if we drop outy of the top 6 then we can always fall back on the record of never having been relegated from the PL.........Arsene continuing a great club tradition in the face of all odds.
I'm talking about clubs like Spurs and Liverpool who have spent shitloads trying and failing to get into the top 4. They've both achieved it here and there but not consistently. Of course City are going for the title but they have effectively infinite resources and can aim higher. And maybe they'll achieve it but you could do it with any club given those resources (the fact they started in mid-table shows that) so it's not much of an achievement.
Top 4 should NOT be the limit of our ambitions, I certainly agree with that. But I think some people are underestimating how hard it is to consistently finish in the top 4 in the PL.
Neither of those two clubs are spending money on the basis of achieving a top 4 place, they want to win trophies and compete for the PL.
Man City do have a lot of resouces and it is hard to compete but Man U have managed it, the point is if you use our methods you have no chance, you can't rely on kids and cheap buys and expect to challenge, if we were serious we'd be trying to bring in top quality instead of the players we bring in.
Getting top 4 when you've come from further down the table is acceptable, but when you've been 4th for as long as we have it isn't, we should be moving forward and be genuine contenders, the fact we never are is a damming indictiment of the manager's performance, as I said before if you look at the whole picture he's not doing a very good job, there's people pointing out basic errors he makes all over the place, errors amateurs wouldn't even make.
Cripps_orig
30-09-2011, 06:48 PM
Time for Usmanov?
Xhaka Can’t
30-09-2011, 06:56 PM
No it is not time for Usmanov.
It is time for the financial resources generated by the Club from its fans and commercial activities to be deployed into the strengthening the team. I hate the parsimonious approach that has been taken in respect of investing in players, but likewise I don't want Arsenal to become another penis extension of a billionaire oligarch.
We were sold the idea of investing in a stadium in order to facilitate a greater investment in the team. Now all I ask is that the Board live up to their part of the bargain.
But it won't happen.
Cripps_orig
30-09-2011, 07:01 PM
I dont really want Usmanov here either but i dont want the current board here either and Usmanov seems to be the lesser of 2 evils
Xhaka Can’t
30-09-2011, 07:10 PM
I don't want the situation where one guy has total control and unfortunately we are in a position where Kroenke is pretty much in that situation. Only Arsenal could have two billionaire owners with a business model that not only lacks investment but even fails to make use of the resources the club generates.
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 10:09 AM
Arsenal's majority shareholder Stan Kroenke insists the Glazers have done a good job at Manchester United since taking charge.
Malcolm Glazer and his family have come under intense criticism from United supporters since they completed their leveraged takeover of the Old Trafford club in 2005.
The American family, who also own NFL club the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, have been criticised for the way that they have financed their purchase of the club with loans partly secured against the club's assets.
Ticket prices at Old Trafford have soared since the Americans took over - a move which has caused the birth of a widespread protest movement against the family, who they want to see out of the club.
In Kroenke, however, the Glazers have a big fan. The American businessman, who became Arsenal's majority shareholder in May this year, thinks there is a big difference in how sports clubs are run on either side of the Atlantic.
The 64-year-old maintains he has no plans to secure loans against Arsenal in the way that Glazer has done at United, but admits he is baffled at the way United fans have taken a severe dislike towards his compatriot given that United have lifted four league titles since they took over six years ago while also boosting revenue at the club.
Kroenke said: "Since they took over they have won and they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club, I would go there and go 'Wow!' because how could you do it any better?
"We have a whole different philosophy I think in the States, maybe, but I think it's time maybe for everybody to think a little bit.
"I think they ought to think about who invests in these clubs.
"He (Glazer) took money out of the club. So what? (LA Lakers owner) Jerry Buss takes money out of his club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it.
"Did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah. They did. How big's their revenue?
Pretty darn good."
Wenger
Before leaving his media briefing, Kroenke was keen to make one more point clear - his unwavering support for Wenger - a man whose future was called in to doubt after the club's shaky start to the season.
"Arsene Wenger is an unbelievable manager. I think he's a tremendous person. He is as good as there is," Kroenke added.
"You lose some games, you have some tough losses. It happens. You can't judge a manager on one game or on one stretch of games. You judge him over time. That's how the really good ones are judged.".
Interesting
Kroenke can STFU and eat a dick tbh.
He's changed nothing since he came here.
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 10:12 AM
Kroenke can STFU and eat a dick tbh.He's changed nothing since he came here.
:bow: Boss
Kroenke can STFU and eat a dick tbh.
He's changed nothing since he came here.
Pretty much, but then he did get approval by none other that PHW the man who couldn't give a toss what anyone else thinks as long as he's lining his pockets.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 12:09 PM
Stan's baffled at why two cunts get grief for coming in and lumbering a club that was ALREADY winning those trophies with a huge financial burden? You see, these bastards don't think like us at all. Every fucking abuse is perfectly reasonable for them, and why wouldn't it be? Insanely selfish financial psychopaths are always going to see it their way and no other way.
Right, so he's spoken and said pretty much what anyone could have predicted. Now fuck off back to where you came from - cunt.
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 12:11 PM
Pretty much, but then he did get approval by none other that PHW the man who couldn't give a toss what anyone else thinks as long as he's lining his pockets.
What did you expect Stan to say?
Flavs
01-11-2011, 12:16 PM
Stan's baffled at why two cunts get grief for coming in and lumbering a club that was ALREADY winning those trophies with a huge financial burden? You see, these bastards don't think like us at all. Every fucking abuse is perfectly reasonable for them, and why wouldn't it be? Insanely selfish financial psychopaths are always going to see it their way and no other way.
Right, so he's spoken and said pretty much what anyone could have predicted. Now fuck off back to where you came from - cunt.#
This
Coney
01-11-2011, 12:47 PM
If we are over the hill of the last 5 years or so, are beginning to win and are preparing to buy more players - decent players - in January, then I am happy with no other change. While we are now beginning to head in the right direction, it is not the time to dick with the situation.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 12:49 PM
Stan's such a cunt
:gp:
Coney
01-11-2011, 12:53 PM
Don't you just hate it when people change your spelling.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 12:55 PM
Don't you just hate it when people change your spelling.
Did a bit of work on grammar for you too sparky!
Cripps_orig
01-11-2011, 05:27 PM
Arsenal (http://www.goal.com/en-gb/teams/england/94/arsenal)’s majority shareholder Stan Kroenke insists that he will not be “throwing money against the wall” and has backed the Gunners' self-sustaining model of business, as well manager Arsene Wenger (http://www.goal.com/en-gb/people/france/2843/ars%C3%A8ne-wenger).
Don't Miss
Why Andre Ayew could shine at Arsenal (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737636/five-reasons-why-marseilles-andre-ayew-could-be-a-smash-hit)
AVB: This week has been disastrous (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737617/chelsea-manager-andre-villas-boas-bemoans-disastrous-week)
Arsenal in talks to sign Madrid's Granero (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737603/arsenal-open-talks-with-real-madrid-for-6m-midfielder)
Wenger: Chelsea game was torture (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737571/arsenal-manager-arsene-wenger-admits-chelsea-win-was)
The club’s other main shareholders have voiced their concerns over the lack of spending power and the outfit’s struggle to match the likes of Manchester City and Chelsea in the transfer market.
However, American businessman Kroenke believes that frivolous spending does not guarantee silverware and has praised the efforts of manager Arsene Wenger during his 15-year tenure and the way the Frenchman has sustained the club.
Kroenke told reporters: “Would I rather be successful spending less or spending more? What’s the question! Anybody who is a sportsman would rather compete on the basis of intellect and cleverness rather than being able to throw money against the wall.
“Anyone can go and buy a player, but it takes a lot more to identify that player, develop that player and position him.
“You look at Arsene [Wenger] as a good example. He has been here 15 years and you look at what the club had as assets and revenues it’s fantastic the growth that has occurred.
“For the long term stability and an approach to excellence, I think that’s unsurpassed really. That’s my view."
Gunners fans were left upset during the summer with the departures of star players Cesc Fabregas (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/#) and Samir Nasri, but Kroenke insists the sale of the duo was not reckless business.
“I think you know that one of the players who departed had nothing to do with money,” said Kroenke. “There was a specific personal circumstance that happened. Maybe I am saying too much. That has nothing to do with money.
“The other player departed for money. Well then, you get into an evaluation. That’s where being smart and not being smart comes in.
“You’ve got one year left on a players’ contract. You’ve got a large sum of money being offered. That’s how I would see the evaluation."
Kroenke also had praise for captain Robin van Persie, following the striker's contributions during a difficult season for the north London outfit.
He enthused: “I think Robin van Persie is a great player, I think he’s doing a great job, he’s captain of the club. Arsene said the other day: ‘can we succeed if we are not together? Absolutely not.’”
“I think that Robin van Persie gets that and I think he has shown real leadership. I have watched him and had a chance to chat with him. I think he has done a great job of that.
“But I think asking me to talk about Robin van Persie at this stage is not fair to Robin van Persie and is not fair to Arsene and Ivan (Gazidis). They are the guys who know the particulars of that situation.”
The American also spoke of his nickname ‘Silent Stan’, insisting he is a busy man (http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/#) and that he puts his trust in manager Arsene Wenger the club’s chief executive Ivan Gazidis.
Kroenke added: “I was perhaps bemused. We are busy, we do have a lot of obligations.
“Sometimes I think if we engage too much, it’s a matter of who did you engage with, were you fair to people, how much time do you have to give to them. We have very capable people like Ivan and Arsene.
“We have lots of very capable people - they wouldn’t be involved if I didn’t have lots of confidence in them. I think it’s more about that."
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737668/id-rather-be-intelligent-about-it-than-throw-money-against
Only we could be taken over by the worst billionaire around.
Time for Usmanov asap
[QUOTE=Ach;62060]hTtp://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/01/2737668/id-rather-be-intelligent-about-it-tjan-throw-money-against
Ojly we could be taken over by thg worst billiona
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 06:21 PM
[QUOTE=ItsMe;62073]Pretty much, he doesn't want to spend money kn the team he just wants the clqb to generate money for him.....he's not really interes|ed in whnning particularly.
Th
Xhaka Can’t
01-11-2011, 07:36 PM
There is a wide spectrum between throwing money at a wall and sleeping in a bed of it and it is not good to be at either extreme end of the spectrum.
I'm fucking sick of twats like Stan who think the people lining his fucking pocket want the Club to spend Man City type sums just because we want the team to reinvest the resources it generates in growing the squad. That approach would be self sustaining as opposed to the current approach of gouging supporters for every fucking penny they can.
Coney
01-11-2011, 07:51 PM
Did a bit of work on grammar for you too sparky!
:rolleyes: That was my point. :)
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 08:09 PM
:rolleyes: That was my point. :)
Which I corrected by changing to a comma.
Coney
01-11-2011, 08:12 PM
Which I corrected by changing to a comma.
I can't see a comma anywhere, though you are right that there should have been one.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 08:31 PM
I can't see a comma anywhere, though you are right that there should have been one.
I changed it back again, just to underline my mastery of this situation.
fakeyank
01-11-2011, 08:34 PM
Stan :bow:
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 08:39 PM
Pretty much, he doesn't want to spend money on the team he just wants the club to generate money for him.....he's not really interested in winning particularly.This self-sustaining model is a p*ss take when it relies on ripping the fan off, why do we always get lumbered with these total losers....why can't we for once have someone with ambition to succeed.
Why should he be he's a business man we all knew before he came here all he cared about was lining his pocket. Not all fans thought he wan't to go splashing the cash.
Did't the Arsenal suppoters trust want him over the russian because he cared more about the club not making money. Be careful what you wish for tbh.
Sad thing is we will never get taken over by a better billionaire now.
Coney
01-11-2011, 08:40 PM
I changed it back again, just to underline my mastery of this situation.
I see where you put it now. :)
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 08:45 PM
Why should he be he's a business man we all knew before he came here all he cared about was lining his pocket. Not all fans thought he wan't to go splashing the cash.
Did't the Arsenal suppoters trust want him over the russian because he cared more about the club not making money. Be careful what you wish for tbh.
Sad thing is we will never get taken over by a better billionaire now.
Underlining my point about the board. They soon got off their high horse when stan flashed the cash. And sold us down the river in the process. Be great if non of these cunts were anywhere near the game and it was still £3 to get in, the pitch was a bit ropey and the hamburgers had furballs in them. These business cunts claim the game is better now. Why? Because there's a gleaming stadium? So what? Nobody can fucking afford to get into it.
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 08:49 PM
Underlining my point about the board. They soon got off their high horse when stan flashed the cash. And sold us down the river in the process. Be great if non of these cunts were anywhere near the game and it was still £3 to get in, the pitch was a bit ropey and the hamburgers had furballs in them. These business cunts claim the game is better now. Why? Because there's a gleaming stadium? So what? Nobody can fucking afford to get into it.
Yep PHW so greedy, but also the thought of Dein coming back and replacing him was not what he wanted, so he went with what could prevent it, even if it ment hurting the team.
I found it funny they did not want the american when he was with dein. Time for the old farts to clear off. A man in Phw's age should retire and enjoying life with his Children and Grandchildren/Great Grandchildren.
Why should he be he's a business man we all knew before he came here all he cared about was lining his pocket. Not all fans thought he wan't to go splashing the cash.
Did't the Arsenal suppoters trust want him over the russian because he cared more about the club not making money. Be careful what you wish for tbh.
Sad thing is we will never get taken over by a better billionaire now.
You're right of course, what we should have looked for was someone interested in football however, someone who will give a sh*t about what's happening on the pitch and will consider results being an important part of that.
This guy seems to have bought every thing PHW has told him like some sort of lemming, with people like these at the top what chance do we have, they have no expectations of the manager and therefore whatever the results it's all good because they are behind him 100%.
How many top clubs put so little pressure on a manager to deliver and don't give a toss when the same problems in the team appear season after season and on top of that treat the fans so openly with so much contempt?
I know people say clubs don't care about fans these days, but there's not a lot that completely ignore fans, PHW's comments about being chairman highlight that further, the guy wouldn't leave even if all the fans (who pay his salary btw) wanted him out....it's disgraceful tbh.
Moreover they're always coming out with sh*t about self-sustaining models, not trowing money at the team etc etc as if to aggravate the fans even more, noone wants 50 million players signed they just want quality when it's needed....the comments about spending loads are just a p*ss take.
AKBapologist
01-11-2011, 11:10 PM
Is it time for me to prance around like Zimm a twat and declare that I was right all a long?
Or too soon?
All arguments about wenger being the root of our problems miss the point entirely.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 11:20 PM
Is it time for me to prance around like Zimm a twat and declare that I was right all a long?
Or too soon?
All arguments about wenger being the root of our problems miss the point entirely.
Wenger is the root of OTHER problems. Let's not brush those under the carpet while we dance.
AKBapologist
01-11-2011, 11:44 PM
Wenger is the root of OTHER problems. Let's not brush those under the carpet while we dance.
Yep, because it's his responsibility to hire and fire himself according to GW.
Niall_Quinn
01-11-2011, 11:49 PM
Yep, because it's his responsibility to hire and fire himself according to GW.
No, was thinking more his insistence on sticking with certain players even though real damage was being done. And other team related decisions. However, he seems to have made a few concessions so far this season.
Is it time for me to prance around like Zimm a twat and declare that I was right all a long?
Or too soon?
All arguments about wenger being the root of our problems miss the point entirely.
:rolleyes:
Wenger is a big problem as well, he supports this sh*t (and preaches about it all the time) and makes plenty of errors on his side. With a normal board he'd be under pressure, he should be judged on his performance which has been pretty poor recently.
Ultimately if we had a decent board they could sack him, but this doesn't absolve him of responsibility for his obvious failings which are clear as day.
Olivier's xmas twist
01-11-2011, 11:57 PM
Is it time for me to prance around like Zimm a twat and declare that I was right all a long?
Or too soon?
All arguments about wenger being the root of our problems miss the point entirely.
Well it was not the board who decided to leave out best player out of the game today. Wenger is not at all innocent tbf.
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 12:02 AM
We wanted the manager to make concessions. I believe he has. We wanted the team to show some balls. They have. Whatever has gone before there's no point pulling things apart when we're on a good run and the middle of a season. It has taken a while but there are positive signs on the pitch again. Meanwhile the board members are utter cunts. Always will be. It's their nature, they've shown their true colours and they're not red and white.
AKBapologist
02-11-2011, 12:15 AM
Well it was not the board who decided to leave out best player out of the game today. Wenger is not at all innocent tbf.
So he's completely shite, inept, Owen Coyle could do better etc... So lets sack h...
“You look at Arsene [Wenger] as a good example. He has been here 15 years and you look at what the club had as assets and revenues it’s fantastic the growth that has occurred.
“For the long term stability and an approach to excellence, I think that’s unsurpassed really. That’s my view."
Oh...
:coffee:
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 12:22 AM
This isn't a court of law, we aren't all lawyers, we're not testifying under oath when we post here. We're footie fans. I can tell Wenger to go to hell today and then kiss his arse tomorrow when we win. So can anyone else. We can all be biased (in fact we should be), we can predict the wrong score, even predict the correct score, we can call a player shit and then get our coats when he scores (apart from Chamakh who is shit all the time), there's no crime in any of this. The truth is highly likely to be most of us are wrong, most of the time. Who cares? It's a forum, it's a laugh.
AKBapologist
02-11-2011, 12:33 AM
This isn't a court of law, we aren't all lawyers, we're not testifying under oath when we post here. We're footie fans. I can tell Wenger to go to hell today and then kiss his arse tomorrow when we win. So can anyone else. We can all be biased (in fact we should be), we can predict the wrong score, even predict the correct score, we can call a player shit and then get our coats when he scores (apart from Chamakh who is shit all the time), there's no crime in any of this. The truth is highly likely to be most of us are wrong, most of the time. Who cares? It's a forum, it's a laugh.
It's not a laugh though is it? Not here anyway, not any more. I only get satisfaction on here from WUM'ing the ones who's sole purpose as a fan is to moan about how everything is wrong at the club and it's ALL Wengers fault, regardless of how that isn't actually the case, or how little value such crap like that has to any community.
Fuck that shit. If we want to engage about the club as normal human beings I'm all for it, but until then...
:coffee:
Everything is wrong at the club and it's all Wengers fault :coffee:
fakeyank
02-11-2011, 06:36 AM
Everything is wrong at the club and it's all Wengers fault :coffee:
:gp:
It will be the greatest day in Arsenal's recent history when he leaves us!
Xhaka Can’t
02-11-2011, 07:34 AM
It's not a laugh though is it? Not here anyway, not any more. I only get satisfaction on here from WUM'ing the ones who's sole purpose as a fan is to moan about how everything is wrong at the club and it's ALL Wengers fault, regardless of how that isn't actually the case, or how little value such crap like that has to any community.
Fuck that shit. If we want to engage about the club as normal human beings I'm all for it, but until then...
:coffee:
Your face isn't a laugh.
Your face isn't a laugh.
Yours is.
Olivier's xmas twist
02-11-2011, 10:02 AM
So he's completely shite, inept, Owen Coyle could do better etc... So lets sack h...
Oh...
:coffee:
Never said that, he does make his mistakes though, but ill back him whilst he is our manager and untill he leaves. he deffo is not the cause of all our problems.
Olivier's xmas twist
02-11-2011, 10:03 AM
:gp:
It will be the greatest day in Arsenal's recent history when he leaves us!
Xs was being sarcastic
Coney
02-11-2011, 12:57 PM
Everything is wrong at the GW and it's all Fakeyanks fault :coffee:
:gp:
It will be the greatest day in GW's recent history when Fakeyank leaves us!
Super Ghel
02-11-2011, 03:08 PM
Is it time for me to prance around like Zimm a twat and declare that I was right all a long?
Or too soon?
All arguments about wenger being the root of our problems miss the point entirely.
Well it’s not like the other side doesn’t have some valid points about Wenger though I do find their diligent witch hunt in trying to pinpoint Wenger as the root cause of our problems (in one inspired form or another), is fundamentally flawed and bears little semblance to reality. As others have said, Wenger is a part of the problem; but only some other part. Because at the very core of this pointless kerfuffle about who is dragging the club down, are two crucial issues; one of which, as NQ wisely pointed out, is the definition of success and the other is the significance of the employer and employee relationship and the implications of that association.
1) So what is success for the club? It means different things to different people, not just between fans and board/owner, but also amongst supporters ourselves. For the sake of simplicity, I’ll say it broadly falls into one of the following three categories below.
A. Success is winning the PL or CL trophy, more befitting a club of our stature. I believe this is what the majority want. So assuming that the board/controlling interest remains where they are, if we appoint a new manager, what is the likelihood of success as defined here, bearing in mind the dominant factor in the landscape of competition now is that of unlimited resources? I believe the grounded majority would say it’s slim or next to none. In fact many would argue that the probability that “this fragile house of cards” would come tumbling down is far greater than that of a sniff of success with a new manager in charge. But what if it was the other way around and we got a new board/owner who measures success as defined above? Do we stand a better chance now? The answer would be hell yes, and if Wenger doesn’t deliver, there’s no way he’ll be around for long too.
B. Success for another group means winning some silverware, be it just the measly FA or CC. Forget about winning the PL or CL they say, because there’s no way we can compete with that kind of unrestrained spending power, but we might stand a better chance of a minor trophy with a new manager. I can see some rational sense in this, but at the same time I also see some slight problems. First of all, these cup competitions are essentially luck of the draw, so if we’re pitted against these mega spenders PL contenders, if you believe a new manager can lead us to glory, then you must believe in some way, that despite the gap in squad quality, we can defy the odds and get the results we want on these one off occasions. So by the same token, shouldn’t you also accept that an inferior team can perform out of their skins against us on their day? But that’s not my gripe. The way I see it, we should be aiming higher and if we’re gagging for success B at the expense of A, with the added risk of a tumbling house of cards, is that a positive move forwards? We’re an elite club after all, going by what most people maintain.
C. Success for the club means long term stability and an approach to excellence which is consistent with the club’s pursuit of self sustainability. Sounds familiar? For people with this mindset, it signifies that fourth place (or even worse) is acceptable (with the caveat that the club grows in assets and revenue of course), until such a time that the landscape of competition tilts in our favour or we are better equipped to do so. We don’t need to second guess who these “fans” are.
So as you can see above, what really stands in our way of success (as defined from the viewpoint of paying supporters) is the governing body/controlling interest of the club. Only with a change of leadership/owner with a real burning desire and ambition to win footballistically, can we hope to have success A and/or B while C takes a backseat. With a change of manager, there’s little to no hope for A, a slight chance for B while there’s no guarantee that C will even fade away.
2) The other crucial issue which I mentioned above is the significance of the employer and employee relationship and the major implications of that association. The way I see it, regardless of how you try to spin around the theme that Wenger is the main problem (or its various inspired manifestations); if you choose to focus all that angst on the golden goose/mouthpiece/whatever instead of the party of consequence with the power to do something about the situation, then we have a big headache as far as logical validity or sensibilities are concerned. I’ll just summarise them here as I’m getting bored of this subject. Briefly, it leads to:
A. Cringeworthy double standards. How can it be acceptable (or ignored just because you think it’s in their nature) for employers to be Wengerites but it is not OK for the employee to be one?
B. Logical collapse. If what you’re saying is true and Wenger is leading the board by the nose and dragging the club down, then by not acting on it, surely the incompetent board is in breach of their duty of care to the club and this would automatically warrant them walking?
C. The mong paradox argument from the perspective of a neutral observer trying to approach and evaluate the situation objectively.
D. Hypocritical stance. If you think that …
Arghh fuck this shit! Nothing’s gonna change anyway. :wave:
Cripps_orig
02-11-2011, 05:15 PM
Manchester United’s Supporters’ Trust chief Duncan Drasdo has hit out at Arsenal majority shareholder Stan Kroenke, following the American’s backing of the Glazer family.
The American business tycoon told United fans they should be grateful to the Glazers rather than hate them.
However, since taking over the club in 2005, the Glazer family are said to have saddled debt of around $850 million (£530m) on United as well as significantly increased ticket prices at Old Trafford, and Drasdo has warned Arsenal fans his praise of the Glazers’ should be ringing alarm bells.
"Backing the Glazers may not be surprising, but considering the debt burden they imposed on United and their lack of passion for the club, it is certainly revealing," Drasdo told reporters.
"If I was an Arsenal fan this would be ringing alarm bells.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/premier-league/2011/11/02/2739164/manchester-united-fans-hit-back-at-arsenal-majority
Not often i agree with Mancs but hes spot on here.
Kroenke is the worst in the business at what he does. Time for Usmanov
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 05:20 PM
If I was an Arsenal fan this would be ringing alarm bells.
These bastards seem to believe there was no such thing as football before they bought their way in. Kroenke's whole argument is a crock of shit. Utd were debt free and successful before the scumbags arrived. Now they are debt ridden and successful. How is that better and what exactly should fans be thankful for? I preferred stan when he was silent. He made more sense.
fakeyank
02-11-2011, 09:17 PM
Xs was being sarcastic
I know.. but I wasnt!
fakeyank
02-11-2011, 09:18 PM
:gp:
It will be the greatest day in GW's recent history when Fakeyank leaves us!
:console:
I am more than likely not going to give you haters any chance to do that.. will I voluntarily leave? Fuck no, its fun seeing some of you shit your pants at every comment I make :good:
Letters
02-11-2011, 09:21 PM
I am more than likely not going to give you haters any chance to do that.. will I voluntarily leave? Fuck no
You and Wenger have so much in common.
fakeyank
02-11-2011, 09:23 PM
You and Wenger have so much in common.
:gp:
True dat..
Marc Overmars
02-11-2011, 09:24 PM
Fakeyank's Mental Month. :bow:
Charlie is absolved.
Cripps_orig
02-11-2011, 09:24 PM
:gp:
True dat..
Are you a shit manager as well then?
Letters
02-11-2011, 09:27 PM
Are you a shit WUM as well then?
You and FakeYank have so much in common.
fakeyank
02-11-2011, 09:28 PM
Are you a shit manager as well then?
No idea.. though in career mode in fifa, I always win all the trophies in the first few seasons and then become a mid-table manager.. hmm!
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 09:49 PM
No idea.. though in career mode in fifa, I always win all the trophies in the first few seasons and then become a mid-table manager.. hmm!
Try leaving the money generated from your success in the club rather than plundering it and leaving the club in the shit house. Save after each game just in case you are tempted to steal all the money and buy a yacht, then you can restore when your sanity return.
He needs a better syrup tbf.
Master Splinter
02-11-2011, 10:02 PM
Fakeyank's Mental Month. :bow:
Month?
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 10:09 PM
November.
That's not what you said last month!
That's not what you said last month!
Knowing me, I'll change my mind next month too.
I'm a glory monther.
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 10:17 PM
Knowing me, I'll change my mind next month too.
I'm a glory monther.
montherfucker
Olivier's xmas twist
02-11-2011, 10:26 PM
No idea.. though in career mode in fifa, I always win all the trophies in the first few seasons and then become a mid-table manager.. hmm!
FY :rose: for what he was not for what he's become, If it helps i think tghe way your treated on here is...
Marc Overmars
02-11-2011, 10:56 PM
Month?
Life?
FY :rose: for what he was not for what he's become, If it helps i think tghe way your treated on here is...
Funny?
Niall_Quinn
02-11-2011, 11:37 PM
Life?
Condor.
fakeyank
03-11-2011, 01:12 AM
FY :rose: for what he was not for what he's become, If it helps i think tghe way your treated on here is...
with double standards? :unsure:
Olivier's xmas twist
03-11-2011, 09:50 AM
Funny?
Thought i let you all fill in the blanks
with double standards? :unsure:
Coney
03-11-2011, 11:07 AM
You and FakeYank have so much in common.
You know your face? That's you, that is.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 11:22 AM
Well it’s not like the other side doesn’t have some valid points about Wenger though I do find their diligent witch hunt in trying to pinpoint Wenger as the root cause of our problems (in one inspired form or another), is fundamentally flawed and bears little semblance to reality. As others have said, Wenger is a part of the problem; but only some other part. Because at the very core of this pointless kerfuffle about who is dragging the club down, are two crucial issues; one of which, as NQ wisely pointed out, is the definition of success and the other is the significance of the employer and employee relationship and the implications of that association.
1) So what is success for the club? It means different things to different people, not just between fans and board/owner, but also amongst supporters ourselves. For the sake of simplicity, I’ll say it broadly falls into one of the following three categories below.
A. Success is winning the PL or CL trophy, more befitting a club of our stature. I believe this is what the majority want. So assuming that the board/controlling interest remains where they are, if we appoint a new manager, what is the likelihood of success as defined here, bearing in mind the dominant factor in the landscape of competition now is that of unlimited resources? I believe the grounded majority would say it’s slim or next to none. In fact many would argue that the probability that “this fragile house of cards” would come tumbling down is far greater than that of a sniff of success with a new manager in charge. But what if it was the other way around and we got a new board/owner who measures success as defined above? Do we stand a better chance now? The answer would be hell yes, and if Wenger doesn’t deliver, there’s no way he’ll be around for long too.
B. Success for another group means winning some silverware, be it just the measly FA or CC. Forget about winning the PL or CL they say, because there’s no way we can compete with that kind of unrestrained spending power, but we might stand a better chance of a minor trophy with a new manager. I can see some rational sense in this, but at the same time I also see some slight problems. First of all, these cup competitions are essentially luck of the draw, so if we’re pitted against these mega spenders PL contenders, if you believe a new manager can lead us to glory, then you must believe in some way, that despite the gap in squad quality, we can defy the odds and get the results we want on these one off occasions. So by the same token, shouldn’t you also accept that an inferior team can perform out of their skins against us on their day? But that’s not my gripe. The way I see it, we should be aiming higher and if we’re gagging for success B at the expense of A, with the added risk of a tumbling house of cards, is that a positive move forwards? We’re an elite club after all, going by what most people maintain.
C. Success for the club means long term stability and an approach to excellence which is consistent with the club’s pursuit of self sustainability. Sounds familiar? For people with this mindset, it signifies that fourth place (or even worse) is acceptable (with the caveat that the club grows in assets and revenue of course), until such a time that the landscape of competition tilts in our favour or we are better equipped to do so. We don’t need to second guess who these “fans” are.
So as you can see above, what really stands in our way of success (as defined from the viewpoint of paying supporters) is the governing body/controlling interest of the club. Only with a change of leadership/owner with a real burning desire and ambition to win footballistically, can we hope to have success A and/or B while C takes a backseat. With a change of manager, there’s little to no hope for A, a slight chance for B while there’s no guarantee that C will even fade away.
2) The other crucial issue which I mentioned above is the significance of the employer and employee relationship and the major implications of that association. The way I see it, regardless of how you try to spin around the theme that Wenger is the main problem (or its various inspired manifestations); if you choose to focus all that angst on the golden goose/mouthpiece/whatever instead of the party of consequence with the power to do something about the situation, then we have a big headache as far as logical validity or sensibilities are concerned. I’ll just summarise them here as I’m getting bored of this subject. Briefly, it leads to:
A. Cringeworthy double standards. How can it be acceptable (or ignored just because you think it’s in their nature) for employers to be Wengerites but it is not OK for the employee to be one?
B. Logical collapse. If what you’re saying is true and Wenger is leading the board by the nose and dragging the club down, then by not acting on it, surely the incompetent board is in breach of their duty of care to the club and this would automatically warrant them walking?
C. The mong paradox argument from the perspective of a neutral observer trying to approach and evaluate the situation objectively.
D. Hypocritical stance. If you think that …
Arghh fuck this shit! Nothing’s gonna change anyway. :wave:
There is a real problem with what you’re suggesting. If that were truly the case, then how did we make it down this road? Didn’t our fortunes change with the appointment of Arsene Wenger? If we had appointed someone like Redknapp or Hoddle instead of Wenger, do you think we’d have moved to the Emirates or dare to dream of competing with Europe’s elite clubs? We’ve had the same Board member for years…so what changed? Do you think they demanded the double when Wenger first arrived or just supported his vision for the club and gave him space to work?
What about with George Graham? Did they demand the double from him? Wasn’t it the same Board members? We hadn’t won anything in ages before Graham arrived. So what do you think happened? It wouldn’t take a change in Board members in turn out fortunes around. That’s never been the case in sports and it’s a recent trend we’re seeing because Billionaires are getting involved and ‘throwing money at the wall’ as Stan would say. A change in ownership is very unlikely and most members on here are against the Chelsea/City model. In fact, nobody really cared about our owners until we started losing but that’s a separate issue.
It’s really flawed to believe nothing will change unless something at the top level changes. Say we win the title this year or we didn’t slip up last year or the year before that and won back to back titles? Who gets the credit for that? Did aspirations at Board level suddenly change? Were new targets set? I highly doubt it. I don’t think we have a Board with low aspirations. They’re just looking focussing on the long term strategy. Trophies will come as long as we have stability and keep growing. I think that’s a similar mindset they had when appointing Graham and Wenger.
Also, a change in ownership doesn’t guarantee success. With Chelsea, they had to appoint Mourinho to win back to back titles. When he left, Avram Grant and Scolari couldn’t win anything despite the high targets set. It took another top manager to come in to see them win the title again. It’s a similar story for City with Hughes and Mancini. You have a point about the hiring and firing part. These owners have a burning desire to win the league and they’re spending big to get it, but it’s worth remembering that they are the exemption. You won’t find many owners like them in football or any other sport for that matter. In most sports, it’s still down to the skilled manager that knows how to motivate a team and get the best out of them. On the flipside, regarding ownership, you have nightmare stories like what we’ve seen at Liverpool. They had the money to spend but Rafa didn’t have a clue or skills to guide that team. Even with bad owners, a manager can change fortunes around. Look at Chris Hutton and Alan Pardrew. Mike Ashley has been terrible and morale was low but a new manager can turn things around.
I understand about the hiring and firing part. The current regime are happy with Wenger so nothing will change for the time being. Staff wise, at least. But again, if by some miracle, we go on a run and win the title or Cup….who gets the credit? Stan won’t cross anybody’s mind if that were to happen. We can only hope Wenger comes to his senses and whips this team into shape.
There is a real problem with what you’re suggesting. If that were truly the case, then how did we make it down this road? Didn’t our fortunes change with the appointment of Arsene Wenger? If we had appointed someone like Redknapp or Hoddle instead of Wenger, do you think we’d have moved to the Emirates or dare to dream of competing with Europe’s elite clubs? We’ve had the same Board member for years…so what changed? Do you think they demanded the double when Wenger first arrived or just supported his vision for the club and gave him space to work?
What about with George Graham? Did they demand the double from him? Wasn’t it the same Board members? We hadn’t won anything in ages before Graham arrived. So what do you think happened? It wouldn’t take a change in Board members in turn out fortunes around. That’s never been the case in sports and it’s a recent trend we’re seeing because Billionaires are getting involved and ‘throwing money at the wall’ as Stan would say. A change in ownership is very unlikely and most members on here are against the Chelsea/City model. In fact, nobody really cared about our owners until we started losing but that’s a separate issue.
It’s really flawed to believe nothing will change unless something at the top level changes. Say we win the title this year or we didn’t slip up last year or the year before that and won back to back titles? Who gets the credit for that? Did aspirations at Board level suddenly change? Were new targets set? I highly doubt it. I don’t think we have a Board with low aspirations. They’re just looking focussing on the long term strategy. Trophies will come as long as we have stability and keep growing. I think that’s a similar mindset they had when appointing Graham and Wenger.
Also, a change in ownership doesn’t guarantee success. With Chelsea, they had to appoint Mourinho to win back to back titles. When he left, Avram Grant and Scolari couldn’t win anything despite the high targets set. It took another top manager to come in to see them win the title again. It’s a similar story for City with Hughes and Mancini. You have a point about the hiring and firing part. These owners have a burning desire to win the league and they’re spending big to get it, but it’s worth remembering that they are the exemption. You won’t find many owners like them in football or any other sport for that matter. In most sports, it’s still down to the skilled manager that knows how to motivate a team and get the best out of them. On the flipside, regarding ownership, you have nightmare stories like what we’ve seen at Liverpool. They had the money to spend but Rafa didn’t have a clue or skills to guide that team. Even with bad owners, a manager can change fortunes around. Look at Chris Hutton and Alan Pardrew. Mike Ashley has been terrible and morale was low but a new manager can turn things around.
I understand about the hiring and firing part. The current regime are happy with Wenger so nothing will change for the time being. Staff wise, at least. But again, if by some miracle, we go on a run and win the title or Cup….who gets the credit? Stan won’t cross anybody’s mind if that were to happen. We can only hope Wenger comes to his senses and whips this team into shape.
Its a very valid point to ask whether the board's ambition has changed or not. We percieve it as having changed because we are not trying to compete spending-wise with Citeh and Chelsea, but the reality is that we're probably not looking at a change of ambition so much as a change of circumstance. Can you be ambitious while accepting that you can't compete financially? I guess you can - because what is ambition? People regard it as wanting to be the best - but you don't have to be able to achieve the impossible to be ambitious, so ambition is more accurately wanting to be the best you can be.
The reason why people are accusing the board of a lack of ambition is firstly its refusal to spend the sums at its disposal, and secondly its wish to back Kroenke over Usmanov. The first issue is a conundrum, because we simply don't know whether it is the manager rather than anything else leading to the club's apparent refusal to spend. But for me, the fact that Wenger has traditionally taken a long time negotiating to secure his transfers, and been willing to lose out rather than pay more than his valuation suggests that this it at least partly the case. Another factor that is rarely mentioned is that once bought, players need to be paid, and i imagine that at least part of any transfer profits are earmarked for players' wages under improved contracts.
And the real issue is whether you can be termed as ambitious if your principal aim is the stability/well-being of the club rather than what might be termed 'short term' gain? Is an athlete lacking in ambition if he trains at 90% because that way the chances of being injured and missing the olympics altogether are lowered by 70%? I would genuinely like to know what people's answer is to this question. I know what mine is.
In fact that question also encompasses the Wenger situation - because its a question of percentages. A golfer might hit a short ball from the rough onto the fairway rather than trying to smack it through the trees onto the green. Because although the potential rewards of the latter option are higher, the likelihood of success is vastly lower. Sticking with Wenger is the equivalent of taking the safe shot - does that mean that the golfer has any less of a desire to win? No - he simply sees playing the percentages as the route most likely to achieve this.
I have been in two minds about the board, I really have. But the fact that AW has bounced back to a degree from his nightmare Summer - the fact that we can see the potential of some of his signings now, and see some spirit back in the team to me vindicates their decision to stick by him following our nightmarish post March half year. We are not, realsitically, going to compete with the Manc teams or the Chavs while keeping to our self-sustainable route, so I see no real disgrace in aiming for the top but realising that 3/4 is most likely the best we'll achieve, and I can at least see the reasoning behind putting the club's stability before a headlong attempt to keep up with the league's moneybags.
Niall_Quinn
03-11-2011, 02:40 PM
You can have your little ducks lined up in a row, swimming along nicely, nothing spectacular, going round and around their little pool which is closed off from the real world. You can do that all day long. Let a shark in the pool and everything can still be calm, until the shark gets hungry. Somebody posted up the transfer records pre and post the stadium move, they may be on this thread somewhere. Is this not enough to suggest Wenger is more than happy to spend whatever budget is placed in front of him? Post stadium move and the whole game changes. "His sort", who nobody wanted near the club (to the point of publicly insulting him) is suddenly flavour of the month and the shareholders are £500mill quid richer (once the naysayers were culled).
Come on! Let's not keep making excuses for these cunts. Wenger has his prize assets sold from under his arse (despite coming the closest he's ever come to defying the board - remember his insistence the star players were staying and his suggestion we couldn't call ourselves competitive if we let them go?) Why do we ignore this? It happened. Then there's the last day rush to bring in reinforcements to a squad that couldn't field a serious eleven against the champions (and our once great rivals). Wenger wasn't even in the country when all that went down. Amazing for such a control freak.
There's stuff going on behind the scenes that would probably see the shareholders lynched if it was ever made public. All we have to work with is the fallout. A cunt has a strong smell though and we have lots of them sitting up in the boardroom. Fucking reeks.
Why are they still here, btw? Why don't they fuck off? They have their money, what more do they want? Hell, they're being told at the AGM to fuck off. They don't even have the good grace to pay attention to the people who fund this club even after they've robbed them blind. What utter, utter, cunts they are.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 03:24 PM
You can have your little ducks lined up in a row, swimming along nicely, nothing spectacular, going round and around their little pool which is closed off from the real world. You can do that all day long. Let a shark in the pool and everything can still be calm, until the shark gets hungry. Somebody posted up the transfer records pre and post the stadium move, they may be on this thread somewhere. Is this not enough to suggest Wenger is more than happy to spend whatever budget is placed in front of him? Post stadium move and the whole game changes. "His sort", who nobody wanted near the club (to the point of publicly insulting him) is suddenly flavour of the month and the shareholders are £500mill quid richer (once the naysayers were culled).
Come on! Let's not keep making excuses for these cunts. Wenger has his prize assets sold from under his arse (despite coming the closest he's ever come to defying the board - remember his insistence the star players were staying and his suggestion we couldn't call ourselves competitive if we let them go?) Why do we ignore this? It happened. Then there's the last day rush to bring in reinforcements to a squad that couldn't field a serious eleven against the champions (and our once great rivals). Wenger wasn't even in the country when all that went down. Amazing for such a control freak.
There's stuff going on behind the scenes that would probably see the shareholders lynched if it was ever made public. All we have to work with is the fallout. A cunt has a strong smell though and we have lots of them sitting up in the boardroom. Fucking reeks.
Why are they still here, btw? Why don't they fuck off? They have their money, what more do they want? Hell, they're being told at the AGM to fuck off. They don't even have the good grace to pay attention to the people who fund this club even after they've robbed them blind. What utter, utter, cunts they are.
The problem with you is, you have a very anti-capitalist, Noam Chomsky / Michael Moore type of outlook. To me it sounds like you have a problem with football ownership in general. You’re not happy with the current regime and you’d probably be suspicious of an Usamov type character as well.
It’s worth reading Stan’s transcript and what he has to say about management and how to build a club. His views and Wenger’s are in synch. To flip Super Ghel’s point about fans calling for Wenger’s head when the Board are happy and insulting such fans, it also works in reverse. Read Stan’s transcript and what he was to say about managing with intelligence and that the game shouldn’t be about clubs with the biggest wallets.
I agree with the philosophy of Wenger and the Board. It should be about nurturing talent, tactics and strategy. Not about whose got the most money. This is why I’m thinking from pitch level. Wenger is messing up with his tactics and needs some fresh ideas. We have to battle with clubs with bigger resources but if we were getting pipped for trophies each year by those clubs or losing Championships because we’ve dropped too many point against the big boys, then fair enough. The gap between us and them is wide because we keep losing to lower teams and in a similar fashion.
If you want the Board out, then what’s the alternative? A sugar Daddy? And don’t say middle ground. This is middle ground. We’re the only club that others can realistically replicate without being bought out by some sugar daddy. That’s a fact. Plus, if I pay money to watch Arsenal, that’s my choice. It goes into some fat cats wallet, but who gives a shit. I paid for entertainment. It’s the same as me buying a CD or an album over iTunes. It’s not like we’re being forced to pay this. This isn’t some evil oil company where we’ve got no choice. You’re fighting the wrong battle.
Xhaka Can’t
03-11-2011, 03:30 PM
There is no way that we are middle ground. No way at all.
Middle ground and true self sufficiency would mean we make full use of the financial resources we generate.
We don't - not by a longshot.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 03:39 PM
There is no way that we are middle ground. No way at all.
Middle ground and true self sufficiency would mean we make full use of the financial resources we generate.
We don't - not by a longshot.
And that's the manager's choice. Wenger says we have the funds and so do the Board. What more do you want? But people would rather believe he works under conditions he abhors. No one sold our players from under Wenger's nose.
If we're not middle ground then we are close to it because we're in a very unique situation. Most clubs are in debt or owned by a sugar daddy. We're in the middle.
Xhaka Can’t
03-11-2011, 03:49 PM
No we arent.
TBH I cba repeating the same shit over and over that should be as clear as day to anybody.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 03:53 PM
No we arent.
TBH I cba repeating the same shit over and over that should be as clear as day to anybody.
So we're not spending all of our funds. Are we only losing out on titles because we can't beat Chelsea and Man U? Or are we losing to teams with less resources than us?
Xhaka Can’t
03-11-2011, 04:08 PM
We are losing out for various reasons, some within our control, others not.
I have no problem losing out, knowing we have given it our all, making best use of the resources available to us, but we don't and haven't for some time.
I have a problem with that and the cocksuckers that bleed us dry.
But it could get a hell of a lot worse now that Stan is setting the scene by praising that wonderful business model the Glazers have up in Manchester.
Fist of Lehmann
03-11-2011, 04:15 PM
So we're not spending all of our funds. Are we only losing out on titles because we can't beat Chelsea and Man U? Or are we losing to teams with less resources than us?The 4 teams that have finished above us in the last 6 years are Man Utd, Chelsea, Man City and Liverpool. None of whom have less resources than us.
Or are you arguing that because we have lost individual games against lesser opposition that we are under-achieving? As though none of the other teams I just mentioned ever lost a game against lesser opposition ever.
Greater resources merely mitigate your risk in any given game, they don't guarantee a result. But over the course of a season those probabilities mean you tend to end up where you belong, according to your resources.
Niall_Quinn
03-11-2011, 04:16 PM
The problem with you is, you have a very anti-capitalist, Noam Chomsky / Michael Moore type of outlook.
I'm the EXACT opposite. I believe capitalism, if ever allowed to prevail, would be highly beneficial for the whole society. Unfortunately we live under communism, whereby the centre is all powerful, privileged and (of course) incompetent and unworthy. Capitalism only ever existed for a short time before it was thoroughly subverted. I disagree wholeheartedly with Chomsky on economics, though I am with him on human rights, the law and open government.
The real problem in these discussions is absolutism. You do it again... This cannot be a conversation about the board investing the money contributed by the fans, instead it must be about doing it the board's way or throwing them out. Doing it Wenger's way or throwing him out. There is zero room for manoeuvre or even analysis in your argument. I'm not saying this to wind you up, it's merely the reason why we will never agree.
You also fail to appreciate the different agendas in play here. You say, "It should be about nurturing talent, tactics and strategy." Wrong, those are components of a method that should focus on the real business of a football club - winning! This end goal is sport, not business. Business is an element of the make-up of the club, not the purpose of the club. Or it shouldn't be. Football fans are not typical customers. They are bound by factors beyond pounds, shillings and pence and these are the very things used against the fans when the businessmen devise their means of exploitation. Yes of course I would have all businessmen out of the game, without a doubt. The game cannot be healthy with businessmen involved. It is impossible because their goals run directly counter to the original aims of sport. They are here to exploit the game, not nurture it. To thin otherwise is spectacularly naive. A simple committee could just as easily manage the affairs of a football club. There are people outside the business community who are intelligent and educated, you know?
But this is besides the point. Business now sits at the heart of football like a cancer and it's not going to be eradicated until such a time as there is nothing left to exploit - which will be the ultimate fate of the game, by the way. I'm talking about this to dispel the myth woven by the exploitative types who prey on the game. Hell, you saw the ex-England captain sitting in a bar planning all the ways to fuck fans up the arse so a few greedy bastards could make a few quid. This is what your tolerance of these types brings. Whether you have a pragmatic or idealistic viewpoint it doesn't matter, these fuckers aren't listening either way. You want to reason with a locust not to eat your crops? You want to try and persuade it to leave something behind? Just because greedy people tell you there is no alternative to greed doesn't make it so. I was talking to Syn yesterday about people who won't WAKE THE FUCK UP! I'm talking generally, I'm not having a pop, so don't go off on one.
I wouldn't mind, but look at where these greedy bastards always take us. To fucking disaster. Bankers, ratings agencies, insurance houses, all corrupt as fuck, all feathering their nests and all leaving a trail of destruction in their wake. And so many people saying this is how it has to be and if you don't believe it you are Noam Chomsky or a commie! The communists are the cunts who run the closed shops! The ones who privatise profits and nationalise the costs. The ones who are a little more equal than everyone else, the ones who feel entitled, the ones who manipulate every endeavour to divert the proceeds into their pockets - including football. Once again I say, let's get real.
Why can't we just call it like it appears before our eyes?
Team < weaker
Trophies < gone
Shareholders > Rich as fuck, took ALL the money and left NONE.
True of false? So why do we have to apologise on the shareholders' behalf and try to find reasons as to why what's under our nose is something entirely different? By the way - if we win again, Stan will indeed get all the credit. OH I'm not talking about plaudits in the newspapers or a medal around his neck. I'm talking about the fucking MONEY! Do you think he cares about the other stuff? Why? Because he said so?
The guy had a chance to put money into this club. The shareholders had a chance to give a little back. They even had a chance to leave us what was in the pot.
They took the fucking lot. Which part of that last phrase is incorrect or misrepresented? It's the truth isn't it? That's why I hate their fucking guts. They have HARMED our team. I could disagree with their ideas for development, disagree with their ideas about stadiums and sponsorship and whatever else. These would be matters of opinion, matters or experience, and so on.
But the robbed our fucking club PnG. You think there's some pay-off over the horizon? Kidding me, right? They are already talking about how they'll plough on robbing the fuck out of us and the financial fairplay rules will ride to the rescue in terms of competition. Do you buy that? These cunts are telling you quite openly how they are going to fuck you. Somebody tries to fuck me without buying me a drink and dinner and they get a punch in the face. And that's exactly what I;d do to Kroenke and his commie cunts if I ever saw them.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 04:35 PM
How comes you fail to see Wenger in all this? Wenger backs the Board 100%. Read Stans transcript and they see eye to eye. I’m not dealing in absolutes here. I’m analysing the situation. If we’re accusing these guys of being thieves, then you have to look at the guy that set this little meeting up. If that’s what you’re saying, Wenger hands are dirty. He sits in these meetings, knows what’s happening, is financially educated and has more knowledge then you or me on this matter, but keeps quiet. Don’t make out as if Wenger is the victim in this.
Niall_Quinn
03-11-2011, 04:40 PM
How comes you fail to see Wenger in all this? Wenger backs the Board 100%. Read Stans transcript and they see eye to eye. I’m not dealing in absolutes here. I’m analysing the situation. If we’re accusing these guys of being thieves, then you have to look at the guy that set this little meeting up. If that’s what you’re saying, Wenger hands are dirty. He sits in these meetings, knows what’s happening, is financially educated and has more knowledge then you or me on this matter, but keeps quiet. Don’t make out as if Wenger is the victim in this.
Where have I made Wenger out to be a victim? Wenger is an EMPLOYEE. Of course he goes along with the wishes the owners. Can you tell me what normally happens to any employee who decides to do otherwise?
If Wenger had £500million in his pocket I'd punch him in the gob too.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 04:56 PM
Come on now. You can play that card all day about him being an employee but he has no integrity if that’s what’s going on. You said something about his top players being stolen from under his nose or something. I don’t agree. That makes him sound like a victim. He goes out of his way to keep the fans in line with this vision. He’s just as bad, maybe worse. He sells the dream and the con wouldn’t work without him.
My post earlier was not trying to defend the board - merely to try to point out that there is another way of looking at the situation.
I do feel that inevitably perhaps there is a tendency amongst Arsenal fans to look for a scapegoat on whom to blame the fact that we used to be one of 2 top dogs and now there are 3, and we're not one of them. Its not an experience likely to generate a feel good factor in any fan. So we lash out at manager; board; certain players - someone has to pay.
The reality is that the real reason why we have had so many barren years is the cold hard cash spunked into the game by the oligarch/arabs. Yes our failure to win an odd trophy might be down to another reason - but that's simply football.
What we are debating here is ambition, and as yet noone has been able to deal with the fact that an ambition to do as well as the club can - while adopting a cautious approach financially is still ambition. It might not be what you would do in the same circumstances, but who said that to be ambitious you have to follow a single path or achieve things within a set timescale?
Its accepted wisdom that there's all this money lying around - but does anyone now this for sure? Yes we can do simple arithmetic on transfer ins and outs, but how much of that cash is earmarked for wages - for contract renewals?
The board is supposed to be hoovering up this cash - but unless shareholders actually sell their shares, how is this the case? No dividends have been paid.
And AW's previous buying policy is cited as evidence that he does want to spend but isn't being allowed to. Sorry, but this doesn't add up to me - because it suggests a policy/philosophy that hasn't changed since 1997, when we know from the teams AW has put out and the style in which we have played that it has. Massively.
If AW can go from the Invincibles to Project Youth to the current blend of experience and promise why can't his philosophy re spending cash change also? In fact, I would suggest that during Project Youth it did massively - the principal issue being that once committed to developing his players he was never going to buy ready made player who could restrict that development. It may well be that, faced with a bloated game where nonsense fees are paid thanks to the Chavs and Citeh AW does not wish to be part of the rot.
And as for the board fucking AW over in the Summer. I'm not buying that. Nothing could have been done to prevent the Catalan erection from his Barca snatch. And with Nasri - even if Wenger was leant on to agree the sale - it was obvious to the world that keeping Nasri would have been an error of judgment. His head had been turned, he didn't want to play for us, and after most likely an indifferent season, he would have walked anyway for free. Personally, I think that keeping him would have been stupidity rather than lack of ambition. We often express dismay that there's noone to tell AW he's doing the wrong thing, but when the owner(by some accounts) does, then he's slated for lack of ambition.
Like I say, I'm no Arsenal Board sycophant, but the assumptions and jumping to conclusions that happen are often unjustified. Like someone else has said. Liverpool and Spurs have deeper pockets than we've had, but have their boards had the foresight to build new stadia? Have they had managers who have delivered sustained success - finacially or footbalistically? Would we prefer to have a board/owners who have saddled the board with debt (Manure), or disrupted a winnign formula by chopping and changing managers like a kid with OCD at the pick 'n' mix counter (Chavs)? What are the long term plans, ambitions of any of our competitors - and do the likes of Spurs and Liverpool even have any long term plans? Damn sure Twitchy hasn't - as he'll be off as soon as the England job comes up for grabs, as he has been from any other club he's managed.
IMO we need to step back and see that overall we ain't in bad shape. Manure fans can say all they like beware of Kroenke doing a Glazers, but perhaps, just perhaps we need to take the view that in maintaining what is seen as such an unambitious status quo we are avoiding a debt time-bomb, and that trying to live within our means is in fact a sensible and justifyable, rather than an unambitious aim.
Fist of Lehmann
03-11-2011, 05:29 PM
A commendably sane and reasonable post :good:
Although...it has been said elsewhere that we maintain a single transfer/wage/renewal pot and that any transfer surplus goes back in the pot.
Allegedly.
A commendably sane and reasonable post :good:
From a commendably sane and resonable poster! :tiphat:
Xhaka Can’t
03-11-2011, 05:59 PM
But the Board have sold their shares and they have hoovered up the money - how else could Stan and Jabba own over 90% of the Club.
fakeyank
03-11-2011, 06:34 PM
Come on now. You can play that card all day about him being an employee but he has no integrity if that’s what’s going on. You said something about his top players being stolen from under his nose or something. I don’t agree. That makes him sound like a victim. He goes out of his way to keep the fans in line with this vision. He’s just as bad, maybe worse. He sells the dream and the con wouldn’t work without him.
From what I am gathering from people against the board... Wenger is just an employee and losing out on all his top players, has no money and the board also enforces the terrible tactics he has displayed from the last few seasons. Fine, they are right! So why is AW still here? Why did he resign a deal to stay at Arsenal? His stock was sky high a couple of seasons back and wouldve easily got as high a pay job elsewhere...
Reality is, AW has this vision of winning with kids coming from the youth academy, similar to Barcelona. This project started after the invincibles were dismantled and Roman became a huge figure in transfers. At this very point, SAF decided that he is not going to take on Chelsea's spending power but rather get players that fit into his vision, played players in their best positions and spent a net of 12 million quid a season (very very reasonable). Does anybody on here think SAF wouldve stayed had Glazers tightened the purses season after season? He would have never tainted his legacy.. same goes for Arsene. I cant see Arsene staying with us if Kroenke or the board did not give him the funds he needs... once again, the question is... Why on earth is Arsene still with us? Never got an answer to this..
Super Ghel
03-11-2011, 06:35 PM
Also, a change in ownership doesn’t guarantee success. With Chelsea, they had to appoint Mourinho to win back to back titles. When he left, Avram Grant and Scolari couldn’t win anything despite the high targets set. It took another top manager to come in to see them win the title again. It’s a similar story for City with Hughes and Mancini.... etc.
I’ll just quickly chime in as I’m bored of this tiresome subject. First of all, I never indicated a change of ownership would bring about a GUARANTEE success. That’s just you with your slant on the issue warping the point I was making. What I’m saying is a change of ownership is the best alternative out of the two which would bestow upon the club the best likelihood outcome or ODDS of Success A and B bearing in mind that the LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION now is different and the dominant factor affecting that playing field is that of an issue of resources and the willpower to compete on that front.
Did you not pay attention to the recent AGM and Arsene’s honest admission (or slip) that fourth is what we’re hoping for? Why is that good enough for the board/employers? Why is it acceptable for a club of our stature? After all, isn’t this the whole point of what you were feverishly moaning about here in the past, about mediocrity and whatnot and claiming that it is Arsene’s fault? What’s changed? A goal post shift now that it’s clear that Arsene is not the main culprit but instead it’s the board/owner and the overwhelming evidence of their zeal for success C at the expense of success A?
Look, I’m tempted to go about via a long winded elaborative post and address the rest of the glaring weaknesses I see in your argument but suffice to say I’ll refrain from going down this route as it’s ultimately a worthless pursuit leading either of us anywhere except perhaps the likes of some hysterical exhibition like the one I’ve been fortunate enough to witness recently. It’s evident that neither of us can ever see eye to eye on the issue and it’s best to just agree to disagree and not waste our time further in this farcical little exercise. Like I said before, nothing’s gonna change.
But the Board have sold their shares and they have hoovered up the money - how else could Stan and Jabba own over 90% of the Club.
Not sure about p diddy to the hw. But i think he has only ever had 1 gabollionth of a share. He owns less of the club than i do. He's just a cunt who is in the family line of to the hw's. Cunt.
Xhaka Can’t
03-11-2011, 07:28 PM
Not sure about p diddy to the hw. But i think he has only ever had 1 gabollionth of a share. He owns less of the club than i do. He's just a cunt who is in the family line of to the hw's. Cunt.
He's also fat.
And a cunt.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 07:36 PM
I’ll just quickly chime in as I’m bored of this tiresome subject. First of all, I never indicated a change of ownership would bring about a GUARANTEE success. That’s just you with your slant on the issue warping the point I was making. What I’m saying is a change of ownership is the best alternative out of the two which would bestow upon the club the best likelihood outcome or ODDS of Success A and B bearing in mind that the LANDSCAPE OF COMPETITION now is different and the dominant factor affecting that playing field is that of an issue of resources and the willpower to compete on that front.
Did you not pay attention to the recent AGM and Arsene’s honest admission (or slip) that fourth is what we’re hoping for? Why is that good enough for the board/employers? Why is it acceptable for a club of our stature? After all, isn’t this the whole point of what you were feverishly moaning about here in the past, about mediocrity and whatnot and claiming that it is Arsene’s fault? What’s changed? A goal post shift now that it’s clear that Arsene is not the main culprit but instead it’s the board/owner and the overwhelming evidence of their zeal for success C at the expense of success A?
Look, I’m tempted to go about via a long winded elaborative post and address the rest of the glaring weaknesses I see in your argument but suffice to say I’ll refrain from going down this route as it’s ultimately a worthless pursuit leading either of us anywhere except perhaps the likes of some hysterical exhibition like the one I’ve been fortunate enough to witness recently. It’s evident that neither of us can ever see eye to eye on the issue and it’s best to just agree to disagree and not waste our time further in this farcical little exercise. Like I said before, nothing’s gonna change.
:lol: This guy.
Yes, please stop wasting my time with these long winded posts that lack any real substance. Iceberg has made a great point about our situation and you should probably try tackling that. That's if you have the time.
AKBapologist
03-11-2011, 07:56 PM
Nonsense Ice Berg Kamping
Wenger has loads of money, he's just too stubborn to spend it!
:coffee:
(good post btw even if I don't agree with all of it.)
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 10:07 PM
My post earlier was not trying to defend the board - merely to try to point out that there is another way of looking at the situation.
I do feel that inevitably perhaps there is a tendency amongst Arsenal fans to look for a scapegoat on whom to blame the fact that we used to be one of 2 top dogs and now there are 3, and we're not one of them. Its not an experience likely to generate a feel good factor in any fan. So we lash out at manager; board; certain players - someone has to pay.
The reality is that the real reason why we have had so many barren years is the cold hard cash spunked into the game by the oligarch/arabs. Yes our failure to win an odd trophy might be down to another reason - but that's simply football.
What we are debating here is ambition, and as yet noone has been able to deal with the fact that an ambition to do as well as the club can - while adopting a cautious approach financially is still ambition. It might not be what you would do in the same circumstances, but who said that to be ambitious you have to follow a single path or achieve things within a set timescale?
Its accepted wisdom that there's all this money lying around - but does anyone now this for sure? Yes we can do simple arithmetic on transfer ins and outs, but how much of that cash is earmarked for wages - for contract renewals?
The board is supposed to be hoovering up this cash - but unless shareholders actually sell their shares, how is this the case? No dividends have been paid.
And AW's previous buying policy is cited as evidence that he does want to spend but isn't being allowed to. Sorry, but this doesn't add up to me - because it suggests a policy/philosophy that hasn't changed since 1997, when we know from the teams AW has put out and the style in which we have played that it has. Massively.
If AW can go from the Invincibles to Project Youth to the current blend of experience and promise why can't his philosophy re spending cash change also? In fact, I would suggest that during Project Youth it did massively - the principal issue being that once committed to developing his players he was never going to buy ready made player who could restrict that development. It may well be that, faced with a bloated game where nonsense fees are paid thanks to the Chavs and Citeh AW does not wish to be part of the rot.
And as for the board fucking AW over in the Summer. I'm not buying that. Nothing could have been done to prevent the Catalan erection from his Barca snatch. And with Nasri - even if Wenger was leant on to agree the sale - it was obvious to the world that keeping Nasri would have been an error of judgment. His head had been turned, he didn't want to play for us, and after most likely an indifferent season, he would have walked anyway for free. Personally, I think that keeping him would have been stupidity rather than lack of ambition. We often express dismay that there's noone to tell AW he's doing the wrong thing, but when the owner(by some accounts) does, then he's slated for lack of ambition.
Like I say, I'm no Arsenal Board sycophant, but the assumptions and jumping to conclusions that happen are often unjustified. Like someone else has said. Liverpool and Spurs have deeper pockets than we've had, but have their boards had the foresight to build new stadia? Have they had managers who have delivered sustained success - finacially or footbalistically? Would we prefer to have a board/owners who have saddled the board with debt (Manure), or disrupted a winnign formula by chopping and changing managers like a kid with OCD at the pick 'n' mix counter (Chavs)? What are the long term plans, ambitions of any of our competitors - and do the likes of Spurs and Liverpool even have any long term plans? Damn sure Twitchy hasn't - as he'll be off as soon as the England job comes up for grabs, as he has been from any other club he's managed.
IMO we need to step back and see that overall we ain't in bad shape. Manure fans can say all they like beware of Kroenke doing a Glazers, but perhaps, just perhaps we need to take the view that in maintaining what is seen as such an unambitious status quo we are avoiding a debt time-bomb, and that trying to live within our means is in fact a sensible and justifyable, rather than an unambitious aim.
:gp: Some good questions posed on your first post as well. These are the tough questions worth thinking about. If we're saying this strategy is wrong, then what's the alternative? It's way too easy to point the finger at figures like Stan and say they've taken us for a ride. If that's true, Wenger is in on it. I don't believe that. I hope that's not the case anyway. We've brought in Stan and Ivan for a reason. They have experience in Sports and have worked under very restrictive financial models over in the US. The plan is to increase revenue through commercial deals rather than looking for outside investors. That's a good long term plan IMO.
It's worth reading all of Stan's transcript.
Power n Glory
03-11-2011, 10:11 PM
http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Arsenal-Stan-Kroenke-interview-full-transcript-on-Van-Persie-Wenger-why-bought-into-Arsenal-nearly-became-a-journalist-and-more-article825147.html
Silent' Stan Kroenke has given his first in-depth insight into his vision as Arsenal's majority shareholder.
The US tycoon, who has splurged £400million on buying into Arsenal, outlined his views on Robin van Persie, Arsene Wenger, Manchester United American owners the Glazers and why he chose to buy the club.
Kroenke also told how he nearly became a journalist, reveals he mixed with Chelsea fans on Saturday and explained that he got his love of football from his son.
It was a 40-minute interview, held at the club's at the training ground on Monday after Kroenke had addressed the players.
Here is a full transcript:
You went to Chelsea on Saturday, had a great weekend and addressed the players [on Monday]. Tell us about it...
"It has been very enjoyable. I think the experience of being able to go to the game at Chelsea was great - I had a great time the whole day. I got out and walked as it was such a nice day. I walked to the stadium and the fans were having as good a day as I was. I spoke with a few of them along the way. Of course, the game was spectacular. It was a beautiful afternoon and nice to be there. I thought our team responded well and I am certainly proud of them because they have had their share of challenges and it's a huge win. I don't know - it's fun. We are involved in a lot of sports [Kroenke's company also owns US major-league American Football, basketball, ice hockey and football teams], as you guys know, so you are involved for a lot of different reasons, and I was out there on Saturday afternoon when I could have been anywhere in the world. I wanted to be there and it was a great place to be. I was proud to be involved in our team and the sport. Sports are a very important part of our modern society, and I think particularly the Premier League and the visibility they have around the world. It does a lot of good in a lot of ways that often aren't pointed out so I was happy to be there."
How did Chelsea fans react to you?
"They were fine. They were very good. They were talking to me a little bit about the stadium. They care about it. It is interesting that they can see with our stadium... that, as a fan, they like seeing things like that. It has been developed, we have a strong economic model - something they don't have - and it is something they are interested in."
How do you define success here and how long can you wait for a trophy?
"The other day somebody pointed it out that I said I wasn't so sure why everybody was so interested in me speaking. Maybe it's because I look at the club differently. These clubs are bigger than one person. They are a lot more about a lot of things than just one person, one fan, one manager, one anything. This club has been here for 125 years, It has had its periods when it was up and long periods when it wasn't so up. But I am proud of the club. We have been around the club for four years at one stage or another and you always like to win trophies. We were very close last year but didn't get there. You are not going to win trophies every year. I am smart enough to know that. I think it is fair to say we have a broader experience than anybody in sports, because we are involved in so many different teams. You don't win trophies every year - you'd like to. I have friends who are owners in the leagues in the US who have never won a trophy and they have been in it for 30 or 40 years. We have been fortunate to win a few. I am very proud of our management and I am certainly extremely proud of our manager and I am very proud of the way the club has been run. I said it the other day, for us to be involved in a club - and we had lots of chances here in England and elsewhere - but to be involved with Arsenal was something different to look at and this is a place where we are glad we are involved here."
Which other clubs did you look at before Arsenal?
"I don't really want to go into that. Suffice to say it was more than eight and less than 15. How's that?"
What drew you to Arsenal?
"First of all, I love London. We deal with this in the States. When you look long term, and that is us - if you look at our history we are long-term investors - we don't get involved just to be here, be gone tomorrow, flip and make a profit, do whatever. That's not us. We like to get involved in things that we like to get involved in and think we can help develop over time. London is a great place and a great market. So, comparably in the US, you would talk about Los Angeles and New York. There was a study done in the States and if you ask any 20- to 30-year-old person where they would most like to live if they didn't live where they presently lived, they will tell you LA and New York. It's interesting because players are a lot of times 20-30 years old, so where are they most likely to gravitate? If you ask players in the US, they'll say being in LA or New York is a pretty good place to be for 20-30 year olds. So those markets to me have an inherent advantage as far as recruiting. Maybe that's just me, but I think London is a great place to be. I think, long-term, if you want to attract players, it is a great place to me. If you are in London, Arsenal football club. 'Wow. 125 years, great tradition, great manager, great model but lots of opportunity.'"
Where did your love of football start?
"Well, my son played the game from the time he was very small. When he got to be 14 or 15 he was so tall, and he was a very good basketball player, [so] the coaches at that level, when you start moving to the elite level in these sports - I'm sure you see it over here in European football - they really want you to focus on their sport and spend all your time on it. So he had some choices to make and since he was into that elite group in basketball, they were wanting him to spend a lot of time there. At one stage, he was chosen for what they call the Olympic development programme in the States for soccer. He had a huge interest in it and I used to go to all his games and it was a game I didn't get to play when I was young. We played baseball, a lot of basketball, ran track and all this. But we didn't have European football, so it's a sport that has grown in the States and the interest level is certainly at an all-time high in the States and the interest level in the States has a lot to do with football over here. I mean, I'm not saying that in a bad way, because the MLS has grown. We are involved in that. It has grown substantially in the States but there is a huge interest. Our game [against Chelsea] on Saturday was on one of the main national-TV channels and a lot of people watched it. People were texting some of the guys [who were] with me. It wasn't because we told them, they were just interested."
Arsenal have a business model. But how do you compete with a team at the top of the league, Manchester City, that's fuelled by billions?
"We have done that in the States, too. We compete with people in our league in the States who have the same resources as anyone in the world. You can check it out. The NFL restricts spending, so it's a bit different. In the NBA, they sort of restrict spending but not really, so if you want to spend you can spend, you just have to pay a penalty for it. I think what you have to focus on... I understand it in the short-term...your business is to write articles... short-term... the long-term good of the club is not always in the short-term interest of the next thing you want to write about... I don't think you can... and I am proud of the fact that Arsenal has had this sustainable business model. I think you can have people, and we have had them in the States, where they will spend a lot and they will do it for a little while and they might have some success. And then the person everyone is relying on maybe gets tired of it or has a financial reversal, but what you are doing is that you are putting the focus on one person, one resource. Is that really in the interests of a long-term situation for a great club that many people identify with and rely on? I would much rather, and I would be much more proud, if all our leagues were developed with the idea that you are competing on the basis of intellect and work and effort instead of just simply, 'I am going to throw dollars against the wall.' That's one side of it. Another side of it is that, in the States, it doesn't always work. It does work sometimes, so I understand what you are getting at. If you look at Arsene, as a good example. He has been here 15 years and you look at what the club had as assets and revenues, it's fantastic the growth that has occurred within the club. It has been done very responsibility and they have the record for participating in the Champions League for the most consecutive years. For the long-term stability and an approach to excellence, I think that's unsurpassed, really. That's my view."
Are you worried, as Arsene Wenger is, whether the Financial Fair Play rules being introduced can work?
"I think Arsene or Ivan (Gazidis) are better people perhaps to chat about that.
Chief executive Ivan Gazidis: "I would be happy to, but I don't want to waste your time with Stan."
Is there anything you've seen from the US sports leagues you would like to see here?
"The greatest league in the US, on the basis of most things, is the National Football League. The National Football League's revenues are far greater than any other league's. The fan following is huge in the States. They implement and have restrictions on spending and what that does is restrict people. Now, it's all about, 'How smart are you in selecting personnel' - utilising these resources so you don't go signing a player to a long-term deal and the guy is over the hill, for example. What really happens in our system is that, if you do that, it will penalise you greatly, because you will have less resources to spend everywhere else - and it will show up, believe me. I've watched the teams that have done that. They will make a big run, then say, 'We will spend on everybody' and they bring in a lot of free agents, [but] the free agents don't work out because they're too old. They have a thing called cash-over-cap and what happens is you then have less to spend on other things and invariably those teams are among the worst in the league. Anybody who is a sportsman would rather compete on the basis of intellect, cleverness than they would at being able to throw money against the wall. Anyone can go and buy a player, but it takes a lot more to identify that player, develop that player and position him. I'm not going to start throwing out that there's a direction that the Premier League should take. It's a tremendously successful league. It's a little presumptous of me to start dictating rules."
Can Alisher Usmanov join the board?
"I think the view - it's a board matter - has been outlined and I don't think I should get into it."
Gazidis: "It's a board issue. As Stan has said, it's not about one individual, not Stan, not Usmanov. The board is running well, aligned on direction and very happy with the way it's running."
Kroenke: "I think the board should be given a lot of credit. I've been around this thing for three or four years now and it goes back to what I said earlier - If you go back to where this club was, revenue-wise, in the early to mid-1990s, in terms of assets and things, then it's dramatically different. That didn't just happen by itself, it's not easy to do the things that they have accomplished. The board should be given credit for that. A lot of people are happy that the board is still around."
Does it taste sweeter when you win things because you don't spend so much?
"I think there are a good few people who would argue that - a few people from other clubs who would argue that. Would I rather be successful spending less or spending more? What a question! If you run responsibly and do it well... if you look at our manager, he's a great example. I said recently that there's a film out in the US called Moneyball. Moneyball is all about being smart in sports, specifically baseball. There's a wave in the US now of statistical evaluation - this whole science of sport goes a long way. There's some very smart people - we employ some of them - who are analysing every stat and who are connecting every bit of data and trying to make sense of it. But that really started with Billy Beane, who is the guy in Moneyball. And Billy Beane's hero truly is Arsene Wenger. He loves Arsene. There's a reason and maybe the reason goes directly to what you are talking about. He's proud and is a fan of Arsenal because he realises what it takes to succeed and be responsible and that is different."
Can you compete on player contracts?
"That is a loaded question."
Can Arsenal compete on the money?
"Here's the thing. Could you? Yeah. You could. Do you want to? Maybe you don't. See what I mean? What I told you earlier - sometimes you can overspend for the wrong assets and you end up shorter in the long run. Or you could say, and you might, 'Well, just buy him anyway. The whole has unlimited resources, go out there and spend anything, stockpile everyone and maybe you'll win. You buy to win.' But you might not. There's examples where you haven't. Now I think that you want to be sure that you want to spend the money and I think that's what our manager does. He makes that evaluation. That's his job. It wasn't because the money wasn't there. We have money. And it wasn't because, Ivan can tell you, anybody sitting here ever said, ' Don't spend it.' Now, if you spend it all and there is no more money, you guys come and say, 'Well, Stan, we're short now, you need to spend some more money.' Well then you could blame me, maybe, but I don't think you can blame me now, because I think it's a philosophy. I think this club is run a certain way and I think people are proud of the way it's run. And I think our fans are proud of the way it's run. Now, does that mean there are people who wouldn't like to see you spend more? I think there is a natural tension there. I think maybe they would want you just to make the biggest offer out there. A club could go into a bunch of debt again, spending debt - there was various proposals, we should do different things, I didn't think we should do them and it's turned out fairly well. The club has no debt now, because the cash resources exceed the amount of debt that's on the team."
How confident are you that Fabregas and Nasri transfer situations won't happen again?
"Well, here's the thing. I think you know that one of the players who departed had nothing to do with money. I think our manager would tell you that. There was a specific personal circumstance that happened. Maybe I am saying too much. That has nothing to do with money. So we say, 'Well, we've seen players depart.' Well, then you could say, 'Well, the other player departed for money.' Well then, you get into an evaluation. That's where being smart and not being smart comes in. You've got one year left on a player's contract. You've got a large sum of money being offered. Can you employ those resources better than you could had you not taken the money, taken a chance on losing the guy for nothing in a year or perhaps overpaying for him now and having less resources later? I don't know. That's how I would see the evaluation."
There have been some tough times for your fellow American owners, Hicks/Gillett and the Glazers, recently...
"What was so tough about the Glazers' situation?"
Lot of fan protests?
"Okay, guys, let's talk about it. But they won. And they have increased revenues by a huge amount. If I was a fan of that club, I would still go there and go, 'Wow', because how could you do it any better? That's what I would say."
Manchester United fans would say the Glazers are taking money out of the club...
"But they still won. We don't need to get into an exchange here but I don't know, as a fan, how could you do it much better? They have increased massively. Some of their players have taken money out, and maybe they haven't performed. We have a whole different philosophy I think in the States, maybe, but I think it's time maybe for everybody to think a little bit. Maybe I am saying too much, but I think they ought to think a little bit about who invests in these clubs. What do you want for the long-term? Because, in the States, you would never get this dialogue that you and I are having. [The Glazers] took money out of the club. So what? Jerry Buss [owner of basketball's LA Lakers] takes money out of the club. A lot of owners in the US do. No-one ever says anything about it. What's it about, in fairness - did the Lakers win anything? Well, yeah. They did. How big's their revenue? Pretty darn good."
How do you propose making money for yourself?
"I don't know the specific situations [about Liverpool] and I don't think it's fair for me to comment because I'm not that close to them. George Gillett and Tom Hicks, they had that situation and I really don't know too much about it."
But how do you propose to make money?
"Well, we'll see. That's the risk. There's no guarantee I'll make any money. As a matter of fact, believe it or not, you can actually lose money in sports! I know you'll find that shocking."
There was a lot criticism after the 8-2 loss at Manchester United in August. But it seems to have got better since then. How much faith does that give you in Wenger?
"I think I've said all I want to. I've never departed from that. Arsene Wenger is an unbelievable manager. I think he's a tremendous person, I just think he is as good as there is. Now, do you lose some games? Do you have tough losses? It happens. You cant judge a manager on one game or on one stretch of games. You judge him over time. That's how the really good ones are judged."
The Silent Stan label - how do you feel about that?
"Perhaps bemused? We are busy. We do have a lot of obligations. Sometimes I think if we engage too much, it's a matter of who did you engage with?, were you fair to people?, how much time do you have to give to them? We have very capable people, like Ivan and Arsene. We have lots of very capable people - they wouldn't be involved if I didn't have lots of confidence in them. I think it's more about that. The gentlemen who created it said, 'Well, I'm creating a character.'"
Did keeping a low profile breed suspicion? Should have put yourself out there more at the start?
"Perhaps. I have a lot of friends in the press. Some of them laugh because I tell them that journalism was my love early in my life and that I almost went to study journalism at the University of Missouri. At the time, that was the number one journalism school in America. I chose not to, but they all think that's quite funny now."
It was said recently that there are overseas owners who want to scrap relegation from the Premier League. What do you think?
"It would be presumptuous of me to comment. The history of the league is a great history. I think that is for people who have studied that and understand it. We don't have a point of view on that. Ivan and Arsene might have - and, by the way, none of the American owners that I know have a point of view on that."
What about Robin van Persie and his current contract situation? Do you have a message to the fans?
"I think Robin van Persie is a great player. I think he's doing a great job. He's captain of the club. Arsene said the other day, 'Can we succeed if we are not together? Absolutely not.' If we are together, we have a chance. I thought it was extremely important that Arsene said that. I think that everybody needs to think about that. I think that Robin van Persie gets that, and I think he has shown real leadership. I have watched him and had a chance to chat with him. I think he has done a great job of that. But I think asking me to talk about Robin van Persie at this stage is not fair to Robin van Persie and is not fair to Arsene and Ivan. They are the guys who know the particulars of that situation.
But Nasri had 12 months left, as Van Persie will have next summer, and you made a business decision [Nasri was sold to Manchester City]?
" Arsene made a business decision. I understand why you guys want to do this, but I don't think it is fair on any of the parties for me to start talking about this."
What was your message when you met the players this week?
"That I'm proud of them. That they have faced adversity and have shown a real class and spirit in fighting through it. By the way, it was a lot of fun to watch that game Saturday. Great game. Great win. It was hard early, maybe gave up some things you shouldn't have done, went in at half-time, they scored right before half-time and then you come out. Tremendous spirit and fight."
Super Ghel
03-11-2011, 11:45 PM
:lol: This guy.
Yes, please stop wasting my time with these long winded posts that lack any real substance. Iceberg has made a great point about our situation and you should probably try tackling that. That's if you have the time.
:lol: Well if my long winded post lacked substance in the first place, why then did you bother to reply with a long winded post of your own via another veiled attempt to justify your position? It’s not like the people here in this forum can’t see what your slant is on Wenger by now. It’s been done ad nauseam after all, in one inspired form or another. Yeah sure, my mong paradox argument was long winded, but it started out only as 2 paragraphs to FY. Hell even after all that, I still sense that there are some issues of acceptance here.
And if the mong dilemma was so obvious to you in the first place, why then have I never seen you factoring this simple logic in any of your arguments about Wenger? Did you not argue vehemently that you felt it was understandable for the board to act this way because you felt it’s in their nature to do so? Why then was the cringeworthy double standard (i.e. that the employers are Wengerites) seem acceptable you? Hell, weren’t you one of main advocates in the old board who maintained the view that that the buck had to stop with Wenger? Should I dig up some old posts and have a laugh?
Why even bring IceBerg into this? I have no problem with his rather philosophical take on ambition or even his sensible view of why things don’t seem that bad from his perspective (in essence his is just another definition of success which encompasses a wide spectrum of many others as one would expect from a diverse fanbase). My problem is your slant on Wenger, but more importantly, one which is of a more immediate nature, which is; what does it take going forwards for Arsenal to achieve the definition of success A, bearing in mind the dominant factor in the landscape of competition now is that of an issue of resources?
Like I said above, did you not pay attention to Arsene’s slip at the AGM that fourth is what the club is aiming for? Why is that good enough for you now? After all, weren’t you moaning feverishly in the past about mediocrity and whatnot and claimed that it was Arsene’s fault? Why shift that goal post now? Is it because that it’s overwhelmingly clear now that the board/owner’s zeal for success C at the expense of A is the main contributing factor which presents a problem in your slant against Wengs?
Well I better stop here before I get accused of being too long winded again. If there’s anything that we can both agree on at this juncture, is this exchange between us is clearly a waste of time. So let me just stop here and part you with the message: “whatever your opinion is of me, let me just say that the feeling is mutual” and leave it at that. If you want the last word, knock yourself out. I can walk away as he bigger man :tiphat:
Niall_Quinn
03-11-2011, 11:53 PM
Wow, is all I can say to that interview. We are well and truly fucked. It's like a broken record. Yes you can read the interview but you have to understand it as well. In summary this guy is saying it's all about the money and only the money, maybe we'll win, maybe we won't but we can all be proud of the fact we run the finances so tightly. Can we indeed? The deceit is staggering as well, unless he really believes what he is saying which in itself is hard to believe considering he's made a lot of money in sports. Is he suddenly naive or is he just in a gambling mood and really doesn't have and idea of how his investment will pan out. His goal plainly is to increase revenues. That's no surprise and not a bad thing in itself. But where are his goals for the football team? Nowhere. And the arrogance concerning Usmanov is astounding. He prefers to hide behind a board that no longer has any interest in the club (having jumped ship financially) so they can decide the fate of shareholder who actually has some money in the game. Ridiculous. I ask yet again, who are these board members that retain this alleged power over those with a genuine interest? I mean Usmanov but much more importantly the fans. Is anyone buying Stan's reluctance to lead, as the majority shareholder? This will be a first in the history of business if true. At least we may be first at something I suppose.
But even though Kroenke's agenda is painfully obvious, let's give him the benefit of the doubt as suppose he is invested in Arsenal for the overall good of the club. It's embarrassing to even pretend to be so naive but for arguments sake let's humiliate ourselves. What of the ex-shareholders and lingering board members? Could somebody please list very clearly the excuses we are making on their behalf? Please spell out clearly how the ex-shareholders have earned their £400million (or £500 million depending on what you read) on the condition that football must (I insist) be included in your analysis. If we are going to understand these people and be reasonable about their actions then let's do it for a reason rather than simply concede their words while overlooking their actions. If these men (and that bird who fled with over £100mill) are misunderstood then please detail their grand (for surely it must be significant given the sums involved) contribution to the club and explain it in the context of our decline on the pitch.
I just don't understand it. It's like the situation with the bankers. Even now you will get some people defending them as if the stark realities of their behaviour are somehow theoretical rather than practical and with disastrous consequences for all except the guilty. Incidentally, if I observe a bank robbery and cheer on the robbers, I am not a bank robber. If I refuse to give evidence against the robbers I am still not a bank robber. So please don't commence your analysis with a conclusion that because Wenger has gone along with all this there is no crime to answer, except perhaps by Wenger.
How many years have the fans been calling for investment in the TEAM? Where has the money that could have been invested ended up? Why has the team been less deserving of attention considering we are a football club supposedly with ambitions to compete at the top of the game? We see the same behaviour as that of the ex-shareholders in every walk of life. That's why the whole world is fucked up, by the way. Greed. It's a fucking terrible thing. I don't mind any guy having ten or twenty or even fifty mansions if he has the cash to buy them. We are not talking jealousy here. But if he has made that cash by robbing people, then I have a problem.
At least with Stan he makes no pretence about his lack of ambition for the club, beyond revenue generation. The fact he has put nothing in so far is highly suggestive of how much we can expect him to contribute in the future, but we'll need top wait to verify this. However, the rotten cunts who have cashed in clearly and without ambiguity informed the fans the purpose of the stadium move was to keep the club in the upper tier. Nowhere did they mention their desire to exploit assets that would increase the value of the club so they could cash out. In fact they very much painted the opposite. If the final outcome is not what they intended at the outset then how happy for them it occurred nonetheless. It must be with great reluctance they pocket their millions while still retaining their comfortable chairs. What a bunch of cunts and how could you call it any other way?
On these other "inevitable" and unavoidable happy occurrences such as the sale of Fabregas, these things do not become inevitable at the flick of a switch. If you drive a car towards a cliff a thousand miles away you will eventually go off the cliff. Yes, it is inevitable if you don't apply the brake. But don't say nothing could be done as the car plunges over. Action could have been taken with 900 miles still to go, or 800, or 500 or even 50. The inevitability increases with incompetence, wishful thinking or bloody minded determination to court disaster. Some investment in 2005 or 2007 or 2009 or at any point within stopping distance of the cliff edge may have reduced many "inevitabilities", we'll never know because the board pressed the fucking accelerator instead. Now we lament the fact that big players don't want to come here. I wonder why? Can anyone Hazard a guess?
This is all just so convenient for these bastards. I'll tell you though, they are clever. It takes some planning to pull off what they have achieved, especially considering they had to completely reverse their position to do it. So yes, they are liars too although they prefer to cover their tracks by blaming Manchester City. It wasn't Manchester City that assembled that rag-tag squad that took to the pitch to get hammered 8-2 by Utd. That was down to Arsenal Football Club and any denial of the fact is a pointless nonsense. That was down to a lack of investment coupled with a chain of excuses designed to distract while the real business of the board was conducted behind the scenes. Their plan to cash out with millions didn't end in humiliating defeat, I notice. That was the one plan that seems to have been executed perfectly. Another coincidence no doubt.
Whatever. Let's hope that what we have can provide us with a more conventional form of entertainment, excitement and pride until recently commonly understood to be the point of football. As "proud" as we all are of our balance sheet (I'm sure), I wouldn't mind a few wins and even a trophy thrown in. or is that much too much too ask? Manchester City, Chelsea, these are the reasons we make a profit in the transfer window - didn't you know? Trophies, we must be patient. As patient as the board has been in securing it's own success. Maybe even more patient than that because Stan makes no bones about it. He won't be throwing money at the wall. That's the only option you see. You either spend fuck all or take your credit card out and rack up a huge and unsustainable debt. There is absolutely nothing in between. Everyone knows that because Stand says so. And so do the fuckers who are still fouling up the place with their presence and feel so comfortable about it they even have time to insult the fans who paid for it all.
That's enough on this for me. I'm off to be proud of our finances now because that's what it's all about. Come on you balance sheet!
There was a lot criticism after the 8-2 loss at Manchester United in August. But it seems to have got better since then. How much faith does that give you in Wenger?
None :coffee:
You don't win trophies every year - you'd like to. I have friends who are owners in the leagues in the US who have never won a trophy and they have been in it for 30 or 40 years
Good for them, this guy's attitude stinks....he's just interested in the business side, the football side he doesn't really give a sh*t about....if we win we win, if we don't we can be proud of what we've achieved....in others words winning isn't that important at all.
We shouldn't be proud of losing, sure we won't win stuff all the time, but we should reserve praise for the time we do achieve something.
I can see some of what you are driving at - but I think that we have become a bit too polarised and paranoid about the board, the manager, and the performance of our team.
Lets start with the basics shall we? No owner, no board member, no manager, no player is in the game altruistically for the benefit of the fans. Everyone has an agenda. The Glazers and JW Henry the are in the game to make cold hard cash - just like Silent Stan. Mansour and Abramovich are in to compensate for their small dick sizes, and because ownership of an EPL club gets you exposure on the world stage. So its wrong to see what's happening at our club from a position of utopian ideals - I think that where the board is criticised for being driven by greed - the point of reference is wrong.
What we are dealing with here is degrees. In wanting to run the club as a business is our owner and board any worse than their contemporaries? I'd say no. Emphatically. Despite their successes on the field, we all know what most Manure fans think about their owners. Liverpool fans have been mollified by the appoitnment of King Kenny and some reasonable signings - but watch what happens if they've won nothing in the next 3 years - which is more than possible. I do not think its representative to argue that there is a lack of greed at Citeh and Stamford Bridge because the cheque books are always open. They are open because of the unbridled greed of their owners away from the game - its a totally artificial situation at these clubs.
So the bottom line is that the gleam of silverware covers a multitude of sins. And the majority of those critical of the motives and modus operandus of our owner and board would not even be entering into this territory if it had appeared recently in our trophy room.
So the next question is whether our owner/board are to be villified for 'aiming' for 4th while teams formerly behind us are reaching for the stars? To start - IMO its ridiculous to suggest that 4th is the club's 'aim'. Do people think that if were to find ourself top of the legue in April, we would throw our next matches to finish 4th? Of course not. So the real question is whether steps are being taken actively with the result that we finish no higher than 4th. I'm not at all sure this is the case. We can point to signings/non signings etc. and the transfer surplus, but there is no evidence that funds have been witheld from the manager, or that signing decisions are not solely down to him. In fact, I'd say that common sense suggests otherwise, because if AW was being treated in this way then he would walk. 6mil pa salary or not. Its funny that those who claim that the board is refusing the manager funds often claim that the manager stays nevertheless because he is too 'cosy' and could never find another club where he enjoys the level of control/influence that he does at Arsenal. Either he enjoys control or he doesn't. And if he does, then its not the board denying him available funds to spend.
And for me - using the Cesc and Nasri situations to justify claims of lack of ambition is wide of the mark. Fabregas had a hard on for Barca and was never going to stay. This much was obvious even when we looked like we could win the league last season. People say he'd have stayed had we won something, or bought this or that player. I think not. There is no way that we could ever have achieved anything to make Arsenal look like a better proposition than Barcelona. As for Nasri - he was simply not worth 22 mil with 1 year on his contract and 173K pw. Keeping him would have been an act of gross stupidity rather than an act of ambition. So was failing to land, say Mata, lack of ambition? - Well, if what we hear is to be believed the main reason why we didn't land Mata was because Wenger misread the Nasri situation, not because the board witheld the funds.
NQ talks about the Citeh situation not being responsible for our 8-2 hammering. What's the purpose of looking at this freak result? But if you do - it was undoubtedly the result of a mismanaged Summer transfer window, injuries and poor team tactics/selection. In the latter, Wenger is joined this season by SAF and Villas-Boas - managers of so-called more ambitious clubs.
So perhaps this talk of 4th from the club is realism rather than lack of ambition. I see nothing wrong with conceding that AFC cannot match the spending power of 2 multi billionaires on a pissing contest, or of the biggest football club, with the most successful manager this county has ever seen. That is pretty much simple a factual observation to me. And what's more, we are not talking forever, we are talking for now. Because if people would only see the other side of the coin, our club has shown clear ambition on a number of fronts. It has shown an ambition to build for the future in investing in the Emirates - an interesting topic given that the Chavs; Liverpool and Sp*rs are all facing significant headaches in this regard in the near future. It has shown the same ambition in outbidding richer clubs for the pick of this country's best talent on several occasions. And from the board's point of view, it has shown ambition in paying big style to retain the services of a manager who remains regarded as one of the world's best.
We may be frustrated that the club is focussed on sustainability at the cost of immediate success - but IMO its wrong to suggest that the Citeh style route is the only way to roll. Given that we are not going this route, maybe we should be pleased that Kroenke isn't taking the Glazer route either - despite his appreciation for their model.
Coney
04-11-2011, 12:54 PM
Can we rename this thread 'War and Peace'?
:gp: Some good questions posed on your first post as well. These are the tough questions worth thinking about. If we're saying this strategy is wrong, then what's the alternative? It's way too easy to point the finger at figures like Stan and say they've taken us for a ride. If that's true, Wenger is in on it. I don't believe that. I hope that's not the case anyway. We've brought in Stan and Ivan for a reason. They have experience in Sports and have worked under very restrictive financial models over in the US. The plan is to increase revenue through commercial deals rather than looking for outside investors. That's a good long term plan IMO.
It's worth reading all of Stan's transcript.
Also worth reading what Herbert Chapman's Zombie has to say over on the Arseblog thread. Certainly appears that its Wenger not spending, not the board.
Fist of Lehmann
04-11-2011, 01:26 PM
Where is this Arsenal podcast of the 4th Oct which HCZ talks about?
Power n Glory
04-11-2011, 01:41 PM
I can see some of what you are driving at - but I think that we have become a bit too polarised and paranoid about the board, the manager, and the performance of our team.
Lets start with the basics shall we? No owner, no board member, no manager, no player is in the game altruistically for the benefit of the fans. Everyone has an agenda. The Glazers and JW Henry the are in the game to make cold hard cash - just like Silent Stan. Mansour and Abramovich are in to compensate for their small dick sizes, and because ownership of an EPL club gets you exposure on the world stage. So its wrong to see what's happening at our club from a position of utopian ideals - I think that where the board is criticised for being driven by greed - the point of reference is wrong.
What we are dealing with here is degrees. In wanting to run the club as a business is our owner and board any worse than their contemporaries? I'd say no. Emphatically. Despite their successes on the field, we all know what most Manure fans think about their owners. Liverpool fans have been mollified by the appoitnment of King Kenny and some reasonable signings - but watch what happens if they've won nothing in the next 3 years - which is more than possible. I do not think its representative to argue that there is a lack of greed at Citeh and Stamford Bridge because the cheque books are always open. They are open because of the unbridled greed of their owners away from the game - its a totally artificial situation at these clubs.
So the bottom line is that the gleam of silverware covers a multitude of sins. And the majority of those critical of the motives and modus operandus of our owner and board would not even be entering into this territory if it had appeared recently in our trophy room.
So the next question is whether our owner/board are to be villified for 'aiming' for 4th while teams formerly behind us are reaching for the stars? To start - IMO its ridiculous to suggest that 4th is the club's 'aim'. Do people think that if were to find ourself top of the legue in April, we would throw our next matches to finish 4th? Of course not. So the real question is whether steps are being taken actively with the result that we finish no higher than 4th. I'm not at all sure this is the case. We can point to signings/non signings etc. and the transfer surplus, but there is no evidence that funds have been witheld from the manager, or that signing decisions are not solely down to him. In fact, I'd say that common sense suggests otherwise, because if AW was being treated in this way then he would walk. 6mil pa salary or not. Its funny that those who claim that the board is refusing the manager funds often claim that the manager stays nevertheless because he is too 'cosy' and could never find another club where he enjoys the level of control/influence that he does at Arsenal. Either he enjoys control or he doesn't. And if he does, then its not the board denying him available funds to spend.
And for me - using the Cesc and Nasri situations to justify claims of lack of ambition is wide of the mark. Fabregas had a hard on for Barca and was never going to stay. This much was obvious even when we looked like we could win the league last season. People say he'd have stayed had we won something, or bought this or that player. I think not. There is no way that we could ever have achieved anything to make Arsenal look like a better proposition than Barcelona. As for Nasri - he was simply not worth 22 mil with 1 year on his contract and 173K pw. Keeping him would have been an act of gross stupidity rather than an act of ambition. So was failing to land, say Mata, lack of ambition? - Well, if what we hear is to be believed the main reason why we didn't land Mata was because Wenger misread the Nasri situation, not because the board witheld the funds.
NQ talks about the Citeh situation not being responsible for our 8-2 hammering. What's the purpose of looking at this freak result? But if you do - it was undoubtedly the result of a mismanaged Summer transfer window, injuries and poor team tactics/selection. In the latter, Wenger is joined this season by SAF and Villas-Boas - managers of so-called more ambitious clubs.
So perhaps this talk of 4th from the club is realism rather than lack of ambition. I see nothing wrong with conceding that AFC cannot match the spending power of 2 multi billionaires on a pissing contest, or of the biggest football club, with the most successful manager this county has ever seen. That is pretty much simple a factual observation to me. And what's more, we are not talking forever, we are talking for now. Because if people would only see the other side of the coin, our club has shown clear ambition on a number of fronts. It has shown an ambition to build for the future in investing in the Emirates - an interesting topic given that the Chavs; Liverpool and Sp*rs are all facing significant headaches in this regard in the near future. It has shown the same ambition in outbidding richer clubs for the pick of this country's best talent on several occasions. And from the board's point of view, it has shown ambition in paying big style to retain the services of a manager who remains regarded as one of the world's best.
We may be frustrated that the club is focussed on sustainability at the cost of immediate success - but IMO its wrong to suggest that the Citeh style route is the only way to roll. Given that we are not going this route, maybe we should be pleased that Kroenke isn't taking the Glazer route either - despite his appreciation for their model.
:gp:
A really good post. Hits on a lot of good points people have missed. It sums up my feelings on this complex situation.
Good read! If we're saying this isn't the right way to go, then what's the alternative?
Where is this Arsenal podcast of the 4th Oct which HCZ talks about?
http://arseblog.com/category/arsecast/
I think he means 4 Nov.
Fist of Lehmann
04-11-2011, 02:08 PM
http://arseblog.com/category/arsecast/
I think he means 4 Nov.Today's?
Maybe I've gone completely batshit, but I recall nothing in today's Arsecast regarding the things that HCZombie mentioned.
Oh and this:
...if what we hear is to be believed the main reason why we didn't land Mata was because Wenger misread the Nasri situation, not because the board witheld the funds.
Have you a sauce?
gunsofashburtongrove
04-11-2011, 02:31 PM
I can see some of what you are driving at - but I think that we have become a bit too polarised and paranoid about the board, the manager, and the performance of our team.
Lets start with the basics shall we? No owner, no board member, no manager, no player is in the game altruistically for the benefit of the fans. Everyone has an agenda. The Glazers and JW Henry the are in the game to make cold hard cash - just like Silent Stan. Mansour and Abramovich are in to compensate for their small dick sizes, and because ownership of an EPL club gets you exposure on the world stage. So its wrong to see what's happening at our club from a position of utopian ideals - I think that where the board is criticised for being driven by greed - the point of reference is wrong.
What we are dealing with here is degrees. In wanting to run the club as a business is our owner and board any worse than their contemporaries? I'd say no. Emphatically. Despite their successes on the field, we all know what most Manure fans think about their owners. Liverpool fans have been mollified by the appoitnment of King Kenny and some reasonable signings - but watch what happens if they've won nothing in the next 3 years - which is more than possible. I do not think its representative to argue that there is a lack of greed at Citeh and Stamford Bridge because the cheque books are always open. They are open because of the unbridled greed of their owners away from the game - its a totally artificial situation at these clubs.
So the bottom line is that the gleam of silverware covers a multitude of sins. And the majority of those critical of the motives and modus operandus of our owner and board would not even be entering into this territory if it had appeared recently in our trophy room.
So the next question is whether our owner/board are to be villified for 'aiming' for 4th while teams formerly behind us are reaching for the stars? To start - IMO its ridiculous to suggest that 4th is the club's 'aim'. Do people think that if were to find ourself top of the legue in April, we would throw our next matches to finish 4th? Of course not. So the real question is whether steps are being taken actively with the result that we finish no higher than 4th. I'm not at all sure this is the case. We can point to signings/non signings etc. and the transfer surplus, but there is no evidence that funds have been witheld from the manager, or that signing decisions are not solely down to him. In fact, I'd say that common sense suggests otherwise, because if AW was being treated in this way then he would walk. 6mil pa salary or not. Its funny that those who claim that the board is refusing the manager funds often claim that the manager stays nevertheless because he is too 'cosy' and could never find another club where he enjoys the level of control/influence that he does at Arsenal. Either he enjoys control or he doesn't. And if he does, then its not the board denying him available funds to spend.
And for me - using the Cesc and Nasri situations to justify claims of lack of ambition is wide of the mark. Fabregas had a hard on for Barca and was never going to stay. This much was obvious even when we looked like we could win the league last season. People say he'd have stayed had we won something, or bought this or that player. I think not. There is no way that we could ever have achieved anything to make Arsenal look like a better proposition than Barcelona. As for Nasri - he was simply not worth 22 mil with 1 year on his contract and 173K pw. Keeping him would have been an act of gross stupidity rather than an act of ambition. So was failing to land, say Mata, lack of ambition? - Well, if what we hear is to be believed the main reason why we didn't land Mata was because Wenger misread the Nasri situation, not because the board witheld the funds.
NQ talks about the Citeh situation not being responsible for our 8-2 hammering. What's the purpose of looking at this freak result? But if you do - it was undoubtedly the result of a mismanaged Summer transfer window, injuries and poor team tactics/selection. In the latter, Wenger is joined this season by SAF and Villas-Boas - managers of so-called more ambitious clubs.
So perhaps this talk of 4th from the club is realism rather than lack of ambition. I see nothing wrong with conceding that AFC cannot match the spending power of 2 multi billionaires on a pissing contest, or of the biggest football club, with the most successful manager this county has ever seen. That is pretty much simple a factual observation to me. And what's more, we are not talking forever, we are talking for now. Because if people would only see the other side of the coin, our club has shown clear ambition on a number of fronts. It has shown an ambition to build for the future in investing in the Emirates - an interesting topic given that the Chavs; Liverpool and Sp*rs are all facing significant headaches in this regard in the near future. It has shown the same ambition in outbidding richer clubs for the pick of this country's best talent on several occasions. And from the board's point of view, it has shown ambition in paying big style to retain the services of a manager who remains regarded as one of the world's best.
We may be frustrated that the club is focussed on sustainability at the cost of immediate success - but IMO its wrong to suggest that the Citeh style route is the only way to roll. Given that we are not going this route, maybe we should be pleased that Kroenke isn't taking the Glazer route either - despite his appreciation for their model.
:gp: Very good post as was the earlier one in which you have rightly pointed out that the transfer policy has always been the same. Wenger has always been a developmental manager.The one thing that has crucially changed is us not being able to retain our important players. While examples of Petit, Overmars etc did exist in the past we still retained a fair bit of our core or was able to directly find a replacement as in the case of Pires. With top clubs all over expanding their scouting network, the young super talents are not always successfully bought neither are the experienced ones as they are all expensive. Despite of this we have developed some very good players in the past 6 years.
Something fans of most clubs as you have said feel the board does not invest sufficiently Manure, Scouse et all. Our board has been very astute at guiding the club through a very difficult phase.We now have a swanky stadium which has increased our income.The common question i get is why cant we spend if we have more money? The answer is simple 1. Clubs like Manure, Barca and Real continue to grow fast the last two at least at a faster rate than us. The growth that the other clubs have achieved are in areas where huge investments were not required 2.The appearance of sugar daddy sponsored clubs.
If anything board has to account for these factors that were not accounted for during planning of the stadium and look at innovative ways at addressing these issues. I think they are attempting to do, so the efficacy of the approach can be measured only later.
As a foot note I would like to see if another club is going to build a stadium and remain competitive like we have. Forget the spuds i would like to see how a Liverpool or Chelsea who both have more revenue than spuds do this
Dog Toffee
04-11-2011, 03:10 PM
Who gives a fuck about Stan Kronk-face?
Dog Toffee
04-11-2011, 03:13 PM
:yawn:
Dog Toffee
04-11-2011, 03:15 PM
:shrug:
Who gives a fuck about Stan Kronk-face?
His wife?
Super Ghel
04-11-2011, 07:14 PM
I can see some of what you are driving at - but I think that we have become a bit too polarised and paranoid about the board, the manager, and the performance of our team.
It’s good to know there are alternative perspectives like yours Iceberg. But what I feel you’ve neglected to consider in your deliberations on the subject is the other side of the coin, and in doing so, you’ve evaded the underlying crucial point of what all the fuss is about. Allow me then to present the alternative viewpoint in perhaps a slightly comical way to illustrate this point.
What we are dealing with here is degrees. In wanting to run the club as a business is our owner and board any worse than their contemporaries? I'd say no. Emphatically. Despite their successes on the field, we all know what most Manure fans think about their owners. Liverpool fans have been mollified by the appoitnment of King Kenny and some reasonable signings - but watch what happens if they've won nothing in the next 3 years - which is more than possible.
Yes that’s one perspective. But what about “in wanting to run AFC as a football club with a desire or willpower to win compared to the aspirations you see emanating from the likes of Manure, Liverpool, Citeh, Chelsea, Tottnumb etc? Are we better than our contemporaries? I’d say no. Emphatically.
So the next question is whether our owner/board are to be villified for 'aiming' for 4th while teams formerly behind us are reaching for the stars? To start - IMO its ridiculous to suggest that 4th is the club's 'aim'. Do people think that if were to find ourself top of the legue in April, we would throw our next matches to finish 4th? Of course not. So the real question is whether steps are being taken actively with the result that we finish no higher than 4th. I'm not at all sure this is the case.
Nah, that can’t be the real question. It’s quite silly to even contemplate that we are taking steps ACTIVELY with the result that we finish no higher than fourth. The more relevant real question is, are we taking steps ACTIVELY to ensure we finish HIGHER than fourth? I’m not at all sure this is the case.
We can point to signings/non signings etc. and the transfer surplus, but there is no evidence that funds have been witheld from the manager, or that signing decisions are not solely down to him. In fact, I'd say that common sense suggests otherwise, because if AW was being treated in this way then he would walk. 6mil pa salary or not.
Yes that’s one perspective. But the notion, that funds have been withheld from the manager is just one extreme, just like the other extreme which argues that Arsene is leading the board by the nose and embarking on some personal utopian quest for glory at the expense of the club with his obsession on project youth. There’s another more logical perspective. The lack of quality signings and the constant surplus of transfer funds we see stems from one common core or strategic directive, i.e. that of a long term approach to excellence which is consistent with the club’s pursuit of self sustainability. It is from this congruent goal (albeit perhaps with different motives from both sides) that we see the kind of transfer activity being exhibited by the club. So there are no funds (though wages might be a different story) to be withheld from the manager, because he doesn’t demand for it in the first place, nor is the board shackling him in any way or form, because there’s nothing to constraint him from. It’s a symbiotic partnership working in harmony with a prime directive.
Its funny that those who claim that the board is refusing the manager funds often claim that the manager stays nevertheless because he is too 'cosy' and could never find another club where he enjoys the level of control/influence that he does at Arsenal. Either he enjoys control or he doesn't. And if he does, then its not the board denying him available funds to spend.
As you can see from the perspective I’ve presented above, the question of whether Arsene enjoys controls or not, then become a rather farcical one because he is doing exactly what he believes is right for the club (i.e. in accordance with the prime directive) with a freedom that may not be available elsewhere and get rewarded well in the process. So if you believe he should resign just because his values or definition of integrity does not match yours as a fan, then just like the mong paradox argument, a long elaborative mocking post can be made to show this sort of hypocritical view.
We may be frustrated that the club is focussed on sustainability at the cost of immediate success - but IMO its wrong to suggest that the Citeh style route is the only way to roll. Given that we are not going this route, maybe we should be pleased that Kroenke isn't taking the Glazer route either - despite his appreciation for their model.
Yes that’s certainly one perspective. But why should the extreme Citeh style route be the only way to go? Why can’t a change of leadership/owner in the club to one which emphasises the desire or will to win or compete more rigorously while self sustainability takes a backseat not be another logical option? Perhaps even one who sees nothing wrong with contributing some equity into the club as a small token of appreciation in consideration of the suffering masses who are paying through the roof out of their own shallow pockets.
It’s good to know there are alternative perspectives like yours Iceberg. But what I feel you’ve neglected to consider in your deliberations on the subject is the other side of the coin, and in doing so, you’ve evaded the underlying crucial point of what all the fuss is about. Allow me then to present the alternative viewpoint in perhaps a slightly comical way to illustrate this point.
Yes that’s one perspective. But what about “in wanting to run AFC as a football club with a desire or willpower to win compared to the aspirations you see emanating from the likes of Manure, Liverpool, Citeh, Chelsea, Tottnumb etc? Are we better than our contemporaries? I’d say no. Emphatically.
Nah, that can’t be the real question. It’s quite silly to even contemplate that we are taking steps ACTIVELY with the result that we finish no higher than fourth. The more relevant real question is, are we taking steps ACTIVELY to ensure we finish HIGHER than fourth? I’m not at all sure this is the case.
Yes that’s one perspective. But the notion, that funds have been withheld from the manager is just one extreme, just like the other extreme which argues that Arsene is leading the board by the nose and embarking on some personal utopian quest for glory at the expense of the club with his obsession on project youth. There’s another more logical perspective. The lack of quality signings and the constant surplus of transfer funds we see stems from one common core or strategic directive, i.e. that of a long term approach to excellence which is consistent with the club’s pursuit of self sustainability. It is from this congruent goal (albeit perhaps with different motives from both sides) that we see the kind of transfer activity being exhibited by the club. So there are no funds (though wages might be a different story) to be withheld from the manager, because he doesn’t demand for it in the first place, nor is the board shackling him in any way or form, because there’s nothing to constraint him from. It’s a symbiotic partnership working in harmony with a prime directive.
As you can see from the perspective I’ve presented above, the question of whether Arsene enjoys controls or not, then become a rather farcical one because he is doing exactly what he believes is right for the club (i.e. in accordance with the prime directive) with a freedom that may not be available elsewhere and get rewarded well in the process. So if you believe he should resign just because his values or definition of integrity does not match yours as a fan, then just like the mong paradox argument, a long elaborative mocking post can be made to show this sort of hypocritical view.
Yes that’s certainly one perspective. But why should the extreme Citeh style route be the only way to go? Why can’t a change of leadership/owner in the club to one which emphasises the desire or will to win or compete more rigorously while self sustainability takes a backseat not be another logical option? Perhaps even one who sees nothing wrong with contributing some equity into the club as a small token of appreciation in consideration of the suffering masses who are paying through the roof out of their own shallow pockets.
I get where you are coming from SG. Because as a fan - if you were to ask me am I happy that AFC appears to have been lacking in conviction in our approach to winning silverware, I would wholeheartedly agree. And until recently, I had started to curse our fortune at having Stan and his cronies in charge. But my philosphysing is an attempt to make some sense out of what is going on and while your perspective is of course as valid as mine - certain aspects of the theory that the board lacks ambition - period - (as opposed to simply being cautious and conservative in its approach to success) don't really make sense. Because
- No matter how much we would like it to be otherwise we simply ain't in a position to compete with Citeh; the Chavs and Manure for players. The board knows this. So do we.
- As Stan has said. He knows little about football and is relying on Wenger to lead the ship here. That is just not consistent with not allowing him to spend any transfer surplus.
- Given the reality of our club's current reputational and spending power, and the fact that the 3 clubs above are moving faster than we are. Trying to ensure that we at least finish in 4th is an understandable aim. Relying on a manager - the only apart from Ferguson who has done this every year since 1998 - seems a no brainer.
- And given that it is a no brainer, the idea that they would rely on him to the extent they have to, yet alienate him by not giving him the funds he wants to spend on players just doesn't make any sense (I know you concede the point). I agree with you re AW's philosophy. What I cannot and do not believe is that he does not have a burning desire to win with our club.
- IMO, comparisons with how more ambitious Spurs and Liverpool are are not valid. Both clubs are trying to get where we are, in truth. They are also gambling a great deal on short term success. Look at 'Arry. He has a creative MF (Modric) who may not be around after Jan. A loan signing striker who is no long term solution. Because lurking afterwards for both is a need to build new stadia that (barring another oligarch) is unlikely to be as seamless an undertaking as it was for them. Both clubs would love to be in our position, believe me. And FWIW I no longer bet on either team finishing higher than us this season.
- I don't see what advantage a huge cash surplus has to the shareholders. The club pays no dividend. Noone has sought to raise capital against the value of their share assets. They want the value of their shares to increase. Is this going to happen by the club becoming less and less successful? Of course not. And its ironic that some of the board members now are the self same ones who launched a stadium project that was stunning in its ambition just a decade ago, and one of the most prominent to actually cash in on his shares is the same one who is regarded as the face of ambitious Arsenal, whom many want back in now!
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 09:13 AM
Today's?
Maybe I've gone completely batshit, but I recall nothing in today's Arsecast regarding the things that HCZombie mentioned.
Oh and this:
Have you a sauce?
http://arseblog.com/2011/09/defending-togetherness-arsecast-210/
Here is the link. Worth a listen and touches on many points discussed here.
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 10:16 AM
I get where you are coming from SG. Because as a fan - if you were to ask me am I happy that AFC appears to have been lacking in conviction in our approach to winning silverware, I would wholeheartedly agree. And until recently, I had started to curse our fortune at having Stan and his cronies in charge. But my philosphysing is an attempt to make some sense out of what is going on and while your perspective is of course as valid as mine - certain aspects of the theory that the board lacks ambition - period - (as opposed to simply being cautious and conservative in its approach to success) don't really make sense. Because
- No matter how much we would like it to be otherwise we simply ain't in a position to compete with Citeh; the Chavs and Manure for players. The board knows this. So do we.
- As Stan has said. He knows little about football and is relying on Wenger to lead the ship here. That is just not consistent with not allowing him to spend any transfer surplus.
- Given the reality of our club's current reputational and spending power, and the fact that the 3 clubs above are moving faster than we are. Trying to ensure that we at least finish in 4th is an understandable aim. Relying on a manager - the only apart from Ferguson who has done this every year since 1998 - seems a no brainer.
- And given that it is a no brainer, the idea that they would rely on him to the extent they have to, yet alienate him by not giving him the funds he wants to spend on players just doesn't make any sense (I know you concede the point). I agree with you re AW's philosophy. What I cannot and do not believe is that he does not have a burning desire to win with our club.
- IMO, comparisons with how more ambitious Spurs and Liverpool are are not valid. Both clubs are trying to get where we are, in truth. They are also gambling a great deal on short term success. Look at 'Arry. He has a creative MF (Modric) who may not be around after Jan. A loan signing striker who is no long term solution. Because lurking afterwards for both is a need to build new stadia that (barring another oligarch) is unlikely to be as seamless an undertaking as it was for them. Both clubs would love to be in our position, believe me. And FWIW I no longer bet on either team finishing higher than us this season.
- I don't see what advantage a huge cash surplus has to the shareholders. The club pays no dividend. Noone has sought to raise capital against the value of their share assets. They want the value of their shares to increase. Is this going to happen by the club becoming less and less successful? Of course not. And its ironic that some of the board members now are the self same ones who launched a stadium project that was stunning in its ambition just a decade ago, and one of the most prominent to actually cash in on his shares is the same one who is regarded as the face of ambitious Arsenal, whom many want back in now!
That podcast on Arseblog talks about some of the points you've made.
Wenger isn't simply an employee for this club. As said, they rely on his knowledge and value his opinion. I expect Wenger to have a burning desire to win trophies because he's the football coach and his goals and focus should be on the short term. The Board on the other hand are looking at long term goals and stability is key to them. I'm pretty sure everyone at the club is disappointed when we fall apart like we've done in the past. But I can't imagine any of the Board members telling Wenger what he needs to do on the pitch to win games. As seen with his response to a fan questioning him about certain players at an AGM meeting and the media suggesting he should bring in a defensive coach, Wenger can get tetchy when his wisdom and knowledge on the game is questioned. I don't know how we can get around that. Do we want a Director of Football at the club? Someone that's an ex player and can support Wenger when it comes to the decisions relating to football? As seen with Newcastle and Chelsea, this sort of set up can lead to conflict and I can't see Wenger agreeing to this. Stan, Gazidis and PHW can't really advise Wenger on football matters. He had to give in on the Nasri situation because it made no sense financially and he was right to concede. The same goes for the Asia tour. These points were raised in the podcast interview. It's worth a listen.
But there is hope because of what we've seen this summer. We've gone for signings that have experience, are cheap and unknown but have the quality. We should have done this a long time ago. These players have always been about but Wenger placed too much faith in his young players. Sessengnon is player I've been impressed with since he played against us in the Emirates Cup and I was shocked to see him move to Sunderland for £6m. He could have done a job for us but Wenger wants to give his young players a chance and won't buy players if it's going to cause a selection headache. Check out his recent comments about our CB situation. He says it's a good problem to have but sneaks in a jab about people saying we needed to buy more CB's.
Well, it looks like we may be on the right road now. We've got to give this team time to gel and I think it would be unfair to say Wenger has a season to win something or else. If we continue to mix youth and experience then we're on the right path. I see no other way we can compete with other clubs unless we bring in a sugar daddy. But Wenger has to get that balance right and know when to call time on players development time. I like Theo, but if he continues to be hit and miss on the wing, he has to try something else or be moved on. If Chamakh can't find his goalscoring form, he has to be moved on. If we continue to struggle with teams that park the bus, then isn't it time to try to play with two strikers? These are the things Wenger has to wrestle with this season and I hope we see some improvement on the tactical side because it's the only way we're going to win. With so many players contracts up for discussion, this club has to show some ambition and improvement. Our actions in the summer has definitely boosted the confidence of the players and if we'd have only had signed a player like Merts last season when Verms was out, or a striker when RVP was out....who knows what could have happened. Oh well.
Great posts, Ice Berg. We'll see how the season develops and if lessons have been learned.
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 11:57 AM
Nobody but SG and GB want to even talk about the investment side in real terms. The whole thing gets brushed under the carpet and then a pile of loosely related or even entirely irrelevant stuff gets piled on top. We have two billionaires that own the club now. The creatures who used to own the club and claimed they loved the club and wanted to see the club do well and wanted the club to be in the top echelon of the game have managed to arrange things so the entire pot that was used by Kroenke and Usmanov to buy their way in went into private pockets. Their new friend who was previously the wrong sort now has control while the other guy can't even get a seat at the table. And anyone who disagreed with these "weaklings" (who are pushed around and dominated by Wenger) has been purged. Not content with that, they have also made year on year profits in the transfer market, just to rub some shit in the wounds.
Arsenal has fallen out of the top flight as a result, and we can talk as much as we want about City but it was the absence of a player like RvP that cost us last year, and the absence of a decent keeper that cost us, and the absence of a decent defender, and so on. Would it have cost a billion quid to correct these problems? No, it would have cost a tiny fraction of what City have spent and it could have been taken from the pot that has been building year after year from major player sales.
It's either a complete coincidence we've sold almost all our best players or it's a strategy. The money flow has ALWAYS been one way. The damage done by these policies has been cumulative. People are free to believe this has all been done in the interests of the club, it's a free country (actually it's anything but, but that's a different argument). All I'm saying is their case is as unconvincing as it's possible to be. We have a lot of people hovering around who want the best for the club. Not one of them has taken a single step to back that sentiment with real action. So let's excuse these guys and soldier on in the hope there's a big pay-off at the end? Yes, there IS a big pay off at the end. Just as they last shareholders got theirs, Stan will get his. YOU, by the way, won't be getting anything - as you have already seen. Except higher ticket prices.
Somebody said the board has done well. I agree, they've done spectacularly well. For themselves. If we're all still here in 5 years we'll see, won't we? By then I'm sure financial fair play will have rushed to the rescue and Utd, City and Chelsea will be chasing us as we stride clear at the top, unassailable due to the marvellous model that has coincidentally dumped £500million into the pockets of a handful of swine. That's a really likely outcome, don't you think? All we have to do is be patient and carry on doing the things that have failed. In other words, business as usual where the rich guy gets richer and the little guy gets fucked.
Is that the way the world works? Yes it is. Should we say thank you, oh you're wonderful, you are, as we get pumped from behind? I think no, it would be humiliating and embarrassing to do that.
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 01:40 PM
It's worth listening to that podcast. You're just repeating yourself.
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 02:02 PM
It's worth listening to that podcast. You're just repeating yourself.
The podcast will clarify things beyond what Kroenke himself has said? Yes indeed, I'm repeating what continues to be ignored in the hope it will stop being ignored. We've got to the stage now where some will not even acknowledge the shareholders' lottery win. What do you suggest, simply accepting an obvious fantasy as fact?
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 03:03 PM
It's worth listening to that podcast. You're just repeating yourself.
I listened to it, almost 35 minutes of talk with about 60 seconds of substance. Nevertheless, what is it I'm supposed to be hearing that explains what has gone on in the boardroom? I get the part about DD, some interesting tidbits there but nothing that wasn't already broadly understood. I get the bit about Wenger choosing youth and wages over expensive signings. He has chosen to spend what budget he has in a way some of us might agree with and some of us might not. Fair enough. Is this the evidence that suggests Wenger is responsible for the lack of investment? How so? Where's the bit about the board tying the proposed purpose of the stadium move to the final outcome, which was them scarpering with a shitload of money? Where's the part about Stan not investing a penny in the team and instead handing it all to the shareholders? I'm struggling to find any relevance in this podcast to the key points.
Here are my complaints set out again.
1. The ex-shareholders are utter cunts because they took the absolute maximum and gave back nothing. 100% to them. Nothing to the club. This does not demonstrate a love for the club, it demonstrates contempt and a level of greed that's hard to comprehend. In fact they took even more than that by turning profits in the transfer windows. Whether Wenger was aligned with this policy of not (and it appears he probably was and is), why should we focus on the manager to the exclusion of the shareholders? And who has gained most from this policy? Wenger? The worst you can say about him is he's wrong. But you can rightly call the shareholders abusive because that's what they are.
2. Stan is no better because he's chosen to put nothing into the team and expects the fans to fund the whole enterprise, despite the fact he's the one who stands to take the lion's share of any future profits. He will not throw money at the wall, he expects the fans to do that for him though. Better if he fucked off really. What use is he? He has openly stated he intends to carry on with the so-called sustainability model, a euphemism for milking the fans for as much as can be squeezed and then some. If we criticise Wenger, why do we not criticise this guy? Why is there a need to show understanding or suggest his behaviour is somehow admirable or expected? If Stan is admirable or had behaved acceptably, then why is Wenger not admirable? Why is his behaviour viewed as unacceptable? Why on earth do we point the finger at the employee but lend a receptive ear to the employer? Both sing the same song, both are out of key with the fans, we want to throw Wenger out of the choir but let Stan keep squawking? Makes not one bit of sense.
Finally, suppose these strange theories about Wenger dictating to his bosses are true. That in itself is enough to get rid of the bosses, is it not? You don't want weak-willed incompetents running the club do you? Nothing good can come of that.
This all started with a debate on whether Wenger should be sacked. I say fine, sack him if you want. But you must also sack the people whose plan he is executing. These are the people that tell you Wenger is the best in the business and is doing a great job. They deserve to keep their positions if Wenger is made to walk - why exactly?
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 03:10 PM
Nobody but SG and GB want to even talk about the investment side in real terms. The whole thing gets brushed under the carpet and then a pile of loosely related or even entirely irrelevant stuff gets piled on top. We have two billionaires that own the club now. The creatures who used to own the club and claimed they loved the club and wanted to see the club do well and wanted the club to be in the top echelon of the game have managed to arrange things so the entire pot that was used by Kroenke and Usmanov to buy their way in went into private pockets. Their new friend who was previously the wrong sort now has control while the other guy can't even get a seat at the table. And anyone who disagreed with these "weaklings" (who are pushed around and dominated by Wenger) has been purged. Not content with that, they have also made year on year profits in the transfer market, just to rub some shit in the wounds.
Arsenal has fallen out of the top flight as a result, and we can talk as much as we want about City but it was the absence of a player like RvP that cost us last year, and the absence of a decent keeper that cost us, and the absence of a decent defender, and so on. Would it have cost a billion quid to correct these problems? No, it would have cost a tiny fraction of what City have spent and it could have been taken from the pot that has been building year after year from major player sales.
It's either a complete coincidence we've sold almost all our best players or it's a strategy. The money flow has ALWAYS been one way. The damage done by these policies has been cumulative. People are free to believe this has all been done in the interests of the club, it's a free country (actually it's anything but, but that's a different argument). All I'm saying is their case is as unconvincing as it's possible to be. We have a lot of people hovering around who want the best for the club. Not one of them has taken a single step to back that sentiment with real action. So let's excuse these guys and soldier on in the hope there's a big pay-off at the end? Yes, there IS a big pay off at the end. Just as they last shareholders got theirs, Stan will get his. YOU, by the way, won't be getting anything - as you have already seen. Except higher ticket prices.
Somebody said the board has done well. I agree, they've done spectacularly well. For themselves. If we're all still here in 5 years we'll see, won't we? By then I'm sure financial fair play will have rushed to the rescue and Utd, City and Chelsea will be chasing us as we stride clear at the top, unassailable due to the marvellous model that has coincidentally dumped £500million into the pockets of a handful of swine. That's a really likely outcome, don't you think? All we have to do is be patient and carry on doing the things that have failed. In other words, business as usual where the rich guy gets richer and the little guy gets fucked.
Is that the way the world works? Yes it is. Should we say thank you, oh you're wonderful, you are, as we get pumped from behind? I think no, it would be humiliating and embarrassing to do that.
Have you even considered the the fact that our spending habits haven't really changed since Highbury but due to inflation and the amount teams are now willing to pay for our players, we're now making more of profit?
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/arsenal-transfers.html
We've sold our star players, but this isn't something new. It's not as if we've sold our players to the highest bidders and you can look at the Cesc case if you need any evidence of that. You could also look back to the Henry situation. We had a chance to sell him for way more but we didn't.
If you feel your getting screwed and your not getting value for money, stop going to games. I know that's what I'd do. It's worth listening to that podcast because your ignoring Wenger's role in this and the footballing side to our dealings.
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 03:18 PM
Let's not even consider it. Let's just accept it is true. So you are saying the fiddle has been going on a lot longer then we suspected and these board members are even bigger cunts than we thought? I don't know for sure, I'd have to dig into the figures and even then I'm betting all the facts would not be available. So even though I unreservedly condemn the board, I'm not prepared to go as far as you are going - though what you say wouldn't surprise me at all.
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 03:33 PM
Let's not even consider it. Let's just accept it is true. So you are saying the fiddle has been going on a lot longer then we suspected and these board members are even bigger cunts than we thought? I don't know for sure, I'd have to dig into the figures and even then I'm betting all the facts would not be available. So even though I unreservedly condemn the board, I'm not prepared to go as far as you are going - though what you say wouldn't surprise me at all.
Please get off your soapbox, mate. Again, this is a football club, not some shady oil company. If you feel that strongly, stop paying. Jeez. Come off this rich get richer crusade. Nobody is forcing you to go to the Emirates. Nobody gave a shit about ownership until we started losing. Stop comparing football to some world catastrophe or great injustice. If it grinds your gears that much, stop paying for the damn thing. This is a luxury.
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 03:51 PM
Please get off your soapbox, mate. Again, this is a football club, not some shady oil company. If you feel that strongly, stop paying. Jeez. Come off this rich get richer crusade. Nobody is forcing you to go to the Emirates. Nobody gave a shit about ownership until we started losing. Stop comparing football to some world catastrophe or great injustice. If it grinds your gears that much, stop paying for the damn thing. This is a luxury.
So we're off the facts and now it's about me? I'm going to check down the back of the sofa to see if I can find £500mill. If I do I'll kick a few quid back to the club I (genuinely) love.
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 04:10 PM
So we're off the facts and now it's about me? I'm going to check down the back of the sofa to see if I can find £500mill. If I do I'll kick a few quid back to the club I (genuinely) love.
Yeah, we're off the facts because of this shit below.
So even though I unreservedly condemn the board, I'm not prepared to go as far as you are going - though what you say wouldn't surprise me at all.
This is all very melodramatic. The money in football is scandalous in general. With all the noise you're making about greed and injustice, you'd be a complete and utter ass to blow £500m on a football club but that's another issue. :lol:
Look we're winning 2-0. :scarf:
All for the entertainment!
Niall_Quinn
05-11-2011, 04:20 PM
Yeah, we're off the facts because of this shit below.
This is all very melodramatic. The money in football is scandalous in general. With all the noise you're making about greed and injustice, you'd be a complete and utter ass to blow £500m on a football club but that's another issue. :lol:
Look we're winning 2-0. :scarf:
All for the entertainment!
You see that's where I lose all respect for you! I NEVER said I was giving the whole £500mill! I said I'd kick back some of it. So busted.
Anyway, you're even more wrong because I looked and I didn't find half a billion down the sofa.
Power n Glory
05-11-2011, 07:10 PM
You see that's where I lose all respect for you! I NEVER said I was giving the whole £500mill! I said I'd kick back some of it. So busted.
Anyway, you're even more wrong because I looked and I didn't find half a billion down the sofa.
No integrity! :lol:
Cool, NQ. We'll leave this one alone.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.