Was losing Dein the problem?

[Olivier's xmas twist]

This has been discussed before, but I wonder whether the issue has more force now that most people seem to accept that Wenger has lost what once made him great.

I am trying to decide whether it is being revisionist to blame our current decline on David Dein's departure? At the time, the club's desire not to become an oligarch's plaything seemed to make sense. There seemed to be purpose in the club being run along sensible commercial lines, and it was reasonable to assume that once Highbury Square was finished we would not be short of funds.

But when we look at things now:

The club's failure to hold onto our best players; allowing contracts to run down and failing to shift our dross

Gazidis' utter ineffectiveness

Wenger's monomania

The failure of the Emirates to make any difference to our relative spending power

The arrogance of Hill Wood and co

The sad demise of Danny Fizman - a Gooner through and through

and...the oligarch's plaything, Chelsea FC now showing a profit!

Would much of this have been avoided if DD had stuck around? Was DD Peter Taylor to Wenger's Brian Clough?

Its a hard one, i mean most people think Dein being here would have changed things. Maybe it would, maybe it would not. One thing i know if Dein never brought Stan to the club things would have been diffrent.

As much as he did for the club and the bond he had with Wumger, he was happy to sell out to the Russian quick. So there, i feel he was looking out for himself more then the club.

He wanted to become Chairman so desperately. Maybe that may not have been a bad thing and he may have given wumger that push he needed. Just think he is as bad as those in charge now.