Winter Transfer Despair and Bafflement.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Why does he need to be a victim of Wenger and Kroenke. Why can't he just be in opposition to Wenger. And would you agree that would be a good thing? A genuine fight for power right at the top of the club that, hopefully, rips the gravy train right off the rails? Probably would never happen, Arsenal is too Jewish for that that sort of behaviour, but it might happen. There's a chance. But beforehand, the troops need to be firing shots at each other. And it seems to me that sentence was one such shots, from quite a few. I don't think it's a stretch to say Wenger and Ivan might not get along as well as they make out in public. The little evidence we have points that way.

I’m saying even if he was in opposition to Wenger it wouldn’t matter

In fact if he was, it would make him look more stupid than he already is. If you have faith in someone who lets their pants being pulled down and having Wengers whole fist stuck in there and responding with “thank you sir may I have another”, you’re living in fantasy land if you think it’s because he’s doing it for us and not the money he wouldn’t be paid anywhere else.

The fact that you seemingly can’t get your head around is if Gazidis was as smart and capable as you all seem to give him credit for being, he’d be gone by now. Because someone smart and capable would get a job just as well paid for anywhere else.

[Cripps]

Do you have any examples to back that up?

Also, why not just appoint more patsy types and keep that cycle rotating to buy time? Why put yourself in the role where you’ll be held accountable for failing to sign a player and Wenger can directly point the finger at him for messing up?

PnG

Still talking sense after all these years

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Do you have any examples to back that up?

Also, why not just appoint more patsy types and keep that cycle rotating to buy time? Why put yourself in the role where you’ll be held accountable for failing to sign a player and Wenger can directly point the finger at him for messing up?

And who is to say he won’t just appoint said Patsies in fullness of time?

I suspect it’s more he wanted to give the impression of being in control to rescue his completely obliterated reputation without giving any thought to the long term implications.

[Cripps]

I’m saying even if he was in opposition to Wenger it wouldn’t matter

In fact if he was, it would make him look more stupid than he already is. If you have faith in someone who lets their pants being pulled down and having Wengers whole fist stuck in there and responding with “thank you sir may I have another”, you’re living in fantasy land if you think it’s because he’s doing it for us and not the money he wouldn’t be paid anywhere else

Arsenal is clearly a unique situation and you know it.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Arsenal is clearly a unique situation and you know it.

Which doesn’t explain why Gazidis would having been made to look like a cunt by Wenger (and he was, there is no possible disagreement there) that someone with both ability and integrity wouldnt be off like a shot.
We all agree that Arsenal doesn’t attract talent or innovation either in playing staff, coaching staff or management staff. And yet Gazidis is the exception that proves the rule?.

[Cripps]

And who is to say he won’t just appoint said Patsies in fullness of time?

I suspect it’s more he wanted to give the impression of being in control to rescue his completely obliterated reputation without giving any thought to the long term implications.

that doesn't make sense. You contradict your earlier point.

You said Arsenal is 'convenient for him because he has less work to do for his obscene amount of money.'

So he does that by taking on someone else's role, on top of his? If he wanted more control wouldn't it have been easier to appoint a yes-man to report into Lord Gazidis, instead of put himself in the firing line in an unrelated and unfamiliar role?

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

that doesn't make sense. You contradict your earlier point.

You said Arsenal is 'convenient for him because he has less work to do for his obscene amount of money.'

So he does that by taking on someone else's role, on top of his? If he wanted more control wouldn't it have been easier to appoint a yes-man to report into Lord Gazidis, instead of put himself in the firing line?

Again like with his attempt to negotiate a deal with Russian Telekom for sponsorship without bothering to do the research to realise that the man who is persona non grata at Arsenal was a major shareholder for that company. It’s probably another fuck up on his part, doing it without thinking about the consequences.

[Power n Glory]

And who is to say he won’t just appoint said Patsies in fullness of time?

I suspect it’s more he wanted to give the impression of being in control to rescue his completely obliterated reputation without giving any thought to the long term implications.

His reputation will take more of a battering if this goes wrong and it most likely will considering Wenger is still in charge. He might as well have handed Wenger the knife!

The smarter move would have been to appoint a former player, like Pires, to be the Director of Football and that buys him time. It gives the appearance of him doing something from the fans perspective but also keeping Wenger happy because he has a former player in the role who can act as the new patsy.

Your theory makes no sense at all.

[Cripps]

Again like with his attempt to negotiate a deal with Russian Telekom for sponsorship without bothering to do the research to realise that the man who is persona non grata at Arsenal was a major shareholder for that company. It’s probably another fuck up on his part, doing it without thinking about the consequences.

You know you can just admit you're wrong instead of continuing to argue and coming out with jibberish to try and save face? Always seems to be the ones that stick up for Wenger that just can't admit defeat

[Power n Glory]

Again like with his attempt to negotiate a deal with Russian Telekom for sponsorship without bothering to do the research to realise that the man who is persona non grata at Arsenal was a major shareholder for that company. It’s probably another fuck up on his part, doing it without thinking about the consequences.

You keep referring to that same example whenever this is discussed. Do you have anything else to go on? Maybe some examples of other Chief Execs do at other major clubs? What are you weighing his role and function against?