Xs was being sarcasticOriginally Posted by FakeYank
It will be the greatest day in Arsenal's recent history when he leaves us!
Xs was being sarcastic
It will be the greatest day in Arsenal's recent history when he leaves us!
"I really like Arsenal. Do you really like Arsenal, or only Arsenal with trophies?" - Dennis Bergkamp.
"Which Arsenal do they want back, the one Arsene created?" - Tony Adams.
Everything is wrong at the GW and it's all Fakeyanks fault
It will be the greatest day in GW's recent history when Fakeyank leaves us!
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.
http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896/...senal-majorityManchester 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.
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
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.If I was an Arsenal fan this would be ringing alarm bells.
Für eure Sicherheit
I know.. but I wasnt!
It will be the greatest day in GW's recent history when Fakeyank leaves us!
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
You and Wenger have so much in common.
NBN has been usurped!
True dat..
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
