Us wonned without Giroud? That's unpossible!

(Author's note: I have worked more than 20 years in public relations and communications, and know quite well how organisations use/co-opt/corrupt journalists, bloggers, and all media types. I've worked for two major metropolitan cities and an international trade organisation--all with smaller budgets and lower profiles than a global brand like the Arsenal Football Club. Trust me when I tell you, I'm 100% certain that some bloggers are being used as mouthpieces by the club to influence opinion among the fan base.)

When the book about this Arsenal season is written, perhaps certain truths will finally be told. One of the forgotten ones will be just why Lukas Podolski was held out of the qualifier against Besiktas.

To my knowledge, a player could appear in a qualifier and not count as cup tied, so there could really only be two reasons for sitting a player who has scored 5 goals in only 9 European matches for the club. One, he is still being shopped around and the club have him wrapped in cotton wool; two, the gaffer absolutely can't stand him.

Poldi, as his fans call him, has actually scored 19 league goals in 53 appearances for Arsenal, which is a fair return if you ask me. Olivier Giroud, the darling of the club-connected bloggers, has taken 72 appearances to score 28 goals. I'm no math professor, but if you compare those goal scoring records, and you don't have some hidden agenda, you'd probably say "Hey, that Podolski guy is pretty good."

This is said without considering that Arsenal barely score 2 goals per match anymore.

Since Saturday's draw (it was a draw, remember?) at Everton, the Arsenal universe has spun wildly in all directions. First, it was "See? Giroud is priceless! The team was shit before he came on! Arsenal can't win without him!"

Then it has been "Giroud may be injured. Oh, and Podolski is shit and is on his way out."

Then it was "Giroud is injured, and whilst Podolski is still shit, he's not on his way out today."

Now it's "See? Sanchez really is great and Arsenal can win without Giroud."

Wait, what? I thought Arsenal can't win without Giroud? What the fuck are you saying?

Giroud is massively unpopular with the vast majority of Arsenal supporters. Podolski, on the other hand, is massively popular with Arsenal supporters. Now, if I were a public relations professional (oh, wait, I AM one) and I had a problem like this, my first step would be to "influence the influencers," and make sure that the most widely read and respected bloggers were on my side.

This has been such a divisive issue that the most widely read and influential Yank Arsenal blogger has in the past week written columns on "Is any Arsenal player not divisive?" and "Arsenal don't need a big scoring forward to win the league." He also wrote a love letter to Wenger, praising the man and talking about his glorious history and brilliance in that time. Transparent much?

What these bullshit artists and spin doctors ought to be saying is, "Arsenal won a fucking match without the priceless and perfect Olivier Giroud." But don't worry, you won't see that story from any of them.

Amy Lawrence came close the other day, and probably risked her access to the club, by writing this column that almost comes out and says "Wenger's transfer policy has been an extremely high risk gamble for years now." Amy is a lifelong Arsenal supporter, so I'm sure this was a big step for her.

What's sad about all of this, this spin, this PR smokescreen, is that it is nothing but a mask designed to disguise the things that have threatened the club's worldwide prominence for a decade now. A parsimonious transfer policy combined with a tactical intransigence, plus the unwillingness to embrace the modern world of club football, put Arsenal on the back foot compared to rivals both domestic and foreign.

Things that would erode confidence in the manager have been constantly diminished, as has anything that would spark a MUFC-style revolt against Silent Stan's penny pinching ownership. Keeping Stan out of the spotlight and having a marketing spin wizard like Ivan as his public face, compared to the bumbling Equaliser Ed Woodward in Manchester, has to be a conscious PR move.

The result has been to sharply divide the Arsenal supporters, forcing them to choose between the club as an institution and Wenger as a person (or Wenger's pet players). It's forced people who love Arsenal to choose between a desire to see success for the club and a perceived loyalty to Arsene Wenger.

Name-calling, insults, epithets, threats--all are the result of this spin campaign designed to protect "the brand" that is Arsenal while simultaneously hiding whatever the actual truth is that exists behind the curtain. The club-promoted spin ends up pitting supporters against each other, with one side accepting the "orthodox" view and feeling the need to attack the "heretics."

"If you really loved Arsenal, you'd shut up and support Wenger and the players!" Unless those players are named Podolski, at which point you should shut up and attack the players.

So where are we now? Qualified for the Champions League group stages and the cash that gets Arsenal's summer transfers closer to break even. No plans to strengthen at the back (clearly a desperate need and just wait until one of Per, Koz, or Chambers gets injured), no plans to buy an established goal scorer (because remember, Mr. Yank Stats Blogger says you don't need one), and no need to buy a powerful defensive midfielder.

The purchases of Ozil and Sanchez, taken in a broader context, don't really signify much other than that there is a bit more cash on hand to keep advancing the brand. It's not about putting together a team that will win a league title. It's about the fear of harming the global cash flow. The trip to the USA this summer looks more and more like a one off designed to do nothing more than appease the Yanks who make up an huge percentage of the world's Arsenal fans.

Lastly, because I've gone on far too long, I want you to consider this line from the world's most famous Arsenal blogger:

"When you consider that we’ve just done Besiktas away, Everton away, and now Besiktas at home, that’s a pretty challenging schedule for a team that has got its troubles right now. Injuries, shortened pre-season preparation, new arrivals still bedding in and overall a group of players that hasn’t really gelled yet, to have come through that successfully is good going."

At no point in that statement is there anything that implicates Arsene Wenger or the club for creating those "challenges."  It's as though the "challenges" were handed down by God or some random force. NO!!!!

The TRUTH is that every problem Arsenal have right now is SELF INFLICTED!!!! Stop the club spin! Injuries?  You didn't know that Gibbs is injury prone? You didn't know that Arteta has had major injury problems in his career and is pushing 35? And all the other crap?

I hate corporate sloganeering as much as I hate anything in the world, but all I can say to this bullshit spin is

IF YOU FAIL TO PLAN, YOU PLAN TO FAIL.

Thanks for reading.

Attack of the unknown unknowns

How quickly things change.

Yesterday it was (most likely) club-planted spin from the Arsenal bloggers about how shite Podolski is and how he won't be missed and how Arsenal can only play Pulis-style ball these days with a hulking target man up front.

I ranted a few months back about "the way Arsenal play," that the biggest defence that the club-connected bloggers put out for Giroud was that Arsenal simply couldn't change "they way they play" to accommodate a lethal left-footed striker like Podolski.

Hard to believe, isn't it, that one of the most accomplished managers in the history of the club can't get his players to adapt, that the only style they understand is lumping it up the pitch to a big Duncan Ferguson-type, otherwise all is lost.

If you buy into that excuse, it certainly makes the marginalisation and eventual dismissal of Podolski seem perfectly logical. Of course, Arsene Wenger's third act in his Arsenal managerial stint is that he's morphed into Sam Allardyce without the defensive pragmatism. Oy.

One of the most famous Arsenal bloggers on earth (and obviously one with close ties to the club's PR staff) actually said yesterday of Giroud "he’s still by far and away the best option we have as the lone front man in the system we play."  Compare that to what I wrote less than a month ago.

This person actually speculates on the most unknown of unknowns at Arsenal, that "somehow" Sanogo "might" score and "open the floodgates." Really?  So let's get rid of a player that is a proven goal scorer and pin our hopes on a player who has never scored at all?

If that's not the biggest bunch of bolloxy spin since Donald Rumsfeld prowled the halls of the Pentagon, I don't know what is. The adherence to the party line has gotten so ridiculous that one begins to question people's grip on reality.

The same day as that attempt to smooth over the cracks was posted, Mr. Rational Yank Stats Blogger just coincidentally posts a treatise on the fact that clubs don't need a big-scoring forward to win the league. That is certainly convenient.

A club that has for the most part averaged fewer than 2 goals per game doesn't need a forward who can find the back of the net better than Giroud. Again, why not?  His 27 goals over the course of two seasons, combined with his Heskey-esque "qualities" will carry Arsenal to a title.

January of 2014 and Arsenal were down 2 of the main goal scorers in the squad, still lacked any adequate cover for the lone "striker," and everyone questioned how Wenger was going manage the transfers in order to sustain the club's first title challenge in years. Fortunately, he responded by

signing an injured midfielder on loan.

None of the "famous" bloggers talk about this response to an injury crisis at the club now. I'm guessing they assume that nobody who follows them has read "1984" nor lived through the good ol' days of totalitarian regimes in places like China, the Soviet Union, or Cuba. Bloggers?  More like members of the Ministry of Truth.

I've spent so much time talking about this issue of the injury to Giroud and the smear campaign against Podolski that I've not even mentioned the lack of cover at the back. Maybe that's what the club PR staff want?

Has anyone considered what might happen if Per or Chambers or Koz get crocked in one of the next two matches?  Has anyone thought about what selling clubs might charge if they know that Arsenal are well and truly over a barrel and desperate to find adequate support in the final hours of the transfer window?

You call that managing the club's transfer business in a proper manner?

The intentions of the ownership, board, and manager will be clear over the next week. I hope that simply contending for the 4th Place Champions Trophy isn't the goal of the season. But at least we know we can count on quality spin from the bloggers to soothe our spirits if it is.

Remain calm, all is well!

One of the hallmarks of global climate change denouncers is that they love taking an aberrant event and saying "Ha! I guess you can blame that on 'global warming,' ha ha!" or something equally thoughtful and intelligent.

They can't take a rebuttal that includes average annual temperatures on both land and sea, disappearing polar ice, droughts, or actual facts. No, it's the one snow in early April that proves that everyone in the scientific world is wrong and they're right.

They also have the support of "research" and "real scientists" who are paid by those who profit from unregulated emission of carbon into the atmosphere. This helps to lend legitimacy to their claims, too. You can say "but those people are paid to doctor up results and produce that information" and they'll say something strange and loud back at you just to shut you up.

Thus we have the reaction to Olivier Giroud's performance on Saturday versus Everton.

I want to make just a few points about the match.

1) I said on this blog after the Community Shield of Giroud, "Bring him on when others are tired and suddenly he looks fast and lively!" This is exactly what Wenger did on Saturday, and exactly how Giroud looked.

You're welcome.

2) What has happened to Arsenal?  Or should I say "Bolton-al?" Or "Ar-Stoke?"

Remember when Wenger teams played...um, without lumping the ball at a big lump in the middle?  It's starting to fade from memory now. And the attack is so impoverished that a player who managed 27 goals in two complete league seasons is the only thing that will help it.

I'm not sure what this means for the future, but this is certainly not the Arsenal of pleasing, attacking football that I first encountered at the beginning of Wenger's reign. His answer to needing goals is hoof it up the pitch to a lumbering big player.

Surely this is a sign of the end of days?  That Arsenal have to play Tony Pulis' tactics to win? No wonder he prefers a player who has never scored to Lukas Podolski!

3) The "Arsene knows!" folk are using the Saturday match to hail the improvement in the side, to trumpet the fighting spirit and character of the team, and generally to say that everything Wenger is doing is perfect and we're still on for the treble.

If you conveniently ignore the schoolboy errors and general lack of composure in the first 45 minutes, you can say just about anything you want, I suppose. What were the problems that put the side into 4th place again last season?

Conceding early from a set piece header? Check.
Playing a defensive line so high that when Per was robbed of the ball he was closer to the opponent's goal than the halfway line? Check.
Fullbacks the only way your attack has width, exposing the back line to a simple counter attack? Check.

Of course everything is fine because the second goal shouldn't have stood. The mistakes that have been happening for years?  Those are...well...those aren't important!   There is no global warming!

4) I've yet to see one person who loves Giroud and thinks he's infallible who isn't already a self-professed worshiper of Arsene Wenger. Makes me wonder if it's possible there's another agenda at work.  Hmm...

5) And lastly, like those who are paid to produce favourable results for the climate change denouncers, you have to speculate on why seemingly neutral bloggers manage never to have a bad word to say about the manager or his pet players.

Can any of these people who have routinely denounced Lukas Podolski apply the same critical eye to Olivier Giroud? No? Well, I suppose that's just pure coincidence and these people aren't being compensated by the club, through money, special access, or both.

So that's it, there's no global warming, Arsenal don't need an upgrade at the striker position or cover at the back, remain calm, all is well. 

Surprise! Meh, not really.

The Everton v. Leicester match had a slightly familiar feel to it. Chris Wood's late equaliser, and really, the way the entire match unfolded, looked a little more like Roberto Martinez' last Wigan side than last year's Everton.

Wigan shipped goals like mad in their relegation season. Martinez was committed to playing an open, attacking, very "Arsenal-esque" style despite having lost many of his best players to bigger clubs. I speculated at the time if winning the FA Cup and playing as though nothing mattered but style were worth the price.  Stylish football is expensive to maintain, as Dave Whelan found out by employing a manager who, not unlike Arsene Wenger, tends to eschew the more agricultural aspects of the game.

The open style and desire to play a pure and aesthetically pleasing brand of football requires talent, commitment, and desire--in that order. Managers who seek to have their teams play this way earn the admiration of writers and pundits because of the purity of their vision and their dedication to entertainment. However, they also often end up with P45 in hand.

Wenger and Martinez, if you listen to each of them talk about the game in the greater sense beyond just their own clubs or players, are seemingly cut from the same cloth. They want their players to embrace a philosophy based on movement, attacking play, going forward. Neither of them cares much for the efforts of managers like Sam Allardyce or Tony Pulis (or Alex McLeish, for that matter), who seem to succeed simply for the sake of succeeding.

And so, neither Martinez nor Wenger have ever cared much for what I call "pragmatic" football. Oh, Wenger was forced to embrace a more bucolic style during the 2013 run in, but immediately reverted to type once the next season began. And Martinez' first season at Everton saw a host of talented young players come together with a few veterans to amass the Toffees' highest points total in the Premier League era.

I would offer that Wenger will once again set his charges out at Goodison to play the style of football in which he believes. I suspect that Martinez will do the same with his.   Expect goals.  I can't say if the traffic will be as one-way as last season's fixture, but for a match that seemingly cries out for pragmatism (given Arsenal's thin defence and halting start to the Palace and Besiktas matches), my suspicion is that AW will ignore that.

SPEAKING OF WHICH...
Am I surprised that Arsenal still haven't bought a central defender?  No, not all. I don't expect Wenger to buy one.

Do I believe that Arsenal are "preparing a massive bid" for Cavani, and that Wenger pet Olivier Giroud will go the other way as a makeweight?

I've never laughed so hard at a transfer rumour. Never. This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Who honestly believes this?  Who retweets it? Who said it in the first place?  And who was the first person to give it any validity?

If this blog post is about managers reverting to type, who honestly believes that a) Wenger would give up on Giroud now that he's made his typically stubborn commitment to him with a contract extension? And b) That Silent Stan approves of spending more of his precious money on a player after he graciously allowed the club to purchase Sanchez? And finally c) That Wenger will be allowed to spend the money from Vermaelen's transfer after a summer of mad purchases?

Wake up. WAKE UP!

Discount bin shopping

The estimable James McNicholas remarked a short while ago on twitter (@gunnerblog) that although Mario Balotelli is utterly mad, £16 million is a great price for a player of his skills.

Well, yeah. I mean, of course, right?

First things first: There will be an implication from a large number of Arsenal supporters that by not buying Balotelli, Wenger has simultaneously left Arsenal weak and given Liverpool the upper hand this season. This is completely unknown at this point and getting one's knickers in a twist over Balotelli seems about as mad as, oh, I don't know, setting one's own bathroom on fire.

It's simply not something that can be proven as of now. At the beginning of the summer the debate among my group of Gooners was that Balotelli was clearly an either/or proposition, and he was a choice that would exclude players like Sanchez.  Now Arsenal have Sanchez, and that means that they were not looking at Balotelli from the off because although they're different players in what they contribute, they would occupy the same space at the club.

Now to McNicholas' point.

There are a couple of things about this that strike me as so obvious that they don't need to be belaboured. But I never let that stop me before.

1) Risk reduces the price of everything. It has a greater impact on the cost of things than any other factor and can only be truly mitigated through artificial means (i.e., lying about the risk).

That meat that's been tagged "Manager's Special!" at the market is about to go past its sell by date. There's risk in buying and eating it.

Bonds, currency, housing, automobiles, food, commodities, entertainment...and footballers. The price of all these things is moved by the associated risks once purchased.  Balotelli has never bitten anyone, but his perceived flaws and fears about his decision making have made his price significantly lower than what it could be.

Now I know that Suarez would seem to counter this argument but look at it this way--he went from untouchable to sold in the course of one toothy encounter in the World Cup finals. Liverpool wouldn't have even considered selling him before that incident. Yet the risk in keeping him outweighed the payoff.

What Balotelli suffers from, to me, appears to be some form of bipolar/borderline personality affliction. That's from afar and not worth getting into a discussion over, I'm simply saying that having been closely involved with someone who suffers from it, I know what it looks like.

He's not some great teammate who has one or two moments in the heat of a contest where he "flips out." He has a long history of doing disruptive things and destructive things to himself, his surroundings, and his clubs. He famously wore an AC Milan shirt while playing for Inter.

This wasn't a Paul Ince "oops this picture was leaked" moment. Baltotelli did this on a very popular Italian TV show. Yeah, you'd love to see an Arsenal player trying on a Tottenham shirt wouldn't you?

Here are a few more incidents detailing Balotelli's inability to exercise self control, in case you're not familiar with them.

Hell, maybe 16 million quid is too MUCH for him.

2) Do you not think Wenger has had more than enough of this type of player or player behaviour at Arsenal over the past 9 or so years?  If not, look at the players culled. I wrote about this last year and listed the remarkable number of exits from the Arsenal first team during the post-Henry era.

It's pretty clear that as he's grown older, Wenger's tolerance for buffoonery and disruptive players has significantly diminished. It's what makes last summer's inability to land a decent backup for Giroud even more ridiculous, considering how little regard Arsene had for Bendtner.

Now, I've heard the argument from people who think they know much more about football than I do, and they've said "Balotelli's problems are all in the past and were just due to immaturity." Yeah, because Calum Chambers is 19 and doing the exact same things, eh?  All young players are naturally arseholes, right?

There was never a chance that Balotelli was coming to Arsenal. Let David Brent deal with that headache. He is the world's best boss, after all. Just ask the Guardian. 

Free myopia screenings available today

An unfortunate byproduct of supporting a team (in the USA) or a club (anywhere else) is that one's point of view ABOUT things forces one to often say something that one does not believe.

This is particularly difficult to avoid with the Arsenal Football Club right now, as supporters have chosen sides over a few things that ought to be rather simple to understand.  The longer Wenger has reigned at Arsenal, the more likely that each season something will come along to sharply divide the fans and pit them against one another.

This is due to the fact that Wenger is incredibly stubborn and persistent with things that don't seem to work out all that well and only reverses course when something catastrophic happens. By doing this, his actions divide people into those who believe he is above reproach and will always do the correct thing and those who "get out the knives" and want "Wenger out!"  Right?

I wish it were that simple.

The first time in Wenger's tenure that I recall being frustrated with his faith in a player (or a tactic or action in the transfer market) was during Sylvain Wiltord's time as a striker.  This was in the nascent period of the interwebs when there were no bloggers with a hotline to the club's PR department and thus nobody trumpeting how great Wiltord truly was and how people who didn't like him were just being negative and "hating" an Arsenal player and "shitting" on an Arsenal player like bad fans do.

Don't get me wrong. Wiltord had his moments and in retrospect he was a decent player who scored THAT GOAL at Old Trafford to win the league. But he cut a very frustrating figure up top and as I recall a number of people on message boards (remember those?) called him "Whale Turd."

"Why does Wenger keep playing this guy?" I thought. "He's rubbish."

The same thing happened with a young Matthieu Flamini. I wrote something long ago about him, comparing Wenger's persistence in playing him with a subject from the TV programme "Unsolved Mysteries."

And during the 9 years of trophyless football? Denilson, Adebayor, Diaby, Clichy, Eboue, MANUEL ALMUNIA...the list goes on and on. Wenger had to be seeing the same things we were seeing, but he kept faith with so many players who were terrible (or had terrible attitudes and work ethics) that supporters began to divide into camps. It was a fight to the social media death between the "Arsene Knows" brigade and "Wenger out!" anti-fans.

Wenger himself brought this on by pretending that players like Almunia and Denilson were competent. He had to be pretending, because he couldn't be so deluded as to think they were doing a good job.

We assumed, after he shipped out Santos and benched Vermaelen and Szcz that things had finally changed, that a "new, ruthless" Wenger had taken over. Then the summer transfer window of 2013 came and everyone was saying "Arsenal really need a striker."

"Yes, that is why I am buying Mesut Ozil" replied Le Boss.

Then the January window came, players were out injured, and everyone said "Arsenal really need a striker."

"Yes, of course, I have signed injured midfielder Kim Kallstrom on loan," said Wenger with a wry grin.

How can you blame a large segment of those who consider themselves Arsenal supporters for thinking the man is either insane (which he of course is not) or simply hell bent on giving anyone who tells him anything the middle finger salute? And trust me, if Kim Kallstrom wasn't the greatest middle finger salute of all time, I don't know what was or will be.

Twitter was exploding yesterday during the Besiktas match with people choosing sides over the value of Olivier Giroud to this club. "Good fans" point out his hold up play and how he "brings others into the play" and things like that. "Bad fans" were rather brutal in their assessment of his ineffectiveness.

Why can't we be critical of Giroud and Wenger's persistence with him (and the yet-to-score only other centre forward on the club) and NOT be considered "bad fans?"

How can a "respected" long time blogger blithely dismiss Giroud's Heskey-esque performances and never call him what he is?

Giroud is dividing the Arsenal supporters, as is Wenger's unwillingness to buy a "real" goal scoring forward or more alarmingly beginning the season with a defence thinner than an MPs excuse for the expenses scandal. Nobody is "bad" or "negative" or "unsupportive" by simply pointing out that Giroud doesn't score enough given the good chances he's given (or that Sanogo hasn't scored at all).

Nor is anyone "bad" for looking at the defence and wondering just what the hell Wenger is on about when a week ago he claimed that Arsenal aren't looking at ANYBODY in that area.

It's particularly unpleasant in the USA because Wenger is the only manager most Yanks have ever known, and they feel that any criticism of him is tantamount to criticising the club itself. I've become a pariah among "my own kind" because they all think Wenger is a saint and beyond reproach and that Giroud is great and everything is great! so what are you bitching about, man?

I'm not predisposed to believe anything. I watch the matches and look at the squad and evaluate the transfers and then I make my assessment. I praised Wenger after the FA Cup final and I praised him for signing Sanchez, and for finding adequate players who filled those positions that needed filling.

Saying that Giroud is not good enough doesn't make me "negative" when the numbers speak for themselves. Let the healing begin.

Crazy sex is hot, crazy life is just...crazy

Loving the Arsenal Football Club is like loving a crazy person. The sex may be fantastic, but when you're not doing that, it's a constant battle just to retain one's own grip on sanity.

Concede a cheap early goal from a set piece and it all seems so familiar. Resign yourself to a draw at home on opening day to what some would call an inferior opponent (although if you look at points accrued from January to May last season that's debatable), and then the great sex of an Aaron Ramsey late-late goal JUST FEELS SO DAMN GOOD.

And quicker than you can say "bipolar/borderline personality disorder," this reality hits you: Arsenal must play an away Champions League qualifier with three fit defenders. Not three fit first team defenders, three fit defenders.

The highs, the lows. Sigh.

Why, Arsene, why? Are we to pretend that this is some crisis that is not of our own making?  Shall we shake our fists at the heavens and curse our fate as though no one could have predicted this?

I asked after the Community Shield (which I still call the Charity Shield) that if Wenger went into the season with his defence as currently constructed, what happens when Gibbo gets crocked, as he always, always does? This was when Koz was a doubt for the Palace match.

The only answer was to go back to the past and slot Flamini in at left back. So that's what a team with pretensions to a league championship does, eh?

And a team that wants to win the Champions League goes to Besiktas with only 3 fit defenders?

Wenger leaves you shaking your head so often you could be a novelty toy that adheres to the inside of an automobile. He knew that Koz would be back late for summer preparation (although Sakho was often preferred to him in Brazil), that Per would be back later than that, and that he was selling TV probably before the World Cup even started but even if he'd planned on keeping him he knew he would be crocked to start the season.

He also knew he played with house money for an entire season when he gambled that he could survive with only two central defenders that he trusted. Talk of Giroud's fitness last season tended to overlook the fact that Arsenal were paper-thin in middle of the defence.

Given both TV's injury history and Koz's tendency to accrue foolish red cards, was that really the best thing?

And now?  I can't even understand this.

People talk of the summer transfers as a sign of Arsenal's ambition. Well, not really. The signings were replacements for players lost, save Sanchez. Arsenal needed a senior right back and replaced Sagna with Debuchy.  Wenger then loaned out his cover for that position and signed Chambers.  Fabianski departed and he signed Ospina.

Sanchez gives the illusion that Wenger went spend-happy this summer and brought in a host of players, but what was done other than that was simply filling holes that any club would fill. All the while leaving a gaping hole in the middle of the defence.

Wenger on 8 August: "We are not close to signing anybody." 

Wenger on 10 August: "To find another one (centre half) of that quality will not be easy."

This is the manager of a club that wants to win the league. Is the challenge of winning the league supposed to be easy?  Is signing a quality player supposed to be easy?  Do Grimsby Town go out and sign the best players in the world?

I'm so frustrated with Wenger right now that it boggles the mind. I said when they bought Sanchez that what was most surprising about it was that Wenger bought without first selling or arranging to sell another player, which he'd always done.  Not immediately replacing TV gives me that old sinking feeling again, that his fee is being used to offset the cost of some of the other signings.

Really, it comes down to this: If you're not going to develop and promote young players who can fulfill the role of cover for your first choice XI and not grow frustrated sitting on the bench, then you have to find competent senior players somewhere who know that they'll receive a nice pay packet while seeing occasional action. Other clubs do this.

What is the purpose of playing Hayden in preseason matches if you have literally zero faith in him to move up to the first team?  And did anyone see Miquel and his unpleasant and unsteady performances in the friendlies?

And let's assume by some miracle Wenger DOES buy an "emergency" centre half (although how you don't plan for the sale of your club captain that you knew about for months constitutes an emergency is a bit of a mystery), if it's a Squilvestre solution, is that any better than nothing at all?

I said on 14 August that if Wenger decided to buy adequate cover at CB then things really had changed. That still doesn't take into account that a team with championship ambitions would go into a season with only 3 regular central defenders, but whatever, old habits die hard.

Yet here Arsenal are, flying to Besiktas to start the Champions League campaign (and say what you will, but these two matches are extremely important) with the prospect of starting a back line of Debuchy, Chambers, Monreal, and...?  Or go against EVERYTHING Wenger has said this summer and rush Per back into play "too soon," after only one week of training.

This doesn't take into account the Everton match.  If the league is won or lost by just a few points, can you write off a contest simply because it's early in the fixture list?  We saw that with the Villa loss last season. Great teams, or teams that aspire to greatness, take nothing for granted. The margins are extremely fine.

I suppose if/when Arsenal come through all this, it'll just be more hot sex with a crazy person.  Unfortunately, the older you get, you start to value the rest of the time you're with your partner, and the crazy becomes unbearable. A nice walk in a park, a good meal with good conversation, hanging out with your friends is more valuable. Why can't Arsenal give us a bit of that? 

Too Many Directions

Those of you new to the Arsenal fold often give me blank stares when I reference things that happened prior to ten or sometimes even five years ago. It's often a funny scene when I'm talking to my Yank Gooner friends and I'll say "he reminds me of Ade Akinbiyi" or compare Giroud to Emile Heskey at Leicester City. It's fair to say that in the USA I may be a bit of an outlier.

There's nothing wrong with being a new convert. "All are welcome." No, I'm not going to cook you on a grill.   I'm not going to complain about enthusiastic people who support Arsenal--we need all we can get. It's just that my point of reference for the club includes Ian Wright and Davor Suker, and also my point of reference for other clubs includes seeing MUFC win the treble and give the middle finger to the FA Cup. Time has actually made fond memories of John Gregory's Aston Villa sides.

What prompted this was today's excellent post from Yogi's Warrior at A Cultured Left Foot. He quantified something that caused me to rethink what I remembered--or didn't accurately remember--about most of Wenger's teams, especially from the early portion of his tenure as manager.

There is something of a myth about Arsenal though. As much as Arsène has produced consistently sparkling football, only in the period 2003- 2005 have they finished top scorers in the Premier League. The rest of the time sitting somewhere at an average of 1.75 goals per game.

Even the double winners of 2002 weren't top scorers?

He goes on to note that under Wenger, once you get past the first few scoring threats, there wasn't much help getting the ball past the opposing keeper. I suppose what made the 2003-2005 period unique was that there was a strong supporting cast for Henry and Bergkamp, including the incomparable Bob Pires, Freddie Ljungberg, and a rotating pool of forwards. 

What I recall about the 2000-2005 period (and I hope this isn't my mind playing tricks on me) is that Arsenal were much more direct than they are now.  Was there less passing?  Was there more counterattacking? Were players more likely to have a go at the goal?  I'll leave the statistical analysis to that other Yank blogger who seems to have an infinite amount of patience and willingness, but my perception leads me to answer "yes" to those questions.

I think at that point Arsenal needed to be more direct because, frankly, Manchester United were the best attacking team in England and one of the best in the world. My hatred for them at that time was based on the fact that they could set out a side that featured Dwight Yorke, Andy Cole, and Teddy Sheringham up top, supported by the likes of Scholes, Beckham, and Giggs, each of whom managed to find the goal with seeming ease. Throw on a late sub like Solskjaer and you have an attack that was built to fill the net.

(Cole, it should be remembered, was an Arsenal player, shipped off to Bristol City by George Graham for the princely sum of half a million quid. Dear god.)

Bloody hell. No wonder Wenger had to find an attack that could match Ferguson's--United won three straight titles before the double winners took it from them at their place in 2002, and Ferg supplemented and freshened that squad with Van NistelHorse (who Wenger famously tried to sign; how many times have I heard that?).  Goals, goals, goals. And what was the goal?

Scoring.  What happened?

Blame it on the Barcelona, the team of dull.

I won't go into the langers who populated the Arsenal team in the post-2005 era (I've done that already) but in addition to their general shite-ness, they were playing for a manager who was transitioning from a style journos called "swashbuckling" to one of incessant sideways passing (Denilson, cough cough).  It's charming that Wenger looked at his charges in the late 2000s and thought they were as good as Xavi and Iniesta and Messi. Really, it could even be labeled "precious" of him. This was during the time when the Chavs of West London were playing ugly, negative football and City began stockpiling strikers "just because."

Wenger's response was to try to emulate the dull metronomic style of Barca, who unseated Real Madrid by putting out a team of clever midgets who could pass the ball, press the opposition, and find Messi. That's really all it was. Unfortunately, Arsenal didn't have those players.

This was the era when I began screaming at the telly "Would you just fucking shoot already!!!!!!" and I realised that Bob and Freddie and Thierry and Dennis were not walking through that door.  The ball went everywhere but in the net. Literally. With Denilson and Diaby you could count on more sideways action than a drunken university party.

Pundits began to remark that Arsenal were trying to walk the ball into the net--this was not a compliment. At the same time, Drogba was doing his impression of a battering ram. Keep the ball, your opponent doesn't score. This is opposed to the idea of scoring and forcing your opponent to take chances.

Arsenal today are still guilty of the term that I think sums up most of the past 10 years: over-elaboration. I think it's changing, slightly and slowly, to a bit more direct style, but it's still predominantly all about passing. I can't understand what Wenger's up to when he has so many players who would destroy the league if he set them out to sit deep and punish on the counter.

What's the point of all that sideways and backwards passing when your opponent has 7 players lined up across the edge of the 18 yard box? You have the Ox, Ozil, Wilshere, Ramsey, Walcott (when healthy), and now Sanchez. Invite the opponent on you and then slaughter them like you did back in old days. I feel like Mickey talking to Rocky--"Why don't you stand up and fight this guy, hard, like you done before?"

Four years ago some manager said after watching the World Cup Finals that the future of the game was the ability of sides to rapidly transition from defence to attack, moving the ball from deep to the opponent's half faster meant victory. Four years ago! Whoever this genius was (no, it wasn't LVG), he predicted the demise of Bore-celona football long before last season's destruction of Bayern Munich or Spain's humiliation during the summer.

People didn't think that Barca under Joey G. were boring because they had Messi. Arsenal have never had Messi. If you don't have Messi, all that passing tends to simply burn out and leave you with a great deal of possession and very few goals.

Direct and deliberate attacking play will win the league this year--if Arsenal play that way. I don't assume Moaninho will do anything but set out his lab animals to spoil the game. Arsenal can't continue to pass the ball in too many directions and think that 1.75 goals/game will accomplish much. Sanchez is a Lambo. I hope AW drives it like a madman.

3 to Arsenal's Caballeros

Winning is getting to be tedious for the Arsenal, isn't it?  A simple stroll in the park and suddenly the anti-Arsenal faction in the media are scrambling to remind everyone that City were nowhere near full strength, this isn't a real match, the Community Shield isn't a real trophy, and didn't United prove last season that winning this match means less than nothing?

Not considering that Arsenal started the match without Mertesacker, Ozil, Giroud, and Walcott, or played half the match with a teenaged right back and a less than convincing left back at the heart of their defence, were the sides really that far apart in class? City have bought and bought and bought so much that journos seem to be numb to the size and quality of the Blues' squad.

One of my Yank friends who is somewhat new to the Arsenal fold issued a complaint this morning as to why "everyone" in the media needed to diminish what happened yesterday. I reminded her that English writers and TV commentators/pundits all essentially were raised to hate Arsenal and love either Liverpool or MUFC. There's no need to hide one's loyalties in the UK--writers openly profess how they feel or to whom they pledge allegiance. So just expect no respect and you'll be fine.

(Amy Lawrence and Philippe Auclair, we salute you.)

As for the match, I was pleased with much of what was on display. Sanchez ran and ran and made beautiful passes and threatened with intent. He is wonderful to watch and it makes you wonder what kind of role Poldi can actually find at Arsenal this season.

Santi Cazorla loves playing centrally, doesn't he?  I can't fathom why Sanogo (more on him later) wasn't offside on Santi's goal, but irrelevant to the outcome, it was a typical and wonderful finish from the wee Spaniard. Again, hard to decipher where he will play when Ozil is back and fit, maybe the German genius gets his winter break and Santi fills that role during the holidays or January.

He won't play on the left once Walcott is healthy because you would assume Sanchez will be moved to that side, and with Ramsey and Wilshere and Ox and...well, you get the idea. I think Santi is vital to the Arsenal attack when he plays more in the central role.  On the left? He drifts inside anyway, making Arsenal far too narrow and crowding an area loaded with central mids. It's a good problem to have, I suppose.

Ramsey is so confident right now that the things he does look routine despite their brilliance. His goal makes you realise yet again that he is the most important player at the club right now and he must stay healthy if Arsenal are to succeed. Players who do what he can do in a calm, routine manner are indispensable--but this season he can't be overplayed. He simply has to be healthy for the entire campaign.

Jack Wilshere, sitting deeper than usual and certainly deeper than a no. 10 normally would, was efffective. Interestingly, he got kicked far less back there than he usually does when he's more involved in the attack. He is a focal point for the opposition, partly because of his massive talent but mostly because of his temperament.  People used to attempt to wind up Patrick Vieira because of those reasons. I don't know if Jack's future lies in that part of the pitch or not, but his eye for the pass that unlocks defences is very keen.

Sanogo seems to have as much understanding of the offside rule at times as does former Spuds manager Ted Lasso. Bless his heart, he makes Kanu look like a champion ballroom dancer, yet somehow, in true Charlie Day fashion, Arsenal's very own wild card manages to influence the match to the positive. I can't tell if he's Zelig or Forrest Gump or the 20 year old man who looks like he's climbing out a window when he's doing his thing, or really, what even his thing is. Yet there's no denying that he has some sort of talent and Arsenal play well when he's out there.

Does this mean he should start every match? With so many goal scoring options, maybe he should. Maybe he is the wild card among a squad of sublime professionals. His movement and strength are a massive plus, and ultimately his strangeness makes him fun to watch.

"But what about Giroud?" you are screaming. You know how I feel about him. I think yesterday was a perfect example of how Giroud can be used. Bring him on when others are tired and suddenly he looks fast and lively! It was a nice goal in a friendly match against a team playing a bizarre combo at the back. I assume this means nobody can say anything critical of the man, correct?

Chambers and Debuchy were both very good. Debuchy plays both attack and defence with skill and confidence and looks to be a very solid purchase and more than able replacement for that bloke at City. Chambers--other than that insane back "pass" to Szcz early in the match which I assume he will never try ever again ever--gives me no fears if he is called upon to fill in for Per. I say for Per because ARSENE NEEDS TO BUY A LEFT-FOOTED CENTRAL DEFENDER NOW to back up Koz.

It's not as though Gibbo has ever stayed healthy, so what happens when he and Koz are both crocked? You play Nacho at centre half and bring Flamini in to play left back?  Oy.

So that's it, then. A friend asked me yesterday what was "the meaning" of this match. I said, "It's always better to win than to lose." That sums it up for me. Pray for Koz's Achilles tendon, please.

Adios, caballeros.

Campbell's Gumbo Yaya

Two matches against two decidedly different clubs with what seemed to be two different agendas, we know a bit more about this version of the Arsenal, but just a bit. How much can be inferred probably depends on your predisposition--if you love certain players or have blind faith in the gaffer, you probably saw only positive things. If you start from a premise that certain players irritate you, or that the gaffer isn't infallible, then you may be able to find fault.

Mindful that these were only pre-season friendlies designed to develop sharpness and fitness, the actual scorelines ought to be discarded. However...

I felt based on the way the teams were set out for the two games that Wenger both expected a tougher challenge against AS Monaco and may have wanted to win "the Emirates Cup." Nacho wasn't playing centre half in Sunday's match and a few more of what would probably be called "regulars" started as well. Perhaps it was a bit more important to Le Boss, going against his old club, who can say?

Benfica didn't offer much, but that match offered a glimpse of three players who could play important roles for the club this season. Campbell, Sanogo, and Chambers featured and made their presence felt from the outset.

I'll start with Joel Campbell, because I'm predisposed to like him and to hope that he gives AW reason to keep faith with him. Campbell looked great. He does all the things you'd want a player to do based on "the way Arsenal play," plus he does extra things that make one a bit excited over his prospects.  He held up the ball and passed it well, made incisive runs on goal, drew defenders away from the middle, and then there was that finish...oooh, that finish. Nice. Clinical even.

I started getting excited by the prospect of Campbell playing for Arsenal after the MUFC Champions League match last season. He played like a man against a team that Arsenal couldn't score upon in 180 minutes of football. Compared to Wenger's options at that time, I was downright miserable that he wasn't available to come home from his loan spell.

His work for Costa Rica this summer only served to reinforce my opinion of him--he can't be accused of being shy on the pitch, and certainly can't be criticised for "not tracking back and defending," which as I've established is the most important thing a striker can do at Arsenal, far more important than simply scoring goals. There have been (club planted?) whispers among the ITK bloggers about his "attitude" and his "willingness to sit," so who knows about his future, but why can't the visible facts about him simply speak for themselves?

He has improved each of his seasons in Europe. He has played against some of the best club sides in the world and given a fair account of himself. He has become indispensable for his national side, a team that showed fantastic "spirit, quality, determination, that little bit extra" during the World Cup Finals. What's not to like?  Forget the club spin and simply watch the boy play. He's good.

What then of Yaya Sanogo? He still looks like a drunken Mary Poppins on roller skates, but he still pops up in the right place at the right time and manages to bundle the ball into the net in a fashion only slightly less elegant than his celebration dance.

Oh, I know what you're saying--I'm being churlish. I'm taking one of Arsene's pets and slating him simply because I'm predisposed not to like him or believe in him.  Well, you're wrong. I want Yaya to succeed, because if he does, that means he's helping Arsenal, and that's enough for me. If I can cheer Nicky Bendtner, I can cheer for anyone.

Wenger likes Yaya because he reminds him of Adebayor, without the grins after being flagged for offside 10 times per match and with a better attitude toward the game, of course. Wenger likes big, odd, awkward strikers--go all the way back to Kanu and you'll see that Arsene has always tried to have one large goofball to play up front. Perhaps it's because that type of player makes the defence confused, unsure of just what is about to happen. WILD CARD!!!!

Of course, Yaya came off injured. It was fun while it lasted, eh?

Chambers drew rave reviews for his "calm, assured" performance on Saturday. I can't dispute any of that. He's quick, strong, instinctive, and he really is calm. I saw one play in particular that I enjoyed, where he tracked his man all the way to the end line and with no fuss simply booted the ball into touch. It was a mature move, the kind you want a defender to make without having to stop and think about it. He's also good in the air. I don't think this is an insult in any way to Carl Jenkinson, it's just the truth as I see it.

As for Sunday...

Debuchy--he seems to be both more defensive-minded than Sagna was last season, and also more willing to make attacking runs knowing that Chambers was there to cover for him.  He's a crucial piece to the Arsenal puzzle and I've no complaints with his performance.

The Monaco goal--this is where you tell yourself "it's only a pre-season match, it doesn't matter, Koz has only been back a few days" but it was shit defending. I'm simply saying it was shit defending, not that the world is coming to an end. 

I still like Chuba, quite a bit, actually. He has a directness with his play and a willingness to run that would suit "the way Arsenal play."

Sanchez (I can't, I simply can't, refer to him by his first name, being from a generation who can only associate it with Joan Collins) is so wonderful that I'm trying to contain myself when talking about him.  If you saw the match you saw everything he can do, but for me there was one moment that defined what he can be--Ox made a run down the right, Sanchez was slightly off to his left, and when he saw what Ox was going to do (run to the end line and drag back to the center), he anticipated this and peeled away toward the penalty spot to put himself in a good shooting position. Wow. Just wow. Thank you.

The last thing I'll say about Sunday's match--the Arsenal attack looked much, much better in the second half. In fact, everything about Arsenal looked better in the second half. Movement, possession, pressure--everything. Draw your own conclusions as to why, just let it suffice to say that "the way Arsenal play" looked different from the usual "way Arsenal play."

Caviar trumps sausage...again

"With all due respect to them, I said to him that he was too good for Arsenal."--Steven Gerrard on a conversation he had with Luis Suarez in 2013.

"Have you ever seen Gerrard win the league?"--Matt Haines to some Liverpool supporters in Manhattan, July 2014.

Stevie G., the man who fell over, thought it was a good idea to insult Arsenal. He's the Liverpool captain, after all. He was the England captain, too. He'd like to thank John Terry for being a racist twat.

Liverpool are were once a club for which honours seemed to be an entitlement. They won the league quite a bit in the 1970s and 80s. Of course, the last time they won the domestic league was in between George Graham's two title-winning sides. That was, let me count, 24 years ago?

"Alexis Sanchez asked me 'Should I move to Liverpool?' I told him, 'They aren't the team they used to be. Join Arsenal."--Javier Mascherano

"You're never too good for Arsenal and Steven Gerrard knows that. But I can understand completely that he asked him to stay because he wanted him (Suarez) to play with him and have a chance to win the Premier League. But it didn't happen, and anyway, Suarez left."--Arsene Wenger

That cabbage truck that rode out of town?  Well, Arsene Wenger didn't just fall off of it. Were he a cowboy, he could calmly say "This ain't my first rodeo." Wenger actually has wits to match with anyone, anywhere.

Sometimes it's done simply through his teams' results.

“The difference from last year is we are on an upward spiral in terms of confidence and they are in a negative spiral in terms of results. And to get out of that negative spiral is extremely difficult."--Andre Villas-Boas, 3 March, 2013

How exactly did that work out for you and your wee trenchcoat, sir?


"Am I afraid of failure? He is a specialist in failure. I’m not. So if one supposes he’s right and I’m afraid of failure, it’s because I don’t fail many times. So maybe he’s right. I’m not used to failing. But the reality is he’s a specialist because, eight years without a piece of silverware, that’s failure."--Jose Mourinho, 14 February, 2014

Chelsea won nothing, and Real Madrid under Carlo Ancelotti won the Champions League.  Arsenal, of course, defeated Tottenham, Liverpool, and Everton on the way to winning the FA Cup for the fifth time under Wenger. Cheers, Jose.

But there are of course times when Wenger looks at those sniping at him and must think, "His jest will savour but of shallow wit, when thousands weep more than did laugh at it." And that is when he reveals just how much of a command of the English language he has.

"They are scrappers who rely on belligerence - we are the better team."--Sir Alex Ferguson, May 2002

"Everyone thinks they have the prettiest wife at home."--Arsene Wenger, in reply

"I think he is one of these people who is a voyeur. He likes to watch other people. There are some guys who, when they are at home, they have a big telescope to see what happens in other families. He speaks and speaks and speaks about Chelsea."--Jose Mourinho, October 2005

"When you give success to stupid people, it makes them more stupid sometimes and not more intelligent."--Arsene Wenger, in reply

"If you eat caviar every day it is difficult to come back to sausages."--Arsene Wenger on supporters booing the Gunners during a dire 1-1 draw versus Middlesbrough, November 1998

"You ask 100 people, 99 will say it's very bad and the 100th will be Mark Hughes."--Arsene Wenger after Hughes defended Emmanuel Adebayor's stamp on Robin van Persie

So you see, Stevie G, in a battle of wits, you came unarmed. Better luck next time, lad.