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.
No comments:
Post a Comment