I am curious, orange

What do I know about the Basque...let me think.

They like blowing up stuff.

They don't like being told what to do.

They have their own identity, and your opinion means shit.

You cross them at your peril.

(If any of that offends, remember, I'm recounting off the top of my head what I know about the Basque, not writing a goddamned manifesto.)

When I think of the Basque, I see a man with a shotgun over his shoulder, casting a wary eye about himself, wondering what the hell it is you want and why you're in his land in the first place.

So Unai Emery, then? Football. Bloody hell.

My flatmate in Manchester, the venerable Alejandro, was from Sevilla. He is well-versed in the ways of the Andalusian dog. He likes Emery. So that's ok with me. He also knows about derby matches, and hates Betis. So again, that's ok with me.

Emery didn't register with me until his years with Sevilla, but I have to say that 3 consecutive Uefa Cup/Zooropa League titles stirred me. By the third one, I said, "Well, Sevilla always win it, so that's that." I remember watching the quarter-final v Porto and thinking "This is nuts." And it was a pretty freaking great reversal.

Another thing I remember about Sevilla during that time is that they had Negredo (the Beast, the real one) and Navas. "What does Navas do?" asked my Arsenal-loving mate Devin. Well, when he was at Sevilla he played really well. And when Emery came in, he had to contend with Sevilla being a selling club and losing players like that, and he did just fine.

I don't know much more about the dude--I didn't see any of his work at PSG that sticks with me. I wanted Ancelotti to replace Wenger, and somehow he's at Napoli. Which, uh...Napoli? Ok.

I like the appointment of Emery because he has won things, he's not David Moyes, and I really don't have a choice not to like it because my liking or disliking it won't register with Stanley Kranky, the ghostly mustache.

Arsene Wenger retires after 13 years as manager

I remember when Arsene Wenger was named Arsenal manager. It was a curious time. Arsenal's previous manager, Arsene Wenger, was one of the club's most successful, rivaling Herbert Chapman and surpassing George Graham with 3 league titles and FA Cup victories over Newcastle, Chelsea, Southampton, and Manchester United. Under Wenger, the Arsenal regularly featured in at least the last 8 of the Uefa Champions League and had made the final of the Uefa Cup. He had even guided the team to a UCL final only to lose in heartbreaking fashion to Barcelona in 2006. 

It was logical that Wenger would move on to find other challenges after that final. He had played a key role in helping prepare the club to move to a modern, large stadium that opened a few months after the Barca loss. He had won medals, and his teams had done it with a flair that few other sides could ever hope to match. He had set a mark of going through an entire Premiere League season unbeaten--something that hadn't happened in the top flight of English football since Preston did it in 1649 when the ball was the severed head of King Charles I.

Wenger was a canny man who understood that as manager of Arsenal he would probably never again scale those lofty heights, and left to become an economics professeur at Le Nouvelle Ecole in his native Alsace. He continues to serve as a commentator for French international football and an adviser to the FFF.

An extensive search was undertaken and Wenger's replacement was named--an obscure French manager who was at the time playing footvolley in Brasil, Arsene Wenger. 

Wenger had enjoyed success in two previous stops in France and Japan, was known as an aesthete and a bit of a purist, and seemed a logical choice to follow the glory of the previous manager, as the club tended to make "unorthodox" choices. 

Unfortunately, Wenger's appointment in 2006 coincided with many boardroom machinations and behind-the-scenes schemes led by the previous manager's ally David Dein and likely fueled by a desire to "cash in" on the club's value by long-time shareholders such as Lady Nina. Chairman Peter Hill-Wood, whose family had served as stewards of the club was reportedly experiencing health issues. Dein himself, the vice-chairman, owned a large stake in the club and he too saw an opportunity to enrich himself by unloading his shares at their all-time high. 

Due to the debt loaded onto the club with the construction and financing of the Ashburton Grove stadium, Arsenal were about to enter a period of restrictive activity in the transfer market. The new manager was rumoured to revile capitalism and believed that through sheer force of will and personality could overcome the financial limitations on the club while continuing in his predecessor's footsteps, forgoing "pragmatic" football in pursuit of a pure aesthetic. 

As the vice-chairman brought in American business hack Stanley Krankey and Russian criminal Alisher Usmanov, and as the Hill-Wood family stepped down from leading the club, Wenger posited a theory that he could "raise a new generation" of footballers in "the Arsenal way," players who would grow up together and learn to love the club and one another. This oft-ridiculed undertaking was known as "Project Youth," which failed spectacularly as within a few years nearly the entire squad had either been sold, released, or badly injured. Despite losing his "prize jewels" and winning nothing, Wenger persisted in attempting to play "beautiful football" with little more than Sunday pub leaguers. 

During this era, Wenger regularly eschewed the defensive side of the game. Unlike his predecessor, he didn't inherit a back five that had been drilled and disciplined by George Graham, and in fact it appeared that Wenger gave little or no thought to defending at all. Arsenal under Wenger became known for conceding on set pieces and simple long-ball tactics, and his teams were often bested by novice managers such as Garry Monk. 

Having enjoyed great success under Arsene Wenger, Arsenal supporters became increasingly frustrated with such tactical naivete and insipid displays. Fractures became common among the supporters, the board were invisible, the "absentee landlord" American did nothing but charge the club "consulting fees," and through it all the manager insisted that the high defensive line and gung-ho attacking would work. 

Wenger's final few years brought 3 FA Cup wins in four seasons and a semi-final appearance in the Europa league. The club began to slip down the table despite featuring a host of international first-teamers, allowing local scum nuisances Tottenham to finish above Arsenal in the table. In Wenger's final two seasons, Arsenal fell from the Champions League places as younger, more dynamic, or more pragmatic managers delivered what he could not.

Wenger's three FA Cup wins in his 13 seasons will be fondly remembered, but he will always suffer in comparison to the man who sat in the chair before him. We here at the Existential Arsenalist wish him well in his future endeavours and thank him for his service to this great club.

Split the difference, go to the Grove

So Arsene Wenger manages his last match at the Ashburton Grove Spaceship Huge-O-Plex. Who would have thought so long ago that the structure that was supposed to give Arsenal somewhat equal footing with "big clubs" would then be used to excuse poor tactics, bad and sometimes inexplicable player purchases, and become a house of horrors for the same man who gave the Gunners two league-cup doubles and a 49 match unbeaten run?

The beautiful lunacy of the man who appeared at a debate in New York and simply repeated the mantra "The rent is too damn high" was first proffered in a different though somehow similar form with "The move was too damn expensive." Over and over, match after match, season after season, the excuse was repeated. Oh Danny Fiszman, what didst thou bring down upon us with Stanley Krankey? The ghostly mustache used Wenger's own natural "Money IS evil, not just the root of it" Marxist philosophy as cover to bilk the club and excuse brainless football.

Ashburton Mongoplex became the first evidence of Arsene Wenger's flaws--the game in England to that point was driven by aesthetes like Alex Ferguson and Wenger. Roman "I made my money honestly wink wink nudge nudge" Abramovich eschewed aesthetics to please a trophy-hungry chavvy fan base and chose to hire the most Philistine "special one" in the world. If Sam Allardyce's Bolton teams were "Kevin Davies and a cloud of elbows," just remember Mourinho's first Chelsea teams, "Frank Lampard, Drogba, and I seem to have lost my bus keys." Wenger was appalled.

And then what happened? Wenger spent the next 14 years clutching his pearls to his chest in shock as other people refused to play "pleasing" football. "Why are others not honouring my commitment and idealism?" he cried! "Why is what I did for 3 titles in 8 years now being undermined by pragmatism?" he wailed as his teams looked ridiculous and his player recruitment became the stuff of comedy legend.

Suddenly, as the glorious "high defensive line" started guaranteeing an annual tilt for the FOURTH PLACE TROPHY, excuses about Ashburton Grove, our supposed saviour in the high-stakes world of global football, became a foxhole into which Kranky and Wenger would hide. "We cannot compete financially, we are a poor club" sayeth the excuse makers. But Wenger, who is not only a purist but a puritan, refused to manage the club like any manager who managed a poor club did; PRAGMATICALLYISTCALLY SPEAKING, he wanted beautiful football, but wanted to coax it from clods and castoffs.

Ashburton Mongoplex drove a fissure in the fanbase initially because it simply wasn't Highbury. Then it created a fracture in the fanbase by excusing Wenger's utter tactical ineptitude by creating the AKB vs WOB scism. "He can't buy good players because of the stadium!" cried the AKBs! "The man is intractable and myopic!" bellowed the WOBs! And all the while, the Mongoplex stood, silent, immutable, unchanging.

A.E. Housman penned the lines "And while the world has still much good but much less good than ill, I'd face it as a wise man would, and train for ill and not for good." One of the greatest poems of our time, it could be rewritten as "Arsene, this is stupid stuff" every time Wenger was undone by such extremely simple tactics as not to be believed. Look at all the times Wenger sides were bested by managers thought to be the dimmest of bulbs, by clubs with budgets that were mere fractions of the Arsenal's. It's embarrassing. No, really. It is. AKBs continued to wail that those results were ACTUALLY the fault of the Mongoplex. The Mongoplex became Wenger's shield and security blanket. "No manager could have moved the club to the Grove and kept Arsenal in the Champions League!" they hysterically shouted for nearly a decade. Really? REALLY? NO manager, anywhere, not a one? "Raymond, I believe you are having a joke on me."

I know that Stanley Kranky is shit--this is fact. The Glazer family took 860-ish million quid out of MUFC, too. What is your point? It doesn't excuse what I like to call THE GLORIOUS TACTICAL INFLEXIBILITY OF ARSENE WENGER. The AKBs would go through such mental contortions to excuse Wenger's failings that their thoughts could join a Chinese acrobatics troupe. And still, the stadium stood there as Wenger's sentry, excusing every flaw.

So we have reached the end of the road at the Ashburton Huge-o-blob for the man who gave Arsenal three league titles in 22 years, no European silverware, and the high defensive line. Oh, and Captain William Gallas. Frank McLintock would be so proud. I will not weep today.

"Nobody ever says thank you," warned the greatest football manager I've ever known, and like Wenger, that man also sat in his seat too long. That man also oversaw a stadium "improvement" that shackled his club with debt. No one would say that Brian Clough didn't stay far past the time that he should have at Forest. I would hope they'd also have no trouble saying the same of Wenger, and saying it with honesty, and saying it without sentimentality. "Wenger manages at Grove for last time"--that should be the only headline.

"For too long you have sat here"

So it has happened.

The only leader that most of the "come-lately" fans have ever known at the Arsenal Football Club shall step down at the end of the season.

22 years as manager, a time in which the role of the "traditional gaffer" has radically changed, the last five of which I have loudly (though mostly unheard) called for his dismissal from that post. Unlike almost all American Arsenal supporters, I started following the club before Wenger arrived. My slavish devotion to the red and white, to "High and I," was not simply about Wenger. It was never a cult of the man for me, it was and remains the cult of the club. Of North London, of players like Alex James and Charlie George and our man McLintock and Bob Wilson. No, I'm not old enough to have watched Alex James play, although at times I feel as though I am.

My loyalty being to Arsenal, and not one man, has often set me at odds with those who have never known another manager. I respect and understand that from their side. Fear of the unknown, or clinging to a glorious past, happens in petty dictatorships as it always has. Yes, Wenger became no better than a banana republic generalissimo, telling people about record harvests, chickens in every pot, conspiracies against his glorious reign, and "Remain calm, all is well, spirit, quality, determination, and a little bit handbrake." Our friends in North Korea know what I mean.

Did Arsene Wenger win 3 league titles in 22 years? He did.

Did Arsene Wenger win 7 FA Cups in 22 years? He did.

Did Arsene Wenger manage the club during a time when "sugar daddy" owners (you know, ones not named Jack Walker) made football clubs their personal playtoys? He did.

Did Arsene Wenger manage the club as it moved from Highbury to Ashburton Grove? He did.

Were Arsene Wenger's teams set out to play a style of football that reflected his spending budget given to him by his parsimonious billionaire owner? No.

Did Arsene Wenger's tactics often reflect those of a man who, instead of drilling his charges to win no matter what, would instead draw a picture of a wolf on the whiteboard? You can decide that for yourself.

This parade went on for far too long.

I celebrate the good, I rail against the bad, I see the man in full. Thank you for the three league titles in 22 years. You stayed too long. Stanley Krankey is shit. God speed.

He did it his way

What do I take away from a rare Arsenal victory?

That BvB are worse than Anderlicht, Hull, Leicester, Swansea, MUFC, Tottnumb, and Man City, I suppose.

That one goal from an offside position after 19 games for Arsenal "justifies" Wenger's faith in (Wake me up!) Yaya Sanogo, I guess.

That every stupid stubborn thing that Wenger has done so far is suddenly forgotten and forgiven and this "proves he knew what he was doing all along," or so I have read from the establishment bloggers.

When Arsenal have been playing such shit embarrassing football for months I think this crumb that fell from Europe's table ought to be taken in context. And let me tell you, I celebrated yesterday and enjoyed the goals and I particularly enjoyed Damien Emiliano Viviano Martinez's performance. Let's hope it's an omen. (Sorrynotsorry)

Watching a rather pedestrian Dortmund playing in a match that their gaffer called a "holiday" as his club currently sit 3 places off the bottom of the table, I couldn't help but wonder where this version of Arsenal has been most of the season.

There was little of the incessant sideways passing across the 18 yard box yesterday. Arsenal scored a lightning fast counterattacking goal. And there was very little "let's push our defensive line up to our opponent's goalmouth." It actually seemed as though some thought had been given to defending and holding a lead! Help me up!

But I hope that everyone who was rightly critical of Maryanne Felatio's offside position Saturday will turn right around and dismiss Bambi on rollerskates' goal yesterday. He was offside.  But the linesman chose to see it differently and suddenly Wenger is justified in selecting him, so all is well.

Have we finally gotten to the point again where ugly results and a miserable start to the season have FORCED Wenger to (gasp!) change the team's approach?  Shocking and hard to believe, I know. Because Wenger has demonstrated time and again that he won't change until the wolves are not even at the door but have come in, raided the fridge, and are watching "Wolvesy Manor" on the BBC.

If you ask Wenger if he changed his pants he'd probably say "I can promise you these pants will come good, why change them?" That's just the kind of fellow he is.

The run in at the end of the 2013 season was supposed to signal a new, pragmatic Wenger. Oh well. The FA Cup final victory was supposed to usher in a new era of prosperity. Oh well.

Instead we have been treated to a steady diet of the high defensive line, devil-may-care defending, and a general inability to retain the ball when needed. It's all so predictable. And one victory over a club that knew it already has (for the most part) won its champions league group proves nothing if not built upon.

This is what Wenger keeps doing. Something ridiculous and horrible will happen, then he'll make some sort of change, then everyone will predict that this really signifies something, then he'll revert to type as a giant "fuck you" to anyone who is critical of him. Tell me it isn't true.

What SHOULD happen is that Arsenal should spend from now until January (when we all know that of course Wenger and his buddy Silent Stan will splash millions to shore up the defence) playing a different style of football. The reason is that if you go by league points, what Wenger has done so far has simply and spectacularly failed. This is as horrible as the 11 from 33 run last season that killed the chance at a title.

But Mr. Wenger will not do that, I predict. I think he will revert to type, Arsenal will be found out, and nothing will change.

Arsene, I'm begging you, please prove me wrong!

Silent Stan and the "protection of mediocrity"

Why in the name of the Buddha would a man who is allegedly worth a few billion quid steal 3 million more from the Arsenal football club?

THAT is the question.

There's so much here that it's a bit difficult to fathom without going all Swiss Ramble on you. Silent Stan conspired to take almost five million US dollars out of Arsenal at the moment that the club can't even purchase an inanimate carbon rod to back up the defence.

Why?

Let me assure you, all I can think of is greed.

This isn't some black scarf/bin bag rant. I'm simply telling you that if you observe the man's behaviour in relation to his sporting endeavours, he couldn't possibly give a toss about championships.

Ah, you say, what is the purpose of a billionaire owning a football club if the "brand" (christ I hate that term) is devalued by his efforts? Football in England isn't like professional gridiron in the USA--winning creates value.

What are the most valuable "brands" (seriously, kill me) in world football? It sure isn't the team that consistently comes in fourth place and averages 1.75 goals/match. No, they're clubs that win titles.

We've been patting ourselves on the back about Arsenal's "renewed strength" in sponsorships, but then we pretend we don't see that the club who finished seventh in the league last season has millions and millions more to spend because companies want to be associated with them.

Puma and Emirates? That's nice. Try Nike and Chevrolet.  And as for the other world giants, Arsenal don't come close to Real Madrid, Barca, or Bayern. We're lucky that we have a tangible history, unlike Chelsea and Manchester City, so that we can "exist" without their petrol fueled cash.

Take a look at Silent Stan's holdings--he's simply a business man who makes money. He isn't at all concerned with trophies or glory. My guess is, as an astute person who married for money and is simply in the business of making more of it, he looked at the next "growth industry" in sport and selected the most valuable "property" in England into which he could buy.

Lucky us.

He literally married the Walmart lady so that he could develop land around their stores. What a fucking romantic.

Arsenal represented "property" for Stan--both the real estate kind and the entity. And what's more, he got a rabid, loyal group of supporters to whom he could pass along 3% rises in ticket costs and then essentially pay his bloody offspring the difference.

Stealing from the club and not giving a toss about winning the league is one matter.  "The protection of mediocrity" is the other.

Let me tell you that as a Yank I have a bit of perspective on Stan's ownership of the St. Louis Rams NFL team. This is a club that since Stan bought into them has won exactly one championship and has for the most part bumbled along.

He's a real estate agent. Thanks, Lady Nina!

The result of Stan's operation of Arsenal is that he supports what Arsene Wenger calls "protection of mediocrity." An owner who doesn't care one whit about winning trophies ensures that Wenger will stay on board forever.

This is where we are now. Silent Stan, it's all thanks to you.

No fault in our stars

Everyone has an opinion on what was most significant about Arsenal's 3-0 dismissal of Aston Villa. The first league clean sheet of the season? Yeah, I'd go with that.

Aside from Callow Chambers (sorry) near dismissal, the back 4 plus Szcz hardly put a foot wrong in what could've been a dangerous contest. Remember how Villa beat Liverpool (which is starting look less impressive by the day)? An early "smash and grab" counterattacking goal from Gabby Agbonlahor followed by 82 minutes of seat-of-their-trousers defending took the Villains to second in the league.

No such luck yesterday for the claret and blue boys. Arsenal's keeper--the maker of his own bad luck--kept them off the scoresheet early and his defending cohorts stayed a steady course the rest of the way. Gibbs and Chambers played a key role in the Gunners' possession game, whilst Per and Koz did the dull and dirty work of mopping up anything that got past a resurgent midfield.

Considering the cheapness of the goals surrendered this season, and the errors which often caused them, the clean sheet has to be the most important takeaway from this match. I've been very dismayed at the way Arsenal have conceded so far; more concentration and tenacity at the back could've easily garnered the club 4 more points thus far.

Switching off after conceding a free kick or corner has been a serious problem for this team. You can only hope yesterday was a platform off of which more success can be built.

Ah, you see, I have chosen the dull side of football for which to praise my Arsenal. That's the exact opposite of what most supporters would see and most likely what Arsene Wnger values the least, if you judge him by his transfer spending.

Defending is not something that is done by 4 players at the back and a keeper--it's a collective effort by the entire XI. And despite the attempts to falsify the contribution of Olivier Giroud by the Wenger-lovers, yesterday was clear evidence of what the long-term contribution of Danny Welbeck can be.

Giroud was often lauded for his "ability to clear crosses" or some such thing. Yeah, whatever, me neither. His work rate was often such that one was tempted to see if the famous inanimate carbon rod couldn't do a bit more in his place.

I'm going to just come out and say it right now--Wenger molly-coddled Giroud for two seasons and it was seriously grating on my nerves. Whether it was out of a sense of Gallic solidarity or a myopic inability to see him for what he really was, for some reason Wenger stuck with Giroud when even Chuba Akpom started to look like the more effective option.

In two seasons, Giroud probably ran less than Welbeck did yesterday. I can see SAF's dirty fingerprints all over him. He knows no other way to play than 100% effort. Giroud looks like a Peruvian cart mule compared to Welbeck.

Ferguson would never have tolerated the Frenchman's lackadaisical (Laconic? Languid? Some other L word?) style, more than likely switching on the hair dryer after one game and then shipping him back to the French 2nd division after two. Welbeck still plays like he can hear a drunken old Scot screaming in his ear.

Giroud's classic move--to amble to the top of the "D" and then stop--grew to be so frustrating that I would simply scream "What are you stopping for?" at the telly and then it was a race to see whether he or I would end up howling first.

So I have to say, not being forced to watch him at the present time makes Arsenal matches just that little bit more pleasant. Oh, and not having to listen to the pro-Wenger spin merchants tell me about Giroud's so-called greatness (or Sanogo's, for that matter) is also a relief. It certainly must clear their consciences not to have to lie for a few farthings from the club.

Welbeck's efforts yesterday pleased me to no end. Whether he was dropping back to receive the ball whilst his teammates ran forward, forcing himself between defenders in front of goal, or constantly harassing the Villa defence, he was in constant motion.

The goal was simple--what you'd expect of a centre-forward, really. It was the product of working hard enough to put himself in the place where a talented midfielder could get him the ball. He didn't lope to the outer edge of the 18 yard box and stop like a United Nations observer. He went for it and he was rewarded.

The assist, however, was not common. It wasn't even what I'd expect from Welbeck. It combined vision, timing, and ability. What a beauty. Again, you can see the way he was raised in football. If he had missed that pass back at United, SAF would've blasted him with a profane outburst, not a pat on the back and a polite defence in the post-match presser. Iron fist, etc.

One other thing that's now apparent is that if Ozil and Cazorla are to coexist, it means the wee Spaniard is going to have to play on the left. Oz looked like a man reborn yesterday. Shame on him for not playing like that before, but if playing him in the 10 spot is what it takes to unleash that talent, then by all means do it.

As for Santi, it's a shame as he's such a delightful playmaker and creative presence in the middle, but let's be fair, he's no bug-eyed Germanic wizard. His efforts on the left yesterday were crucial and of the two options, it's clear that the only way to get him involved is to play him there and let Ozil do his thing through the middle.

I fairly well destroyed my living room when I saw Ozil run into the clear for Welbeck's pass. That was the 2010 version of a player who has looked a bit bereft recently. His first touch was sublime, and the finish was so simple that I felt bad for my compatriot in the Villa net.

All I really want to say about this match is "More, please." More switched on defence, more Welbeck, more Ozil in the fashion we saw them. More energy, more intelligence, more effort, more simple finishing, more breaking from deep (as opposed to sideways passing around the box).

More like that. Just keep doing it. We'll all be happier if they do.

Switch to southpaw

The sequel is almost always worse than the first. That's some kind of rule that is only really proved by its exceptions: The Godfather Part 2, Rocky II, The Empire Strikes Back, Gremlins 2, Superman 2, The Wrath of Khan...

Each has its iconic moment--Michael kisses Fredo, Darth dares Luke to join him, Brain Gremlin referencing Susan Sontag, Zod telling Superman to kneel, and hell, Kirk screaming "KHAAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!"

Today's story, however, is about that moment in Rocky II when Mickey demands that his big dopey stubborn fighter switch back to "southpaw," and how Rocky sits there and says "No tricks, I ain't switchin'!" 

Strategy, it seems, is always a tricky thing.

Mickey decided that Rocky's left-handed fighting style had become too predictable, and too easy to counter. He was a one-pace, one-tactic fighter and Apollo Creed could easily handle him.  A change was required.

Mickey went so far as to tie Rocky's right hand to his side in order to force him to learn to jab with his left. Suddenly, a left-handed fighter who had come so far in that style was now a right-hander, so much so that even the Italian Stallion himself couldn't bear to switch back to his natural style, deriding that as a "trick."

You see where I'm going with this.

For 7 years at Arsenal, M. Wenger achieved remarkable success that was founded on a strong defence and Patrick Vieira. I've never made a secret that I believe that PV4 was the greatest and most important player of Wenger's tenure as manager. That, however, is another story for another day.

Since the self-imposed destruction of the invincibles, Wenger shifted from that foundation--in a sense, he switched from fighting southpaw. He has no defence to speak of, and he certainly has no player comparable to Vieira, and he hasn't since 2008-09.

But beyond just personnel, that switch also includes a style of play, most notably in attack. In boxing, as in tennis, going up against a left-hander may be predictable, but it's also awkward. For the first part of Wenger's tenure at Arsenal, the style seemed to be based much more on quick and devastating attacks that capitalised on the movement and pace of players like Pires, Ljungberg, Henry, Bergkamp, and Vieira.

No player in the history of the Premier League started attacks like Vieira did. I don't care who you throw up in argument against that statement, there isn't one. People often compare Vieira and Roy Keane, which is fair enough, but in style they were completely different. Keane didn't break up an opponent's attack and then drive the ball forward in the same manner.

Vieira wasn't so much a defensive midfileder in the Makelele role as he was an engine for an entire side. He was at his most effective when playing alongside Petit or Gilberto Silva, players who could do the dirty work and impose themselves physically whilst PV4 launched another assault.

This is not to discount his tackling ability or how he could break up play because he was excellent at that, but for those who have come to know Arsenal since his departure, he shouldn't be classified as a "defensive mid."  He was a unique player in that he could defend and then easily start a counter attack from deep that could result in a shot on goal.

But Vieira represented the style of Arsenal back then--first it was the Graham hangover defenders behind him, then Wenger replaced them with 4 new players (more than 4, really, because he actually invested in defenders up until 2005), but no matter if it were Spunky and Tone or Jens and Big Sol, there was a solid structure back there that was fronted by strong mobile central midfielders.

That has to be classified as Wenger's southpaw phase.

But now? Wenger switched to fighting right-handed, with diminutive midfielders--most often five at a time--and a single "target man" up front. This is a style that is compounded by a very narrow attack through the middle, fullbacks who are most often almost standing on the opposition's end line, and centre halves who are positioned so high up the pitch that they are at or beyond the halfway line.

Since the end of the 2012-2013 season, when fate more or less forced him to finally adapt, Wenger sets out his teams to play the same way every minute of every match. Last season this cost Arsenal quite a few points that they surrendered from winning positions. Aston Villa, Swansea, Southamption, Everton--this represents 8 points that could have won Arsenal the league if Wenger had been willing to mix it up a bit.

I can't understand why, with trainer Mickey yelling in his face "Switch back to southpaw," Wenger persists with the same formation and tactics from minute 1 to minute 90+. It's fairly clear that everyone has this sussed. Care to mix it up, Arsene?

"No tricks, I ain't switchin'!"

It's a shame. This sequel (Arsene Knows Part 3) is looking much more like "The Matrix: Convoluted" than any of the ones I listed above. Welcome to Jaws 3D, without the camp Michael Caine to liven things up.

Broken

Not much to say about a performance as abject as Arsenal put in yesterday.

The bigger picture is that the club seem to be in trouble. Each match is punctuated by an injury, which is really unfortunate considering there is essentially no youth programme to call upon for reinforcements.

The question of tactics and the use of the squad ought to be called into question, along with the "inspiration and motivation" that a manager is supposed to provide. Does the formation get the most of the players?  Are the players being deployed in positions that best utilise their abilities?

Does the persistence with a high defensive line from the first minute to the last really give Arsenal the best chance to win? Can Arsenal find a way to widen the attack other than using the fullbacks to essentially abandon their defensive duties?  Is it wise to leave only 3 players to defend counterattacks, especially when two of them are Per Mertesacker and one of Arteta or Flamini?

In some ways, yesterday felt like the culmination of years of poor transfer window policy and misguided tactics, yet in some ways it simply felt like Groundhog Day. Nothing has really changed.

Arsenal have played 4 league matches and three Champions League matches. In seven competitive matches they've scored eight goals and conceded eight. They have no real identity at this point, based on those numbers.

They are neither an exciting, attacking force, nor are they a lock-down defensive machine capable of grinding out results. To be fair, they resemble a mid-table side. A bit boring on both ends of the pitch, neither all sheets to the wind in attack nor biting and bitter in defence.

After the FA Cup final I wrote that I didn't want Wenger to return as manager. I listed three areas--transfer policy, in-game tactics, and inspiration/preparation--where I thought he had failed. Of course that was the primary reason I didn't want him back--I didn't think Arsenal could win the league with him in charge.

My loyalty is to the club and has been since I started following Arsenal, back before I even knew who Wenger was. So my first thought was, it's best for the club if he goes. But at the same time I do appreciate what he did and has done for Arsenal and I didn't want it to come to this.

I didn't want it to come to the point where people are shouting and angry and wishing he'd be fired. What if he had simply left after winning the FA Cup?  A true feel good moment to cap off a legendary career would have been the best way to exit. Many people who had grown weary of him could have forgiven his faults and saluted him.

Instead, now, I'm afraid it can only end one way.  Arsenal are broken right now, and the blame for that can only be placed with Wenger. When even the Irish blogger names him and says it's Wenger's responsibility, you know the situation is dire.

Were this not Arsenal, and there were no such thing as "the Arsenal way," and this hadn't been going on for years, Wenger might well be given his P45 before this crucial stretch of league matches. But this is Arsenal, and that won't happen. Sadly, I'm afraid it won't happen until after this season, which will be a season that will end in disappointment and failure for the club.

At that point, Wenger will probably leave in disgrace when it could've all ended in glory last spring. Shameful, that, for everyone involved.

Europe for Europe's sake

In 2000 I was working for a multi-national company based in Atlanta, Georgia and was lucky enough to have a boss who had lived in England for a while and understood and tolerated my love of Arsenal.

At the time, there was basically one football pub in the entire city that would show live matches--which back then meant paying a hefty satellite subscription price as no USA-based TV networks/sports channels were showing football on a regular basis.  This place, the Brewhouse Cafe in Little 5 Points, was run by an ex-pat Aussie who understood the value of cultivating a loyal client base of football fans.

The 2000 Uefa Cup final was the first Arsenal match I was able to watch live. My boss excused me from the afternoon's work and when I got to the pub there were equal numbers of Turks and Englishmen there, the owner with the good sense to divide the place in half and sent opposing fans to opposite sides.

This was, of course, weeks after two Leeds supporters had been stabbed to death in Istanbul and to say that tensions were running high in the place would be a ridiculous understatement. I sat at the bar and watched the match with a couple of other Yanks who didn't seem to have an allegiance to one side or the other. Having gone straight from work, I wasn't wearing anything to identify me as an Arsenal supporter, so I suppose that's why I wasn't instructed to join them.

My excitement at finally getting to watch my team play live quickly devolved into gut-wrenching tension and ultimately heartbreak. Arsenal simply couldn't score or make anything of any chances, and then in extra time Galatasaray went down to 10 men and the Gunners still couldn't find a way through. Henry and Kanu couldn't beat their keeper, and then came the failure in the penalty shootout.

My mind was fairly reeling at the prospect of being an Arsenal supporter amongst others when the Turks began jumping on the tables and chanting and the English ex-pats trudged out muttering curses under their breath. "So this is Europe," I thought.

Arsenal used to go into these competitions with a legitimate chance to win--and I say "used to" meaning since I began following the club in 1996 and Wenger arrived. The loss to Valencia in the Champions League in 2001 ranks as one of the most painful in my time as an Arsenal supporter, because in all the years that Wenger has been qualifying for the competition, that was the one that seemed set up for the Gunners to go all the way.

Of course the inability to score in the second leg of the quarter final and a late John Carew header meant that Arsenal wouldn't get to face Leeds in the semis or a very average Bayern in the final. Valencia weren't that good, and misfiring Arsenal couldn't capitalise.

A few more years and a few more trips into the latter stages followed, including the miraculous journey to the final in 2006 and the embarrassing semi-final capitulation to MUFC in 2009 (that preceded the infamous Nikky Bendtner "pants out!" night).  Since then, however, the norm has been to simply qualify for the competition, hope for the best, and go out in the round of 16.

I've wondered if Arsenal supporters look at the Champions League the way that most of the clubs in the Premier League look at winning that title--we're here to make up numbers, and being in the top flight is certainly preferable to anything else, but we entertain no illusions about winning the whole thing.

This is one of the reasons I don't really give a toss about Europe any more, other than being able to lord it over THFC that we're there and they're not. Could anyone in his right mind expect Arsenal to win the Champions League this year? Wenger didn't even buy enough defenders to compete domestically, much less slog all the way to winning the big cup.

Qualifying for the Champions League has become an end unto itself, just like "Premier League survival" has for clubs like Stoke City. They know they're not going to hoist the trophy at the end, just as Arsenal supporters surely can't believe that they'll see Arteta lift the big silver cup next spring.

Knowing this, is it possible to even get excited about playing in Europe anymore?  What is the measurement of success for Arsenal?  Has it too been lowered to simply finishing second in the group and losing to a "big club" in the first knockout round?

As finishing fourth in the league has been elevated to trophy status because of nothing more than revenue, getting out of the group stage has been elevated to a trophy for the same reason. As a supporter, am I supposed to cheer fiscal results over match scores?

Europe is a fleeting dream for a club with only 5 fit experienced defenders. Can you write an entire column or blog post about that, and where the club are right now, without saying the name "Arsene Wenger?" The Irish blogger has. What a shame that this is what has happened to our hopes and aspirations for Arsenal.

So here's to another season in Europe's top flight. Pat yourselves on the back, Arsenal. You're now the Stoke City of the continent.

It just isn't funny anymore

The 2008-09 edition of the Arsenal Football Club managed a 21-match unbeaten run. Do you remember those heady times?

That team was utter garbage on a hot plate. They matched both MUFC and Chelsea with 68 goals scored (Liverpool led the league with 77 goals, had a goal differential of 50, and still finished second) but conceded 37, 13 more than the champions.

I don't know what the excuses being made for that team were, or how their 4th place finish was spun into gold. I've spent much of the last 6 years trying to forget those players.

What has always stuck with me, however, is how that team managed to go 21 games unbeaten. From matchday 15 to matchday 35, Arsenal didn't lose. And in all that time, Arsenal managed to climb all the way from 5th to 4th. Astonishing, ain't it?

At one point in that run, there were four dour 0-0 draws in a row.

Was the spin "Hey, you know how tough it is to beat West Ham at the Grove!" or "You know how tough Sunderland are at the Grove!" or something else?  I've no idea. Back then there were no club-sponsored bloggers pumping hot air into the multiverse trying to hide the fact that Wenger had put together a "Wizard of Oz" squad--No brains, no courage, no heart.

So far this season we've heard "Hey, you know how tough it is to go to Goodison and win, so under the circumstances a draw was a great result!"

This was followed by "Hey, you saw how tough the Foxes played Everton, so to go there and get a point without the extremely vital Olivier Giroud is a great result!"

Now we're hearing "Hey, you know how tough City are, so to hold them to a draw at the Grove is a great result! Oh and Wilshere scored, and so did Sanchez, so it was a great result!"

In the meantime, Wenger is down to 5 defenders. But don't worry, the spin merchants are working their magic, telling you that "It's not a bone break, so that proves that Wenger's transfer policy is fantastic!" Or better yet, the Irish fellow is using the classic "we" and "our" to describe the paucity of options at the back.

How about this for some NO spin--

Two classic Wenger schoolboy errors led to the two City goals. Simple counterattack employed against a nonsensical high defensive line gifted them the first, then the same lapse on a free kick that we saw against such esteemed opposition as Hull City and New York Red Bulls gave them the second.

Once again, points squandered from a winning position, as they were last season time and again against Villa, Southampton, Swansea, Everton...but hey, you know how tough Villa are at the Grove, so...

Why are we supposed to believe that this is any different than any of the seasons since a decade ago when Wenger won his last league title?  Are the mistakes going to magically disappear?  Is the squandering of points going to stop? Will Hayden or Bellerin magically become trusted first team defenders?  Will Gibbs miraculously stay healthy?

For all the Irish man's jokes, for all of Mr. Rational Yank Stats Man's obfuscation through jargon and numbers, there is a problem at Arsenal. The problem starts at the top.

The mistakes and lack of composure haven't suddenly materialised, nor can they all be blamed on Lukas Podolski (or now Mesut Ozil). I wish the bloggers who have been bought by the club, or the Wenger-lovers (as opposed to those who actually love the club more than one person) would shake up the world and place the blame where it belongs for once.

Placing loyalty to Wenger above the club is a mistake. Making jokes about the games or about the fact that Arsene Wenger actually believed Yaya Sanogo is a Premier League quality striker isn't appropriate.

Your jokes aren't funny anymore, nor are your excuses. Wenger has failed once again--this time by not buying adequate defensive cover. If you can come back to me and say that Wenger has put together a squad that can challenge for the title, I won't laugh anymore. I'll simply tell you that your jest isn't funny.

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.