You can’t imagine how happy I am firstly to have him in the squad, because he is an exceptional player.
Whoa, we signed Lionel Messi? Ronaldo? van Persie issued a mea culpa, begged forgiveness and has shown so much contrition that he has signed a new contract for £15 per week on the basis that if it was good enough for Joe Mercer, it’s good enough for him?
The player in question is Abou Diaby.
I am sure that the manager is delighted to have him back, we probably all are if you consider his ability on its own. But you can’t because his injury record is second to none in length and frequency of his absences. He will always come with a massive BUT.
Arsène is right to be cautious about the midfielder’s fitness and absolutely right to determine the player’s future based on this tour. One bad tackle and a career has been tortured out of the Frenchman, seasons begun and ended before their natural conclusion. Just when you feel the player has turned the corner, injury strikes once more. The Gods who govern such fates have turned with malevolence on Diaby.
It highlights the risks that waiting for him to be fit hold. The praise of club and country managers is welcomed but surely overly optimistic. With Jack Wilshere absent for at least the first six weeks of the season, is Arsène right to wait and see before venturing into the transfer market for the defensive or box-to-box midfielder?
It is not the number of midfielders which is the concern, it is that two are recovering from serious injury and there is no guarantee that they will not break down again. You could counter that by arguing that injury might strike at with someone who is currently fit and we would not buy just in case that happens. In the circumstances, caution is well-applied with signings.
As ever there is a But. In these circumstances, is Arsène taking too much of a risk? What happens if two of the remaining quartet named as being part of the “well stocked” midfield are injured? That leaves two plus Rosicky to play as a triumverate for an unspecified length of time. The greater danger is the temptation for the manager to rush a return from injury as a result of short-term necessity, over-playing a recently injured player on their return is as much of a problem as the over-playing which caused the injury in the first place. Or at least set the environment for the injury to occur.
The balancing act is delicate. In the days before named squads, such issues could be glossed over with a signing. Before the transfer window became a domestic hurdle, the end of March was the only time-barrier. Problems before then could be resolved with a loan or permanent deal. Now the manager(s) have to take a punt, drop to their knees before the Injury Gods and pray.
Crucially, there is no necessity for Arsenal to buy right now. The tour will give them time to assess Diaby and his reaction to matches, even though the intensity of competitive games is not recreated. This is a secondary issue, hence the manager’s caution. If he breaks down now, action will be required quickly and decisively.
For Diaby, I wonder how this is impacting on him? It would be natural for him to be hesitant initially, to not throw himself fully into a game for fear of aggravating his condition(s). Yet he has to, to prove to himself that he is not going to crumble under pressure, to prove that he is going to resurrect his career. At 26, there is a danger of being cast adrift although playing in a less physical league might be a better option for his long-term career.
I hope it does not come to this. He is a talented player and I don’t think the manager would have kept faith in him under other circumstances. I hope that he comes through the tour and decides too much time has already been lost to the medical rooms and operating theatres, tearing through Premier and Champions League midfields is the answer, the best therapy. A fit Diaby has the potential to be as comparably influential to Arsenal as Yaya Toure was to Manchester City last season. At 26, we are still talking about unfulfilled potential. Hope, the eternal sustenance of a footballer for the coming season.
And yes, I am well aware that the manager may have been publicly closing the door on M’vila to turn down the flames of speculation to allow discreet talks to take place. I am sure of one thing; Plan B has already been identified in case of setbacks.
’til Tomorrow.
Ateeb: Forget it. The owners of Arsenal do not speculate to accumulate.
Thanks for the birthday wishes! I appreciate it big time!
How can the going rate be what a few financially doped teams pay the players. That is not sound reasoning.
I agree with Ateeb
A really interesting counter argument to the prevailing mood Ateeb – and of itself a convincing one. My only comment would be you are arguing against a slightly different point than the one some other posters are making.
Within the context of the game at the moment; yes, the superstars do command a certain wage and yes we refuse/can’t pay that rate. However I sense that some people don’t accept that rate is correct, appropriate or defensible and don’t want Arsenal to pay it. Even if we can afford it.
Looked at one way the wages a handful of players command is correct, in a broader context it’s obscene and unsustainable. I just get a sense on ACLF that a growing number of posters are finding it increasingly difficult to align themselves with a sport where they have to accept the first case over the second. I think it runs deeper than an Arsenal thing. I wonder if some of us aren’t maybe struggling to follow the sport at all.
I remember the game at Sunderland when the Gunners were giving the home team a lesson in keeping the ball and Peter Reid (I think) sent on a young scroat to “get into them” and he duly went in studs up on Diaby and broke his ankle and didn’t even get a booking. Shame. One player Arsene didn’t mention as midfield back-up was Henry Lansbury and I hope he gets a chance this season.
I mostly agree with Ateeb. Steww makes a nice attempt to bridge the gap. As far as context, I don’t understand why greed is only the province of the players in our discourse. See the whole article Shotta posted a small excerpt from by 7amkickoff.
http://www.7amkickoff.com/2012/making-peace-with-arsenals-finances/
Morning Limestone. Wasn’t trying to bridge the gap really. I genuinely see both sides I just think it’s like watching two tennis players on opposite sides of different nets.
The problem you see Ateeb is that we argue points with no facts, nor do we have privy to those facts in most cases. So it is speculation. Q. What is RvP being offered? Q. what are the “best” players being paid, on average and including perks and bonus’, across various comparable teams and situations, including in Germany, Italy and France?
When we make “definitive” statements without facts, it is rather silly.
On the whole, Bill bases much of his case (not dissimilar to yours) on the experiences in American sports, without once considering the Bundesliga as a model, or the French, Italian and Dutch football models. Forget Spain, that’s a basketcase, and is not replicable.
When someone can actually prove how Arsenal “underpays”, then I change my opinion. Until then I do believe you are talking rubbish because the sole basis of arguments to break the current “wage constraints” is in comparison, it would seem, with Manchester City and potentally United and relative to their successes. But things are changing fast in United and it deserves scrutiny. Listen closely to SAF, close your eyes, and ask yourself why he is sounding like Wenger.
As for the others, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs, Newcastle – we discount these “examples” of how “best” to do things because they finished lower than we did and under-achieved compared to the hype. So where are these successful model that pays insane wages? Manchester City? Is that your case? Show us your facts.
And then BOOM Zimpaul smashes one over the net and I change my mind again. Gah. Think I’ll just watch the Women’s Beach Volleyball until the season starts.
I think steww has it exactly.
The ‘going rate’ business just goes right over my head. I don’t even have a means of determining what such a rate is, never mind caring about how much money already rich people decide they ‘deserve’.
It’s the game that’s sick. Money solves nothing. It begets a need for yet more money. An endless spiral.
If football attempts to chase the clubs that are bankrolled beyond their earning capacity, that cannot go bankrupt because of the ambitions and mean of those owning them, to placate a few players in the attempt to win one of the few trophies available, then it is doomed.
I could not love such a sport.
As for the ‘profits’, well, at least owners can’t take out more than the club can afford, unles thet are the Glazers, of course. We can see where that leads.
I still agree with Ateeb
Ah, I should have waited for ZP before posting.
And where are these fantastic Arsenal profits that the owners make? Do the accounts show the funds leaving Arsenal, and how much precisely? Or this is (returns on their investment) expressed rather as asset appeciation on the increasing value of their shares?
Why select Manchester City as an example? Why not Dortmund? Is Dortmund less of an example than City? They too “bleed” players. When you don’t want to go the route of sugar-daddy ownership, for reasons of sound business practice, “bleeding players” (selling at a profit) is one of the measures used cleverly to compete financially. Wenger has always known and used this extremely well.
This is not a moral question per se as Ateeb rightly points out. But to maintain there is no possibility ever of “ethical business practice” (for example valuing players and their wages fairly) in football, therefore go the route of the worst excesses of capitalist speculation anyway, is irrational and panicky. Or perhaps as someone might have said, choose those struggles you can win and fight them one by one.
you see Ateeb, actually it is important that Arsenal fights to impose a sustainable model; actually it means a lot. If Arsenal give up now, after all it has achieved and the manner of achieving these successes, we are not guaranteed trophy success. Ask Liverpool about that.
And still we return to what is Arsenal offering these players? What is the differential with the “mean average” for “top quality” – outside Manchester City. You will find a few interesting answers.
http://aculturedleftfoot.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/chamakh-hopes-as-arsenal-seek-to-capitalise-on-financial-folly/
ACLF is delighted to announce that today’s post has signed a new contract is available all day.
You would go and interrupt this fine conversation wouldn’t you YW? And do we know that ACLF has actually signed? Or is this simply more media speculation?
No, steww, ACLF are confirming that it happened early this morning. Out of respect for the blog, both sides maintained a media silence on the matter until it was fully resolved.
I’d say Bayern is a good example. Sustainable, high commercial revenue, lower ticket prices from their new stadium, and a new improved tv deal for the Bundesliga. They attract some of the best players in the world and pay them a competitive wage on revenues quite similar to our own. They do this by having an unequal wage scale that included a number of talented younger players like Alaba, Badstuber, Muller, and now Shaqiri. In the CL final or semifinals frequently the last several years and perennial league winners, apart from the last two seasons. There are differences between our league circumstances but their performance in Europe is telling. They are really competing and they pay their best players big big wages.
How about Juventus as second example? They are back and undefeated league winners with a new stadium. They are the ones reportedly offering RvP 190K per week plus a 19 million euro transfer fee for a player in his final year–this after their undefeated season! They ate going for it in Europe. They are run now in a sustainable way. Lots of solid players on reasonable wages but some top class stars bought in and paid handsomely like Pirlo from Milan and perhaps our own RvP.
So those are two examples of clubs in Germany and Italy that are succeeding, sustainable and paying their best players competitively high wages above Arsenal’s scale to keep or recruit top players.
I dispute the logic of the case. The team that pays the most for players and their wages will always win more (assuming comparable variables like good managers). Therefore support the team with the most money OR pressure your team to find money above other all other considerations.
It all comes back to why I watch and love the game. The memories and the joy of it, the play and players, the battle of wits. Arsenal already gives me so much more than my fair share, I am a glutton at a feast. I have all I need, more than I could ever eat in my football appetite. I feel priviliged. I feel sorry for City fans and Chelsea Daves, how hollow their ridiculous success. I don’t want that meal.
I have a sneaking respect for SAF, canny fellow, but I know all he has really done is play a formula better than other manager, and that is not the kind of adventure I want either.
Here’s a curious fact. Arsenal smashed the record for player purchase cost back when they bought SuperMac. Is that right or earlier? It smashed it again when we bought Bergkamp. We did not go on to achieve the greatest distinction. Not until Wenger came on board.
Well, OK YW but I’m waiting until I see it announced on the official site.
Bayern and Juve are both fine examples. I trust we have offered RvP a highly salary than Juve might have. When all the facts come out, I think we will find Frank’s view is rather closer to Arsenal’s. That the top tier of players are being paid competitively. A variation on the current model.
ZP
No Supermac was below the record which was £350k for Bob Latchford going to Everton from Birmingham. Arsenal deliberately settled on the fee lower than that to ease some pressure on the player but also because Denis Hill-Wood didn’t think any player was worth that much!