Arsènal

by Alex Fynn

  “The players take responsibility when they are on the pitch,” countered Wenger. “It depends what you call taking responsibility. We play in the best league in the world and I tell you, you do not stay 21 games unbeaten if you do not stand up and you do not fight. People around the club know what is most important when you are a young team is to be supportive. It is easy to sit in the stand and say that they are not up for the fight. What they have done in this season in a negative environment shows that they will stand up and take responsibility. And it’s my job to take the blame.” Certainly, but what he failed to understand was that by paying his young players such ridiculous sums he had made them hostages to fortune. Moreover he has made a rod for their back and his own by raising expectations to a high level that previously he met with ease. Now though, over the last year or two diminishing returns had begun to set in. Under such circumstances fans have every right to be unforgiving when there is a palpable lack of quality, especially in experienced players and perhaps even worse when their more gifted colleagues show a continuous lack of commitment and are seemingly indulged by the manager.

  Aside from the fanciful notion of the professional foul, where cynicism is permitted in the interest of gaining an advantage, professionalism, which the players are so fond of claiming they represent (as if they were comparable to doctors, lawyers and accountants), brings with it certain obligations, namely that they will be prepared to perform to their best mentally, physically and technically for the paying public. This is a minimum requirement. Any genuine love of the club, spirit of camaraderie and duty to their teammates is a bonus. By their own standards, Arsenal were unprofessional.

  As far as Wenger was concerned, the impression he gave was that no one had a right to criticise his players and call themselves supporters. Unchallenged by the directors and his staff, he appeared oblivious to the notion that as a key employee in a plc he could be called to account by shareholders. His disinterest was exemplified by a run-in he had with a fan at Stamford Bridge. “We win at Chelsea after a disastrous game at Man City,” he recalled. “I go to the loo after the game, and a guy says, ‘Well done Arsène, we won today, but we will not win the championship this year,’ and this was in November. I said, ‘Sorry, to me you are not an Arsenal fan’. He said, ‘Of course I am an Arsenal fan’. I said, ‘We are just a team with the oldest player 21 in midfield, and we beat Chelsea, who are a mature team with a massive investment, and the only thing you can say after the game is we will not win the championship. You cannot say to me you’re a fan because you don’t even believe in your own players.’ That’s a responsibility as well, because people say ‘I am a fan, but only if it all goes well, you win 38 games on the trot, and win all the trophies, then I am a fan.’ I’m sorry, but that is easy.”

  For most of his life as an Arsenal fan, it hadn’t been “easy” for Steve Mono. Yet he has never left before the final whistle and under no circumstances would ever contemplate booing his team. A mild-mannered professional man who has been an Arsenal supporter for longer than Arsène Wenger has been alive (a season ticket-holder for 50 years and a shareholder for 45) Mono freely admits to being an admirer of Wenger who, he says, has brought him more pleasure in supporting his team than he ever believed was possible.

  Perplexed at the manager’s preference for youth over experi ence, he felt he had some legitimate points to make at the shareholders’ Q and A. He began, after trying to reassure the manager, telling him that he was among friends, by expressing his failure to understand what Wenger had in mind before the 2008/09 campaign kicked off.

  Mono: “It’s very difficult to understand how we lost five international midfield players when we started last year, including Rosicky. Three of them captains. How was your thinking that we could possible compete in the Premiership having lost those players? I don’t think it’s fair to the younger players, especially Fabregas, I just don’t understand your mindset. Also I can’t understand the virtual swapping of Senderos with Silvestre. The policy has always been not to give older players contracts and it seems totally against your philosophy to allow a 23-year-old centre half to go and to bring in – I could almost refer to Silvestre as a geriatric centre half – and he’s been unfit for half of the season, but when he was up against class players he’s been totally inadequate.”

  Wenger: “I do not accept the statements you make about our players. Are you a shareholder?”

  Mono: “Yes.”

  Wenger: “And you speak like that about our players. I’m sorry, I cannot accept that, the way you speak about the players of your own club.”

  Mono: “What I said was about one individual player.”

  Wenger: “You should not use these terms about the players, you should see him [Silvestre] in training every day.”

  Mono: “I’m sure he’s a very nice man and behaves very well but up against very high standard players he’s been found wanting.”

  Wenger: “I can’t understand how we lost five internationals?”

  Mono: “I’m including Diarra.”

  Wenger: “How many games did Diarra play last year?”

  Mono: “He was at the club.”

  Wenger: “He left in January.”

  Mono: “I said last year.”

  Wenger: “And who are the other four?”

  Mono: “Well I’m including Rosicky. Then Hleb, Flamini and Gilberto.”

  Wenger: “Gilberto played 13 games last year. He was 33 years old.”

  Mono: “Yes, but we still lost that experience.”

  Wenger: “We lost experience because we did not know that Rosicky . . .”

  Mono: “You lost five international players.”

  Wenger: “We did not know that Rosicky would not be available and we did not want Flamini to go. We did not want Hleb to go. Do you know the rules of the modern game? After three years a player over the age of 28 can buy his contract out. You cannot stop him. Hleb had completed three years. We did not want him to go. He came in with the transfer request and we cannot stop him.”

  Mono: “I understand that you did not want him to go but how could you possibly not bring in replacements? How did you think you could possibly compete in the Premiership without these five international players?”

  Wenger: “Because we had plenty of young players who we used.”

  Mono: “You have wonderful young players and I’m not attacking you.”

  Wenger: “You are attacking the players – that is much worse. Today we had a training session. Do you know how many injured players we had? Eleven. Do you want me to give you the names?”

  Mono: “You misunderstand me.”

  Wenger: “No, I don’t misunderstand you. You cannot say on one side, ‘Why do you not play Walcott’ and on the other side say, ‘Why do you not play experienced players?’ You cannot say on one side, ‘Leave out Fabregas’ and on the other, ‘Why do you play a 30 year old guy in his place?’ I know. I am 30 years in this job, I know a guy who is 30 years will make less mistakes than a guy who is 20 but you must accept as well that you will lose the young players. We lose a Walcott. We lose Fabregas. When he came here he wanted the chance to play. I accept – if you say the players are too young – that’s your view. Everybody has an opinion until he is in the position to show what he can do with his opinion. But what I do not accept is that is if we have come from this position in agreement with the board, what I don’t like is for you to say, ‘You go wrong with these players, you will never go anywhere.’ I say that is your belief, but I don’t believe it. But people always criticise the players and if they go somewhere else in two or three years you will say, ‘Why did you let Diaby go, why did you let Song go? Why did you let Walcott go? They are all great players’ They will show you that they are great players.”

  To be rebuked by the manager and (in the press) by the chairman and subsequently misrepresented by the media was both deeply upsetting and a serious piece of miscasting. The exchange probably represented a lowpoint in the manager’s re
lationship with the supporters. Wenger doubtless believed that they should endorse all his selections, and his response gave the impression that he considered them, in the words of blogger and shareholder Vic Crescit (who gave an account of the meeting online) as “ill-considered and ill-informed. Some he seemed to regard as outright impertinent.”

  After the Q and A with Wenger, in an amiable conversation with Mono, Gazidis admitted that maybe Arsène takes too much on his shoulders. With his intimate knowledge of American sports where the media have far more access than Arsenal or indeed any Premier League club are prepared to concede, and where the customer is king rather than being taken for granted, this was a public relations exercise that seriously backfired. Even worse, in this case, the customers were part owners of the company. And as a final insult to injury, the session was edited before being broadcast on Arsenal television, the more critical exchanges including Steve Mono’s and Wenger’s defence of Adabayor in response to diving allegations (‘a great player who has done fantastically well for the club’) were unsurprisingly omitted.

  Wenger was obviously affected by the experience. Bob Wilson, who chaired the meeting commented, “The general tenor was constructive, [but] the comments singling out players upset Arsène like I’ve never seen him before.” The following week at his pre-match press conference Wenger reflected, “There is criticism I accept with respect, but dis respect I don’t accept. I accept everyone’s opinion, but what was not enjoyable in that meeting was that it was disrespectful to some players and I don’t accept that. If we lost 38 games on the trot I would not accept that. The club have moved forwards, not back, since I came to Arsenal. I was disappointed because I believe especially the shareholders cannot complain. In October 1996 the share price was around £400 and now it is £10,000. I would prefer it if the fans complained than the shareholders. I could understand that more.” But all the shareholders present at the meeting were also fans (as one succinctly put it, “It’s Henry who excites me, not the price of shares.”) and probably voiced their concerns in a far more civil manner than a meeting with the rank and file would generate, as a cursory look at the independent websites or a flick through the pages of The Gooner would tell Wenger. But his only regular exposure to the opinion of supporters is probably the occasional booing he hears on a matchday when things have not gone well.

  Although he himself had described the 3-1 Champions League defeat as “the most disappointing night of my career” he felt that there had been some over-reaction to his team’s failure to rise to the big occasion. “When you look now at people assessing the situation, it has just become ridiculous. Every year, every day you feel like you killed somebody. It is unbelievable. If you do not distance yourself from it you think, ‘What kind of world are we living in?’”

  The club decided he should see some supportive messages emailed to them from those in the stands who backed him. The response was partly prompted by the media in Spain and the UK picking up on an interview for Telefoot on TF1, the main French television channel for whom Wenger is a consultant. Questioned about Florentino Perez’s candidacy for the Real Madrid presidency, and his subsequent plans if elected, Wenger responded, “With Perez, the project will be obviously interesting for any coach.” Would he be tempted? He replied, “I’m a coach.” Had he been in contact with Perez? “Allow me to remain discreet on that matter,” said Wenger. Asked by the presenter Christian Jeanpierre how he found Arsène, the interviewer, David Astorga, replied “tendu” (uptight). With two years until the end of his current contract, it could have been a coded warning to the club, and possibly its supporters, that he should not be taken for granted and that he might be more appreciated elsewhere. On his return to England, he had an extended lunch with Peter Hill-Wood and Ivan Gazidis at the club’s training ground, doubtless discussing plans for the summer, and quite possibly confirming that he was as committed as ever to the club – or at least that was the media’s interpretation.

  Wenger had held discussions with Perez in 2003, at a time when his budget had been severely cut ensuring he missed out on possible signings such as Cristiano Ronaldo. Since then, Roman Abramovich’s fortune had catapulted Chelsea to the forefront of English and European football, whilst Manchester United continued to speculate on players and accumulate trophies at a rate Arsenal could only dream of in the far-flung future. Arsène Wenger was still fighting the odds, only in the face of such a financial disadvantage – in spite of the club’s phenomenal turnover – he was not actually beating them anymore.

  CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

  NOW OR NEVER

  “If we buy, it certainly won’t be players who lack experience. We have enough of those.” When Arsène Wenger outlined his intentions for the summer a few days after his team’s exit from the Champions League at the hands of Manchester United, there would have been a loud chorus of “hear, hear” from Arsenal fans. “I do what I can with what I have available and you have never heard me complain,” he said, “but I do not accept that people think I’m stupid enough that I have £100million at my disposal and I put it in the bank because I am scared to spend it,” contradicting his response to Peter Hill-Wood and Danny Fiszman who, when asked what he would do if he was given such a windfall, were promptly told, he’d hand it right back again. Then, for good measure, Wenger added, “I believe the more everybody shuts up inside the club, doesn’t talk about anything and works hard is [for] the best.” It was perceived as a clear message that he did not want to hear any more “Arsène can afford to buy any player he wants, he only has to ask,” statements from board members.

  But it was too late. The manager had long ago let the cat out of the bag. The popular assumption that he was happy enough to construct a young team through choice had been seized upon by the board for their own purposes. Better to let Wenger face the brickbats from the supporters and the media than admit that the club could not afford to buy the stars who would increase the likelihood of success.

  Certainly all the tickets may have been sold, but the poor fare on offer was turning the public away. So when it was habitually claimed, over the course of the 2008/09 season, that 60,000 were in attendance (amounting to over 99 per cent matchday stadium utilisation – the highest in the Premier League) even though there were clearly empty seats all around the ground, people believed the evidence of their own eyes and no longer trusted the official line. Yet if the club had issued the true numbers who had passed through the turnstiles, the illusion that demand continues to outstrip supply would not be so easy to maintain. That many season ticket holders were not even bothered about occupying seats they had paid so handsomely for should be a matter of grave concern. The next logical step would be that they will not be bothering to renew them. After the anticlimactic finish to the 2008/09 season, a significant number decided to do just that, with others opting to subsidise their outlay by renting their seats. The novelty of the Emirates is over. Fans now know they can easily get tickets to go six or seven times a season, which is sufficient for many of them. The market for selling seats, generally at face value, already flourishing through the unofficial supporters’ chatrooms, forums and email lists is set to continue to expand. Of course it is tougher to get a ticket when Manchester United are in town, but for Bolton it’s a breeze, especially if the game is televised. Even the added attraction of Champions League participation is not always enough to fill the stadium.

  The Champions League semi-final elimination at the hands of Manchester United encapsulated the season. Arsène Wenger talked up his team and they let him down. They were simply not good enough. Supposed to come of age for the second leg, the biggest game the Emirates had hosted so far, the evening fell flat early on in the proceedings and there was a steady exodus of fans by half time.

  In the final that United reached at Arsenal’s expense, Barcelona took care of the English champions in a way that Wenger must have wished his team could emulate, with a style that he has always aspired to but, more and more of late, has consistently failed
to produce. “We are convinced, [myself and] the directors, that we are doing the right thing,” said Wenger adamantly, “Because we want to run the club by respecting the financial balance, by developing the idea of the game played how we want it played, and by developing the players who we bought, who have been at the club for five years. If we do not get there next year, or the year after, then I will be responsible and stand up for it, don’t worry.”

  Looking to the future, the relationship between the manager and new CEO Ivan Gazidis – a man with new ideas and methods – is key. A few months into the role, Gazidis’s work can now begin in earnest. The initial signs augur well with Wenger revealing, “I see Ivan as someone who can help me achieve my targets, and we have a shared vision as to how the club has to be run. As much as you can say, ‘if we don’t win, I am responsible,’ I want to say, ‘If we don’t win, he is responsible!’” Gazidis’s experience in the buying and selling hundreds of players for MLS should enable the manager to take more of a back seat once he has identified a target, proposing more and disposing less. Wenger may have been overprotective of his squad, but he will not be able to shield them from the evaluation of the CEO. “My focus is going to be very, very laser sharp on what we do to improve the performance of the team,” said Gazidis.

  Whether Wenger continues to be master of all he surveys will be interesting to observe. Gazidis, although fully supportive of the manager, will have noted that he is unchallenged by his staff and his fellow directors. David Dein was fond of repeating that the manager had a job for life at the club but a human resources department is about to be established because “As we now have over 400 employees we require that,” said Gazidis, admitting, “I was surprised when I came in that that didn’t exist. It’s one of the key areas in any size of organisation.” Undoubtedly such a move will challenge the wisdom of the current arrangement whereby Arsène can do what he wants with a budget of £100 million provided he delivers Champions League revenue every season (expected to pull in the highest amount ever for 2008/09). But Gazidis set a loftier benchmark when he pronounced, “This is a club that aims higher than 4th place. We don’t believe that’s good enough, this club wants to win things.”