Robert Exley
‘S***hole! About time they knocked the f***er down’ stated a worse for wear Liam Gallagher, on entrance when his rock combo Oasis headlined one of the last ever gigs at the Old Wembley in the summer of 2000. Whatever Liam lacks in articulate expression, he often has a Paul Calf-esque ability to hit nail on the head in the crudest manner possible. As we entered the new millennium Wembley wasn’t just a relic that belonged in the 20th Century, it was a ground that even looked and felt pathetic in the post-Taylor report all seater era with its stupid backless benches which only the terminally anorexic could have fitted their backsides on with any semblance of comfort. However over ten years after the twin towers of Wembley were bulldozed, was the greater evil allowing Wembley to reach this putrified stage or was it allowing the stadium to be rebuilt at all?
Arsenal’s failure to reach major finals since it reopened has been somewhat eased by the relief at not having to set foot in the place. Since the new Wembley reopened for business in 2007 I’ve been there four times in total and have found no love for the place on any occasion. Both Old and New Wembley are an embodiment of the fallacy that the all-seater stadium brought comfort and safety to the football spectator – in the 1993 FA Cup Semi Final, the only way I got to see Tony Adams’s winning goal was by standing on the bench, despite being over six foot tall. At New Wembley in 2007 watching England v Israel for the cheapest price involved being perched at the highest possible vantage point and at the most nauseating angle. As everyone knows the cheapest seats are where the best atmosphere is, though atmosphere is the last thing you really want at over 80 metres up at a sharp angle.
New Wem-ber-lee is also over corporate. It may be annoying seeing Arsenal’s club level empty immediately after half time as the corporate guests quaff the free drinks – however with New Wembley its middle tiers are completely empty in their entirety for ‘lesser’ games such as play off finals because the corporate guests just aren’t interested in them, denying an extra 20,000 a seat at their club’s big day. New Wembley cost over £800 million to build, £120 million of which came from public funds. It was also originally to be a stadium which could host Athletics and any future Olympic bid. Such plans were shelved and hence a further £500 million was spent on building a stadium to host the Olympic Games in 2012. Surely a bit of foresight could have been given here by all concerned? The New national stadium and an Olympic stadium could have been a two in one facility and with proper effort made to incorporate a retractable athletics track, like London’s 2012 competitor the Stade De France in Paris does quite adequately.
The last fifteen years has seen historic old grounds like Highbury, the Baseball Ground and Maine Road bulldozed. White Hart Lane, Anfield and the Boleyn Ground are also earmarked for extinction. Most of the domestic clubs seemed to have cottoned on to the idea that history means nothing if it stands in the way of future progress, so why then were we over-sentimental enough to keep the national stadium in Wembley? This little corner of North West London is a horrific place to get to and from wherever you live. A National come Olympic Stadium in Stratford could have solved many problems with its superb links all over London and to connecting National Rail and Inter-City stations, plus with Stratford International also the rest of Europe. Also, if the Olympic Stadium was to play host to Cup Finals, Play off Finals and International Matches there would have been no argument over its legacy and future viability, so three London clubs would never have had the chance to argue over its impact, positive or otherwise. There would have been no Premiership clubs gaining a new stadium from tax payer’s money and no threat Orient’s survival either.
Wembley is reported to have cost the FA over £85 Million a year to maintain, while the subsidiary group wholly owned by the FA is around £320 million in debt. Wembley also hopes to pay off its debts with corporate packages and rock concerts. However David Bernstein, the FA chief who previously oversaw the running of the national stadium, admitted that there are only around 40 events a year that could fill an 80,000 capacity stadium in London. Therefore it clearly isn’t commercially viable for London to have two stadiums of this size; one is inevitably going to lose out to the other. The accessibility of the Olympic Stadium for concert goers and its close proximity to the financial centres of Canary Wharf, the City and the new business district in Stratford itself in comparison to the National Stadium means Wembley will most probably lose much of its business to the Olympic Stadium as a result, further fuelling the coffers of West Ham’s Gold and Sullivan in the process.
Other than sending Marty McFly back in a DeLorian to the year 1999 to persuade the powers that be against keeping Wembley and throwing its lot in with Stratford, in 2011 little can be done to avert what will turn out to be a shameful waste of the tax payer’s and the football industry’s resources. However the obvious lack of foresight, lack of progressive thinking and unmitigated profligacy with resources and public finances probably gives us a great deal of insight into how these endemic national failings helped to produce the financial mess of today, not just with football’s governing body but also within the wider economy of the UK itself.
And so to the game itself on Sunday – much of the Gooner’s content in print and online has harked back to previous finals and my input is no different. The two figures I will place great emphasis on are an enigmatic talented forward and a hapless centre half. Andrey Arshavin has always reminded me of Charlie Nicholas in many ways – both were the first big Arsenal signing for nearly a decade and brought with them an incredible level of hype, both were undoubtedly talented and yet conversely both failed to turn out great performances on a regular basis in the red and white of Arsenal. The only difference between them is that with Charlie, he was present at a time where Arsenal experienced dearth of great talent and consequently was a terrace hero due to being slightly taller than the midgets that surrounded him in footballing stature. Arshavin however is unfortunate enough to be here in a time where talent oozes through much of the side and hence why he’s not accorded the same terrace hero status as Charlie Nick. Hopefully by the end of the weekend another thing they’ll both have in common is the honour of League Cup winning performance, as Charlie managed in 1987.
At the other end of the scale are Ian Ure and Gus Caesar, thus two centre halves who produced horrendous mistakes which aided surprise defeats in League Cup finals which we believed we were a nailed on cert to win, nineteen years apart. Neither centre half ever really lived down their mistakes either. Gus was mere rookie in Arsenal colours however; Ian Ure in contrast came for a World record fee for a centre half. In many ways he’s similar to Sebastien Squillaci, who came to Arsenal with an international and Champions League reputation, but has so far flattered to deceive to the extent that many are praying his name is not in Sunday’s starting line-up. So for me, what awaits us will be either a 2011 edition of ‘Champagne Charlie’ or a steaming pile of ‘Man-Ure’. Let’s all hope it’s the former and not the latter!
