Robert Exley
There are some so-called “facts” that people actually believe without fully scrutinising or even questioning their basis. For instance, 1977 – ‘the year of punk’ – actually saw the charts dominated by Wings, David Soul, Abba and Leo Sayer - not The Clash, The Jam or the Sex Pistols. The first black musical act to break the colour-bar and appear on MTV was not moonwalking Michael Jackson, but the Bash Street kids of Reggae, Musical Youth. They also say that John Major lacked the popular appeal of Margaret Thatcher, despite the fact that, in the 1992 General Election, his Conservative party actually got a higher number of votes than any party had ever received in any General Election before or since.
The world of football also has its own equivalent “facts”. One of them is Arsène Wenger’s ability to fashion a successful young side. It’s easy to see where the misapprehension comes from – it is true that there have been legions of very young players brought through by Wenger over the years who have prospered. From the signing of 20-year-old Patrick Vieira from AC Milan back in 1996 right through to Jack Wilshere’s elevation from the youth team in recent seasons, he has certainly had an eye over the years for quality, attack-minded young players (central defenders and goalkeepers, however, not so good). His ability to weave a successful side that is predominantly youth-oriented, however, is as mythical as the 1977 Top of the Pops Pogo fest.
Taking the facts of his period at Arsenal at face value, this myth is easily debunked. In Wenger’s first and second Double seasons, the average age of those fielded in each of the 1998 and 2002 FA Cup Finals was 29. Come the time of Wenger’s last trophy success, the 2005 FA Cup Final, the average age of the players fielded had been 27. As his side has got progressively younger over the years, it has failed to win anything. Last year’s Carling Cup side had an average age of 25.
Now, there are mitigating factors for the years since 2005 for sure: the restrictive financial situation of the club isn’t just Wengerite propaganda, it has curtailed Arsenal’s financial muscle to a certain extent. However, if you look at Wenger’s record at Monaco, a similar pattern also emerges. It’s difficult to get hold of records for the Monaco Squads between the years 1987-1994, but, from the information gleaned in the early years of Wenger’s reign, his initial success (in his first season in the Mediterranean principality in fact) came with a very experienced side. Between the sticks he had Jean-Luc Ettori, who starred in goal for the French in España 82, as well as Patrick Battiston and Manuel Amoros, who were mainstays of the great French side of the 1980s. He also drew on the experience the English duo of Glenn Hoddle and Mark Hateley (for those who accuse Wenger of Anglophobia, these were his first two signings in a job where he actually had money to spend). From this site the Monaco side of 1987/88 seems to have an average age of around 31 years old and his 1991 Coupe de France winning side had an average age of 28.
Wenger’s record in Monaco at times, however, seems eerily similar to his period at Arsenal. Just as we often played second fiddle to Manchester United (even in the good years), for much of his time in France he came second to the all-conquering Olympique Marseille side of the late 80s and early 90s. (With hindsight, the corruption which was uncovered after Marseille’s Champions League success in 1993 indicates that Monaco could have had further success under Wenger but for Bernard Tapie’s corrupt influence in French Football, which even included bribing Monaco players to throw games.)
Despite high finishes in the French League, however, Monaco didn’t win a great deal under Wenger – just two trophies in all. They did, however, over time develop or scout from abroad young players who went on to make a name for themselves, though mostly away from Monaco – from the modest successes of Gilles Grimandi, Sylvain Legwinski and Victor Ikpeba right through to world-class talent like that of George Weah, Emmanuel Petit, Youri Djorkaeff, Lillian Thuram and Thierry Henry. It’s interesting to note, however, that - even as late on as 1994 - the average age of his squad was roughly 28. Any inclination to develop the likes of Lillian Thuram and Emmanuel Petit was counterbalanced with the experience and world-class talent of Jurgen Klinsmann and Enzo Scifo. The ability, therefore, to fashion a side top-heavy with under-25s has never been a particular trait of Wenger pre-2006, even in his most fruitful periods. So, rather than the last few years being some sort of pragmatic reverting to ‘what Wenger does best’, it is in actual fact a period of trial and error (mostly the latter).
You see, for all the criticisms of ‘Project Youth’, it’s not necessarily a bad idea, depending on who’s implementing it and how it’s implemented. The Manchester United side that has just scored eleven goals in the last two games has an average age of around 23, and the club is believed to have in place a transfer policy that they will not spend big money on players over the age of 26. The difference is that the man implementing it is one who has won the double with a side that had roughly the same average age as that of our beaten Carling Cup Final side of last February and also managed to see the project through to a Champions League victory in 1999, which in itself was the foundation of further successes.
To sum up Arsène Wenger’s managerial style, in contrast, it’s important to hear what former players under his wing say about the man. Martin Keown states: ‘He was great to be around when I was a player - he's calm, considered and very intelligent. Wenger treats all the players like adults, he always gets a good response from them and I don't think he’s actually fallen out with anybody who has been under his wings’. Here’s also an article by Ian Wright circa May 1998 as Arsenal were heading toward their first Double, echoing similar statements such as ‘He does not rule by fear or threaten people by banging the table with his fist. In fact, he's probably the first manager ever to win the title without raising his voice all season… The old school method, the fear factor and trying to frighten kids into playing well, is all old hat to him’.
The appreciation of his methods by these two accounts is clearly there for all to see, but it’s worth noting that both players were over thirty in a side predominantly made up of players in their late 20s and early to mid-30s. At this stage in their careers, this approach is fully appreciated and, with established pros, more than likely to be reciprocated. However, how successful can it be with a group of players who, in the space of a few short years, have predominantly gone from flicking elastic bands and drawing willies in school textbooks for a laugh in the fifth form, like a bunch of characters from the Inbetweeners, to international stardom and a seven-figure income? Yes, you can treat an 18-year-old footballer like an adult, but will he reciprocate? Especially when, unlike in the real world, the environment of professional football seems to be a fertile breeding ground for prolonging an adolescent mindset well into adulthood. It may well be that, in all probability, Arsène Wenger has an overly mature mind-set that doesn’t quite relate or function well with the mind-set of a group of developing footballers who, on the whole, are quite immature in their outlook. It’s also worth noting that Wenger wasn’t even a father himself until his late 40s, such is his total immersion with the maturity of adulthood and mature company.
It may well be that the old school methods carried out by the likes of Alex Ferguson in developing a team of successful youngsters are not quite so old hat or outdated after all. Where Wenger believes in discussing things like adults with his young players, Alex Ferguson’s approach is drastically different, as described here by one of Fergie’s fledglings: ‘I would go into a meeting with him and I would have prepared exactly what I was going to say, but once I was in there my mind would go blank - then he would totally control the situation’. Now I’m not sure if I would ever advocate such a level of fear or blind obedience to authority in any walk of life, but a very big part of me wishes that Nicklas Bendtner felt at least one per cent of this amount of fear when about to enter Arsène Wenger’s office for a meeting, instead of feeling safe in the knowledge that he is able to prattle on for an hour about being the greatest centre forward in the world without having to back up such a bold claim.
However old-hat Wenger may believe the disciplinarian approach with young players to be, it seems startlingly obvious throughout history that managers who have got success out of a predominantly young side have had this approach. Other than Ferguson, few players were inclined to take liberties with Matt Busby or Jock Stein in their pomp. It’s also notable how the last two occasions where a predominantly young Arsenal side went on to achieve success, neither was achieved under the managers who initiated the youth policy in the first place, but rather under an incoming manager who forefronted a disciplinarian tone. Seven of the Double-winning squad were there as a direct result of Billy Wright’s youth policy, though he was considered too nice and lacking in authority to develop any kind of success with them, in contrast to the former war veteran and Sergeant Major, Bertie Mee. Similarly, Don Howe was considered too genial and not hard enough on underachieving older star names, though he was responsible for the vast majority of the young up-and-coming stars that brought Arsenal success under George Graham in the late 1980s.
George’s authority with younger players was laid down almost immediately when Martin Keown was allowed to leave after a dispute over a pay rise, as well as six months later, when he sold Stewart Robson to West Ham after falling out with him. Despite the fact they were two of Arsenal’s best performers of the previous season, and despite the fact that, seven years on, Graham had to buy Keown back for ten times the price he sold him for, a powerful message was sent out to the young side that endured for several years – the message that ultimate authority lay with George and that he was not one to be crossed.
Thirteen years on, and the Anelka transfer saga became a precedent that seemingly reversed the whole process. Within a few years Patrick Vieira was publically slating not only Arsenal but his fellow colleagues via the pages of The Sun, only to roll out again the following season in an Arsenal shirt. Although Vieira was an all-time Arsenal great and a cornerstone of further successes, the embarrassment caused by this little episode a decade ago sent out totally the wrong message and no doubt paved the way for the future recalcitrance of Cole, Flamini, Adebayor and, this summer, of Cesc and Nasri. Contrast this with Ferguson’s fallouts with players as big and important to his side as Stam, Keane and Beckham, which ultimately resulted in only one winner – the old Shop Steward from Govan himself. You also couldn’t imagine George Graham allowing the Nasri saga to drag out for an entire summer like Wenger did, seemingly wasting his time trying to keep a player who thought he was too good for the Arsenal. For all the talk of Wenger being a father figure to his young protégés, far too often they have been too quick to test the boundaries with the boss and, in reality, his financial rewarding of young unproven players in recent years, and their ability to twist Wenger around their little finger after just a solitary season of turning out, is actually more redolent of an ageing Sugar Daddy than a paternal father-figure.
Another point that others have falsely stated through these pages is that Wenger’s perceived greatness was built on inheriting some of the senior players that he did back in 1996 - something I’ve rubbished in previous articles, as it overlooks the fact that working with such players effectively, and changing some of their well-entrenched training methods and diets, involved considerable managerial and inter-personal skills in itself. This is even more so the case in relation to his time at Monaco, where he came with no reputation in French football as either a player or a manager, and, at the age of 38, was less than a decade older than some of his well-known, well-experienced and internationally-lauded players. What is correct, however, is the previous role of older players in socialising some of the up-and-coming youngsters among Wenger’s sides into the ways of top-level football – something that, evidently, has been badly missing at Arsenal in the last few years.
The sight of Theo Walcott rollocking Carl Jenkinson on Saturday was ludicrous in itself, seeing that young Theo is still considered a boy in many people’s eyes, despite being around the Arsenal first team for the last five years – something you couldn’t have said about Rooney or Giggs five years after their top-level debuts at roughly the same age as Theo. I’m no lip reader, but I’m pretty sure young Carl’s response to Theo contained two syllables with one ending in ‘off’ – as pretty much anyone naturally would if they were faced with Walcott laying down the law. This Lord of the Flies scenario is certainly a far cry from the days of Keown’s and Adams’s initiation of the Ljungbergs, the Vieiras and the Ashley Coles of the side into the ways of the Premiership. Ultimately, there seem to be only two ways out of the scenario in which we now find ourselves – either the composition of the Arsenal squad gets considerably older and more experienced, like the one of 1997/98, or Arsenal gets a new manager who is more able to lay down the law to his young players, like the incoming manager back in 1986/87. And, contrary to your proclamation at the Supporters’ Trust Q&A session last May, Mr Gazidis, the choice actually ultimately lies with you, not with the fans.
