Peter Le Beau
(Ed’s note – This piece was submitted on the afternoon of Wednesday last week, hence the references to the event with Ivan Gazidis later that day)
One of the big events of the Arsenal calendar is eagerly anticipated as I write. The Ivan Gazidis Q&A sees the CEO step into the Lion’s Den and face 300 very inquisitive, and some very angry, Gooners. I will be there, but frankly I never expect too much from sessions where the questions are submitted ten days in advance, simply because the PR machine spins into action and ensures that Ivan the Terrible, as many Gooners believe he should be called, is able to nuance his answers as deftly as possible.
This will not prevent papers like the Star (the paper with the hotline to our Chairman, Lord preserve us) and the rest of the tabloids spinning one way, and the rest of the press trying to analyse exactly what he said. His words will be scrutinised in detail like the utterances of a new head of state in China for the slightest indication of what he might be thinking.
But what is the state of the Gooner nation, from which Gazidis will face a hopefully representative contingent? Frankly, I wish I could tell you. I’ve supported Arsenal for 54 years, and I can never remember a more divided fan-base. It’s inevitable with so many Arsenal blogs that there will and should be disagreements in a healthy way, just as a group of Gooners in the Tollington or wherever might argue before a game. But, honestly, some of the stuff I’ve read (and, like most Gooners, I’m addicted to the blogs) worries the hell out of me.
A couple of weeks ago, I read the most unbelievable two-part rambling blog on Untold Arsenal, where a lady (American I think) dissected a Steve Howard article in the Sun spinning a conspiracy theory that would do the X-Files proud. Never has so much respect been paid to Steve Howard. I think the upshot was that there was a deliberate conspiracy to injure Arsenal players to make them spend money in the transfer window! I would not have expected anybody to dignify it with a response, but it prompted a lot of wild support and very little criticism (except from me). My final comment was that I didn’t know there were so many Arsenal–supporting ‘nutters’ out there! Not Hemingway-esque, but a reaction to a blog that disturbed me because it tapped into a mob of “Arsène is God” followers.
At the other end of the scale, I couldn’t believe a recent piece in Le Grove, not because it wasn’t well-written and well-argued, which it was. In fact, it was a good, challenging blog at the other end of the scale to UA, but it stimulated a series of fanatical Wenger-haters spewing such malign and unpleasant cries of anguish about our inability to spend that some of the initial points were lost as the group replying started scrapping with each other like hyenas fighting over a carcass. And that is what some of them would like to do with Wenger, Gazidis, Kroenke and PHW. Sir Chips escaped explicit criticism, but he would no doubt be hanged by the baying mob as the Board were made to pay publicly for their parsimony. Maybe the statue of Tony Adams is big enough to build a scaffold on?
It was unbelievable stuff, and alluded to blogs like A Cultured Left Foot, which I regard very highly as a balanced and articulate view, along with others like Goonerholic, East Lower and View from the North Bank. When I read what they write, even if I don’t agree with it, I don’t feel the need to distance myself from the people replying. I recognise a love of the club, a respect for the club, and a mature acknowledgement that things in a competitive industry like football, especially now it is so skewed financially, never always run smoothly.
But can you reconcile these strongly held points of view and, given the disparity in sentiment, is there any explanation for it?
The glib answer is “yes, win a trophy, preferably a big one” and of course this would help enormously to heal the rift. Many writers in the Gooner have referred to the long gaps between periods of success in the club’s history. They occurred before the Champions League (with its largesse) for nearly but not quite as long as the time when clubs first came into being and when the FA Cup was regarded as more than a trinket by fans and managers alike. For long-time Gooners, this period, studded as it is with really major change at the club, is nothing out of the ordinary. I hear people say that this is the worst side in Arsenal’s history. This is patently untrue. Can they not remember the days of Terry Mancini, Jim Magill and Eddie McGoldrick to name but three? The name of Gus Caesar still brings friends of mine out in a cold sweat!
The problem is that the game now is inextricably linked with money and, sadly, the richer the club, the more successful they have been. Abramovich’s era at Stamford Bridge is like a bad soap opera, but it is studded with trophies. Yes, we finish above Spurs every season, but they can blow a ten-point lead in a heartbeat, and, if you’re fighting over the minor places, does this really matter?
Someone asked me if anything hadn’t changed at Arsenal since I supported them and the only thing I can think of is that I have never known a time when the Chairman didn’t have a double-barrelled name! Sir Bracewell-Smith, followed by the two Hill-Woods. I have banged on for years about our current Chairman. He is a PR disaster and, to take last year’s AGM as an example, an underwhelming public speaker. He might point to the record of financial and playing achievement during his tenure, but one suspects his input into success is peripheral at best. He gives the board the veneer of sophistication behind which an American-style marketing operation is emerging, and is often the fall-guy for Kroenke, the absentee landlord with the dubious franchise record.
In fact, that very term, “franchise”, is at the heart of the problem. Try telling the person who supported Arsenal in the fifties and sixties, or the person who travels all over the world supporting them, that Arsenal is a franchise! It’s not; it is at the core of most Arsenal fans’ existence and, unless Kroenke and co appreciate this, they will never be accepted at Arsenal. No person who goes twice a year (if business interests permit) can ever convince fans he has a real affinity with the club. I have long felt that Usmanov would be a more convincing owner, but let’s hold on a second. The clamour for Usmanov is understandable.
Football changed when Abramovich swept into Stamford Bridge. Fans now plead for rich men effectively to buy them a team that can win trophies. As one of the most glamorous teams in Europe, we have attracted rich shareholders, but I can’t believe a man who has made so much money in business as Usmanov will be content just to throw money at Arsenal simply to win trophies and won’t want it organised like a proper business. And, if Financial Fair Play did come in, how ironic would it be that Arsenal, the epitome of self-sustainability, might be one of the first teams to be affected in a shower of Russian roubles. I doubt this would be an acceptable scenario for Wenger either.
Oh yes, Wenger! What about him? The man vilified in so many comments on the blogs. What did Arsène Wenger ever do for us? According to one commentator (who showed his ignorance of chronology as much as of Arsenal itself), all of the great superstars of the last fifteen years were purchased on the say-so of Damien Comolli. How convenient it is to rewrite history when it suits your argument!
The length of Wenger’s tenure is a very important debating point. If he is omnipotent, as seems the case at Arsenal, he takes the blame for seven trophy-less years, the débacle that was last close season, and the failure to win the Champions League. But, if you throw this at him, at least allow him to throw back two doubles, an unbeaten season, the building of the new stadium, and fifteen successive seasons of qualifying for the Champions League. It’s a record that deserves respect, as does the man himself. He genuinely remained loyal to Arsenal when he could have had his pick of any managerial job in the world. Frankly, the phone would ring off the hook if he resigned today.
He is very far from perfect. I find his touchline and after-match behaviour embarrassing on an increasing number of occasions, and I suspect he doesn’t take advice easily. The loss of David Dein was crucial in damaging the club, and the coaching staff could do with some new blood. I’d hate Wenger to depart with animosity from Arsenal. He deserves far better than that. He is an obstinate S.O.B, but so are many great leaders. With the right support, I think he might be able to win again, although, until FFP comes in, that gets tougher each year. It may be the time for him to depart but, if he does, I hope it is in the right way. He has achieved too much to be kicked out unceremoniously and, frankly, while Kroenke is there, it won’t happen.
We need to accept that life changes and that football changes very quickly. Supporting Arsenal is a life-long commitment and transcends great periods, and periods of misery. I can’t imagine it, but I’d still pitch up at home matches if we were in the Ryman South, and most Gooners I know are the same. We’re noisy, opinionated and concerned, but we bleed red and white and always will, whoever owns “the franchise”.
