Alex Steine
"Oh yes, and the ball is put through to Groves. Can he finish? Oh my word, he can! He has equalised and there may not even be time to centre the ball before the final whistle is blown." That was an imaginary commentary from Chelsea versus Arsenal, a 'what if' moment on Saturday 2nd February 1991, with Perry Groves equalising at the Bridge in the dying seconds, making Arsenal - that season- Invincible.
"Well would you believe it? A penalty in front of the North Bank to save the unbeaten season and Henry hits the post. So Arsenal failed to repeat their unbeaten season of '91. Even Vieira came close to rescuing it near the end but the linesman gave offside, though the cameras clearly suggest otherwise. So near, yet so far. A 'what if?' moment against Leicester City on Saturday 15th May 2004.
Football history hangs by a thread, blowing in a breeze of uncertainty. Any number of minute incidents can create that 'butterfly effect', to change an eventual outcome. That isn't news to anyone, but the ramifications are generally overlooked or quite naturally dismissed because there are so many variations possible. We live in the now. Time is rapidly rushing past us, and there is a limited period in which to reflect and recognise a sense of realism beyond the immediate.
Nobody would suggest a course in yoga is required, or an intense session in deep meditation needed to assess and maintain a healthy balance of understanding. We can engage, and often do, especially with those things in life that leap out and bite us in an unexpected fashion - those things we consider vital and important. Yet we seem to find it difficult to focus our considerations on more mundane matters, like football and supporting Arsenal. It is a form of reductionism. Football? It's just twenty two people kicking a piece of leather around. No; look deeper. It is so much more. Then so too are the problems of everyday football support and understanding them.
Anything I write will be considered 'psychobabble' by those most likely to benefit from the message these words carry, and they will sit shaking their heads. At the other end of the spectrum there is the group who can readily connect with the theme, and will be sitting nodding. I cannot influence one set and have no wish to change the comprehension of the other; it is that broad swath of people in between that I am really addressing. To reaffirm a weakening viewpoint to any of either camp who perhaps have a sense of conflict over points raised on forums, twitter or blogs, the media, or even in everyday face-to-face chats, and feel a brand of uncertainty that perhaps needs dispelling, it is not enough to say 'It didn't happen that way'. I am aware of that. My point is that it could so easily have panned out differently and that circumstance demands respect and recognition. There is the balance.
I listed two Arsenal historical events. Flimsy and fickle circumstance which can influence to a degree beyond its value. 'You get nowt for being second', was a Billy Bremner biography. Reductionism - though it helped to sell the book. Hard-nosed and gritty, but in English language sense it is tosh; in influencing minds it is dangerous. A much more astute and revealingly honest title was, 'That's the way the ball bounces', by our own Frank McLintock. A grasp of reality in a book title. (Seems that for the rest of my life I shall be thanking you in one way or another, Frank).
If you are still with me, you can list any Arsenal-related event and imagine a slightly different outcome, and all would be influential. WHL 1971, Ray scores; from the KO Willow doesn't prevent Mullery from toeing the ball past him, 1-1, and Leeds are champions. On the Saturday, Heighway scores a minute earlier in the last minute of normal time, not the first of extra time. McLintock, 'always the bridesmaid, never the bride', carries his Wembley record of six cup final defeats to the grave. Linighan's header is saved and Arsenal are beaten on penalties. Nayim's shot is tipped over by 'Safe Hands' and we become the only club to defend the ECWC by winning on penalties. The 'Nutty' boy's penalty goes in and Luton are buried; they cannot register a last-minute winner by a namesake, Brian Stein.
It is obvious that these situations could have permeated our combined psyches, but would they have affected our corporate views? I think so. Instead we have the accounts and outcomes registered, which clearly have held sway. If this point is accepted then scratch the surface and dig a little deeper in more pertinent areas. Jens in 2006 doesn't see, or get, red. We hold onto Sol's goal and Titi tucks away that one-on-one. Champions of Europe. It was that close.
The following year we see off Chelsea. Having led and dominated the first 30 minutes we knock in a second - the cup is ours. In 2011, Koscielny hoofs the ball into row 'Z', and we put four past Birmingham in extra time. The tackle misses Dudu's shin and we roll all over Birmingham; in May we are crowned deserved champions. These are frivolous scenarios, but very plausible alternatives. Yet that is my point, a plea to re-evaluate. The difference between success and failure is often wafer-thin. We should judge them as such. Michael Thomas was tackled before he delivered the coup de grace at Anfield, so that iconic season can never be trotted out as a defining season of grit, and a never-say-die attitude. More; George Graham failed. He was unable to motivate a side who were looking at the title. He allowed them to lose to Derby, and more importantly let them slide into a draw against no-hopers Wimbledon, and at home.
Of course it didn't happen in any other way than history tells it. Yet what if it had? Would we still have people bemoaning our fate at AFC, complaining that our prospects are bleak? I think so. Probably slightly differently, but moaning all the same. Just as I am convinced that people will still gripe when Arsène, superseded by a new manager at some time in the future, fails to fulfil their expectations. There are no guarantees in life - for many there is no guarantee of life.
Perspective is vitally important, or judgement is affected, and we are all lost. Fans insisted Fellaini was the man we should buy. What happened to him? Moyes or Laudrup should take the reins. What happened to them?. Hound Gervinho from the Grove so that he can set Italian football alight. Sanogo (who may become a Big Gun), is a dire purchase. Those clamouring for, and railing against, those individuals would by default have perhaps earned the sack. I say to them, spend half a day in football. To the impressionable rest I say, be true to your views, but always apply the consideration of perspective, because without it your views are hollow.
Why do AFC fans grumble today? Simply because they can. In days of yore it couldn't happen; there were no avenues open to pursue any narrative with anyone, least of all the club. Now we have the facility available to anyone who wants to vent their spleen, so they do. What of people today? Well politically we are media-led, and so too in footballing terms. Sky (The Sun of visual football) has a lot to answer for; so too the 'pundits', the newspapers, 'Talk Sport' buffoons, and the big loudmouth in the pub with the pint in his hand. Infinite gems of wisdom cascading from their biased collective comprehensions. Bigotry, secret agendas, and half-truths spilling forth constantly. Is it any wonder that these, often inexperienced outpourings muddy the waters of clear-thought processes?
This doesn't mean many views are not valid. Articulate, well-reasoned and insightful some individuals' opinions may be, but they mask the limits of the hordes behind them, those carrying the lighted torches and shaking their fists at the 'monster'. The observation is that many have no concept of the same things they accuse the club of lacking. Integrity. Good manners. Respect. Consideration. And I could go on. Much of the ranting I've witnessed is of a very poor level. Sometimes homophobia creeps in. A soft form of racism can rear its head. Ageism and sexism are not strangers to the rants. People addressing a group of well-intentioned fans, albeit possibly misguided - certainly in their opinions, label them with acronyms, and seem regularly to spit out the vitriol. Often rudeness and insensitivity become de rigueur in exchanges. Then attitudes are pursued akin to those who suffer on the autistic spectrum. ADHD, ADD, OCD, are these at fault? I have some experience in these matters, and usually one of these authentic acronyms could describe some behavioural patterns of repetition. So perhaps this goes some way towards explaining the on-going conflict between those entrenched outlooks?
Personally, I believe the initial starting point is at the crux of the matter. If an individual, an Arsenal fan, begins from a position of believing a season-ticket purchase, or for that matter a single admission ticket, gives them the right to demand anything beyond that which they receive, they are mistaken. It gives what it says on the ticket, a PL game. No more, no less. We all hold a point of view, but the rumbustious and the blustering, the aggressive and the bloody-minded win no favours. If they cannot impress me, what chance of impressing the board, gentlemen?
The editor of this fanzine and its website holds differing views to me regarding the manager's tenure. However, despite his frustrations he conducts himself admirably, full of respect and offering a well-balanced and constructive case for a change of leadership. Who cannot respect that? I would naturally go with that if it occurred, but see little sense in the same argument continuing ad infinitum in the shape of a bun fight. As I write, we are still in with a shout for the PL, the CL, and the FA Cup. Let's hope that shout is in a loud voice, but somehow I think it shan't be. Oh, and Westlower, I claim my 70% discount for your AFC (Aged Farts Compound), and would be honoured to stand with you.
