Peter Le Beau
In the past few months I've started to ban subjects from conversation because they are just too tedious. First it was Brexit and then Trump, but in the last few months Wengergate has joined the list. In the circles in which I mix I am very well known as a Gooner and have not been slow in the past to give abuse in large measures to followers of other clubs, especially our near neighbours. The frenzy of speculation over Wenger and the almost epic mishandling of his situation by a supposedly competent board made me consider the other day just what has gone into this situation and produced this incredible period of humiliation for Gooners everywhere.
A perfect storm - we have a perfect storm of elements so toxic in their combination that it would be hard to invent such a dire set of circumstances. Discontent has been festering among supporters for a long time, but it has been held in check largely because of respect for Wenger's achievements and a feeling, held by many, that he has shown great devotion towards the club. That is not a universally-held view; many see this devotion as a selfish clinging-to-power and an obsessive unwillingness to change his position as the ultimate control-freak.
Perfect storms do however require more than one element to create them and we have in this situation a remarkable set of events that is driving us up the wall on a regular basis. It is hard to divorce Wenger from any of these, and I will revert to that, but these elements need to be isolated to analyse what exactly has gone wrong.
A team of pussycats
Until 1996, Arsenal had an image that was a combination of elegance mixed with a reputation for dour, effective football, characterised by strong defenders who never shirked a battle. McLintock, Storey, Rice, Adams, Keown, Bould and Winterburn were archetypal Arsenal players, hated by other fans but loved by us for their obvious devotion to the cause.
That image changed quickly after Wenger arrived, to encompass a focus on beautiful passing football that Arsenal had never enjoyed before. In Chapman and Whittaker's era they were reviled for being a side built on a strong defence and counter-attacking power. George Graham's two title-winning sides were a combination of power and attacking flair but, because they were founded on a rock-solid back four, the admiration for them was tempered by the old criticism of the defensive Arsenal Way. Who can forget the scene in the Full Monty in the Labour Exchange where the lads raise their hands in formation aping the famous offside drill of the Tony Adams side? I roared with laughter but also with pride. Arsenal were able to win through sheer character, a trait never more obvious than in Copenhagen in 1994 when we fought a patently more skilful Parma side to a standstill.
Of course there were the Invincibles, the culmination of a new Arsenal philosophy, initially utilising the old Graham back four but now changed in personnel and philosophy. Led by Vieira, a monster of a player and a hard, competitive captain, that team had Campbell, Lauren, Gilberto and Bergkamp, who combined quality with an inner steel. Contrast that team to the displays we have seen from the current team. Possibly the two second halves against Munich were the worst examples, but the capitulations at West Brom and Palace were in their way just as awful. Take Koscielny out of that defence and all hell breaks loose.
It is a trend that isn't new. The surrender of a four-goal lead at Newcastle a few years ago was another perfect storm of a referee sending off a player and then awarding two dubious penalties, combined with a complacency that tipped over into near cowardice against a modest Newcastle side. The surrender of a three-goal lead to Anderlecht at home was another example. But this season we've seen an inability to compete against the best teams married with defensive disorganisation and a surrender mentality that shames the club to its core. There are many reasons, but the most obvious is the oft-observed lack of leadership and the contempt for the role of captain that had been fulfilled with such distinction by Hapgood, Mercer, McLintock, Rice, Adams and Vieira. Now our designated club captains don't even play in the first team. To choose Theo Walcott as skipper (thoroughly decent lad though he is) is to cast scorn at the contribution made by those great captains of the past.
The result is a team that plays without drive or seeming pride in performance. One that sulked its way through the home leg against Bayern where Adams and McLintock would have exhorted the team to fight for respectability. My grandson's Saturday team (he is nine) genuinely displays more fight and pride in performance than the current Arsenal side. I've seen Arsenal sides comprehensively outplayed and outclassed but none that throws the towel in so readily. Allied to the worst-drilled defence I've ever seen at Arsenal (not the worst individuals, the worst-drilled) it leads inevitably to regular beatings and ritual humiliations. I literally dread the Semi-Final and the North London Derby. This team on those stages could take us to lows we didn't know existed.
A craven and incompetent board
I met Sir Chips once. He bore the expression that I would bear at a dressmaking circle that was scheduled to last three hours. Boredom laced with apprehension. It was a supporters’ Christmas bash and he escaped massive interrogation because few people knew who he was. He struck me as an amiable man, at home in City boardrooms and perhaps on the grouse moor. In that sense, he was a worthy successor to our previous Chairman who always gave me the impression that he wasn't entirely sure what was going on and rather resented these working-class johnnies who had attached themselves to the club.
The role of a football club director needs to combine an understanding of finance (which we have in spades) with a real appreciation of what football is about, the politics of the game and the ability to network with other clubs. Love him or hate him, David Dein understood the game so much better than the current board. Much has been written about Kroenke. I won't call him 'Silent Stan' because that's an almost affectionate nickname for someone for whom I have not got a shred of affection. Here is a man who has bought an organisation that has appreciated in value by almost 100% since he took over, without the slightest contribution to that growth on his part. Small wonder that, despite a bit of aggravation 5,000 miles away, he has no wish to part with it. Kroenke has a record of never selling any of the teams in his empire and, in Wenger, he has had a man who could guarantee a stable earnings-pattern in an industry where the pickings were getting better every year and who showed a remarkable willingness to act as a lightning-rod to protect the board and owner and give us a highly credible presence overseas as a blue-chip player in a rapidly-expanding global business.
Nevertheless, after the decline we are seeing, it is inconceivable that we are even considering whether Wenger wants to sign a new two-year contract and that his future is within his gift. That is not management, it is abdication of responsibility. I sit on four boards and none of them would allow a CEO the incredible power and isolation that Wenger has. The lack of a Plan B has come back to bite a Board who must have realised that, with a 67-year-old man in charge, they needed a ready contingency plan.
I desperately hope Kroenke decides to sell. Certainly a Simeone/Kroenke type of partnership would look destined to fracture before long as the manager demands funds for team-building but is also unwilling to deflect so much criticism away from the board.
The media
I'm old enough to remember the last year of Billy Wright's tenure. Appointing him was akin to appointing Steven Gerrard to manage Arsenal - an iconic player, associated with a rival and with no managerial experience. In his last season, we axed our two best players and they left the club (sound familiar?). It was a ghastly time that culminated in that tiny gate against Leeds when bonfires were lit on the terraces. Even then, Wright wasn't sacked until the end of the season. So despair is nothing new but it's heightened by social media and a tabloid radio/newspaper focus that is unflinching. That was absent in 1966, and thank goodness it was. Now we have a scrutiny and focus for debate that is intense and unyielding (but can still probably be ignored 5,000 miles away if it doesn't impact on the balance sheet).
Social media is in meltdown and those like me who sow will reap umpteen fold. I have a meeting today with a Palace fan who has been waiting twenty years to bait me! This new focus can enable you to lose perspective but the existence of ArsenalFanTV and the Black Scarf movement is a reality that no-one can ignore even if they don't approve of them. It's not a crime for someone paying what we pay to watch Arsenal to complain, in fact it's his right in our consumer-centric world. Arsenal handle this by employing Gazidis, a cool and impressive public orator but not a man who seems able to take the decisions he needs to without substantial reference. It's almost as if he was handed his job by Wenger - but that couldn't possibly happen…
That media scrutiny will just continue to intensify. Many enemies of Arsenal smell blood and are not prepared to swim away from a flailing carcass until they've devoured it.
Wenger at the centre of the storm
I've left Wenger until last although he is really the catalyst for everything that is happening. The team is one he has assembled, the defence is one he has failed to coach, the character is missing because he has assembled a team of questionable fortitude and mentality. He has a position that only Ferguson in recent years came anywhere near to occupying. The Board are so in thrall to him they have enabled him to design the club in almost every respect as the model that he feels works best. While he was a breath of fresh air in the mid-90s in English football, twenty years later he is doing the same things, with largely the same staff and the result is currently chaotic. Ferguson constantly reinvented himself, a sort of footballing Bowie. Wenger plods on relentlessly, believing it will all come good if we believe hard enough. The Invincible season was his zenith; the current one looks likely to be his nadir unless he gets the contract extension he craves and is ready to undergo two further years of abuse. In the meantime, views vary from gratitude for his ability to navigate us through the move to the Grove to a feeling that, for £8 million and wage expenditure way beyond many others, his achievements are only moderate, especially in Europe.
