World Football Thread XVI - The demise of one Ronaldo and the rise of another

[Ãskallin]

That David Dein thing is really interesting. He owns like 15% of Arsenal aye? Keep us updated Cort

[Maquiladora]

I don't know what the rest of the board is like at Arsenal, but this is definitely Arsenals loss.

Now it depends whats worse, a takeover from a yank (and possible greater period of debt), or the chance of the old board ****ing things up with Wenger.

[Cort Haus]

Dein was the closest director to both Wenger and the players. He was the most energetic, footballistically, and the one that has done the most to bring the club forward over the last 20 years.

However, Arsenal have a thing about their traditions, and whilst local and English players have never been part of that tradition*, ownership by resolutely pro-Arsenal, non-business-only and English forces has been.

Of the current owners, it had looked like Danny Fizsman was the most likely to sell his shares to Kronky - but it turns out that Fizsman, Hill-Wood, Lady Nina and the Carr family all want to hold onto theirs to retain English ownership (for the time being), while Dein wants to sell to Kronky, who he believes will inject some much-needed cash into the transfer budget to allow the club to compete again with the Blue Circus and Man Utd.

* The first Woolwich Arsenal team comprised many Scots and Midlanders, and Arsenal were the first English side to field many Irish players, then black British players, then French players, then African players.

The tug-of-war is therefore between the desire to retain the traditions of ownership ( the 'Bank of England' club) and to reap the benefits of foreign investment that is increasingly becoming the standard way to 'buy' success - or try to buy success.

The 260 million pound debt of the new stadium has inhibited team investment, which is why Wenger has had to try and work miracles with cheap, young imports (and English players are extremely expensive). His 'Great Experiment' has yielded two finals, beautiful football, and no silverware for two seasons.

The fans are split between the patient, pro-Wenger camp (called 'ostriches' by their detractors) who will wait and try to grow success from seedlings, and the impatient, wanna-spend big camp (called the 'moaners' by their detractors) who want experienced, proven internationals to come and ensure silverware.

I'm an 'ostrich', FWIW, because I admire Wengers commitment to the beautiful game, and developing young talent as the antithesis to the Mourinho/Abramovich formula of raping a country to provide hundreds of millions of pounds for Galacticos to guarrantee success with competant, successful but mind-numbingly boring football.

Arsenal are not strangers to boring football, as George Graham's teams achieved success playing the dull game, but like Wenger's teams, on a budget. The fans are split between the Wengeristas (beautiful game) and Grahamistas (pragmatic success). I am a Wengerista.

[Cort Haus]

Another thing - Keith Edelman is Managing Director - but not an Arsenal man. Dein has been in opposition to him over many issues. Edelman has failed miserably on the commercial deals - ie shirt and stadium sponsorship.

Compared to domestic rivals Chelsea, ManYoo and Spurs, commercial revenues are derisory, and German club FC Shalke provide a stark contrast. The Emirates deal is worth about 6.5 million a year compared to over 15 million a year for Shalke's deals. Chelsea bought out their old crap deals and got more lucrative ones in place, and it is possible that Kroenke would do the same for Arsenal.

The consequence of selling the club short commercially is lower transfer budgets and too-high ticket prices.

[Ãskallin]

Thanks Cort, good post.
Although Wenger is a whining bastard and french into the bargain, he has my respect for playing the beautiful game .

I have to post this interview with Keane. I look forward having the guy in the premiership .

My Sunderland can beat Chelsea - Keane tribalfooball.com - April 18, 2007 Sunderland boss Roy Keane says his current team would survive in the Premiership - and even give Chelsea a run for their money. Keane watched the champions' FA Cup semi-final against Blackburn Rovers on Sunday and the former Manchester United captain said he saw nothing to fear in a Chelsea side who are still chasing an unprecedented quadruple. He said: "I went to the game just hoping to see a decent game and have a look at Chelsea, see what their manager is all about and pick up different things. I left before extra-time but overall I have to say I didn't think it was a very good game. I thought it was poor. "I looked at both teams and thought: 'We could have either of them' - just as I looked at Middlesbrough and West Bromwich a few months ago. "We could take them and I saw nothing to worry us. I have watched plenty of Premiership teams recently I reckon we could take a few of them."

[Cort Haus]

" I didn't think it was a very good game" - hehe. Chelsea games rarely are - but as a team they are incredibly effective at grinding out results and show superb commitment to keeping going for the win - which they invariably get in the last 10 minutes, however unconvincing the overall performance.

It must be wonderful to be a Chelsea fan and watch that energy and commitment prevail. During the CC final I watched them massacred in the midfield for 60 minutes, but gradually their experience allowed them to take control against a team of youngsters, and towards the end of the game I felt victory was inevitable.

Some Arsenal fans are hoping that Roy Keane is the man to follow Wenger, should he not renew his contract. I'm sure Man U fans would be tempted for him to succeed Fergeson.

[Ãskallin]

I thought Arsenal fans despised Keane? Or was that only as a footballer?

[Maquiladora]

I thought everyone despised Keane?

Although the EPL could do with more straight-talkers.

[Cort Haus]

Everyone despises effective players and managers when they work for the enemy. The prospect of them working wonders for one's own club is another matter. I expect Keane is still very unpopular with most Arsenal fans, but among those who are impatient with Wenger, some would prefer a manager that rules by fear.

[Cort Haus]

Good piece in the Guardian about takeovers:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/04/20/why_arsenal_are_reluctant_to_v.html

[Colonâ„¢]

So why won't they turn the club into a non-profit organisation if they believe return on investment shouldn't be in play?

[Cort Haus]

I think it's a bit late for that, but it is possible that they don't want the club straddled with nearly a billion pounds of debt which the Kroenke bid (which seems inevitable) could precipitate IF the Glazer model is used for the debt.

In fact Liverpool's US owners will be sending 'pool most of the bill too, AFAIK.

Mr K doesn't have £650,000,000 splashing about, and seeing as charging the target for the cost of buying it seems normal business for these guys, this would be added to the existing £250,000,000 debt for the stadium.

Things have been fine at Old Trafford so far, but their debt servicing costs are far higher than Arsenal's, and they've been relying on pre-Glazer purchases for this year's success. As players like Giggs, Scholes & Neville fade the squad might start looking thin, and funds may be tight to get the quality replacements required.

It freaks me out the way you can take someone over with their own money, it really does. Imagine if someone came and bought your house then sent you the bill for it.

[Colonâ„¢]

That's a bad analogy because ManU's previous owners just got paid for the shares they sold. It's not them who took on the debt.

[Cort Haus]

Yes, I don't know what would be a good analogy, but it just seems criminal to me that a pirate can take over a club and send the bill to the club. Ultimately it's the fans who pay.

[Ãskallin]

Yea its sickening how you can buy a club with money that you dont own and then let fans pay the debt
Especially people like the Glazers