Arsenal Roundup: Henry, Cesc, Youth Team News
Less than a week remains before we kick off our season against Villa on the 19th. There has hardly been any movement in terms of transfers. The Cole saga continues, and everyone seems to be taking a breather as far as Reyes’ flirtations with Madrid (along with idiotic denials) are concerned.
However, in all probability, Ashley Cole will be a Chelsea player next season, and following Mijatovic’s arrival in London, Reyes will most likely be plying his trade in Spain. While Cole will definitely not be missed, Reyes has been an integral member of the squad despite underperforming. We hope that the promising start of Tomas Rosicky against Zagreb will lead to him cementing his spot at left wing.
Thierry Henry’s spoken of his desire to build on last season’s impressive Champions League exploits and go a step further the coming season. He used diplomatic language for Ashley Cole, but that is most probably lip service and niceties for a player he’s tried to stand by as captain. He talks about how Cesc can become an all-time legend (he seems to be on his way) and how his workrate and vision in midfield is the heart of the new Arsenal. He also talks about the leadership responsibilities on the shoulders of new vice-captain Gilberto, Kolo Toure and Jens Lehmann.
He also uses diplomatic language to play down Chelsea’s obscene financial advantage, however, the legendary Amy Lawrence paints a clearer picture in her latest Observer piece. I agree with all that she has to say, I’m not too fond of people saying “oh well, they have money, so let’s just live with it.” They may win every trophy for the next ten years, but it should not be forgotten how they got it, and any words of respect should keep the origins of their success in mind. A fellow writer at this site has chosen to term her piece a ‘rant’. I’ll take this opportunity to remind my colleague of the difference between a rant (which us bloggers are all too familiar with) and an intelligent analytical piece, especially as it comes from one of Britain’s most respected football writers.
Finally, our young guns are in Holland playing the ADO Den Haag International Youth tournament, which also features youth teams from Juventus and West Ham among others. Ashburton Groove has more information on this tournament, whose final stages are being played today.
As most already know, Thierry Henry’s left Nike and signed up with Reebok for their new “I am what I am” campaign. Check out Thierry at RBK’s new site.
Remember to sign up for Soccerlens' 08/09 Fantasy Football.
Related Items from Soccerlens
- Int’l Youth Tournament Final: Arsenal lose to Cruzeiro
- Arsenal MUST Keep Fabregas
- Barcelona vs Arsenal - News roundup
- Arsenal v Aston Villa: Preview and Team News
- Cesc Fabregas on fire - literally!
I’m sorry, but (most of) what Chelsea has done is completely within the rules, and you CAN’T complain about it. How come no one wants to put an asterik to Madrid’s titles, Champions League winning squads, etc? They bought and bought and bought, and sure they made a whole bunch of mistakes. See, you’re implyig that they’re ruining football - that’s what they’d be doing if they had players on steroids, whatever, something that HARMED the game. Like say, Tiger Woods could drive the ball farther than anybody else could. Fair enough. Golfers started to catch up, and now a lot of people can do it. Same with Chelsea’s point winning totals - if a higher points total is required to win the Premiership, the other teams raise their standards, which is fine by me as long as they put in an effort. See, Chelsea could get more for Duff etc if they waited and tried, but they have the luxury not to wait, that’s all. I still think after buying the 11 best players they’ve got to go out and win the match and you’re taking that way too lightly. There have been superstar teams in sports before, they HAVE been shown up, and you can’t just say “lets put an asterik next to their achievements”. I’d say Wenger has a better take on it, which is to win as many football matches as they can.
I honestly think it’s not about “living with it”, it’s rising up to it. And if you saw last season, United managed to play better than they had in the two previous seasons - it’s a challenge, and people rise up to it. You can’t put asteriks on clubs spending money as long as it’s allowed - that’s like, as long as the system worked for you, it was a flawed but acceptable system, and now that it’s not working out for you, it becomes flawed and unacceptable.
My $0.02.
I don’t question the legality of Chelsea’s spending (though I hope MPs and European legislators do), I question the ethic driving Chelsea.
Manchester United were the team to beat in the 1990s, yet no one begrudged them for their ethic and the fact that their on-field successes allowed them to build a commercial empire. Based on that success, they could go and make 25 million pound signings each season, and that was fine by me.
But because of the carte blanche awarded to Peter Kenyon, the ability of other clubs to ‘rise up’ as you’ve stated in your post has been hampered. Deals are hijacked (Obi Mikel) and rival bids placed just to prevent other clubs from buying. Such is their audacity that they choose to tap players up in crowded restaurants (Cole, Ferdinand).
Finally, I’m an Arsenal fan so I can’t be accused of saying “I want the flawed-yet-acceptable system that worked for us.” We played catch-up to Liverpool in the 1980s and broke their hegemony before United. We played catch-up to United financially and on the pitch until we succeeded. And by building a new stadium and investing in youth, we’re going to try and counter the Chelsea factor as well. A system where we have a small stadium, a shoestring budget and constant poaching from the likes of Barcelona and Madrid can’t be one that “works” for us.
You know what I really dislike? Nitpicking on the smallest of things said and then taking them totally out of context.
Seriously, you of all people know that when I said that just like no one wants to give up on their quest to rant against Chelsea I’m taking a swipe at everyone who blames Chelsea for what they are doing, and it has nothing to do with Amy Lawrence in particular, despite my disagreements with the article.
So considering that you took that bit out of context (not the first time today, actually - ref. gerrard vs rooney argument on today’s news roundup), I’d like to return the favour and ask you to justify what you mean when you say:
While Cole will definitely not be missed, Reyes has been an integral member of the squad despite underperforming.
Cole will not be missed? I agree that he was injured last season, but he WAS missed. Arsenal coped, but coping isn’t the same as not missing (United missed Heinze, although we coped with buying Evra). How has that changed, sans any signings?
And was Reyes really that valuable to Arsenal - more than Cole?
Let me remind you that while there is a difference between rants and intelligent analysis, presenting facts and using pretty language does not constitute intelligence. At the end of the day, we praise the opinions we agree with and always consider the authors to be smarter than those who disagree with us.
For me, Amy’s piece is jumping on the “Chelsea are ruining the game” bandwagon and not much more. She writes well, but ultimately she supports the same point without offering any substantial arguments of her own (what we get are quotes from Ferguson, Bayern and Sepp Blatter - as well as the number of people who don’t want to play at Chelsea because they won’t get any opportunities).
Chelsea is ruining football? They are merely taking the money game to a whole new level. Liverpool did it, Manchester United did it, now its their turn. It’s up to the rest of us to suck it up and improve ourselves.
The argument that players don’t get enough opportunities at Chelsea is about as dumb as it gets. If you’re good enough to break into the first-11, you’ll go there. If you’re not, you can still go there and sit on the bench and earn your paycheck, it’s up to the player. How does it ruin football if the footballers themselves decide to go to big clubs that won’t play them?
Chelsea, if anything, are hurting themselves with their star-studded squad and money squandering (100 mil of ‘whatever money’, as Amy says).
Oh, and that bit about Amy Lawrence being one of the most respected writers in Britain - well, it doesn’t allow her the luxury of being right every time, now does it?
If you make the effort to analyse Amy’s article in depth, all it does is give you an overview of what everyone is saying about Chelsea. Great work, very intelligent. It’s filler material by any other name.
to add to the ‘unfair’ bit - Amy quotes Rummenigge (Bayern Munich president) as saying that Chelsea have an unfair advantage is also pure dren.
Chelsea have more money to play with. So do Manchester United and I don’t hear anyone complaining when United or Arsenal or Liverpool go up against Championship or League Two sides in the domestic cups.
Is everyone supposed to have an equal chance to win? To a limit, yes. The difference is in each club’s ability to turn out a better team and then to play better on the day.
Clubs are, and always will be, on different levels UNLESS you put in wage caps and transfer budget caps. It will always be an uneven contest unless this happens.
With Ashley Cole’s departure, we will not miss a disruptive influence on the squad who chose to violate the terms of his contract with the club that gave him a chance to be all that he is today. I don’t think “coping” is the word I’d use for a back four that now holds the Champions League defensive record.
Reyes, despite his longing for Spain, was a player who put in 100 percent for us on the pitch last season, and his defensive work was one reason we didn’t miss Cole much. His assist-rate was remarkable, even if he didn’t contribute in terms of goals. He gave us a direct approach on the left wing that we were missing due to Pires’ decline in form and distracted performances from Cole, when fit.
This state of affairs from last season more than justifies my feeling that Reyes will be missed more than Cole.
As for the nitpicking, as a writer you’d know that a piece of yours being labelled a “rant” is a bit demeaning. The tone of Lawrence’s article was hardly in the “rant” category (I recommend a helping of Mr. Lawton’s work for further reference), and the point of me mentioning that in the post was in support of that view.
The presentation of facts to support a well-constructed “pretty language” argument does constitute good work in my books. Which is exactly why I defended Ms Lawrence’s work against the “rant” label. It’s an opinion, nothing personal.
Rumenigge’s comments were directed at the Champions League, not domestic and traditional league cups. You won’t find Getafe playing Milan in Europe’s biggest competition. And the financial repurcussions are far greater in the Champions League, than in local cups (where the lower sides end up benefitting the most from a rewarding run…that is why Premiership teams only enter the FA Cup at the 3rd round stage). The Bayern boss has a very valid point, every club bar Chelsea invests to do well in the Champions League, making hard choices along the way. Chelsea do not have to worry about such choices, thus altering the market and spending patters(something undeniable). This kind of situation never came up during United’s glory days.
The scariest thing is not that Chelsea bought the last two titles. It’s that it takes a billionaire to turn a no.4, no.5 ranked team into a No.1 team. If Chelsea didn’t have that money to spend, does anyone think they would have a hope in hell of winning?
Football’s getting to the stage where only the top dogs have a chance. Promising sides (Leeds, Newcastle, Tottenham) will hover around that 4th spot, and either overspend and go bankrupt or be picked apart by the big boys. There’s no way they can compete with the budgets and squads that teams with regular Champions League football can provide.
The only thing different with Chelsea is that it’s Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool who are feeling the pinch.
Gloryhunter, you’ve made a very valid point. However, I feel that pre-Chelsea, it was still possible to rise up against the established regime (which, previously, was Man United). Arsenal have operated on a much smaller budget than most clubs (Spurs have spent more than us! Ditto, Newcastle, though I’m not so sure aout that).
I sincerely think that had Leeds United not blown away their Champions League money by gross mismanagement, they could have cemented their position with some astutte investments like Arsenal.
Now it’s much tougher as if you try to manage your club properly, Peter Kenyon will come and poach your best player, your best youth player, your chief scout, best physio and the tea lady.