Arsenal vs Reality – Wenger Speaks
Arsene Wenger is…well, playing media games (to be politically correct – wait for our off-the-record column for my actual views).
I’m trying to be objective here, I really am. But after reading these statements by Arsene Wenger, I wonder how much bullshit I’ll have to wade through before getting an honest, straight-forward answer to my questions.
Wenger’s quotes are in below, and I’ve put in my thoughts on them in bold:
“It is not true that we have turned any offer down.
It has been confirmed through the media and by both clubs that Chelsea have made a bid which fell short of Arsenal’s demands.
Chelsea have had June, July, August. Everybody says Chelsea are interested in buying Ashley Cole but they have had three months now to buy him.
We are ready. From our part there’s no problem. Why don’t you ask Chelsea what the problem is? I don’t know.
The problem could be that you’re asking for too much money. And while that’s Arsenal’s prerogative, the problem then is money, which I’m sure you’d be aware of.
It’s also difficult for us. We have a player and we cannot really count on him. Is he with us or not?
We have to sort this situation out quite quickly. The numbers are not so important for Chelsea. They just bought a player.
This situation is not a money situation. We have not turned down an offer. The problem is not between us and Chelsea.
So what’s the problem? Is it that Chelsea are now screwing over Ashley Cole by not offering him enough money? That is highly doubtful considering that whatever they offer will be more than what Arsenal are giving him (or even ‘planned’ to give him).
He doesn’t need to ask for a transfer because we gave him permission to leave when he extended his contract at the end of last season.
He has permission to leave if a club come in and makes the right offer.
If that doesn’t happen the consequence will be that he will stay. If nobody gives us the right offer what can you do?”
So you have offers, but not the right offer?
This is reminiscent of Arsene Wenger’s famous “I didn’t see anything” approach to all things anti-Arsenal.
I wouldn’t be picking this apart if I hadn’t read about Wenger criticising Real Madrid for trying to unsettle Arsenal’s players (namely one Jose Antonio Reyes). It is quite childish of Arsenal and Wenger to point fingers at Madrid (and Chelsea) like this when they (Arsenal) have an equal role in the transfer taking so long.
Fact: Ashley Cole and Reyes want to leave, for different reasons.
Fact: Arsenal are within their rights to ask for as much money as they want.
Fact: Real Madrid and Chelsea are within their rights to offer as much money as they think they can get away with.
At the end of the day, the transfer game is about getting the best possible value for your club. And if Arsenal are planning to push the transfer fees high enough to discourage Chelsea and Real Madrid (both of whom have signed players over the weekend), they should also be prepared to start the next season without having sold either player.
And if that happens, is that really “the best value” for Arsenal?
Topics: Arsenal, Arsene Wenger
Football News 24/7
Maybe he has accepted the offer…
August 20th, 2006 @ 16:40This article is just bewilderingly fatuous.
August 20th, 2006 @ 16:51but of course….what did you expect from someone who DOESN’T worship the ground Arsene Wenger walks on?
August 20th, 2006 @ 16:55If this is what passes for analysis then there isn’t much point waiting around for the ‘off-the-record column’
August 20th, 2006 @ 16:59Have you considered that they may have accepted an offer involving William Gallas but they haven’t been able to tie up negotiations with him yet?
August 20th, 2006 @ 17:04Or of course that WG said no and therefore the cash price, which is known, has not since been offered…….
August 20th, 2006 @ 17:07Can you show some evidence to back up your claim that arsenal confirmed chelski had made a bid? David Dein confirmed informal talks & nothing else, its only chelski & the media that are spouting rubbish about bids. Arsenal want cole out as he is disruptive so why would they hold up any deal?
August 20th, 2006 @ 17:16It’s clearly David Dein who’s playing hardball over the Cole transfer
August 20th, 2006 @ 18:36I’m struggling to understand what the point of this article is. Arsenal are asking for more money than Chelsea want to pay. Both managers are playing mind games. I hope you didn’t get paid for this, it’s hardly insight.
August 20th, 2006 @ 18:51First of all, this article is yet another in a series of “foaming-at-the-mouth” articles by the author.
First, what “Anti-ArsenaL” line of questioning is Wenger responding to? The question was stated merely to find out about the Cole situation and Wenger gave his interpretation of it. He didn’t say Chelsea were doing anything wrong, he just said that no offer meeting the club’s demand has been offered. What “anti-Arsenal” questioning is Wenger responding to?
Also, how exactly does this relate to Real Madrid unsettling Reyes? Especially considering Madrid actually have been trying to unsettle Reyes by offering him a way out of his unsettled ‘social life’ in London, and then not meeting Arsenal’s valuation.
In the end, while presenting ‘facts’, you state that Arsenal are well-within their rights to ask for their valuation. Arsenal are under no obligation to sell. Saying that other clubs are not meeting their valuation isn’t pointing fingers, it’s simply stating your position. What would you like Wenger to say…We’re absolutely wrong to place a valuation on our player so let us please the other clubs by stooping to their demands?
What exactly, then, is the point of this article? Try to clutch something other than (very thin) straws while taking a shot at Wenger next time.
August 20th, 2006 @ 18:53excuse me while I go celebrate the 5-1 win (albeit against shoddy opposition).
Rocky – I actually expected something more rational out of you.
Mick – will respond, definitely.
Little Dutch – the point is that Wenger is fudging the truth.
I’ll be back tonight to respond to you guys…
August 20th, 2006 @ 19:35Maybe rationality in the article will breed rationality in the comments to your liking!
Like I said earlier, what’s childish about saying Chelsea and Madrid aren’t meeting our demands therefore the players (who CAN leave if our demands are met) are still at Arsenal? It’s not Arsenal’s job to make transfers easy for Madrid and Chelsea, Cole and Reyes are Arsenal players and being professionals, will play on if needed.
Again, failing to see the point. That’s all.
August 20th, 2006 @ 19:48Rocky
First of all, this article is yet another in a series of “foaming-at-the-mouth� articles by the author.
Touche, Rocky. I absolutely agree that anyone who questions Wenger’s statements must be a bit crazy. I take it you still haven’t gotten over my calling Henry a diver?
First, what “Anti-ArsenaLâ€? line of questioning is Wenger responding to? The question was stated merely to find out about the Cole situation and Wenger gave his interpretation of it. He didn’t say Chelsea were doing anything wrong, he just said that no offer meeting the club’s demand has been offered. What “anti-Arsenalâ€? questioning is Wenger responding to?
It’s easy to get very literal here – the questions about Ashley Cole have been asked with respect to what Chelsea have been saying for the last week or so. Wenger responds that there has been no offer, and then puts it all on Chelsea that they haven’t made a move yet. That’s fudging the facts, and that’s what I was talking about.
Also, how exactly does this relate to Real Madrid unsettling Reyes? Especially considering Madrid actually have been trying to unsettle Reyes by offering him a way out of his unsettled ‘social life’ in London, and then not meeting Arsenal’s valuation.
A player desperately wants to go to another club, and suddenly they are accused of unsettling the player? Ronaldo had an episode after the England vs Portugal game where he said he kept saying that he wanted to go to Madrid. The circumstances were different, but he was clearly unsettled at the time. United controlled the situation, and turned Madrid away.
With Reyes, Arsenal haven’t been able to control the situation. Reyes is unhappy in London and wants to leave. He wants to go to Madrid, and they are offering what they think they can get away with. How is that unsettling? This is business, they will offer what they think is right and Arsenal will ask for what they think is right. Wenger saying that Madrid are unsettling Reyes (by not meeting their evaluation) is untrue – if they had offered less money to the player and told him he had to clean the toilets to come to Madrid, that would be unsettling.
In the end, while presenting ‘facts’, you state that Arsenal are well-within their rights to ask for their valuation. Arsenal are under no obligation to sell. Saying that other clubs are not meeting their valuation isn’t pointing fingers, it’s simply stating your position. What would you like Wenger to say…We’re absolutely wrong to place a valuation on our player so let us please the other clubs by stooping to their demands?
When you say that another club is unsettling your player, that’s pointing fingers. I think Wenger is right on pricing Reyes and Cole so high, but then he shouldn’t bitch about other clubs offering a low amount. And he certainly shouldn’t put the blame on other clubs for drawing out the transfer – the responsibility lies on both sides.
What exactly, then, is the point of this article? Try to clutch something other than (very thin) straws while taking a shot at Wenger next time.
Believe me, if I were taking a deliberate swipe at Wenger (Arsenal god and all that) it would have been much worse. I think Wenger is not just playing mind-games, he’s plain lying about the deal.
Little Dutch
Yes – it is hardly insight. But it’s still worth pointing out. Like I said, I think Wenger’s not telling the whole story. I’m loathe to trust Mourinho, but if he says they have made an offer then they probably have.
August 20th, 2006 @ 21:12Mick,
Arsenal will hold up the deal because they want Chelsea to pay a lot of money.
My understanding is that Chelsea made Arsenal an offer, Arsenal came back with their own terms and from that time on both sides have refused to back down. I’m not going to take Ashley Cole’s side here because no one really knows for sure what happened between him and Dein, but suffice to say that Cole, his agent and Dein are not completely innocent in this matter.
Bottom line is, Cole shouldn’t be asking for this transfer but he’s bent upon it and has destroyed his reputation in the progress.
And as the whole lot of you have completely ignored this question, I’ll ask again:
At the end of the day, the transfer game is about getting the best possible value for your club. And if Arsenal are planning to push the transfer fees high enough to discourage Chelsea and Real Madrid (both of whom have signed players over the weekend), they should also be prepared to start the next season without having sold either player.
And if that happens, is that really “the best value� for Arsenal?
August 20th, 2006 @ 21:20“It is not true that we have turned any offer down.”
Isn’t this the point of the article? That Wenger’s said they haven’t turned any offer down, when he goes on to say that they haven’t got the “right” offer? Slight difference, that’s all. If there’s an offer and he says it’s too low, that’s talking business, which is A-OK.
August 20th, 2006 @ 21:49Questioning Wenger’s policies and actions is not crazy, that’s a lush presumption especially as you know I don’t necessarily agree with his transfer policy of late. But like Little Dutch stated, this is hardly insight, merely a manager trying to present as clear a picture of the situation as he can while maintaining some confidentiality. You think Mourinho’s so nice to the press that he’s going to simply state the truth about every deal? Consier the contrast between his statements regarding Cole and those regarding Gallas. He follows this pattern while talking about Gallas: “not going anywhere” one week, “can leave for a suitable offer” the next. It has been well documented in the press that Gallas has come up in the Arsenal-Chelsea negotiations (courtesy Steve Stammers, arguably the most well-informed journalist in London club affairs), but you don’t see Mourinho being frank about that.
This is how managers will talk, you should know considering Fergie’s whiskey-fuelled rants regarding Veron’s situation at United among other things.
“Lying”…you’re having a laugh. Didn’t see you use that word for when Fergie was “fudging” details during van Nistelrooy’s last days. Or when he’d booted Beckham in the eye.
August 20th, 2006 @ 22:11Rocky – considering that you’ve been around since the site started, I’m assuming you remember how pissed off I was when Ferguson dumped Nistelrooy to the bench.
http://soccerlens.com/rvn-has-left-the-building/092238.html
And considering that I’m probably the biggest fan of Beckham you’ll ever meet, I think the last argument falls flat too.
You’ve got a point about managers talking this way, and I agree – you’re right. I’m not ok with it when Ferguson does it and I call bullshit even then.
Just like I called bullshit on Wenger’s statement.
You want a direct quote from me? Read the link.
August 20th, 2006 @ 22:29Actually, better yet, read this article:
http://soccerlens.com/ruud-van-nistelrooy/163933.html
I don’t buy the training ground incident argument one bit. It’s just spin to justify RVN’s benching, and a shabby one at that.
August 20th, 2006 @ 22:31I was speaking about Fergie’s situation with Beckham in 2003 when he took a book to Beckham’s eye. Ferguson said something along the lines of “there’s no problem as far as I’m concerned, nothing happened” while the player was saying that he’s being frozen out of training sessions while wearing a bandage on his eye. And no United fan is under the illusion that Beckham was sold because of a decline in his ability, rather than Fergie’s ego.
Ditto for van Nistelrooy’s lack of fitness being an excuse for not playing him when he was playing the full 90 for Holland.
I’m not saying you weren’t pissed, I was simply saying that this is managerspeak, no manager will wash his team’s, or his own, dirty laundry in public. And during transfers, it’s not even a case of dirty laundry, simply holding one’s card to the chest till the very last minute.
August 20th, 2006 @ 22:36And back to your Reyes clarification. Are you so naive to think that his head wasn’t turned prior to Real showing a formal interest?
August 21st, 2006 @ 12:23Do you not think that his Agent was contacted about his availability leading to quotes in Spanish papers of desires to leave?
This is the unsettling part and it would have started with an Agent and Real Madrid.
Hi, this is my first time writing on this wall so please forgive me if I kind of miss the point of the article and the site but I came across the article and wanted to add to the debate.
I think the first point that needs to be made that the article, in my interpretation, seemed to miss, is that both Wenger and Chelsea are trying to make it seem like the other club needs the deal more. This is business and thus anything either club states cannot be taken as fact, the more Chelsea need Cole the more Arsenal can charge and vice versa. Thus it would seem to me that the whole article is flawed, it is attempting to sort out the truth in what is essentially a bluffing game. Both sides are going to obscure the truth in order to get the best deal for them.
In the analysis of Wenger’s second quote area it is stated that the Wenger does know that problem is money which I think doesn’t read into him enough. In a later quote (evaluated below) you read between the lines but fail to here. Wenger is not stating that he doesn’t know what the problem is but rather making a veiled jibe at the amount of money Chelsea has. No other transfer Chelsea have been involved in have stalled over money issues, I think Wenger is probably having a dig at this when he claims he ‘doesn’t know what the problem is’ because it can’t be money — money is never a problem for Chelsea.
I also wanted to mention that in your analysis of the last of Wenger’s media announcements it is suggested that because Wenger states Arsenal need the right offer that offers have been lodged. I feel this is reading what you want into the statement, while I agree that your analysis is definitely a viable option I also believe that he words his statement like this because he has to. Admitting that Arsenal are “open to offersâ€? suggests that they are looking to offload the player as soon as they can whilst mentioning the “right offerâ€? is tantamount to saying we will reluctantly sell should the offer be good enough. It is the same as the media games I mentioned above, it makes Arsenal seem less desperate to do a deal than Chelsea and doesn’t necessarily reveal that an offer has been lodged and rejected.
Whilst I’ll admit that there are flaws in my last paragraph I just wanted to show that there is always a second way to interpret this and that your article seems a little biased. I admit that I am an Arsenal fan myself and thus am hideously biased to the other extent but I did feel that the article did miss these points and was a little one sided (I don’t think Chelsea is mentioned once in a negative light despite being just as guilty as Arsenal). Overall, I believe Wenger is trying to do right by Arsenal and let’s not forget we have over a week left until the transfer deadline for these games to continue.
August 22nd, 2006 @ 16:12Hmm… I always thought that when you send back an offer asking for more money, it’s called negotiation and not ‘rejection’.
August 23rd, 2006 @ 19:00My bad.