Following yesterday’s Arsenal shareholders’ question and answer session with Arsčne Wenger (aka The Great Helmsman aka The Dear Leader), today’s blog consists of some personal reflections on the proceedings in the Royal Oak suit in Club level of the Clock End at the Grove.
I was concerned that the new system of having to submit questions in advance would turn the event into Soviet style bland-out. To be fair, the questions that most Gooners who are critical to one extent or another of Le Boss would have asked were posed – why no new goalkeeper? Why don’t we spend the money we have available? Why can’t we defend?
My perception, admittedly based only on anecdotal evidence, is that a small but increasing minority of Gooners want to see the back of Wenger. A further minority group is losing patience with the manager’s “project youth” but hasn’t yet alighted at the view that the manager should be given the club gold watch and shown the door. On a practical level terminating his employment could cost as much as £24-28 million, depending on the exact terms and salary in his new contract which runs to end of the 2013/14 season. The man is intelligent and isn’t backwards in coming forwards when it comes to looking after his own interests. Completely understandable. We all want to have security and stability in our lives.
He was slightly more forthcoming than I expected him to be on a few issues. He admitted that the club wants to tour overseas occasionally. I understand why he’s sceptical, but it doesn’t seem to have done Manchester United or Chelsea much harm, certainly in the short-term. I think he’s right in that touring should be a no-no in even numbered years when either the European Championship or the World Cup will be taking place. I’ve previously blogged before though that I think touring every other year in odd numbered years is something we should seriously examine though.
The contracts for friendly matches tend to specify that the visiting club’s top players have to appear. There’s often a contingent reduction if they don’t. They clearly won’t be available if they’re to be given a decent break after an international tournament, especially if their national team reaches the latter stages. The last thing we need is players running on empty. There’s also a standard contractual requirement in the Premier League rules on player contracts which requires a minimum four week holiday.
Aside from physical recovery, players need a decent break to “unplug their heads”. I know they receive handsome salaries but no matter how much money you’ve got everybody needs to have a space where they can completely turn off. There’s also the issue of not bouncing around the world pell-mell like a travelling rock and roll band, dropping out of the sky, playing and moving on. To get the real commercial benefit of such tours they need to be part of a coordinated, though-out and well-planned strategic play. Ivan Gazidis said this at a recent question and answer session with member of the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust. He’s right.
We also don’t want players dying in 40 degree heat. South Africa, Australia, New Zealand central and southern Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Chile are all in their winter in July. The big money is perceived to be in Asia and North America. That’s perfectly true. They need to be “in the mix” but as things stand nobody can remember the last time a major European club went to South America. Brazil has a football-daft population of over 190 million is economically and politically stable and growing. Our style of football would knock them dead out there. We could have the market all to ourselves. Likewise in Argentina, Uruguay and Chile.
Manchester United has found that you can go to well too often. Their gates this summer in North America were good but not what they have been on previous tours. I think we should start looking at a cycle that goes something like this:
2011: North America
2013: Asia
2015: South America
2017: North America
2019: South Africa
2021: Asia
2023: North America
2025: South America
2027: Asia
Within Asia we shouldn’t ignore India either as well as the more obvious countries like China and Japan. With intelligent planning for good training facilities in a “base” from which the team travels to games and the right on the ground operation with reliable partners we can build our international profile without over-egging the pudding.
One question which Wenger completely failed to “get” last evening was from Mark Brindle, chairman of the Essex Arsenal Supporters’ Club and a member of the board of Arsenal Supporters’ Trust. Mark prefaced his question about the continued failure of the club to make the senior players available once a year for an annual supporters’ dinner by referring to the growing alienation of supporters from the players in the modern professional game. He cited the hostile reaction to the underperformance of the England national team in South Africa.
Wenger’s response was to go into one about how the really top players weren’t just motivated by money. I’m sorry old son, you just don’t get it do you? Bob Wilson had to put Arsčne straight that the question was about the players spending one evening a year with their most loyal fans. Essentially Mark wanted to know was that too much to ask? Arsčne said he had no objection but the problem was dates. He also referred to the annual charity dinner that the club now holds with money going to the official club cause of the season.
That’s all very laudable but the tickets for these does are simply out of the reach of the majority of Gooners. I was at the last Arsenal Football Supporters’ Club dinner/dance at which the players were present at Alexandra Palace. I felt insulted. The players were in a “coral” surrounded by, I pooh you not, a white picket fence. Some chatted amiably with the Gooners present. Others clearly would have preferred to have been drinking raw sewage rather than spend an evening (actually, less than two hours) with supporters. They were clearly there on suffrage and wanted to be anywhere but where they were.
And what was the picket fence all about, prey tell? Is it too much to ask to require the players to spend one evening a year at an event which average supporters can afford to go to without taking out a second mortgage? I think not. There is a standard clause in all Premier League players’ contracts required by League rules which requires players to make themselves available for up to six hours a week, subject to reasonable notice of when and where being given specifically for work with club and League sponsors. “Approximately” half of this should be devoted to “club community and public relations” activities.
Speak to anybody working in football and they’ll tell you that many if not most players simply ignore this contractual requirement to which they have freely consented as part of the conditions of employment. The clubs are complicit by failing to enforce the obligation. Infamously players have time on their hands, particularly in weeks where there are no midweek away games. It’s amazing how players can find the time when somebody waves a large cheque to increase their already large bank balance. Guys, you’re paid very well. How about giving just a microscopic bit back? It really isn’t too much to ask.
There is a destructive, nihilistic, materialistic “bling” culture which afflicts all too many professional footballers. At its worst it can descend into the positively sordid and tawdry. Spending a two or three hours a week in the real world would do none of them any harm. There are some great examples of players who put in a lot of time and effort supporting worthwhile causes. Too many don’t. The clubs need to get real and enforce the obligations the players have consented to in return for their lavish salaries.
Some more thoughts on the thoughts of Arsčne Wenger next week. Meanwhile total focus on three points at the Stadium of Light tomorrow please fellas!
Keep the faith!
Receive a digest of our best Arsenal content each week direct to your mailbox
