A fallacy quashed?

[budesonide]

This is courtesy AKBapologist in the rumour thread. I thought it might get lost amidst all the shite in that thread.

Agents involved in potential deals with Arsenal and even some at the club itself, report that he is so scrupulous in weighing up his options that he might be described as dithering while his empire burns.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’ No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.

[Cripps_orig]

This is courtesy AKBapologist in the rumour thread. I thought it might get lost amidst all the shite in that thread.

Agents involved in potential deals with Arsenal and even some at the club itself, report that he is so scrupulous in weighing up his options that he might be described as dithering while his empire burns.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’ No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.

One of the problems of not having a Transfers section and having just one thread with all the transfers, things are missed.

Anyway the rot started long before Dein left the club, we were pretty shite 05/06 and 06/07 but the shiteness then was excused cos of the new stadium and the rebuilding Wenger needed to do.

Few years on we are still at that shite level with no progress. Doubt Dein being here would have changed much on the pitch.

Would have been better than Gazidis though who has done f all

[Power n Glory]

It doesn't matter how many quotes you find, some people would rather believe he's a victim of circumstance and in a powerless position.

We've had quotes from Wenger saying that we have money but he chooses to nurture young talent. Quotes from various board members saying we have money to spend. Quotes from Wenger about sitting in on contract negotiations when needed, heck, a few months back I heard something on the Tuesday Club about Wenger saying he sits in on the catering budget meetings! Which other manager does that?

But given all this, you'll still find some that believe he's just a puppet. He's one of the longest standing managers in Prem League history, has changed the culture of Arsenal, convinced the club to make huge changes such as building the youth development academy to the move to the Emirates, yet some believe he's some sort of pawn. I don't believe that for a second.

Look back on his quotes during his early days as a manager and you'll see he's doing what he's always wanted to do. He's trying to build an Ajax. That's great for us and great for him, but we need someone at Board level that knows just as much about football as he does. American guys that know about Sports management won't help because they'll depend on him for guidance just like how the Board do now. They can't get rid of Wenger because he's their walking stick. Dein was a football man and Mr Arsenal which is why he could put Wenger in check. Wenger respected his footballing opinion and we need someone else like that.

[Joker]

I wouldn't want David Dein back, because of his behaviour in the past, but I think that this is evidence that Wenger did impose artificial budget constraints on himself, to the detriment of the club as a whole. I think the whole problem is that Wenger is economically a free marketeer, and like the free marketeers in the Conservative government at the moment, they believe in austerity and adhere to this ridiculous notion of the housewife's budget, where increasing debt even in a manageable way is seen as heresy. I believe it would have been entirely possible for Wenger to spend reasonable amounts of money in the last 5 years to augment the squad with quality players, and if he did this, we may have won something.

I am not saying we needed to spend huge amounts of money like City, but more signings like Sagna and Vermaelen (i.e. players who didn't cost the earth, could slot in immediately and were the sort of quality players who could improve the squad) would definitely have helped. The fact that it appears Wenger put ideology over the welfare of the squad is a bit of an indictment his performance as manager in the last 5 years tbh.

Nevertheless, the board need to take responsibility for not putting extra pressure on Wenger to invest in the squad. However, they had an incentive to maintain the status quo, seeing as they were making a good return on their shares and were increasing their bank balances due to Wenger's parsimony, even though it was hurting the on-field success of the club.

[Coney]

@ budesonide

It's a rumour. I had thought that Dein was able to get money out of the old-style board members to buy players and to push the wages to what was required to make it all work - the Ashley Cole issue is why I think this. It was the one time I've noticed AW letting his guard down a bit by a comment.* I am hoping that having Kroenke on board and running things, the need for a few special buys will be realised in the form of some decent backbone type players to give the otherwise talented team the strenght to go the extra mile - or the extra 10 games at the end of the season.


* C***ley C*** had wanted an extra 5k for the agent bit and it appeared he had a verbal agreement from Dein - certainly Cole did appear to believe that which is why he later came out with his 'nearly swerved off the road' comment. Dick as he may be, I do think he had been led to believe that 5K would be there. The other factor for me is the comment by Wenger when asked about the issue and he (I think without meaning to reveal things) said words to the effect of how it would be ridiculous to lose an important player for just 5K. Now putting 2 and 2 together from that (and sure, it might be wrong) I am pretty certain that Dein wanted to arrange the extra 5k and the board blocked it, either for old fashioned reasons or to clip Dein's wings, and that caused the big issue. If Wenger spends again at a level we seem to want with Kroenke now in the saddle, I think that will make things clear. We will know at the end of the summer transfer period.

[Power n Glory]

Dein was the reason Cole didn't get the 5k from my understading. Cole said it was Dein blocking it because of a personal beef. Or am I wrong?

[Coney]

Dein was the reason Cole didn't get the 5k from my understading. Cole said it was Dein blocking it because of a personal beef. Or am I wrong?

I can't state this as a quaranteed fact, but I am pretty sure that at the time, Cole had understood that he had an agreement with Dein on this issue, so I would not expect him to be the blocker. However, as with a lot of this stuff, we don't have clear establishable facts to prove things either way. I speculate based on what I interpret the statements to mean when they make an unguarded comment. Guarded comments have to be taken with a bigger pinch of salt because they are carefully picking their words.

Maybe everything is bollocks. Ah well. We can but wait to see what the squad looks like at the end of the transfer period. 2 more months of speculation and innuendo to go...

[budesonide]

I believe it would have been entirely possible for Wenger to spend reasonable amounts of money in the last 5 years to augment the squad with quality players, and if he did this, we may have won something.

I am not saying we needed to spend huge amounts of money like City, but more signings like Sagna and Vermaelen (i.e. players who didn't cost the earth, could slot in immediately and were the sort of quality players who could improve the squad) would definitely have helped. The fact that it appears Wenger put ideology over the welfare of the squad is a bit of an indictment his performance as manager in the last 5 years tbh.

Nevertheless, the board need to take responsibility for not putting extra pressure on Wenger to invest in the squad. However, they had an incentive to maintain the status quo, seeing as they were making a good return on their shares and were increasing their bank balances due to Wenger's parsimony, even though it was hurting the on-field success of the club.

:goodpost:


spot on, mate.

[Power n Glory]

I can't state this as a quaranteed fact, but I am pretty sure that at the time, Cole had understood that he had an agreement with Dein on this issue, so I would not expect him to be the blocker. However, as with a lot of this stuff, we don't have clear establishable facts to prove things either way. I speculate based on what I interpret the statements to mean when they make an unguarded comment. Guarded comments have to be taken with a bigger pinch of salt because they are carefully picking their words.

Maybe everything is bollocks. Ah well. We can but wait to see what the squad looks like at the end of the transfer period. 2 more months of speculation and innuendo to go...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...wsstory.sport5

Check this out. Cole blamed Dein the most and was also disappointed with Wenger for siding with the Board. But this was after getting caught with his pants down.

[Coney]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...wsstory.sport5

Check this out. Cole blamed Dein the most and was also disappointed with Wenger for siding with the Board. But this was after getting caught with his pants down.

The thing is, once Cole was, as you say, caught with his pants down with Moronio, everything he said after that was going to be whatever it took to justify his moving to the chavs and he kicked everyone at the Arsenal that he could, to the extent that any possible credibility after that went down the toilet. Offhand remarks while he was still there carry a little more weight, but the sour grapes afterwards (that made him so popular with Arsenal fans) are something I would tend to discount.

Once the 5k had been stopped, Wenger would take the official line - he does that because he is a professional manager and will avoid criticism of the board. That is why I think his mention of "ridiculous for only 5K" was a slip and thus carries more weight as an unintentional revealing of his position. As a young dick, C***ley would not have understood the concept of behaving like a professional and thus not understood Wenger's position.