Is Arsenal anger acceptable from grown men?

Joe Williams
Arsenal fans

Thanks for your mails on Arsenal and more. Send thoughts to theeditor@football365.com

 

Fan behaviour
I saw something that amazed me the other day.

Firstly, as a Liverpool fan, I found myself very disappointed with the performance and result against Fulham. So much so that when the final whistle went, I puffed my cheeks out and said ‘bugger’. To which my 5 year old son declared ‘I know how to spell bugger’, before promptly failing to spell it correctly. My wife thanked me for this, and I apologised.

That behaviour is light years away from when I was a 15 year old, and I would get visibly upset at such a result. It would ruin my week. However, as I said, I was 15.

Later that evening, a friend recommended I watched Arsenal fan TV after their game. I was simply astounded at what I saw.

My questions for the mailbox are these; is this acceptable behaviour for grown men? Would you be happy raising your children to become such people?

A gentleman was recently lambasted on these pages for referring to football fans as knuckle draggers, but on this evidence he was being kind.

Is this seriously ok to some people?

It’s tragic and unacceptable that reports of domestic violence increase when certain teams lose. I never thought it possible for grown men to act like this over something so trivial.

No doubt to some, I’m not a real fan and should stick to my armchair.
Dom Littleford 

 

As difficult as it is to watch Arsenal’s descent into mediocrity, I can’t help but feel that this is exactly what the fanbase deserves after years of negativity from the likes of Arsenal Fan TV over Wenger’s latter years. Funny how as soon as the goals dry up from a Wenger era signing, we get exposed as a team out of ideas.
Harry, AFC, Dublin (Willian turning out to be as bizarre a signing as it felt in the summer)

 

The myth of Mikel
It’s hard to be too invested in the drama of another club when your own (United) is in a state of perpetual comic crisis. But I saw a thought-experiment mail in the Mailbox today which concluded that Mikel Arteta would be more suited to the United job because he’s apparently good with more technical players. I call shenanigans. Where is this myth coming from? Why have we all collectively decided that Arteta is some purist football visionary who’d be doing so much better if only he had smarter, more technically gifted players than this lot purchased at decent (if not extravagant) cost by Wenger, Emery, and Arteta himself?

I liked Arteta as a player—he was that classic Moyesian prototype, with great commitment and determination and some added silk. As Guardiola’s plus-one, he always seemed threatening. Like he’s some total football genius just waiting to be unleashed. And when he arrived at Arsenal finally, he gave the impression that he was the kind of manager who would always play sexy football.

First, he had clearly raided Pep’s wardrobe before leaving, dressing like that middle-aged man at a nightclub who thinks he’s hip. There was the overt chumminess on the pitch with his players with all the exaggerated hugs and head rubs, something Pep and Klopp do as well—it always feels just a touch excessive and showy. And of course the constant Bollywood hand gestures from the touchline (I’m Indian so I can say it). He says cool, dramatic shit like, “My chest is here, hit me guys.” I’ll admit, these are all clear indications of the next German or Spanish wonder-coach with an innovative take on xG and PPDA and tactics and football “philosophy”. Arteta certainly has all the bluster required.

But has the football ever been good? I ask this genuinely. Looking beyond the occasional good result (usually against United), has Arteta’s Arsenal ever passed the eye test? Yes, they were well organised last season and looking more solid—though he joined at 8th place and finished the season there too. And the impressive FA Cup win. But (to me) even at their best, they’ve always looked like no more than a hyper-organised, disciplined, well-drilled team in search of a spark, usually provided by Aubameyang, before he was replaced by his identical, not-very-good-at-football twin brother.  This was passed off as Arteta going back to the roots and getting rid of the defensive instability that had crept in. But then what?

Where is the zippiness? The quick triangles? The visionary football? The interchanging of positions, the constantly moving players? All I see is a David Moyes Tribute Act, but far less effective. How the hell does a Jose Mourinho team look more exciting than Arsenal?!

And the excuse that he doesn’t have the players to execute his Utopian vision is hollow. Look at Brighton under Graham Potter. He inherited a team playing an efficient (just about) but much more primitive brand of football than Emery’s Arsenal. And while they’re not pulling up any trees in terms of league position, the style of football changed almost immediately after he came. Potter’s team has a clear identity, even without the players that would optimise that style. Maybe, just maybe, Arteta is not the most stylish coach around? They don’t have to be the next Man City but there is a world of styles that lies between high octane tiki-taka and cross-merchants without someone who can head the ball in.

I want Arteta to do well, and I hope he does—I’m sure there’s a process in place. Not to sound patronising, but I always admired Wenger and the football he played and Arsenal are the least objectionable of the Big Six clubs. So it’d be nice to see them playing well again (and ideally not win a lot). But is Arteta the kind of coach everyone pretends he is? (Or is he actually the guy everyone thinks Ole is?)
Akhil (just relieved to not be reading the Great Ole Debate for a few days), Man United, Delhi

 

The issue is the board…
Dear Editor,

Response to Strevs, AFC Canada

The fact that you put Arteta in the same bracket as Petit, Gilberto and Fabregas means i’m not sure if you’re being serious.

The blaming of Xhaka for all of your woes doesn’t fall on Xhaka but any big club who deems a player not good enough ships them off on loan or sells them.

I agree he is clearly not good enough but the problem with Arsenal is that as long as the company (club) continue to make serious money why would they change?

Kept Arsene for 6 years too long and were making a profit

You’re going to keep getting rejected older players (Willian, David Luiz, Cech)

You keep average players for too long

You always look for bargains rather than paying the going price – My die hard Arsenal fan friends always said “who give a f*** what they spend it isn’t my money”

Arteta sums up the club, a very average player who is likeable but you can’t hate him because of this. He is also clearly out of his depth and he is the budget option

In all this time your club still charge the highest prices for a Premier league

As the great Neil Maupay said last season “you get what you deserve”

You can keep blaming the players who are clearly not good enough but the issue is the board.
M4RCU5X15,CFC

 

Big Sam at the Emirates…
I’d love Arsenal to hire Sam Allardyce, just for the craic. 😂  All those years of snobbishness from elements of the fanbase about the sacrosanct “style of play” (sideways passing everyone to sleep  😴 ), not wanting to sign certain players because they didn’t “fit” (e.g. Jonny Evans, Jamie Vardy), “we don’t buy superstars we make them” etc, etc only to end up with Big Sam.

On a more serious note, the decline of Arsenal would make an epic study on the decline and fall of an institution through poor management, faulty decision-making, corporate failure etc.  Tom Bower do your work.
Matthew, Belfast

 

Termination of contracts
I understand where Rob A is coming from in regards to his views on Arsenal, however when he states they let Mesut Ozil hang around and not terminate his contract, it just legally isn’t possible in the football world without “just cause”.

Unfortunately unless there are solid grounds to terminate, it has to be mutual agreement, otherwise the legal fallout would be a spectacle, if it was quite easy then I’m sure Chelsea would have terminated Winston Bogarde’s contract back in the day, which does beg the question, which footballer’s contract at your club would you terminate and why?
Mikey, CFC

 

 

Rio on the Manchester derby
Just read Rio’s story about not talking to any of the other players from City or Liverpool. To me all that proves is he cared about his club more than his country. The players now are friends and it shows when they play for England. They have a relationship with each other and with the fans that Rio and his “Golden generation” never had.

The 90 minutes was over let the players act how they want. During the game I completely understand staying professional and keeping your concentration but when the game is over I don’t mind them going back to being mates especially if it benefits the national team in the long run.

I saw an interview with Jamie Redknapp and Patrice Evra not long ago where Redknapp says it was always the Man United boys that kept to themselves at England camps and always struck up a divide. I for one hope they continue being mates and it benefits us winning the Euro’s in the summer!
Chaz (Essex)

 

Merci, Monsieur Houllier
Dear Editor,

I’m sure you’ll get loads of these, but I thought it worth a punt to put my thoughts down on Gerard Houllier.

I was 14 when he became Liverpool manager, we had become a bit of a joke team as you know, despite the obvious talents of Fowler, Owen, Redknapp, Ince, McManaman, Berger. We also had our fair share of unreliable and under par players. We were miles behind Man Utd, despite often bloodying their nose, it never felt like we would actually topple them, we always ran out of steam. For an excellent summary of this, I’d recommend Simon Hughes’ Men in White Suits – it starts with Jan Molby discussing punishing passing drills with Johan Cruyff and ends up with tales of David Thompson pissed up with Steve Harkness trying to convince us how good (he thought) he was. For me that one sentence sums up our decline.

It’s not an exaggeration to say that Gerard Houllier dragged the team and club towards the new model of professionalism, conditioning and seriousness. He deserves to be spoken of in the same way as Arsene Wenger in my opinion, obviously not in terms of number of trophies, but as a revolutionary coach. What’s more, in the first few years the development of the team was outstanding. Bringing through and developing Gerrard, Carragher, Owen. Bringing in Sami Hyypia, Henchoz and Hamann – that spine was integral to everything that came with it. He even squeezed 22 goals in a single season from Emile Heskey (not an insult to Heskey btw, I love the man, but he was, ahem, a non-goalscoring striker as they now say).

But most important of course, was what he did for the fans. Before Klopp turned us in to believers it was Houllier – I was lucky enough to go to most home games that season, and to follow the team to Rome, Barcelona and Dortmund. Forgetting the defensive display in the final, these were some of the most tactically astute games I’ve ever seen. But there was attacking flair to go with it (127 goals scored and a counter attack that was frankly terrifying for most teams to face). Of course we won a fantastic treble of trophies and had some amazing trips along the way. For me, now 36, I don’t think I’ll enjoy a season more. I followed a young, exciting, winning team around Europe with my Dad, Cousin and thousands of like-minded Reds.

Songs at the Trevi fountain, beers on Las Ramblas, scouse pies in the Kop end. What a season. What a manager.

Merci, Monsieur Houllier.
Marc (LFC)

 

Diving…
Morning Ferg, Cork. I just read your note about Dyche being a hypocrit because Tarkowski and Westwood “dived” and he didn’t call them out on it. I just thought I’d write in to say they didn’t dive. One got pushed in the face and the other got grabbed around the neck. You can’t dive after someone physically assaults you. A dive is where you didn’t get touched but you pretend you did. So now you know.

Now, both players clearly made the most of it. But they didn’t dive. The person who did dive was Elnenny. He pushed Tarkowski in the face and then threw himself on the floor holding his ankle. That’s a dive.

Cheers,
Nick P. Burnley FC.

 

Seeing what I want to see…
Definitely missed the ‘r’ when I first glanced at the heading: ‘Aston Villa captain banned from driving‘.
Stu, Southampton

 

Wrong
AD, Bromley…you’re wrong.

But it sounds like you’d be willing for someone to shatter your ankles and tear your MCL/ACL…if only we can find you 150k.
N.V.M. (I volunteer as tribute?)

 

Back off Lamps…
Sadly this is a mail of gripes. I read the Lamps vs Klopp piece this morning and think it deserves reposting under mediawatch. Was there not a f365 video just before the Chelsea everton game with Winty admitting that she had been harsh on Lamps and he was doing exactly what was needed to be done with regards to performance this year and bedding in the squad? (There definitely was). Admittedly a loss against Everton isn’t what was needed to be done but does that transform into ‘has he done much at all’? One defeat changing the entire narrative, Mediawatch’s breakfast.

Then there’s Lampard getting ‘riled’ up. Mourinho said Chelsea are contenders, to which Lampard very calmly replied with that Spurs should be contenders too – someone get Jack Nicholson and put him in anger management. The Klopp thing – Klopp said Chelsea are favourites. How can this be true? Yes, teams that spend should challenge and Lamps has not shied away from that, but obviously multiple title winners having won together have to be favourites. Obviously, other teams can win but they are not favourites and I really don’t understand the gripe about that point. Having proven premier league scorers is a big deal. Just back off Lamps will ya,
Saaj (CFC)

 

Mailbox Mails

Related Articles