Every Gooner knows it’s a conspiracy. Thus, it’s no surprise to see the headlines yesterday and today.
First off, the BBC is reporting that Arsenal may face disciplinary action from the FA, UEFA, and FIFA for an under the table loan made to Belgian club, Bevern, the club where Emmanuel Eboue came from, with whom Arsenal have a public working relationship.
It seems to be much ado about nothing, but decide for yourself. Check the NewsNow feeds to the left.
Then, today, vice-chairman David Dein was voted off of the FA Board, and was replaced by Gill from ManUre.
Again, make up your own minds about this, but I’m sort of nonplussed.
What does interest me is the timing of these events/news breaks. When the papers should be filled with investigations into the money being spent at Stamford Bridge, they are instead filled with the tripe we’ve seen the past two days.
Again, just grist for the mill. Fire away at will Gooners….
June 2nd, 2006 at 2:35 pm
Chelsea get even better with Schevy and Ballack… what is OUR response. Thats about ALL I care about.
If we did the dirty dealings… and it wasn’t above board… then we pay the penalty.
Hopefully,its much ado about nothing.
I don’t care what Chelsea spends… thats just life in the big leagues.
June 2nd, 2006 at 2:37 pm
At the risk of sounding as paranoid as a Scouser, I do wonder why I haven’t heard an outcry at the foreigners being brought in at the Bridge. When Arsenal were buying players from beyond the Isles it was a national travesty. But then Chelsea grab Ballack, Shevchenko and many others, but not a peep.
The one that really kills me is that they just grabbed a 30-year old Portugeuse goalkeeper as their number 3! No English kid could take that spot?
Double standard.
June 2nd, 2006 at 3:05 pm
The one thing that annoys me the most is the incorrect garbage about Dein’s powers. One of the examples in print is that Dein used his power to alter Arsenal’s league fixtures after the champs league first round games. Mourinho made those stupid statements in spite and they are taken as fact. If Dein had that much power, could he not have changed Arsenal’s fixtures in 2004 when they were denied a treble by a painful fixture list? Now a ManU person is at the head, and we all know how fair ManU have been in the past.
Argh!!
On a seperate topic, no matter what negative press they say about Arsenal, here is an example of something other team’s money could not buy:
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_henry_honor/nike_henry_honor_us_high.wmv
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:03 pm
What the whole thing about seems to me is like -
someone accused Arsenal for having a CONTROL of Beveran, so that it broke the rule of “fair play” as there would be a CONFLICT OF INTEREST that the Gunners may face Beveran in the Champions League?!!
All that because Arsenal loaned a 1 mil GBP to a third party, who in turn used the money to help Beveran out of their finanical trouble.
Base on that, someone in BBC believed we had a CONTROL of the Belgian club?
Work this out yourselves.
To me, it’s just another act to give Tottenham Hotspur a false hope that they now have another chance replacing us in next year’s CL, only to have their heartbreak again by the reality…. I start to feel sorry for our North London neighbour.
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:06 pm
Thanks for the media file! I loved watching Henry dribble. That was a nice commercial - what are they selling and what is a Nike but a Winged Samothrace.
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:10 pm
That “someone” was in fact the Belgian police, who at first suspected organized crime figures were using the club to launder money.
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:19 pm
What’s funny is the the Belgian Cops first started sniffing around because they thought something fishy was going on at Beveren with the Russian Mafia and possible money laundering.
What an irony, Abramovich has learn to make “tax right offs” with his losses, instead of soiling his hands with such shady deals as money laundering. Arsenal is not being accused of money laundering just conflict of interest rules. Were it true, why has no one been charged. The Flemish aren’t charging anybody.
This is going to blow up into a debacle I’m sure. It will be interesting to see who gets the egg on their face.
The whole nonsense about bringing Africans into England is a red-herring. It is about as bad as trying to stop Brazilians from playing in Europe with the nationality cap, as they’d be the most hurt by it. This part of the story smells of Racism and BNP trolling if you ask me.
I hope they sort this out fast though as it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
Andez, you kill me with the Trots Spurs sympathy; maybe it was a plot to drive the knife into them even deeper with false hope :)~ very funny…
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:23 pm
“It is about as bad as trying to stop Brazilians from playing in Europe with the nationality cap, as they’d be the most hurt by it.”
How do you make this connection Gerard?
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Completely off topic but in case people have not seen all these Joga TV ads..
Gerard, I picked the Henry ad out of this long chain email list that I got:
Wayne Rooney in goal
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_rooney_heart/nike_rooney_heart_us_high.wmv
C. Ronaldo -v- Zlatan
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_ronaldo_vs_zlatan_skill/nike_ronaldo_vs_zlatan_skill_us_high.wmv
Henry 5-a-side
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_henry_honor/nike_henry_honor_us_high.wmv
“Make The Ball Happy” - Ronaldinho
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_make_the_ball_happy/nike_make_the_ball_happy_us_high.wmv
“The Big Cup”
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_the_big_cup/nike_the_big_cup_us_high.wmv
“Brazillian Ping Pong” - The Ronaldinho Crossbar Ad
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_brazilian_ping_pong/nike_brazilian_ping_pong_us_high.wmv
“R9 Goal” - Ronaldo
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_r9_goal/nike_r9_goal_us_high.wmv
” 4-4-2 or 1-1-8″
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_442_or_118/nike_442_or_118_us_high.wmv
“Alone you are just a vine”
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_alone_you_are_just_a_vine/nike_alone_you_are_just_a_vine_us_high.wmv
“A Fistful Of Goals”
http://nikefootball.nike.com/nikefootball/jogatvcontent/nike_a_fistfull_of_goals/nike_a_fistfull_of_goals_us_high.wmv
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:30 pm
There are definite conflict of interest issues here if this proves out…
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:32 pm
“That’s just life in the big leagues.” Are you kidding? No, it’s not. It’s life when you are owned by likely the richest man on the planet for whom losses of hundreds of millions of pounds are without consequence given his desire to legitimate and publicize himself outside of Russia so he does not end up in prison like certain of his fellow oilgarchs (no, that’s not a typo.) There is no other club in the big leagues — whether Real Madrid, Barcelona, Juventus, either Milan, or Man U — who can acquire Shevy and Ballack in the same off season, and then seriously contemplate also purchasing Ashley Cole and Roberto Carlos. There is no club who could even come close to the four year buying frenzy that has ensued since Abramovich bought this club. For you to continue to insist that this is just ordinary business is to close your eyes to reality because you are angry that Wenger is not engaging in a pale imitation of this strategy with the money at his disposal. There is Chelsea and then there is every other club in Europe. Deny it all you want but you are distinctly in the minority here.
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Stag isn’t denying anything I don’t think.
I completely agree with Mr.133. The rule set out by the biggest clubs is that money dictates all. The reason the likes of Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal didn’t complain about the rules is because they were top of the food chain, and never had to honestly fear a big money bid for one of their stars. Now that they’re second tier, suddenly the rules are unfair.
Not that I think this situation we’re finding ourselves in is right, but that to single out Chelsea is wrong.
June 2nd, 2006 at 4:46 pm
Definitely Stag.
European football is not like North American sports, with their farm team systems. Since any club can theoretically reach the highest level, the issue of conflict of interest is far more important an issue.
Stag, say Arsenal was found guilty of this serious conflict of interest, what do you think an appropriate punishment would be?
June 2nd, 2006 at 5:19 pm
I’m not saying that Chelsea should be barred from purchasing whomever it wants for whatever price the selling team demands, no matter how outrageous (see sale of S Wright Phillips). What I am saying and what I will continue to say no matter what Mr. 133 and Clarkey say is that Chelsea is playing by a completely different set of rules than any other club in Europe, namely, the economic rules that punish clubs when they make multi-million pound purchasing mistakes do not apply to Chelsea. Even under the Galacticos regime at Real Madrid, it was basically a Galactico a year and it appears clear that this buying strategy will not continue at the Bernabeau. However, Chelsea continues with its buying campaign apparently undaunted by losses of several hundred million pounds. No other club in Europe could do likewise and survive.
June 2nd, 2006 at 5:25 pm
Legally they are playing by the same set of rules, which is all that technically matters.
If we want to argue about morality and money, then things become relative. Compared to Chelsea, Arsenal is an economic pygmy. Stand Arsenal next to Birmingham City and suddenly their spending power looks awesome.
June 2nd, 2006 at 5:35 pm
Your relativity theory does not hold up because both Arsenal and Birmingham suffer proportionately similarly when they make expensive purchasing mistakes. They can’t simply fix such mistakes by buying again and again until they get it right. In that sense, Chelsea and everyone else are not playing by the same rules. Moreover, the notion that “legally they are playing by the same set of rules, which is all that technically matters” is circular reasoning at its finest. Legally and technically are the same thing. What we’re talking about are economic realities that apply to every club — no matter how big or small — except for Chelsea.
June 2nd, 2006 at 5:52 pm
You are right Rick.
Chelsea are not only getting older foreign players but even younger foreign players but no outcry. They can go after other players using unfair methods but nothing.
Funny thing is if Chelsea or ManU get an easier fixture load, then nothing. If Arsenal get one break in their fixture out of an always difficult list, then it must be rigged.
June 2nd, 2006 at 5:56 pm
The same can said of anything in life. Some people can do almost anything by virtue of their gigantic wealth while others are powerless to make any meaningful choice in their lives. Football is showing itself to be no different.
Do not misunderstand me, I agree with you that what Chelsea does is wrong. However I feel it is better to attack the system which allowed a Chelsea to flourish rather than Chelsea itself. Why vent your anger at the fat which blocks arteries and kills people and not the system which says “Anyone can have as many cheeseburgers as they want so long as they can afford it”?
Oh and thanks for the tip on the semantics. You’re right, I could have written that statement without the word “technically”. I like how you criticized the form of my argument rather than the argument itself.
June 2nd, 2006 at 7:33 pm
We don’t have an English captain. We’re not an “English side”. Wenger breaks the mold, doesn’t belong to the boy’s club, and the moldy boys don’t like it. We’re a club without a country, and the whole of Europe doesn’t know what to make of the Arsenal.
All we can do is win to shut them up. I’m fine with it, the hypocritical c*nts.
June 2nd, 2006 at 7:37 pm
All you seem to care about, buddy, is what we’re buying. Not how we’re growing. We’re being a smart club that must conduct itself with an entirely different set of criteria. We must find players that can be made great, morseo than those that have enjoyed great careers abroad. Minus 1 Russian mobster, that’s the ticket.
The League is a joke now. Its like Barry Bonds taking over Babe Ruth - he gets away with it legally, but not for the fans. That’s where its at, Stag. Not empty titles.
Its apples and oranges as far as how Arsenal and Chelsea conduct their off season. If that bothers you as much as it seems, you may want to trade up.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Not to mention when we won the FA Cup on penalties, people acted like we stole the trophy under the cover of night or something.
Ahhhh I’m always amused & the enlightened & all-encompassing hypocrisy of multi-culturalism. “We welcome all ethnicites but Heaven forbid should a French guy start winning EPL titles with French players!”
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:15 pm
Heard that.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:20 pm
But how is it a conflict of interest when the teams play in separate countries or in separate leagues? If there truly was a conflict of interest than any loan move is technically illegal b/c a player after all, if he is under contract, is an asset, he has value, so you technically are enhancing value by loaning a player to a team detracting from that team’s value when recalling a player from loan. That is not partial control of a team? If not than that’s just shortsighted from a FA/UEFA/FIFA perspective when it comes to loaning just cash. After all, the FA guideline doesn’t specifically state the loan has to be cash, so why not make any loan, whether a player of financial illegal?
This is all just stupid.
Italian clubs have had feeder clubs or working relations with Serie C1 & C2 teams to loan out younger players for years. EPL teams do it lower leagues in England. How are those “conflict of interests” any different than loaning a club money.
And where is it written that any business in any field can’t give a loan to another competing business? Why should football be any different? Yes, the FIFA & FA laws are there but just b/c something is a law it doesn’t mean it is either fair, logical or right.
None of this makes sense, esp. when compared to Chelsea & Abramovitch’s dealings with CSKA Moscow, the clubs in Brazil & wherever the other clubs are around the world where Roman has a financial stake in.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:29 pm
Yes, “if this proves out”
But it’s no more a conflict of interest than loaning out younger players to lower division clubs. A loan is a loan, whether it be a player loan or a monetary loan, they’re the same thing. A player has value, money obviously has value. So why the difference in a player loan to a monetary loan in terms of conflict of interest?
A player loaned to a lower division side can have just as much “control” of a club as a monetary loan b/c after all, that player after being loaned is still owned by the parent/original club. So how is that not partial control/influence on the other club receiving the loaned player b/c you can recall the loaned player under certain agreements? So, in essence you can exert certain control over the other club who has received the loaned player.
This is all idiocy.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:29 pm
Because each domestic league is connected through the UEFA Cup and the Champions League. If Beveren ever made it to the final of the Champions League and were to face Arsenal, since both clubs were owned by the same people the owners could order one club to lie down to let the other one win.
The feeder club system in Europe, if you can call it that, is very informal when compared to the system used in North America.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:44 pm
What’s the response.
Thats ALL I care about.
You can cry poor mouth with Village… all you wish… but Chelsea aren’t breaking ANY rules, and we have more spending power than 99% of England… so cry in your soup if you like.
Whats the response. Rosicky and WHO?
Either you curl up in the fetal position and get kicked or you PICK YOUR SPOTS and get the right players for a fair amount of the MANY MILLION we have made in recent years.
Compete. Don’t cry in your soup about “damned Chelsea”… because Reading and West Brom and QPR don’t want to hear that f**king crap.
Neither do I.
Respond Arsene… find another hidden gem.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:48 pm
So we BAIL OUT Beveren financially… and they just happen to sell us Eboue, and then next year another of their stars… and if we played them… well, they lose, because you don’t want to BEAT a team thats finacially backing you….
You don’t have to see the conflict of interest. It doesn’t matter what you see or want to see.
If the FA and FIFA see it… and there is a penalty to pay… we’d be in serious trouble.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:49 pm
Perhaps a points deduction would be fair?
That way we’d still be competing in the CL, so its not a major financial blow… but getting points deducted would definitely HURT where it counts. In the standings.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:55 pm
I thought maybe a limited transfer ban. It would suit the crime wouldn’t it? I mean, get players underhandedly, you’re prevented from getting players.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:57 pm
Am I dreaming?
I am in complete agreement with Stag. Rousing stuff too mate.
June 2nd, 2006 at 8:57 pm
“Either you curl up in the fetal position and get kicked or you PICK YOUR SPOTS and get the right players for a fair amount of the MANY MILLION we have made in recent years.”
Which is what we’ve always done. Why the call for action?
My objection isn’t with your facts, but your tone. You’re a tough love kind of guy, and that’s cool, but I sense a disappointment in the club’s moves. If its coming from last summer, well…we were thisclose to a CL trophy.
I’m not rah-rah poster, before you chime in to that effect, but we’re doing what we can and building a special side. You want to pay attention to the ultrarich c*nts to the West, have your picnic. But what we should be talking about is the form of our lads in the WC. Let Chelsea make their moves for the payday foreigners. We still play by the rules that connect with the fans.
ps. did you see the Sky report with Chavchenko? Oh, he looked thrilled.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:02 pm
I understand that. But why was there no big fuss when Manchester United had a similar agreement with Royal Antwerp in Belgium.
Why is it then NOT a conflict of interest when Emirates sponsored Chelsea & the FA Referees at the same time? And now our stadium?
And you’re also dealing with an IF. IF Beveren were to play Arsenal in the CL, blah blah blah. Then why could the same claim not be made when a former player plays against his former team in the EPL or the CL?
The looks of a conflict of interest do not equal a conflict of interest. And let’s say Arsenal owning Beveren WAS legal. It still doesn’t mean that Arsenal orders Beveren to lie down & lose.
And then there’s the matter of loaned players. Say Arsenal loans a player to oh, I don’t know, Beveren. Beveren is playing Juventus with an Arsenal loaned player. Can it not be ordered by Arsenal for their player playing for Beveren to take out an important player for Juventus with an injury causing tackle or something? Or even better a loaned player within the EPL, go kick Rooney you on-loan from Arsenal FUlham player! Where does the “conflict of interests” claims end?
And I understand how the farm system works in NA v Europe. The farm teams in North America are FULLY or MAJORITY owned by the parent club. But you don’t have to have majority or full control to exert or influence control over a club, so my point was that by loaning players even to teams within lower divisions you are gaining de facto partial control of the club or giving a de facto loan b/c a player has value.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:10 pm
But it wasn’t a direct financial payment & we had already had the 1st right on player development/signings with Beveren.
But then if we were to be found “guilty” then FIFA should come down with a ruling that says any club can not have ANY stake in any other club, i.e. Ajax’s former partnership with Ajax Cape Town or Sheffield United’s paternerships with that Chinese side. Or Man U’s former partnership with Royal Antwerp. Or Roman’s partnership with several clubs.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:12 pm
Stag:
Why don’t you cite to clubs who are in League 2 to make your point even stronger or clubs from the Football Conference?
You’re wrong that clubs like Reading, West Brom and QPR don’t want to hear that crap. There’s a reason why English fans were rooting for Arsenal and not Chelsea this year in the Champions League. That’s because, unlike you and your buddy Clarkey, they get it. Chelsea may be playing “technically” within the rules but everyone understands that Abramovich obtained the moneys he is using to fund Chelsea in ways that would not be “technically” or “legally” permissible in the West and that Chelsea can buy anyone and everyone to whom Mourinho, Kenyon and/or Frank Arnesen take a hankering.
Moreover, no one is crying poor mouth here. No one here is saying Chelsea can’t continue to buy recklessly and without heed for the economic realities that govern every other club in the world. However, what I am saying and what football fans outside of you and Clarkey recognize is that Chelsea has changed the balance of power in a fundamental and UNFAIR way. Chelsea suffers no negative consequences for buying ineffective players for hundreds of millions of pounds (see Wright Phillips, Veron, Del Horno, Bridge, Parker, etc.) For two purported Arsenal fans, you and Clarkey just don’t get it, do you? Chelsea is offensive and all your accusations that I and others are crybabies isn’t going to change that reality. Abramovich may or may not be a mobster, his money may or may not be tinged with the suffering of an entire nation but he’s playing a game where he can afford to lose pot after pot of chips and just keep on betting. No one else can do that and there’s the rub for millions of fans. Even Chelsea fans find their victories these days a little less than satisfying.
Ask yourself this question, would you want Arsenal to be bought by another Russian billionaire so that Wenger can buy to his heart’s content whomever he wants including countless Cygans, Jeffers, Stepanovs, Wrights but also Ronaldinho when the mood suits him? I know I would not and I suspect, make that know, that most Gooners would agree with me and not with you.
By the way, if what Chelsea is doing is so admirable, why don’t you just root for the Blues?
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:24 pm
Agreements are one thing but cash payments, however indirect, are another. It’s a far step from close trading partner to outright ownership. I think as a Canadian I very much understand the difference
And I must stress, I don’t think any these agreements are good for the game. You’re right, even the loan system is open to abuse. I suppose it is an acceptable risk as it is relatively minimal, as the loanee club is still independent, whereas there is no chance of resistance from a club actually owned by the loaning club. Does that make any sense? Tell me if you get my idea here, it seems a bit convoluted even to me.
Oh and when I criticize Arsenal, I do so because it’s like my family. Any parent is always more concerned with how their own child behaves than how the kid down the street does. (That wasn’t aimed at you Curtismo, but to the people who think The Boston Strangler ((Stag)) and I should go support Chelsea)
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:26 pm
Cheers.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:32 pm
Curtismo, I think you’re right, FIFA should make all of these sorts of alliances illegal under their statutes. Even if this conflicts with international law FIFA will use their trump card and say that all players clubs do not comply with their laws cannot participate in tournaments like the World Cup.
What we are seeing here gentleman will ultimately shape into another watershed ruling akin to Bosman, wherein the big clubs will be allowed to outright own smaller clubs in other leagues. With their farm teams thus in place, the next step would be a European superleague, and the official stratification of European football will be complete. Watch this space.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:39 pm
You worried about missing out on the financial windfall that is the ECL. But perhaps that was part of the strategy all along about not splashing out major cash in the transfer markets the 3 previous summers- saving up for the rainy day when ECL football doesn’t come or helping paying for the debt from the construction of Emirates.
You were worried about paying off the debt incurred by building the stadium in case it doesn’t get filled after a couple or a few seasons but yet you want to spend tons of money in the transfer market.
If finding another gem is something like paying 8.5 million for an Andy Johnson, no thanks, I’ll take my chances with the squad we have. Because guess what, Stag? Arsene’s not going to go crazy in the transfer market. Never has, I doubt he never will & when he does sign somebody it’ll probably be somebody that most of us will go- who?
Personally, the way money in football is going, I’d rather Arsene’s cautious approach at signings & choosing to rather develop players than splash out loads of cash every summer. B/c I am willing to bet for every 30 million pound Ferdinand signing there are as many 9 million pound Stan Collymore signings (or Denilson’s once world record signing which was an incredible flop v value)to where it either system- buying or developing works out to about the same.
BTW, exactly how much is a MANY MILLION? Is it enough to honestly compete with Chelsea? Compete enough in signings to where supporters like Stag are satisfied? You think somebody like Shevchenko would’ve signed for Arsenal when Arsenal’s not going to pay the wages Chelsea will after signing Henry? Who could Arsene & Arsenal possibly sign that would be even remotely competing with Chelsea signing BOTH Ballack & Shevchenko? Somebody like Zlatan? Probably on his way to Milan if Juve’s troubles are real & he’s kind of a selfish player anyway who might not mesh in Arsene’s team chemistry.
Well, at least Arsene’s reprise lasted a few weeks before the Nicks get back to form… on the 2nd day after the transfer window opens. But I’m not too worried, Man U & Liverpool are also curling up in the fetal position & getting kicked so far too.
And for the record I want to hear about “damned Chelsea.” I want to hear that “f**king crap,” b/c for me it balances out the the f**king broken record every summer from the moaning about lack of signings. England’s moaning about World Cup eliminations come every 4 years but transfer market blues come every summer.
Personally, I think Arsene likes to p!ss you off, Stag, by holding you emotionally hostage by not signing many players, hoarding the cash then doing things like winning the FA Cup with a crap performance & taking a weakened young team of divers to the brink of European glory. Then every summer Arsene wins the competition that is the easiest of all to win- make supporters like Stag nervous by not being Arsene Spender in the transfer market. Hooray Arsene!
But I understand b/c you probably don’t want to hear this crap either.
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:49 pm
Yes, I understand what you meant… I’m not sure if that’s good or bad or that makes us both crazy
And I think for all the heated debates we have from time to time I don’t think any of it ever is truly personal. My posts seem to be but that’s just b/c I have that grating, teasing personality.
Not to mention I think most of it (the deabtes) can be chalked up to just a general frustration of slightly unmet potential (winning the ECL) within the team & the doldrums of pre-WC friendlies.
And I can personally say that I’m a bit ticked b/c I still don’t know what I’m going to do for the WC! My new living arrangement doesn’t have cable & most games are during the workday & as it is, I’m going to have to finagle my schedule to see the US game that’s during the week not to mention take lunch and/or late lunches to see the big 1st round matches!
Ok that was a random all-over enough post, I think, cheers…
June 2nd, 2006 at 9:54 pm
!
I can completely understand that frustration mate. Luckily(?) for me I don’t have a job right now and every game is being shown in Canada, so… that means a few hundred hours of football for me.
And yeah don’t worry mate, I didn’t think for a second you taking or giving anything personally.
June 2nd, 2006 at 10:58 pm
Why do I keep thinking if Arsenal had not complained about Chelsea’s cole tapping, none of this would have happenned? Chelsea started going after Arsenal with all sorts of accusations after that and I am sure Dein is in trouble for that. Chelsea and Mourinho have shown how spiteful they are. A perfect example of a bully.
The funny thing is the amount. How many players can be bought for 1 million now. But no point in talking about the amount as other clubs not as fortunate as Arsenal would complain. Moreover, the amount that did GG in was not even half million. As frustrating as this is, the only way Arsenal can respond is by results on the pitch. Until then, Chelsea and ManU will get away with a lot. Other clubs don’t care. But if Arsenal complain, others will talk that Arsenal are better off and Spurs will always be there to talk about 1919. Arsenal need to start winning on the field to shut all these #@### and prove that money can buy the biggest stars but not continued success.
It is damn frustrating though. A man who has clearly earned his money through not so legal ways, comes in one day to London, throws millions on the table and can do whatever he wants. Nothing will happen. Oh well….Atleast we still have Henry. That little bit proves that there is still some hope out there…
June 2nd, 2006 at 11:02 pm
Funny thing is I just wrote below that the only thing Arsenal can do is win to shut everyone up
Basically I am tired of all the negative press Arsenal gets. Enough is enough. It’s about time Chelsea were put in their place (4th would be a good start
June 2nd, 2006 at 11:09 pm
well said, vg. methinks you were once (or are currently) a prodigious debater…
you back up your points with sound reasoning and facts. plus your words don’t SCREAM out from the screen…
June 3rd, 2006 at 12:44 am
Andez, I stand by what I said. It looks and seems some folks here can?t get Chelsea out of their mind and deal with football reality.
There is a huge question of ethics here. You can’t blame Arsenal for something most clubs are doing.
As I said sometime back in September- the slave trade of footballers from Africa have to stop and regardless of my loved for Arsenal some of the questions need to be answered soon. For every 100 African kids that end up in Europe only 5 will make it and for a second guess where the rest end up?
The GG saga started like this and I really hope the club act fast but this does not sound good. I can?t even believe David Mellor of all guys defending Arsenal. That says a lot about the state of football.
Gerard this has nothing to do with racism but human beings and kids from Africa. It will be front-page news if the kids in England or the Western world were ship of to Africa per say with huge promises and end up on the streets of Africa or in Jail. There are 17 kids in Jail right now in Europe. So for a second folks let think, out of every 100 kids less than 20% will make it as a footballers. Almost half of the 80% will end up on the streets, crime and in jails. I loved football but I also have to think is someones’ kids out there in the cold.
So before folks start coming out with excuses and maybe they should start paying attention to this crime and buy a copy of the African times, which reported this story, last year summer. Maybe a bit of African news to see what really happens when these clubs go there promising to help but not telling the full story?
Every in football knew David Dein was going to be voted off the FA Board. The lower division clubs who voted for him years ago have been upset with him for a long time now. To be honest is good for Arsenal he is off.
As for Chelsea I don?t get the connection here. Stop sounding their sour grapes here folks. The English league was told back in 1995 about the end of English football with the creation of the PL. Did they listen? Nope - because with the help of Sky, the top club directors decided it was about business not football anyone. They created is huge monster called ?PL money making football? also known as greed and now they are complaining about the monster they created. Give me a break. Arsenal, Liverpool, Newcastle, United, Leeds can?t complain now if Chelsea is the one benefiting from what they created.
As David Mellor said football is now a huge business so why cry foul if is a big capitalism business. Do you feel sorry for the lower division clubs I bet not.
June 3rd, 2006 at 7:52 am
LoveG, i get what u mean now of the EPL is the source of greed claim.
To a certain extend i agree with u. Kinda like Man U fans protesting Malcom’s take over, they didn’t really have the right to as nobody forced them to go public (company) at the first place.
Had never been the intro. of EPL, u r right, i dont’ see a Roman take over at Chelsea neither.
But take a step back, i think it’s a tide that we can’t stop. ‘Cos the information technology has taken a great leap the past decade or so. Take Internet for instance, when i was still in College 10 years ago, i never even heard of stuffs like internet, email, window. And DOS was what we got in our computer 101! Now even a 5 year old probably knows how to log onto the internet!
And the cable TV probably changed the face of the world sports. Not just football. Nowadays, even snooker they got a Premier League. Cable TV made all these possible. U can access ESPN now all over the world.
As a football fan not living in Europe, I do welcome the intro. of SKY, cable TV. Without it, it’s impossible for me getting to watch that much Premiership game a season. Yet having watched football during the “old” days, there are a lot of things I miss.
Funny enough, I did enjoy watching football playing in a snow covered pitch, or a muddy pitch of the old days.
June 3rd, 2006 at 8:27 am
The arguments about Arsenal being just another Chelsea to smaller, lower division clubs is one that doesn’t hold much water for me. Its HOW you arrive at your success that makes the difference. Making smart choices and developing character over the course of generations is not the same thing as landing a Russian oligarch.
Yes, Arsenal bought their way into the Premiership back when men grew curly mustaches but since then, the club, like most other clubs, generated their wealth by generating a winning tradition. I’m talking about history. What do Chelsea have? They have a benefactor that has proven that, as far as the fans are concerned, you can’t just buy a title. You have to make a run up and improve over time for a trophy to have true value. Wigan knew this last season and made a great account of themselves, and now they have a chance to make a big signing. Reading may do the same. This is their chance to grow. Let’s see if they take it like The Arsenal did when we got DB10.
I won’t make excuses for us next season when we play Chelsea. We need to beat them, even if they bring 50 million pounds off the bench when the legs get tired. Even if they have Chavchenko. Even if they operate under the auspices of legal, financial doping. All we need to do is finish our chances and bring back our record breaking back five that got there because Arsene knows talent before the world does. Great stuff.
We’re a club with history, and its not for sale.
June 3rd, 2006 at 8:53 am
The point is… 99% of the other teams would LOVE to have our money to spend. Its that simple.
Now that Manchester United and Arsenal aren’t the KING spenders any more, its a “problem”.
The fact remains. They are absolutely 100% NOT doing anything illegal in their buying of whatever players they want. If you can’t get over that fact, oh well, thats on you. Don’t blame Chelsea.
The New York Yankees have unlimited funds to buy whomever the hell they want to by in Baseball. Nobody can compete with them in that area. Hell, my Boston Red Sox lagging about 70 Million behind them in payroll. Should Sox fans be crying about it? The other teams would love to be able to spend what Boston does. They don’t want to hear about NY spending too much from Boston. I don’t want to hear United or Arsenal or Liverpool complain about Chelsea. Its ridiculous. (in my opinion)
You don’t like WBA QPR and Reading?
How about Bolton, Wigan and Charlton?
Do you think they believe its UNFAIR that Arsenal or United or Liverpool routinely snag their better players because of their buying power?
Good arguements for the most part. I don’t care what “other Gooners” would think. I think my own thoughts and have my own beliefs and convictions. I don’t follow the crowd of Gooners or others…. and…
Please save the “go root for Chelsea” non-sense. Nobody said Chelsea is admirable. They have bought and assembled a very good team LEGALLY.
I suppose if Arsenal were bought by a wealthy businessman, you’d stop supporting them and go with AFC Wimbledon? I wouldn’t.
June 3rd, 2006 at 8:55 am
Not direct?
yes…. sure… with a wink and a nod.
June 3rd, 2006 at 8:55 am
btw i also agree with LoveG on one thing - i too feel it’s good that David Dein was voted off the board.
As long as he’s there, Fergie, Speical One the likes would forever have excuse whenever things like fixtures list don’t go their way. From what i’ve known the fixutre list is generated by computer, Mr. Dein must be a computer genius to them i guess!!
Anyway, u get what i mean. From now on they got no one to blame, at least not Dein, not Arsenal. No more Arsenal always get the benefited all soft of craps. I remember two seasons ago we had to play Newcastle, Livepool, Chelsea, Man U the likes in a space of 10 days or something, wonder why back then nobody made any noise?
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:00 am
Scotty, 100% agree with what u said. With only one exception, we bought our way to winning way not back when men were growing funny tach, it was even early than that, when men were wearing hats!
Under Herbert Chapman, his philsophory was - to gather a team of the best players possible, whatever it took. Nevertheless, nothing likes the way Chelsea spending currently. Hell, not even Real Madrid could match them at their hey days. ‘Cos no matter what, every club has a basic principle - while they are spending, they need to look after the BALANCE of their book. Chelsea is the ONLY club in the entire football history which doesn’t care if they lose 100 mil the previous year, they still got the ability to spend another 100 mil the next year. Nobody could match that.
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:01 am
yes, its OK that we bought our way in…
but not now, in your “era”…
have the cake, eat it too… enjoy!
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:02 am
gerard, me to feel, the whole things when first emerged, the first thing came to my mind was - somebody was not happy to see the Africa players playing in England. As simple as that.
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:10 am
Curtisimo, brilliant put! i’m great somebody here do see sense! it’a actually quite simple - we are carrying hundred millions’ debt yet folks expect us to play the Chelsea game (spending big), crazy.
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:17 am
Clarkey, an European SuperLeague will spell the dead of English football, or European football as a whole.
Without a doubt, a Barcelona V Arsenal, or Juve Vs Man U type of fixture every week is attractive by the hype. Yet like World Cup, it’s good to watch the best teams in the world pitch against each other once for a while, doing it every year will bore ppl to dead.
Every major league in Europe has the style of its own. We love English football because it’s more direct, quick, and physical. Some best matches in my recent memories were Man City beat Spurs 4-3 with 10 men, Arsenal beat Boro 5-3, Arsenal beat Spurs 5-4 etc. Despite our rather successful CL campaign last season, the PROCESS itself was rather boring. Against Real, Juve, Villlreal on the way to the final, we had 3 goalless drew. I personally would rather to see us playing the lowly Premiership sides like facing the likes TACTICAL EXPERTS Juve, Milan, Inter in a regular base.
June 3rd, 2006 at 10:16 am
Please, Stag. There were 12 teams in the world back then. You’re stretching pretty far here, even for you.
You shock me now and again, fella.
June 3rd, 2006 at 10:19 am
I forget to add that, when we bunged our way to the First Division, we were still on equal footing in terms of players. Same team, same playing field. Ours was a rotten sewer, but that’s beside the point.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:02 am
I could not agree more Andez. A European superleague would be like a kid who got his wish to only eat candy - he’d find it would make him sick awfully quickly.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:06 am
“…when i was still in College 10 years ago…”
Showin your age Big Man
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:13 am
My logic is that 5 players on every squad must be of the nationality in the league they’re playing. That means in England for example there would be 20 X 5 = 100 English (not Irish or Scottish) players. If you multiply that over every league in Europe that would mean some foreign players would have to go home or take on a new nationality. As it is the Brazilians who fill the lions share of foreign players throughout Europe, followed by Argentine and African players they would feel the brunt of this decision.
If European Countries start saying that there must be 5 carpenters or plumbers or rocket surgeons on and in every business it would defeat they own current rules. How is soccer any different?
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:15 am
I’ve seen the Rooney and Ronaldhino ones but none of the others. The Henry one is classy although the Ronaldhino as a kid ad was pretty good as well.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:22 am
“why cry foul if is a big capitalism business”
We have baseball, hockey, and football. If there where such a thing as relegation in the super sports here it would really stir up the pot.
In theory Arsenal could be relegated but the New York Yankees will always be in the Major Leagues.
We’re used to capitalism here and in a big way. Maybe that’s why soccer is so refreshing.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:33 am
I’ve also worked in Africa and every kid there would give the world to play or be given the chance to play football for a living anywhere.
Who are we to say they shouldn’t be given this chance. it’s not like they are whisked away on a crowded ship and released from chains just before the match. They have a choice, a passport and a ticket home. If they fail and decide to rob banks it’s they’re individual choice and has nothing to do with human rights.
Every kid that follows the Pirates in Johannesburg would love to be given a chance to play in Europe. Think of the choices: play in Europe or play on a dirty pitch without shoes in Soweto or Kliptown.
Your suggestion almost makes them seem like they’ve chosen without knowing the risks involved. I think they do know or learn quick if they are coming to play in a first division team anywhere in Europe like Beveren. Give them more credit than this.
It’s not football that’s putting them on the streets there are many other factors involved.
June 3rd, 2006 at 12:07 pm
Said the same thing above. If Dein really had power, the 2004 tough fixtures would have changed. But no one said anything then.
June 3rd, 2006 at 12:50 pm
I think that is a bit of a stretch mate. I do not believe the ultimate aim of this investigation is to lower the number of Brasilians playing in Europe. I concede that it may (may) have that effect, but it is not in the minds of the decision makers.
June 3rd, 2006 at 2:39 pm
Very true, Andez. I think the arguments about Chelsea get mired in “my teams is more upstanding than your team”. When Arsenal negotiate various deals, at least its our club, our people, generating the results and money. When we bought well, we bought with money generated by the club itself. We’re not a side that can rely on deus ex machina to come in and save the day.
Not having to balance the books is perfectly legal, but it seriously compromises the league and very many careers. We’re rather fortunate that Chelsea have failed in their big cup runs. This could be much worse, and there’s nothing to suggest that it soon won’t be.
June 3rd, 2006 at 4:49 pm
Yes it wasn’t direct, unless you don’t know what direct means? Direct payment would’ve been “Make check payable to Beveren Football Club.” A 3rd party source even if an affiliate or associate of a club is not a direct payment.
Shady & maybe illegal? Possibly. Direct & illegal? No. Wink or no wink.
June 3rd, 2006 at 5:15 pm
You & Scotty are spot on b/c there’s a difference from spending crazy money that you EARNED as a football club.
Chelsea right now are nothing more than a sporting subsidiary of Roman’s Oil Companies. They’re a division, one that loses money b/c of football spending v earnings, of Roman’s oil companies. But they fear not of losing money b/c the money from the parent company (Roman) is just shifted down to Chelsea… goes on all the time in corporations. One dept. or several depts. help bail out or help money losing depts. survive until they can be profitable themselves.
And even if Chelsea’s dealings & spendings were all on the up & up… who wants to support “Chelsea?” Such a sissy sound club. Maybe, just MAYBE if they’re “Chucky FC,” or “Charlie FC” but Chelsea? Girliemen! Sissyball! Chelseacrap!
June 3rd, 2006 at 5:18 pm
Great analogy.
The quickest way to cheapen something is to make it readily available to everyone & as often as they wished…
June 3rd, 2006 at 5:19 pm
Thanks, Andez… plus, it’s fun to wind Stag up
June 3rd, 2006 at 5:22 pm
From Arseblog:
And how much of a story was it anyway? According to Beveren spokesman Markus Siegler:
A joint venture agreement has been made between Arsenal and Beveren but the police said everything was in order and there was no case to answer. We don?t know why the media suddenly made so much of the matter though probably because the name Arsenal made it newsworthy.
About right.
June 3rd, 2006 at 6:38 pm
This is a lot of fuss about nothing. Yes, Arsenal had a technical relationship with Bevern, yes they loaned a director/investor money, but they were never going to play them so there was no conflict of interest. The relationship isn’t as dangerous as Abramovich sponsoring the Russian team that do get to play in Europe - CSKA Moscow.
I understand what Love_G says about the exploitation of African and other youngsters. What I say in reply is that every club does it too. The difference with Arsenal is that their kids always seem to end up playing somewhere rather on the rubbish heap. Some of the Irish kids have left Arsenal and gone home to play in the League of Ireland. It is not the greatest amount of money but it is better than working in a supermarket. They are able to do this thanks to the football education that Arsenal give them. Look at the number of ex-Arsenal kids playing at lower levels - plenty of them. If arsenal give them a future in the game, albeit at a lower level, they have done more for them than many other clubs do for their kids.
As for Stag133 wanting more signings in response to Chelsea, I have to laugh. I hope Chelsea sign Ronaldinho, Carlos, Kaka and even Cole (if he wants to go) The number of egos in their dressing-room will then ensure even more in-fighting. More chance of them imploding. There are already reports that players like Duff and Drogba want to leave. I am happy with the transfer policy of Mr. Wenger. Assuming nobody leaves, we have a good squad for next year plus some youngsters coming through. If Wenger wants to sign some more and change a few things, so be it. If he is happy with the way it is, so be it. Keep the faith.
June 3rd, 2006 at 9:58 pm
I never suggested that the aim of this investigation was Brazialians, it is clearly about “conflict of interest rules”. I only mentioned them because of the red-herring of the Africans at Beveren in this story. The result of Nationality quotas will only end up hurting Brazilians.
June 3rd, 2006 at 10:19 pm
You almost make it seem like the BBC reporting, all those Africans at Beveren were doing the moral thing because many of these failed African soccer players end up in European prisons - me think not.
I strongly believe that it is motivated by Racism. As an example where do you think all those Brazilian players come from, they come from the slums and back waters of Brazil.
I know a lot about Brazil and what is important to know is that 1% of the pop. owns 90% of the wealth. There is a 10% middle-class and the remaining 89% live in absolute poverty. How is that any different than being a poor kid from the Ivory Coast or Senegal. From the Townships to the Barrios being poor in these countries is far from what we imagine in our 1rst world as being poor.
My point being, if Beveren was filled with Brazilians they’d be considered a world class team but no because they’re Africans they could somehow get into Britain.
That’s also why I’m puzzled by your saccharine statement “Almost half of the 80% will end up on the streets, crime and in jails. I loved football but I also have to think is someones’ kids out there in the cold.”
They are playing at Beveren in the first division of the Belgium premier league. I can’t imagine your serious that the rest end up in the street and of course they resort to crime as you suggest.
Dude, that’s all racist propaganda to make you feel afraid of black men. Many of these people are as salt of the earth as you and I. If we landed without a job we look for one, but we wouldn’t rob steal or kill, how are Africans any different than us. They are not!
I really hated that part of that white middle-class lily coloured BBC reporters story. Your statement about “I also have to think is someones’ kids out there in the cold.” Poppycock.
June 3rd, 2006 at 10:31 pm
I agree with you entirely but I wonder about this whole notion of exploiting Africans - please read my reply to Love_G above.
I hope that Arsenal is an ethical club!
Your examples above clearly indicate that many are called and few are chosen for the first team but a contribution to life doesn’t end there. More can always be done of course but these lads go on to meet their own levels such as League play in Ireland. Jeez, back in the 80’s this team was almost an Irish team.
I have walked the dirt streets, with open troughs of dirt as open sewers, in the slums of Africa and let me tell you playing for Beveren, in Belgium, is not an exploitation. Returning there is much worse than working at a super market.
If we where to find that their passports were being withheld and they were not offered return air fare that would be different but nothing like this has been alleged in Belgium.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:26 pm
You aren’t looking at the bigger picture Gerard. Individual players, and maybe their families, benefit by playing for European clubs. But ultimately it is European football, and the European economy, which benefits, not African football or the African economy.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:31 pm
Ah I see what you are saying now.
I agree what Chelsea does is just as bad if not worse than what Arsenal allegedly did, but my main concern is what my club does. If the Outer Mongolian government was committing atrocities in their country I would be alarmed, but I’d be more alarmed if (”if” :P) the Canadian government intentionally misappropriating money for their own ends.
June 3rd, 2006 at 11:35 pm
I don’t tend to trust everything the OB say but in this case I’d trust them over a Beveren spokesman.
I have to say I disagree Curtisimo, I don’t think the BBC engages in such wild speculation and sensationalism as many other media sources *coughFOXNEWScough*
June 4th, 2006 at 7:03 am
some of the gooners in here have little faith. lot of doubters as compared to other forums i have visited.
from http://www.arsenal-mania.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23243&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=570
“Just trawled through alll this thread and have concluded that some people are getting a bit worried about all of this.
Im a lawyer, specialise in debt and equity finance. Here’s my take on Beverengate:
The facts are that Arsenal football club entered entered into a loan agreement with a company called goal. David Dein signed for Arsenal, whereas the french/belgian bloke signed for goal.
This company bought a controlling share in Beveren.
The loan agreement (from the look of the first and last pages on the BBC website) is a standard form loan agreement. By definition such agreements require the repayment of the money.
If it was a gift there would be no such contract - none would be needed.
The money has not been repaid - fine. But the contractual evidence, that the BBc is so proud of having a copy of, shows the money to be a loan.
If Bank X gives bloke Y money, they have no control over an object bought with that money unless it states in the loan agreement.
A mortgage agreement (a form of loan) would state such a control, in a mortgage example the house is used as security for the loan. The house is the SUBJECT matter of the agreement.
The reason I am sure that no condition of control was stated is that the BBC would have mentioned this (rather than asserting a ’straw man’). And DD would not have signed such an agreement.
Remeber - and this is the crux - such an agreement would be drafted by Arsenal’s lawyers (Slaughter and May I believe) they WOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED SUCH A STUPID THING TO BE INCLUDED If they had they will be sued for professional negligence in failing to advise on the ramifications
The consideration given by Goal is not evidenced as allowing Arsenal FC to control Beveren. It cannot be evidenced, if a board member at Beveren asserts as much it wuill come down to their word against Arsenal’s and Arsenal’s will prevail because the loan agreement says nothing about any controlling condition.
How the money is repaid is immaterial - out of transfer funds fine, that’s a guaranteed source of income for a selling club like Beveren so it is evidence of a sensible clause to ensure Arsenal get there money back.
The money has not yet been repaid - doesn’t matte rit is still a loan. And if it has become a gift (and no evidence) there is no evidence that this gift has bought control.
Goal have the stake, not Arsenal. Goal like any company raises finance through either selling shares (equity) or getting loans (debt). The latter has happened here, and Arsenal happen to be the lending institution.
End of story. Arsenal have done absolutely nothing wrong vis-a-vis PL, UEFA and FIFA rules.
Maybe there was some behind the scenes nudge nudge wink wink but it cannot be proved.
View user’s profile Send private message Reply with quote”
June 4th, 2006 at 8:00 am
“Some of the Irish kids have left Arsenal and gone home to play in the League of Ireland. It is not the greatest amount of money but it is better than working in a supermarket. They are able to do this thanks to the football education that Arsenal give them. Look at the number of ex-Arsenal kids playing at lower levels - plenty of them. If arsenal give them a future in the game, albeit at a lower level, they have done more for them than many other clubs do for their kids.”
Definitely agree with u on that! Irish G!
June 4th, 2006 at 9:28 am
G,
We are also used to capitalism here in England too. We lived in a capitalist world. The world market today is a huge global business and the rich are getting richer. There is a wicked article in the Sunday Telegragh about this subject and Chelsea including the whole business with football.
June 4th, 2006 at 9:39 am
Sorry but I’ve to agree to dis-agree with your statement here - I’ve also worked in Africa and every kid there would give the world to play or be given the chance to play football for a living anywhere.
Yes we have problems in africa but not every kid thinks like that. Some poor kids yes because they were told or promise all these sort of crap by teams wanting to get cheap labour “Players”. I’ve been there and seen it.
Every kid that follows the Pirates in Johannesburg would love to be given a chance to play in Europe. Think of the choices: play in Europe or play on a dirty pitch without shoes in Soweto or Kliptown.
Sorry but this make me really sad thinking this is how most folks see and think about Africans. They have no hope somehow and have to depend on the Western world. Damn G but that is not on.
June 4th, 2006 at 9:49 am
I_Gunners, I do understand your points and I’m not saying Arsenal FC is the only club doing these sort of deals. Most clubs are behind this trade but guess what money talks here.
But remember there is a total different world in Africa compare to Ireland. If an Irish kid don’t make it to become a footballer he can stay and work in England but if you from Africa that is not the case.
June 4th, 2006 at 10:02 am
“some of the gooners in here have little faith. ”
Pray tell, what exactly am I lacking faith in?
Arsenal may be my club, but I am not so childishly naive to think that because they “are Arsenal” that they are saints. People make mistakes all the time, on and off the pitch. George Graham, an Arsenal manager, got himself involved in a bit of dodginess that alot of Arsenal fans at the time would have tried to pass off as not all that bad. And in today’s Arsenal too many have come to believe the myth that Arsenal is a shining beacon of the most glorious style of football, which celebrates the Corinthian values of fair play and beautiful play. Tell me, if Arsenal have been so aesthetically and morally wonderful over the years, how can we rationalize all those red cards? I’m not saying Arsenal are no more inherently corrupt than other clubs, but they are no more morally responsible than the rest of the big clubs either. Let’s face it, from Henry Norris to George Graham Arsenal has had their share of controversy and shady dealings.
Now, is this really how you wish to end your post? “Maybe there was some behind the scenes nudge nudge wink wink but it cannot be proved.” Was that sentence included in order to inspire me to have some more faith that my club acted morally responsibly and legally? No, I take it however you mean I am lacking faith in the fact that even if these dealings were done, Arsenal won’t have to face any consequences.
June 4th, 2006 at 10:15 am
Let me start by saying I’ve seen what I’m talking about. This is nothing new and as I said let pay some attention to this issue. Channel 4 news reported this back in 2004 but the football world were not interested back then. Some ex-players have gone back to help these kids but clubs with money not helping.
You keep talking about racism and I don’t understand what racism got to do with this. Choice FM like many AfroCaribbean radio stations have being talking about this subject for a while now.
My point being, if Beveren was filled with Brazilians they’d be considered a world class team but no because they’re Africans they could somehow get into Britain.
I don’t even know one person who went to last Monday football match between Ghana and JA who thinks like that. What the folks are saying if these clubs really wants to help these Africa kids why don’t they do what Feyenoord is doing in Ghana.
The world at large don’t want to deal with reality.
June 4th, 2006 at 10:21 am
Well there you go Andez. Football does not belong to the people anymore - Is a business.
Yes I want the whole world to watch the beautiful game but selling our soul to money is the end of the beautiful game.Chelsea just killed the game but can you really blame them if the top clubs don’t want to do anything about it.
June 4th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Exactly Julian, Africans are still forced to rely upon the Western world to save them.
If European football didn’t have the financial might it does, maybe African football would be far better than it is now, and with that the money would filter through all the African economy. Africa would no longer bleed money the way it does now.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Now, now, Fox News gets a bad rap. You can do the research & find the studies that say it’s not really as right-leaning as everyone thinks it is (a claim started by other networks who lost their lion’s share of the market).
There’s also the UCLA media study that says that up to 80% of the US media outlets are left leaning.
CNN engages in outright speculation & lies, as in reporting “Rush Limbaugh was arrested on drug charges” weeks ago, when that was not the case. Also pick just about any story in the aftermath of the Katrina Hurricane, being orginially from New Orleans, I can definitely guarantee a lot of news stories were race-baiting sensationalised garbage). And speculation masquerading as “analysis” has replaced factual news for the most part on all the alphabet networks & especially the cable news networks such as CNN, MSNBC & Fox.
Now in the BBC’s case, I would tend to agree but then again, I don’t trust any entity completely that is government owned or governement financed, sponsored, etc., any government, even the ones I mostly trust.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
But that is not necessarily Arsenal’s fault. You cna argue they shouldn’t import African players & give them a chance b/c if they don’;t make it they have to go back to Africa but guess what? That’s a UK & EU problem, not Arsenal’s. Arsenal doesn’t write immigration law, old farts in suits do.
ANd as far as Africa goes, yes, their continent was pillaged & raped for centuries in the name of colonialism but with the amount of foreign aid & supplies that flows into Africa, there is no excuse why most of those African countries should have the majority of their population living in poverety. Some of Africa’s current problems lies with the African government & leaders themselves.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
Too right Curtisimo that some of Africa’s problems lie with African governments.
But who is supporting many of these corrupt regimes in the first place?
June 4th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Thank you. I didn’t know the actual legal lingo but I knew that loans (especially 3rd party loans) can not expressly be proven as to show control in an entity any more than being friends with or just knowing somebody doesn’t prove a working relationship or exerting influence, pressure, etc. on another person or entity.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:19 pm
Well, that’s a good point too Clarkey but I’m not going to get into the whole industrialist/capitalist/consumer based society arguments. B/c in a free society we do not have to participate & are free to find our own ways of living outside of the system (even though the system is stacked & setup against us) & the majority of us take part in consumerism, so technically we’re all to blame.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:20 pm
That was just a bit of a joke that one
But you must admit that overall the BBC is a very reputable and reliable news media outlet.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:24 pm
Oh I could not agree more, none of us are free of blame. Still, like most religions say, none of us are free of sin, but that’s not the point; it is the process of working towards bettering ourselves and the people around us which is the most important thing. That’s what it’s all about, working towards a perfection we can never achieve.
June 4th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Oh, from what I’ve seen, definitely more reputable than US media outlets. Frankly, I watch the US news (& I’m an American) so as to know what NOT to believe.
But I’ve been living in Gainesville, FL for about 3 months now & their cable service has a rotating network channel (3 hour blocks of different networks) & in the evenings, they have BBC coverage from like 6 to 9 or 6 to 8 or something & I watch so as to get a different perspective on world events such as the Middle East, Iraq, etc. From what I’ve seen, they’re definitely less prone to speculation as US media are which is refreshing compared to US media networks who can’t wait to get through reporting the story so they can launch into their “analysis” of the event…
I hate the media! As one of my favorite bands Nevermore so adeptly says in a rippin’ metal tune titled “Posion Godmachine”:
The media machine knows what to do
It knows how to feed the poison to you
Usesless information for your useless little lives
The tv lies and pacifies
Do you believe everything you see?
Children of the void come follow me
Denounce your faith and penance the savior is unseen
I am the new drug, you Poison Godmachine…poison!
Poison Godmachine
Poison is a word, God is a word used for fear
In subtlety we obey through ink and broadcast wave
The doubts and fears that shadow media decay
Deprogram this affliction and the cathode ray unclean
I am the last nail, the empty soulless screen…soulless!
Poiosn Godmachine
And we eat the poison, we created the Poison Godmachine
June 4th, 2006 at 12:49 pm
Nevermore, are they newer or old? Where are they from?
I had alot of mates in high school who were into metal but I was more into punk.
I watch the Daily Show for news now
the Colbert Report was good at first but then his “Right Wing Nut” shtick got old… fast.
June 4th, 2006 at 1:17 pm
Nevermore’s been around since the mid 90s. They’re the new breed of “real” metal, not that crap the radio passes off as metal such as Korn, Slipknot, Linkin Park, etc. Nevermore is thrash metal influenced with touches of really heavy & death metal. Lots of awesome chugging riffs, double bass drum beats, awesome hammer-on, fret walking riffs. The main guitarist in the band, Jeff Loomis, is about the best riffmaster in American metal right now.
They’re out of the Seattle area & they’re on the Century Media label, so if you know anything about metal record labels that may give you a clue to their sound. Their 1st cd was rather crappy but on their 2nd cd back in 95 or so, they started to sound like a heavy Ozzmosis-era Ozzy when Zakk Wylde played with Ozzy Osbourne. Now, they’re up their with being arguably the best American metal band out there along with God Forbid, Lamb Of God, to name a few.
But if you even remotely like metal music, pick up any of Nevermore’s cds execpt their 1st one & you’ll be satisfied. I think they have 6 cds now, the most recent being This Godless Endeavor which is just an awesome metal album from start to finish, IMO.
As much as I like heavy & aggressive music, I never really got into punk. I kind of like the Sex Pistols & Rollins Band but Rollins Band isn’t really punk, I know, even though their founder Henry Rollins was in Black Flag, one of the premier American punk bands.
June 4th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
Sure. folks like you are soo naive. I don’t have faith because faith is used as a weapon these days.
June 4th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
What are you talking about? Faith has ALWAYS been used as a weapon.
June 4th, 2006 at 5:17 pm
Let’s clear up this confusion. Dein being voted out of the FA has nothing to do with Beveren - it’s because he tried to get Phil Scholari in and it went wrong - maybe he flexed his muscle a little too much. Still, it’s England who will suffer, McLaren is a useless clown.
As for Beveren, Arsenal have done nothing wrong, I’m not saying what they’re doing is ethical they’re just exploiting loopholes in the law. Basically, in Belgium rules regarding work permits, nationalities etc, are extremely lax. Using Beveren as a feeder enables Arsenal to get first pick on certain African players who they might otherwise not be able to get - particularly players from the Ivory Coast.
Dein and Wenger are not stupid and obviously would have gone into all the necessary ramifications through the club’s lawyers to ensure any financial dealings with Beveren were legal. Of course, nothing will happen to Arsenal - because they have done nothing wrong. However, you can expect UEFA to find the loophole and put a great big plug in it in thenot too distant future. Just like they will soon try to plug the loophole that allows Chelsea to spend hundreds of millions of pounds when the club, not the chairman, is hundreds of million in debt.
June 4th, 2006 at 5:22 pm
Read the book of Hebrews Chapter 11, Ver 1 to 4.
And I’m not talking about the faith of Blair, Bush or Bin Laden. I don’t buy into those sort of faith. That sort of faith is used as a weapon.
Not good in English but I believe faith is to have allegiance to duty or belief and trust in loyalty to God.
June 4th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
You’re right there, humans will never attain perfection - it’s impossible because there’s no such thing. In fact working towards anything, psychologically, is a redundant philosophy. If you see something is wrong, change it now - any movement towards change involving time indicates you have no real intention of changing at all.
June 4th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
I think what he means is that any dissenting or critical opinion is denounced for being less than “fully faithful” to whichever cause is being scrutinized. It has always been used as a weapon but it seems moreso nowadays.
Like some people will say you aren’t a true Gunner/American/red-blooded male if you don’t subscribe to views A, B and C.
June 4th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Wouldn’t that be ironic, and in some way karmic justice, if Arsenal “got away” with what they allegedly did by way of a legal technicality only to be punished by UEFA’s use of a different legal technicality?
June 4th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
I don’t buy into organized religion period. Much like government. To me divinely inspired is not the same as divinely written, so even the Bible to me is only a guide not a book to be taken verbatim end-all, be-all of every situation. But it’s a guide to me no more so than things like the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita, Gnostic texts, Native American texts, whatever. All were written by men who had experiences I can not relate to, but that in my view are no better than the epiphanous moments of clarity & joy I have felt in multiple moments throughout my life.
Man, we’re all over the map today on the topics!… I like it!
June 4th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Spot on… perfection is like infinity- it’s a concept, not an attainable state… like God
June 4th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
Sort of like being found innocent in CRIMINAL court but being found guilty of monetary compensation in CIVIL court… what a strange, confusing world we live in sometimes!
I forgot which theologian said it but:
“May you live in interesting times…”
Indeed!
June 4th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
I was thinking more of those Law and Order episodes where the accused gets away with the one crime but is charged with another right at the end of the trial.
haha, that made me sound real cool didn’t it?
June 4th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
Heck yeah it did! I loved Law & Order! Not so much the last few seasons but mid-to-late 90s I was addicted to that show almost!
Jack McCoy would make a good EPL manager too! hahaha
Those would be some interesting psych battles between Sir Red Nose, Moaninho & Jack “Bulldog” McCoy!
But I got what you mean
June 5th, 2006 at 12:25 am
No. Have a little faith in DD and Wenger’s ability to steer themselves away from legal naughties, considering the former is a more than capable businessman with years of financial transaction and the latter’s highly keen intellectual when it comes to matters of economics. (Laugh all you want at Wenger’s coaching nous but you can’t fault his intelligence in finance)
I wouldn’t argue on the moral responsibility part on Beveren acting as our feeder club or its social component on importing African players. You have your stance and I have mine. Rather, I would want to focus on the legalities of the issue. I didn’t made that post above. It was someone else, thus the link before that.
Is Arsenal legally at fault? No.
Is Arsenal going to face legal sanctions from the FA or UEFA or FIFA? No. Not if they want to carry this all the way to the high courts and lose.
Is Arsenal morally and ethically wrong in conducting its affairs via this issue? Ah… I guess this is where the contention lies.