Football can be an odd game sometimes.

In the first few games of this season, Viktor Gyokeres looked like a little boy lost. Hardly seeing any game time, completely out of form and questions over his future. Then the international break happened.

Kai Havertz had started Arsenal’s Premier League campaign as the manager’s preferred option through the middle, scoring twice in his opening five league appearances. Then away with Germany, he picked up a hamstring injury that is likely to see him miss the next few weeks.

What the international break took from Havertz, it gave to Gyokeres.

Gyokeres scored in 4 goals in 4 games for Sweden during this international break and has now found the net in seven consecutive Nations League matches, setting a competition record.

Not only was he finding the back of the net, he looked sharp, ready and focused. And that is exactly what Mikel Arteta needs.

With Havertz out, it is difficult to imagine a better time for Gyokeres to rediscover his swagger and Saturday’s meeting with Leeds could therefore represent something of a reset.

Gyokeres knows where the goal is against Daniel Farke’s side, having scored three times against Leeds last season. More importantly, he now has the confidence that comes from consistently putting the ball in the net.

But Arteta does have another option.

Mikel Merino has already shown that he can operate as a makeshift striker, and his qualities are arguably closer to Havertz’s than Gyokeres’. He can link play, hold the ball up, bring others into the game and arrive late in the box. And last night he scored twice as Spain came from behind to beat Croatia.

Merino could be particularly useful if Arteta wants Arsenal to continue playing in a way that relies on combination football rather than simply looking for runs in behind.

The contrast between the two is fascinating.

Gyokeres offers power, pace and that instinctive striker’s movement. He wants to run beyond defenders and attack the spaces between centre-back and full-back. Merino, meanwhile, can provide a more connective presence, giving Arsenal another body between the lines and allowing the likes of Bukayo Saka and Eberechi Eze to benefit from his movement.

Ideally, Arsenal won’t have to choose between the two for too long.

But with Havertz unavailable, this is their moment.

For Gyokeres, it is a chance to remind everyone why Arsenal signed him in the first place.

For Merino, it is another opportunity to demonstrate just how valuable his versatility can be.

And for Arteta, it is another test of the depth and adaptability he has spent years building into this squad.

The international break has created an unwanted problem.

Now Gyokeres and Merino have the chance to turn it into an opportunity.

DJ

The simple answer is no. If you want, you can now stop reading.

In the last few weeks we have seen some laughable claims from Man City fans. The most hilarious is that City lawyers deliberately lost the case with the aim of either winning an appeal, or presenting their case to a higher authority. It is crazy that people with this underdeveloped thought process are allowed a vote.

Another claim by City fans is that their club is aiming to “burn down the Premier League” and will “take the red cartel with them” if found guilty. Again, this is just crazy talk with no foundation or evidence.

City fans are presenting two main points that they believe to be true:

1) That the UAE will fly in and present evidence that sponsorship to the likes of Arsenal provided by Emirates was funded by the UAE government, therefore making Arsenal as guilty as Man City.

2) That they UAE will force the cancellation of all sponsorship deals, such as the Emirates deal with Arsenal, which will leave Premier League clubs in financial turmoil.

So lets look into these claims.

Financial support of sponsors

The key to Man City’s charges around financial irregularities is that they were aware that sponsorship money was being subsidised and failed to correctly report the true source of funds.

If it is found that Emirates, or any other UAE based organisation, was receiving funding from the UAE Government, the Government of their Emirati, or any other source, it only becomes an offence if the club they were sponsoring were aware.

Arsenal, for example, can not be charged for failing to report the true source of funds if club executives were not aware that Emirates were being funded by the Dubai Government, or any other organisation. You can not report what you do not know.

Now, if like Manchester City, an email trail is found and that Arsenal was aware of being in a similar situation, the club could be in trouble. But this raises two points.

Firstly, why would Arsenal, and other Premier League clubs, allow the Premier League (which they are all members of) to pursue with the push for charges if they knew they were guilty of the exact same thing?

And secondly, the UAE has two flagship airline carriers – Emirates and Etihad Airways. Having already seen Etihad’s name dragged through the mud, why would they also want to see the same happen to Emirates? It would make zero sense.

Likewise, it should be remembered that Emirates is owned by the government of Dubai’s Investment Corporation of Dubaiwhilst Etihad is owned by the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund ADQ.

In the competitive world of airlines, Etihad and Emirates are direct rivals, both aiming to be the premier carrier for the UAE, and have different ownership based in different Emirati. It would make no sense for Emirates, Dubai or the UAE to come out and say “Emirates were doing the same thing with Arsenal”, when Emirates could be a big beneficiary of all of this.

UAE could force organisation to cancel contracts

This really shows that many of those on social media do not have a club what they are talking about. Emirates, for example, could not simply decide to break their contract with Arsenal.

Arsenal announced an extension of the emirates deal earlier this year, extending the contract to 2033. That contract will likely be hundreds of pages long, and contained within it will be agreements on how the contract can be cancelled (mutual termination, poor performance, branch damaging scandal, etc) and the punishments if either party breaks the contract without just reason or agreement.

If a sponsor terminates the agreement without a valid contractual basis, it would likely constitute a breach of contract. The football club could claim damages for the breach. Damages might include the loss of expected revenue from the sponsorship and any additional costs incurred in finding a new sponsor.

Also, as above, why would Dubai owned Emirates cancel their contract with Arsenal to punish the Premier League for the Manchester City case? Again, this makes no sense.

The UAE would unlikely look to encourage Emirates, or anyone else, to cancel contracts. The UAE is made up by its seven emirates. Abu Dhabi, serving as the capital, would not want to appear to be controlling all decisions in the benefit of themselves. This could lead to the break up of the country.

UAE and the likes of Dubai are more likely to double down on Emirates and other sponsors. They will look to protect them, ensure contracts are water tight and that they can continue promoting the region through sponsorship. They will not want what is happening to Manchester City to impact other deals.

 

Manchester City fans really have shown a level of delusion following the judgement. The mental gymnastics their fans are doing to save face is incredible. From “this was the plan” to “lets burn it to the ground”. It shows a like of intelligent thinking, and is mainly as a result of group think.

Come January, once the appeal is heard and punishment confirmed, their fans are in for a huge awakening. But what will really happen?

The loyal local fans will just crack on with things, as they did when the club was relegated two divisions. The global fans in Nigeria, Asia, etc, where the majority of the noise is coming from, will just pick a new team to support.

City will not be missed.

Keenos