“Arsenal – All or Nothing” – I would rather nothing

Leave a reply

Yesterday it was announced that Arsenal would be the focus of the next episode of Amazon’s “All or Nothing” series.

Arsenal announced the partnership by stating “You asked. We heard you.”

 Let’s be honest. Hardly anyone asked.

In fact the majority of response to the announcement is negative. So Arsenal should stop pretending they are doing what the fans wanted.

So why have Arsenal agreed to be the next victims of All or Nothing?

Money.

Amazon reportedly paid Spurs around £10m for their 2020 series.

When you consider Arsenal have no European football next season, £10m is a huge sum. It will far outstrip any other sponsorship agreement bar Adidas and Emirates.

And it is not just the amount Amazon pay for the series that is financial important. It is the long term impact of the series.

Arsenal, like Tottenham and Manchester City before them, will hope that the “all access” show will attract a new wave of fans from the USA. That those that side of the pond will become hooked on the series and as a result end up a fan of the club.

Now Amazon do not release how many people watch stream their shows. However Spurs All or Nothing was in the top 0.4% of documentaries watched in the UK. In America it is in the top 50%.

Taking into account there is an air of negative surrounding Arsenal at the moment – both on and off the pitch – the club will probably be hoping to use the documentary to boast the “brand” around the world.

If Arsenal have a good season, win a trophy and finish top 4, a positive documentary will do wonders to boost the brand. In turn this will increase the amount of Arsenal fans globally as well as make us more attractive to sponsors.

Now if, like me, you think the globalisation of football has ruined the game for the local fan, this will all mean nothing to you.

Is someone who is currently a Chelsea fan deciding to support Arsenal due to a documentary really a fan? No. But the club do not care about that as long as they buy a shirt, follow the club on social media, etc.

We live in a world of REACH and IMPRESSIONS. And the more people that follow you on social media, interact with you; the more sponsors will pay to be associated with you.

And that is all what this is about. Money.

The other bit of Arsenal news from yesterday was the changing of the criteria for Cup finals.

Now to lay my cards on the table. I am a home season ticket holder. I was an away scheme member.

The club decided in a couple of weeks ago to scrap the away scheme.

Now whilst some people “celebrated” it; that decision will cause the likes of myself a headache.

The away scheme made things easy for away games. I would not have to think about when games were on sale, setting alarms, ensure I had access to a computer to buy tickets.

Myself and the 3 mates I sat with would automatically have our money taken from our account, tickets bought on our behalf next to each other, and two weeks before the game they would arrive in the post.

It made life very easy.

Now yes, some people did exploit the away scheme.

There were a few touts on it who never went to games and sold tickets on for huge profit. But these were in the minority.

For years AISA and the AST have been pushing the club to scrap the away scheme. And they have now got their way.

Both groups are supposed to be supporters clubs, but neither of them represented the views of those 1000 or so fans on the away scheme.

The attack on away scheme members by AISA and the AST has always felt like “we are not on the away scheme so will do everything we can to get it scrapped”.

But hey, as long as Tim Payton gets his seat on the board as the “fans representative” I am sure he does not care.

So then we have the change in semi final and final requirements.

The criteria for as long as I can remember has always been a mixture of being a season ticket holder and having away credits.

Basically, if you had 3 away credits and a gold membership, you were guaranteed a ticket for the final.

Away credits are awarded for going to away games in the last 2 years, as well as the current year. So basically you would have had to have gone to one away game a year for the last 3 years. Not exactly a hard task.

I have agreed for a long time that home games should also be taken into account.

Those that go to every home game should get priority over those that leave their seat empty or sell on the Ticket Exchange.

But I can not get behind the scrapping of the away credit criteria completely.

Surely a better solution would have been to combine away and home credits? So someone that goes to 19 away games a season and 10 home would have more priority over someone that goes 25 home games?

Again, it feels like an attack on away fans by AISA and AST.

Just because their members (or probably those running) do not go to away games, they have no time for them.

They do not want a criteria that is fair for all Arsenal fans. They want a criteria that gives themselves the best chance to get tickets.

And how long until the club move the goal posts a little and give you points for spending money in the club shop?

It is all just very disappointing from both the clubs and those supporters groups who pretend to be fighting a battle on behalf of the fans.

Maybe I am just being as equally selfish? But with the 3 decisions in the last couple of weeks, it just feels like the club is doing less and less in the interest of a fan that has travelled up and down the country following the club for over a decade.

As each year goes by, Arsenal becomes less and less “my club”.

Keenos

Should Arsenal look closer to home following England’s Euro 2020 performance?

1 Reply

Which academy has developed the most members England’s Euro 2020 squad?

It is a question I can see being added to pub quizzes up and down the country if England go on to win the championships. And the answer might surprise you.

Sheffield United.

Kyle Walker, Harry Maguire, Dominic Calvert-Lewin and Aaron Ramsdale all came through Sheffield United’s academy.

When you consider that 14 of the last 16 FA Youth Cups have been won by Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City or Manchester United, you would expect players from those teams to be dominating the England team. But they are not.

When you go through the England starting XI from last night, the keeper was from Sunderland. The back 4 from Sheffield United (x2), Barnsley and Southampton.

Move through to the midfield it is the West Ham and Leeds access that has been the engine room of success.

It is only when you get to the front 4 that you see players from Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham.

After Sheffield United with 4, the next most represented academy are Southampton and Manchester City with 3.

Then comes Sunderland, Liverpool, Manchester United and Chelsea with two a piece.

With one representative are Arsenal, Aston Villa, Barnsley, Birmingham City, Leeds, Leicester City, Tottenham and West Ham.

When you dig down at the players who came through the bigger academies, a bigger story unfolds.

Whilst Manchester City might have 3 academy products in the squad, Jadon Sancho and Kieran Trippier both left without making an appearance.

It is the same story for Sam Johnstone who left Manchester United without even a League Cup appearance to his name, whilst Conor Coady’s only start for Liverpool was in Europa League group stage match against Anzhi Makhachkala.

This is a squad forged in those “smaller” academies, where players are perhaps not as pampered as much. Where they have had to graft to get to the top.

Maybe it is this reason why this England squad is a lot more likeable than those gone past? They do not have the arrogance of the Manchester United / Liverpool dominated teams of the 00s? They seem a lot less “media trained” and just say what they think?

It also brings up a wider discussion.

Whilst “home grown” players often come with a premium, that tends to be only when they are “truly established”.

Take Maguire.

Maguire joined Hull City in a deal worth £2.5 million. Three years later he joined Leicester City on a five-year contract for an initial £12 million fee. In 2019 Manchester United paid £80million for him.

His central defensive partner was signed by Everton from Barnsley for a transfer fee reported to be in the region of £3 million.

Mings joined Bournemouth from Ipswich for just £8million an Wolves spent just £2million bringing Coady to the club.

Over the years Arsenal have scoured the world to look for defensive reinforcements – but how many of our solutions could have been found had we spent a bit more time looking at home.

We are linked with James Maddison for £60million. Three years ago Leicester City spent £20million on him.

The same year that Maddison joined Leicester, Jack Grealish was on the verge of signing for Tottenham for a similar price.

England’s success has shown that there is talent lower down the Premier League and in the Championship.

We as Arsenal fans should not turn our noses up if we buy lower league layers. They could be the next Maguire, Maddison or Grealish.

Keenos

Would James Maddison and Houssem Aouar be upgrade on Hale End pair?

2 Replies

Emile Smith Rowe and Joe Willock had fantastic ends to last season.

Joe Willock on loan at Newcastle was key to their survival scoring 8 goals in 14 games; whilst Smith Rowe became a key player in Arsenal’s revival in the 2nd half of the season.

But we might be in a situation where both end up leaving the club this summer.

Now over the years, I have been a huge champion of our academy and the fact that we now have so many academy graduates in and around the first team is something to be excited about.

But that does not mean we need to keep every single one.

Last season Arsenal were crying out for creativity and goals from midfield.

Smith Rowe provided the creativity and Willock showed for Newcastle that he can score the goals.

It is not hard to make the argument that both should be part of Mikel Arteta’s plans next season.

But what then happens when upgrades on the pair are available? And offers come in for them that are just too much to turn down?

Houssem Auoar is a player Arsenal have chased for some time.

He risks becoming a Julian Draxler-esque where we are linked every summer but never actually sign him.

If he were to join Arsenal, it would be this summer or never.

Last summer Lyon were demanding a £55.5m transfer fee for a player who was considered one of the hottest prospects in Europe.

12 months on and Lyon would reportedly accept a bid in the region of £25m.

A mixture of his drop in form, Lyon’s financial woes and Auoar having a year left on his contract has seen his price plummet.

Capable of playing left, right and centre behind a striker as well as deeper in an “8” role, Auoar is exactly the type of player we need to add to the squad. And at £25m we would be getting an absolute steal.

Still just 23-years-old, Auoar would start ahead of both Smith Rowe and Willock.

James Maddison was perhaps unlucky to make the England squad as Gareth Southgate went for Phil Foden, Mason Mount and Jack Grealish as his attacking midfield options.

“It’s an area of the pitch where we have unbelievable competition for places,” Southgate said during his squad announcement. “We just feel there are players ahead of James in those areas of the pitch.

Maddison’s season was hampered due to various injuries knee, hamstring and hip injuries.

It is the hip injury that is most concerning as he picked it up taking a corner and since his return Youri Tielemans has remained on set pieces.

Taking into account the quality of Maddison’s delivery, you have to assume that his absence from corners and free kicks is due to that hip injury.

I remember watching Maddison during his Coventry games and one thing that always stuck in my mind was his “unusual” technique of striking the ball – he tended to hit the ball with the back of the inside of his foot rather than middle.

This technique alongside the power and whip he gets on the ball puts a lot of strain on the hip. And if surgery has restricted his movement in that area, he might never be the same player again.

We would have to assume if he were to join Arsenal, we would give him a thorough medical to ensure that hip is 100%.

With 27 goals in his last 3 seasons, Maddison would certainly give something Arsenal are missing.

His striking of the ball from outside the area would also be a game changer when teams are sitting deep.

For Leicester City he has played left, right and centrally, showing that he has the versatility to rotate in and out of different positions – a key factor under Arteta as he looks to bamboozle opponents with attackers swapping positions during games.

A fee of £60m does seem big taking into account his recent injury record – but if he is fully fit it is probably his “market price” when you see what other attacking midfielders might go for this summer.

It is similar to the fee that is being floated around for Grealish, who I would say a fit and firing Maddison is on par with.

Aston Villa paid £38 million for Emi Buendia and are reportedly chasing Smite Rowe for a similar value. Maddison is more established and influential than both of these.

So with Maddison and Auoar potentially available for a combined £85million, and Willock and Smith Rowe being linked away for around £55million combined, should Arsenal sell 2 and invest a further £30million?

You perhaps have to be cruel to be kind.

Are Maddison and Auoar better than Smith Rowe and Willock? I would say yes. Would getting the pair for a net of £30million be a great deal? I would say yes. So should we upgrade? Probably.

I think the more likely solution is we end up with one – probably Auoar.

Auoar would then be alongside Smith Rowe competing to play with Nicolas Pepe and Bukayo Saka behind Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang up top.

But then Maddison, Auoar, Pepe and Saka as options behind the striker would be even more powerful.

The final thought is the last scenario is 4 players for 3 positions. Is that enough? Could we actually also keep Smith Rowe alongside Maddison and Auoar giving us 5 options behind Aubameyang.

Would Smith Rowe be happy with being 5th choice? And would Arsenal be crazy to turn down such a big offer from Villa? And can we afford to turn it down if we target both Maddison and Auoar?

Plenty to think about over your lunch break.

Keenos