After a couple of years of rumours, the news broke yesterday that Arsenal have held internal discussions about expanding the capacity of Emirates Stadium.

Inspired by Real Madrid’s Bernabéu upgrade, Arsenal are considering increasing the stadium capacity to over 70,000 whilst not changing the footprint of the stadium. And whilst work is going on, Wembley is being mooted as our temporary home.

Next year will mark 20 years since we moved from Highbury to the Emirates, and I certainly have conflicting thoughts about this.

Do we need a larger capacity

100,000 on the waiting list
Average ballot success of 40% for silver applicants
Average ballot success of 10% for silver applicants

These statistics will lead many to say “even 70,000 is not enough. We need 100k”. And I get the argument. But then where were all these loyal fans when the skies were grey?

Pre-covid is still not too distant a memory. Less than 50,000 turned up to suffer the home defeat against Frankfurt as the Unai Emery-era crashed and burned. And that 50,000 was overstated as we all know Arsenal advertise “tickets sold” rather than people through the gate.

For some time before lockdown, those that went to games were noticing more and more empty seats at games, even if the club still maintained that attendance was 100%.

When the sun is shining and we are playing on the crest of a wave, there is no argument that we could sell out over 70,000 without an issue. But as soon as we find ourselves in times of trouble, will the demand still be there? Or will the empty seats expose the fair-weather fans?

But we should look to invest from a position of strength

When you are top of the tree in football, sponsors fall over themselves trying to associate their brand with your club. Positivity breeds positivity.

The best time to invest in new infrastructure is when you are at your peak, as you have the surplus cash to make investment.

2023/24 saw our revenue increase by 32%, driven by Champions League football and new deals. The summer just gone, further new commercial deals were signed that will see our revenue increase further. That means we can use the credit and financing available to us to invest in the stadium.

If we were in a downward spiral, with revenues dwindling, we would need to dip into that credit and financing to meet operating costs. There may be no better time to invest.

But we were told this in 2000

Welcome to the year 2000. Not much has changed except with live underwater. And football had not yet become the plaything for oligarchs and countries looking to change their reputation through sportswashing.

There was no Big 6. Just a Big 2. Arsenal and Manchester United. Arsene Wenger and Alex Ferguson. Roy Keane and Patrick Vieira.

We were always the underdog. Less revenue, smaller stadium. 3 league titles in 7 years whilst up against the juggernaut Sky, favouring Manchester United was an incredible achievement. But we needed plans to try and close that financial gap. And those plans was to build a 60,000 seater stadium, increasing our revenue by 50%.

The board sold fans a dream. That by moving from Highbury to the Emirates would see us go from hanging onto the coat tails of Manchester United, Bayern Munich and Real Madrid to competing with them, both financially, for the best players and, most importantly, for major honours.

Since we moved from Highbury in 2006, we have won 0 Premier League’s and 0 Champions League’s. That has continually led many to say “was it worth it?”

We all know that we might have to take a step back for a couple of years whilst the financial strain hit. But none of us could have predicted the global financial crisis, the UK credit crunch, and the property market going through the floor.

So much of Arsenal’s plan was to finance the stadium through building and selling flats that sat on the land around the stadium. A great idea were it not for the global recession. It meant stadium loan repayments had to primarily come from the revenue of the playing side of the club, and not hugely subsidised by the sale of property.

And then to compound the issue, the footballing landscape changed with Roman Abramovich coming into Chelsea. No longer was the game about revenue and spending what you receive. Abramovich sat there with his tanks of cash, firing huge fees and wages across Europe. We could not compete financially. No one could.

And whilst we struggled with those stadium repayments, Manchester City materialised on the horizon. Chelsea on steroids with their billions in oil revenue. And whilst we struggled financially, the likes of Manchester United, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich grew. Record revenues. Able to pluck any player they wanted from us. And they all did.

We built from a position of strength, and it took us 15-years to recover.

You can not stand still in football

What us fans went through from 2006 to 2020 will hugely influence our thinking on this matter. But it is also a fact that we can not stand still.

In 2006, the Emirates was the 2nd biggest stadium in England (discounting Wembley). Now it is the 5th behind Old Trafford, Tottenham Stadium, London Stadium and Anfield.

Manchester City are currently expanding their stadium to over 60,000, whilst Chelsea have long had plans to build a stadium in West London north of 60k. Meanwhile Newcastle United are currently working on plans for a 70,000 stadium.

In 10-years time, we could find ourselves with the 8th biggest stadium in the land. That is not a position you want to be in if you want to continue competing at the top.

And it is not just about stadium capacity, but also stadium quality.

There was a time when Old Trafford was undoubtedly the greatest stadium in the English game. The Theatre of Dreams had the largest domestic capacity in England, and was the go-to place outside of Wembley for semi-finals, finals, concerts and more. But from around 2000 their board was more concerned with adding seats than stadium improvements as they took the ground from 55,000 to 74,000.

With no further investment since 2006, Old Trafford is falling down.

We have all seen the leaks in the roof and read stories about the rat infestation. You only need to go to one game to see how behind with the times the stadium is. It is suffering from the lack of investment to the point where remedial options are no longer on the table. The best option now is to knock it down and start again. A project that is projected to cost over £2 billion.

I am not saying Arsenal are in this position yet. But if you do not make continually upgrades to your ground, every few years, then you end up in the position where Manchester United are.

Old Trafford can no longer be upgraded. And they are going to have to fork out £2bn on rebuilding it rather than spending £10m every year for the last 20 years upgrading it.

But we have only just got back to the top

Having seen us go from Invincibles to no-hopers, us Arsenal fans are thirsty for glory.

Mikel Arteta has built arguably the strongest squad of players that I have seen in my lifetime, and it feels like we are on the cusp of glory.

With this manager and this set of players, we could win multiple Premier League titles over the next 5-years and maybe even finally taste Champions League glory.

Why would the board want to throw away that opportunity to (potentially) restrict what we can spend as money is siphoned off to finance a stadium upgrade? And then we also have the inevitable dip in form that playing in Wembley will give us.

Having suffered for so long, could we just not hold back for 4-5 years and let the fans bask in some (potential) glory? Why push the button now and risk all what we have coming to us.

But will the stadium be financed buy AFC?

There is some talk that the stadium could be financed by the Kroenke’s, meaning that the debt to build the stadium could sit with KSE. That would mean Arsenal would be protected from the issues which we faced in 2008 with the credit crunch. And that whilst we would need to pay KSE back for the investment in us, they could turn those payments on and off as they wished to ensure the we remained competitive on the field.

KSE know that the best way to increase revenue, and as a result the value of your asset, is to be competitive on the pitch. It should be no surprise the steps forward we have taken as a club since they took 100% control in 2018.

With the board infighting gone, KSE have only been concerned about making us better on the pitch, which in turn increases the value of the asset they own off it. Whereas when we were under the dual ownership of KSE and Usmanov, any improvement on the pitch would have just led to SKE having to spend more to own 100% of the club.

If KSE are willing to take the stadium loans out in their name, and offer Arsenal favourable terms to repay them without the need to reduce on-pitch spending, then we should be able to rebuild without it damaging our title chances.

But do we want to go to Wembley?

No thanks.

And finally…

In the last 10-years, Liverpool have expanded Anfield from 46,000 to over 61,000 whilst winning 2 league titles, the Champions League, the FA Cup and League Cups (and finished 2nd twice with 90+ points). A fantastic achievement whilst competing against Chelsea and Manchester City’s wealth, whilst rebuilding the club.

They have shown that you can expand the stadium whilst competing for the highest of honours. If we can follow their lead, then we can become successful whilst expanding the stadium.

So what do you think? Let us know in the comments…

Keenos

Well, what an incident-packed game that was!

The right team eventually won. A 96-minute winner from Gabriel as he rose up amongst the crowd to nod in. But it was a game filled with continuous decisions, and Newcastle fans are licking their wounds this morning, playing the victims.

Viktor Gyokeres penalty

In normal time, no one was in doubt – it was a penalty. But then VAR got involved, slowed everything down, zoomed in and re-referred the decision.

The technology showed that the ball nicked Nick Pope’s outstretched foot, and this was deemed enough to cancel the penalty. But was it really?

A case was made that “Pope won the ball”. But he did not. Just because the ball nicks off you, it does not mean you won it. Gyokeres won the ball, knocked it past Pope, with the ball glancing off him, before going over the keeper’s knee.

And just because Pope touched the ball, does not mean it is not a penalty. Do not believe me? Just ask Premier League referees’ chief Howard Webb, speaking after a penalty was given to Brighton last season after William Saliba headed the ball away and then clashed heads with Joao Pedro: “That touch on the ball doesn’t negate the possible award of a penalty”.

And this is the issue fans have. The lack of consistency in the decision making.

Just last week, we saw Robert Sanchez win the ball cleanly before clattering into Bryan Mbeumo. The decision was a red card to the Chelsea keeper. So why did winning the ball mean nothing last weekend, and touching the ball mean everything over the weekend?

Joe Hart (who is becoming a brilliant pundit when looking at goal keepers) tried to explain on BBC the difference between Sanchez and Pope, and it does make some sense:

“There’s definite contact [on the ball].

“But that’s not the most important point. As Pope plants his foot, he’s deemed not to be using a forward motion towards Gyokeres. Therefore, as Gyokeres’ knee clashes into Pope’s knee, it is just seen as a clash of bodies. It’s not Pope taking him out. It’s not a foul. Not a penalty.”

I get Joe Hart’s argument. And for me had the penalty not been given by the onfield ref, it would have been justification to not overturn the decision. But VAR was bought in for clear and obvious decisions. And it would be an opinion that Pope’s forward momentum had stopped – his foot might have been planted by his knee and leg was still moving forward. Therefore, I am not sure it was a clear and obvious error by the referee.

The penalty should have been given to Arsenal.

Nick Woltemade

For Newcastle’s opener, Gabriel went down under contact from goalscorer Nick Woltemade. For me, the Brazilian was being soft. He felt contact and went down instead of staying strong and challenge for the ball.

Note for his goal there was plenty of contact on Gabriel, but he stayed strong and nodded it in. I am not sure why he did not do similar yesterday. And he has done this in the past.

If slightly out of position, Gabriel does have a tendency to try and win the free kick instead of challenge for the ball. He needs to be reminded that even just challenging for the ball may be enough to put off the striker. By flopping to the floor he gives his opponent a free header.

Goal was rightly given.

Gabriel and Nick Woltemade clash

A lot has been made from Newcastle fans around the clash between Gabriel and Woltemade shortly after his goal, with many claiming the match winner should have been sent off.

Recent history between the two teams has seen similar incidents committed by both Bruno Guimaraes and Joelinton. I am not sure how Newcastle fans can call for Gabriel to have been sent off in this incident, whilst backing their players in similar incidents and labelling them as “soft Southern softies don’t like it up them”.

A similar incident also happened later in the game Gyokeres nearly had his face ripped off by Jamaal Lascelles.

Ref correct to take no action.

Gabriel handball non-pentalty

Another incident that the Geordie faithful, and many opposing fans, have jumped on to highlight Arsenal get favourable decisions from the PGMOL.

In the closing stages, Gabriel went to ground in a challenge, the shot ricocheted off his shin and into his arm.

Everyone knows that in the Premier League, if the ball comes off your own body and hits your hand, it is no longer handball, regardless of what position your arm is in. So the referee rightly waved away the Newcastle claims.

What this shows is just how many online football “experts”, with hundreds of thousands of followers, do not actually know the rules. either that or they just have zero opinion on anything themselves and just jump on trends for content. It is likely both.

Newcastle fans do not know the rules. Football social media bods just jump on it for content and to earn a few quid.

Ultimately, the referee got it right.

Gyokeres and Jamaal Lascelles clash

The referee showed his consistency (finally) by judging the Gyokeres and Lascelles incident in the same manner as the Gabriel and Woltemade.

Had the ref punished Gabriel, Lascelles would have recieved the same punishment.

No Arsenal fan is screaming for Lascelles to have been sent off. But also no Newcastle fan is saying he should have been given his marching orders, despite the claim against Gabriel.

No action needed.

William Saliba blocking Pope for Gabriel’s goal

Like Gabriel had to be stronger for Woltemade’s opener, Pope had to be stronger against Saliba.

Joe Hart had it spot on in punditry by saying your 6ft 6in keeper needs to be moving the centre back out of the way. And if he is unable to do so then questions need to be asked.

Conclusion

Ref basically got every decision right. I would however question whether the arsenal penalty decision was enough of an error to be clear and obvious. And that just leads to inconsistency.

My final thought is it is interesting that VAR could not conclusively judge Mo Salah had handled the ball, but could conclusively judge that Pope had touched the ball. More inconsistency.

Keenos

Arsenal overcame a spirited Port Vale side to book their place in the Carabao Cup fourth round with a 2–0 victory at Vale Park. Goals from summer signing Eberechi Eze and substitute Leandro Trossard proved decisive, though the hosts pushed Mikel Arteta’s side harder than the scoreline suggests.

Early breakthrough

Arsenal wasted little time asserting their superiority. On eight minutes, Gabriel Martinelli worked space down the left and drilled a ball across goal. It fell kindly for Eze, who calmly slotted home his first goal for the club since joining from Crystal Palace.

That early strike hinted at a long night for Darren Moore’s men, but to their credit Port Vale regrouped quickly. Arsenal dominated possession – at times nearing 80 percent – but struggled to create further clear chances before the interval. The League One side sat deep, denied space between the lines, and forced Arsenal into patient but predictable passing.

Vale grow into the game

The second half brought greater ambition from the hosts. A misplaced pass from Arsenal defender Christhian Mosquera handed Vale midfielder Rhys Walters a half-chance, only for the visitors to scramble clear. Soon after, Devante Cole tried his luck from distance, his effort whistling over the crossbar and briefly lifting the home crowd.

Despite these moments, Arsenal remained largely in control. William Saliba marshalled the back line with authority, while Eze linked play intelligently in midfield. Yet the longer the game stayed at 1–0, the more belief Vale carried that they could nick something.

Trossard settles it late

The contest was finally put to bed four minutes from time. Saliba launched a long ball into the inside-left channel, where Trossard timed his run to perfection. Collecting in stride, the Belgian cut inside and drilled a low finish past Joe Gauci into the far corner. Vale protested for offside, but with no VAR in operation the goal stood.

That strike deflated the hosts and ensured Arsenal’s passage into the next round, where they will meet Brighton.

Standout performers

For Arsenal, Eze’s composed finish and assured display were hugely encouraging signs. Arteta later described the 26-year-old as “a player who will give us so much more” in the months ahead. Saliba, too, was excellent, snuffing out Vale’s sporadic counter-attacks with calm efficiency.

Port Vale could take heart from their defensive organisation and commitment. Walters impressed in midfield with his energy and composure, while goalkeeper Gauci made several solid interventions to keep his side in contention until the final minutes.

Verdict

For Arsenal, this was a professional performance rather than a dazzling one. They controlled the tempo, limited risks, and relied on individual quality to make the difference. For Port Vale, it was a night to savour despite defeat: they held one of England’s elite at bay for long stretches and showed resilience and pride in front of a raucous home crowd.

In the end, class told. Arsenal march on, but Vale depart with credit and encouragement as their focus returns to the League One campaign.

DJ