Tag Archives: Arsenal

Luis Suarez – What can Arsenal do?

The recent comments from Liverpool owner John W Henry confirming that Luis Suarez did have a release clause in his contract for any bids over £40million has caused a lot of debate amongst Arsenal fans. It has led Wenger loyalists to hit back at journalists who labelled the £40m+£1 bid as derisory.’ It has led to people questioning the future validity of such clauses. And has even led to a #FreeSuarez petition being created on line.article-2355588-1AA7616F000005DC-687_634x416

The loudest comments have been as to why Arsenal did not force the issue, take Liverpool to court and force through a move. A lot of people see this as a simple process which would have seen Suarez be an Arsenal player as the court would have upheld the clause. But that is not the case.

In the first instance, it would have had to be Luis Suarez who would have had to taken Liverpool to court over breach of contract. The clause is in the contract between Suarez and Liverpool, therefore by not honouring the clause, Liverpool were going against Suarez. Arsenal could not have done anything legally. Liverpool had no contract with Arsenal, and therefore had no duty to sell Suarez to Arsenal based on the clause. Their duty was to allow Suarez to leave if the clause was met. Upon the clause being met and Liverpool denying this, they were breaching the agreement between themselves and Luis Suarez, not between themselves and the bidding club.

In summary, it would have been up to Luis Suarez to take Liverpool to court for breach of contract, and not Arsenal to take Liverpool to court to establish the existence of the clause.

Secondly, it can take over a year for a contract law court case to be heard. I have previously had to wait over 2 years for a court case to be heard when someone was in breach of contract with myself. In the fast moving world of football, Arsenal and Suarez would have been silly to initiate a court case which would have taken potentially 2 seasons to resolve. Arsenal would have moved on in that time, leaving Suarez in limbo.

At the time, I felt Henry was playing a very clever game, and was proved right. He knew that by denying the clause would force a court case, and it would take a while to be resolved. In that time, Arsenal would move on and they could discuss a new contract with Suarez, without a release clause, with Suarez receiving a large wage increase.

Suarez himself was also playing a clever game. Had he wanted, he could have pushed through a move to Arsenal. We saw it with Van Persie, with Anelka, with Van Hooijdonk. If a player wants to move, he can get his way. This makes me think “just how much did Luis Suarez want a move to Arsenal.” And for me, the answer was not enough. He would have been happy signing for Arsenal for £180k a week. He would have been happy signing for Real Madrid for £180k a week. And he would have been happy staying at Liverpool for £180k a week. As it turns round, his new contract with Liverpool is worth a reported £200k a week.

In a game where money is king, he got his wish. A big pay rise.

Add in loyalty bonuses, an odd concept in football, not pushing through a move has made Luis Suarez a far richer man. A loyalty bonus is a payment made by the club to the player for fulfilling their contract. It was originally designed to encourage a player to stay at a club, to not hand in a transfer request. The player receives a portion of the loyalty bonus each year of his contact. If he hands in a transfer request, and subsequently leaves, he often has to repay what he has already received in loyalty bonuses.

Likewise, if a club sells a player, without that player demanding a move, then the club will often have to pay up the remaining loyalty bonus. What now happens is the player will simply not hand in a transfer request, and force the issue through other methods, so as to not lose out on a big sum of cash. In some cases, such as with Cesc Fabregas, the club will stand firm despite a lack of transfer request, and the player will pay up. In other cases, the club will fold and pay the player what he is ‘owed’ creating a situation where a player get his loyalty bonus, despite leaving the club (Tevez reportedly got this from Manchester City.)

A final factor is the fact the Luis Suarez could not exactly strike. With him already set to miss the first 6 games of this season, he would already not be available until the end of September. His first game for Liverpool this season was September 25th, nearly a month after the transfer window shut. So what would have happened had he striked? He would have lost pay, Liverpool would have stood still, waited for the transfer window to shut, and he would have pulled on a Liverpool shirt once more on September 25th. Suarez striking to force a move would have been futile.

So why didn’t Suarez push the issue? It is probably because he did not want a move to Arsenal enough. Had it been Real Madrid? Who knows. But Arsenal was not a massive step up, it was not ‘leaving England’ like he originally claimed, and when the new contract offer with Liverpool was mooted, his head was turned.

In the short term, Henry’s stance has benefited Liverpool and damaged Arsenal. With Suarez, Arsenal would have run away with the league. Without Suarez, Liverpool would have been fighting it out with Manchester United in mid table. With the tables turned, Arsenal and Liverpool are level on points.

In the long term, Henry could have done a lot of damage to Liverpool. A lot of players around Europe will still see Liverpool as a stepping stone. A chance to prove themselves in a Premier League side before making a big money move to Chelsea, Manchester City, Real Madrid or Barcelona. Liverpool are in the ‘2nd tier’ at the moment alongside Arsenal where if one of those 4 came hunting, they would quickly become a selling club. With Henry’s stance over Suarez, things will change. Why would the next Luis Suarez want to join Liverpool if, when the time comes for him to ‘make the step up’ Liverpool disregard the clause and fail to release him.

Agents are clever people. They will not let their clients join a club with such a strict stance. Expect in future, contracts to have further clauses that dictate ‘if a minimum release clause is not acted upon once activated, my client doubles his money’. This saga will damage Liverpool in their long term recruitment plans.

As for Arsenal, the damage is short term. We dropped Jovetic when Higuain came available, then let Higuain go to Napoli when Suarez came available. We were so confident of Plan A that we let Plan B & C slip, and had no Plan D. It left us a striker short. In hindsight, we should have settled for Higuain – although I am sure people would have moaned had Higuain joined us, then Madrid signed Suarez for a similar fee.

So what could Arsenal have done in the Suarez saga? Bar encourage Suarez to force the deal, or continue to throw more money at Liverpool above the clause agreement, not much.

Arsenal’s problem is that we did not have a back up for Suarez, and that is what has cost us this season.

Keenos

Wenger Needs to Rest Players in the Champions League

With the loss at Stoke on Saturday the league campaign is once again slipping away. I cant see us maintaining a challenge to finish top. Chelsea seem to be bang in form and with City winning the C1C it’ll give them added momentum to move through the gears and start putting the pressure on to Chelsea. It will be a 2 horse race IMO.

We gave a huge effort against Bayern Munich in the first leg and with 11 players on the pitch the game could have taken a different turn. Had we deservedly gone 1-0 up in the first 10 minutes we would have been confident enough to get the win but it didn’t happen like that and now we have the prospect of going out to Munich 3 days after a massive quarter final against Everton in a competition we have a real chance of winning.

Off target: Mesut Ozil missed from the spot in Arsenal's 2-0 defeat against Bayern Munich on Wednesday night

We need to be selective over the game we choose to be more important and ultimately play a weaker side in the game we deem to be less important. Last season Wenger played a weaker than usual side against Blackburn on a Saturday in the FA Cup, as we were due to play Munich at home on the Tuesday after. This ended in disaster with us losing to Blackburn and then going out against Munich. We should have chosen the more important game and gone all out to win it rather than to try and win both, which was beyond us.
Don’t get me wrong, the team we put out against Blackburn should have won comfortably but they didn’t and so you look at the changes made as the reason why. Squad players that came in were Coquelin, Ox, Diaby and Rosicky I think, and Wenger made a total of 7 changes to the team from the previous game.

If we look at the current situation we need to choose the FA Cup game as the one to win and we need to play a strong side which means playing squad players out in Munich. We are fading in the league, top 4 should still be a formality but a title challenge is becoming more and more distant. Being 2-0 down to Munich is a hard result to overturn especially in their own back yard, yes we did beat them last season 2-0 but I can’t see us doing that again. We have Everton in the FA Cup quarter final in a game we can possibly win. If we get through we have a Semi Final at Wembley with a shot at the final. This has to be the game we target.

It raises the question of the fans. Fans that have paid good money to go out to Munich to follow them and support them, if they saw a weakened side they wouldn’t be happy which is understandable. My Step Dad is one of those fans going out there and he has stated the opposite, he would happily go and support the squad players so long as we play full strength in the cup against Everton. I’m not sure if this opinion is across the board with fans going out to Munich, maybe you could let me know your thoughts.

We have a chance of a trophy and we need to do everything we can to get to that final to win it. Id be disappointed if on Saturday we see changes and players rested for the Munich game. Our squad is not the deepest and its too much to ask to be at full strength for both games.
I truly hope Wenger sees it this way and does the right thing!

Cheers for reading

Norby

Title Race, Olivier Giroud, Jack Wilshere & Sol Campbell

Title Race

We are out of the title race. Defeat against Stoke City is the nail in our coffin. Whilst we are only 4 points behind Chelsea, the fact we have to play Man City at home, and go to Everton, Chelsea and Spurs in our final 10 games is the reasoning behind us being out of the race. We will not get 12 from 12. Even 6 from 12 is fairly optimistic. My reckoning is we will get 4/5 points from those 4 games. and that will not be enough to make up the 4 point gap on Chelsea. It has been a good season. We have moved forward. We are still 2 players short (how long have we said that?) Hopefull we can build on this year over the summer, buying the players we need, and challenge again next year.

We have achieved more this year then many thought. Most pundits, and many fans, had us finishing 6th, behind Chelsea, City, United, Liverpool & Spurs. The fact that we currently sit 3rd shows we have achieved beyond their expatiations. Rather than a pundit or fans saying “I told you they wouldn’t win it” they should perhaps remember there own prediction, which will show they have been wrong this season. Not right.

Bring on the FA Cup.

Olivier Giroud

Olivier Giroud needs to sort himself out. He is very quickly losing the backing of Arsenal fans. Many were already not a fan of his due to his on pitch performances. 33 goals in 82 games for an Arsenal side who create as many chances they do. Many already point to the fact that a better striker upfront would make more of a use of the hundreds of chances Mesut Ozil creates. He makes up for the lack of goals with his all round play and work rate. But patience is now running out.

With his recent personal problems, his career has taken a noise dive. Firstly he cheated on his wife before the Crystal Palace game and today reports having come out that he begged another stunner for a threesome. With him not in form, this is the last thing he needs to be doing. We saw the effect that scandal had on Marouane Chamakh during his Arsenal career. Giroud needs to be whiter than white, and he isn’t being.

For me, the straw that is breaking the camels back is his play acting. Yes, he was stamped on yesterday, but how often he went to ground during the game. Whining. Complaining. Flicking his arm in the air whilst rolling about. He needs to man up. This is a guy who is 6ft 4in. He is a big strong lad. Yet he acts like a pansy. And whilst rolling about on the floor, it is not only embarrassing for him, for us, but it also means that he can not get involved in play.

Giroud, time to man up, sort your life out, or leave.

Jack Wilshere

Another poor performance by Jack Wilshere. Another performance which leaves you wondering whether he is good enough for Arsenal. Whether he can be improved on. And he has a major issue in his game. Like with Olivier Giroud, he is laying on the ground too often. Yes, he is fouled a lot, he is targeted by opposing players, but he needs to get up quicker when he is not injured.

I have lost count this season how many times he has gone down, stayed down, play has continued, and he has laid their for 20-30 seconds whilst play has continued. He is a central midfielder, he needs to be involved. Laying in the opponents half because you felt you were fouled, whilst you are not injured, is damaging to Arsenal, and he needs to refrain from this.

Jack: If you are not hurt, get up and get back involved in play. Man up.

Sol Campbell

This morning, Sol Campbell’s new book has been serialised in the Sunday Times. The headline story is him claiming “I believe if I was white, I would have been England captain for more than 10 years”. Should Sol Campbell have been captain? Perhaps. Was he overlooked due to being black? Unlikely. So why was he overlooked?

Alan Shearer was the first permanent captain Sol Campbell played under. He was made captain in 1996 for the World Cup qualifiers. At this point, Sol Campbell was not a regular. This was why he was overlooked.

The key decision was in 2000, when Peter Taylor made David Beckham captain, and the decision was upheld by Sven-Goran Eriksson. At this point, Sol Campbell was considered as one of the best centre backs in world football. He was an England regular. And he was an experienced captain. He had even become England’s second youngest manager (after Bobby Moore) in 1998. It is hard to argue against him being made captain in 2000, rather than David Beckham. But the arguments for Beckham over Campbell has nothing to do with race.

David Beckham was made captain to help improve the brand of the English football side and The FA. The FA used his celebrity throughout the world to gain sponsorship money, to improve the public face of the England team after the problems of Hoddle & Keagan. He was a celebrity appointment, appointed for off field reason’s rather than on field one. In 2000, should Sol Campbell have been made captain? Yes. But the reason he was not had nothing to do with skin colour.

His attack on Michael Owen seems churlish. He captained England 9 times. The first was a friendly at Anfield – Sol Campbell did not play. Of his 9 caps as captain, Sol Campbell played in 3 of them. So Sol Campbell could perhaps argue that he should have had 3 more caps as England caps, bringing his total to 6. However, during that period, Steven Gerrard was a regular. Would Sol Campbell have been a better pick over Gerrard? Probably not. So again, it has nothing to do with colour. Gerrard was not made captain, and he is white.

Racism in football is a touchy subject. For me, the comments from the likes of Campbell simply re-opens wounds. Similar to when Paul Ince complains there are not enough black managers (it is his record which finds him unemployed, not his skin colour). Sol Campbell has mugged himself off. Written a chapter in his book about institutional racism within The FA to sell copies. Flip it round the other way, should Sol Campbell have been made captain because he is black, as a form a positive discrimination? No. Sol Campbell, the colour of your skin was not the reason you were not made captain.

Keenos