Monday I went rogue and wrote a blog for another site (shhhh, don’t tell GC!). It was about every Arsenal fan’s current favourite subject, Arsene Wenger. The piece was about how almost every gamble by Arsene Wenger had failed. It can be found be read over on You Are My Arsenal.

The reason I published it for them rather than She Wore is I recalled writing a blog very similar for this site, and did not want to be repeating myself. After a bit of research, I discovered that my original blog, titled Wenger the failed gambler was actually published on 2nd December 2012 when this blog used to be hosted on the FansOnline network.

A couple of years ago, after 5 years without a trophy, I wrote a blog for this site calling for Wenger to end ‘The Experiment.’ That he had to take a step back and admit ‘The Experiment’ had failed. ‘The Experiment’ of course was trying to build a title winning team using as little funds as possible, relying on a group of 20-something growing together as a team, as a unit to become champions.

It was always going to be a tough experiment. One so close to working. You feel were it not for greedy players leaving (Adebayor, Nasri) and others getting frustrated at lack of success (Cesc, Van Persie) we might well have challenged for the title. Probably last year. Almost certainly this. But we move on, Wenger stopped the experiment and bought in established players. Mertersacker. Giroud. Cazorla. Arteta. However, with the experiment over, Wenger seemingly embarked on a new game this summer. This time, he embarked on ‘The Gamble.’

Over the years, Arsene Wenger has always gambled in the transfer market. And more often than not, especially in the early years;

Gamble – Signing a young Frenchman from PSG for 500k to replace legend Ian Wright

Gamble – Signing & building the team round Patrick Vieira, plucked from AC Milan’s reserves

Gamble – Signing a blonde haired porn star average CB & playing him CM

Gamble – Signing an injury ravaged Marc Overmars when many had written him off

Gamble – Signing a Frenchman struggling on the wing for Juventus to turn into the World’s best striker

Gamble – Signing the ageless Kanu, who had just had heart surgery

There are many, many more examples of gamble’s Wenger took during his early years. Young players signed. Written off players signed. Talented but struggling players signed. Almost every transfer in his early days was a massive gamble. Almost every gamble in his early days paid off.

However, this summer, his gambling failed. Whereas previously, all his gambles were about signing players, this summer, his gambles were about not signing them. Gambles which many said, even at the time, he was wrong to take. These gambles have left us where we are today. A squad short on both quality and quantity

 The Goalkeeper Gamble

The last 5 weeks of last season, Wojciech Szczesny did not train and played through pain killers. With Euro 2012 in the summer, it mean the young goalkeeper would not get the time or assistance to get fit for the beginning of the season. His breakdown during the Sunderland game, failed comeback v Southampton has led our number one to play just 6 from a possible 22 games this season.

An injury to Szczesny would’ve been not so bad had Lukasz Fabianski not played just 1 pre-season game, and, like Szczesny, was still suffering from an injury suffered the season before.

This left us with a realistic possibility of starting the season without our number 1 & number 2 keepers. This would leave us short. Without even opening the discussion on whether these guys are good enough. Wenger gambled. Why did he not sign Julio Cesar from Inter Milan, who ended up going to QPR in a deal which reminded me of when Van Der Saar went to Fulham. The old Wenger would’ve taken a gamble on a talented, yet out of favour player.

Or more short term options; Alan McGregor from Glasgow Rangers who was also available on a free after The Gers tax affairs. Or Jussi Jääskeläinen from Bolton. Paddy Kenny from QPR. All decent, whilst not World Class, keepers who could’ve done a job till Szczesny got back, who would not of cost much and I am sure would’ve jumped at a chance to join us.

What we ended up with was Vito Mannone. Who whilst did his best, is never going to be good enough, and our defence looked shaky in front of him.

Wenger gambled on the goalkeeping position, and that gamble did not pay off.

 The Left Back Gamble

Kieran Gibbs is a talented player. He has it all to become a superstar. Strong, quick, tall, can defend & can attack. But he has glass ankles. He can not be relied upon to play 38 league games. And as the only left back in the squad (I refuse to acknowledge Andre Santos as a footballer, let along a fullback) it was always going to be a gamble by not buying someone to either play ahead of him (Baines) or back him up (Anyone). 

Manchester United, sitting with only 1 LB having let Fabio go out on loan, went and signed Alex Butner. A decent option to back up Evra. Wenger gambled. He decided that in Thomas Vermaelen we had sufficient cover. A gamble, which once more, collapsed. As suspected, Gibbs got his usual injury. As suspected, Vermaelen moved out to LB and, already being in shocking form, deteriorated even more.

Wenger gambled on the fitness of Gibbs and the cover of Vermaelen. Both gambles did not pay off

 The Midfield Gamble

Sell Alex Song. Not a massive gamble. Put faith in Diaby’s fitness. Not only a massive gamble. A stupid one. It would be like putting £1 million on Spurs to win the league. Your sanity should be questioned.

I mentioned earlier that 90s Wenger would have taken a risk on Julio Cesar, a talented yet troubled player. (90’s Wenger would have certainly taken a risk on Yann M’Vila. A talented, yet troubled youngster. Wenger would of backed himself to assist him fulfilling his potential. Maybe it is the stab in the back by Nasri & Van Persie. 2 troubled youngsters who Wenger supported, that made Wenger not have the heart to open up to another one. Stabbed too often in the back by those of ‘The Experiment’ has clearly left a scar, one potentially affecting his judgement when it comes to similar attitude players.

The signing of Yann M’Vila was a gamble Wenger should of taken. Instead, Wenger gambled on Diaby’s fitness. Who whilst his performance v Liverpool showed what he could do if fit, the problem is he was never going to be fit. I am never going to be 100m Olympic Champion. Diaby is never going to be fully fit. That is the realism for it. We all knew it. Wenger should’ve known it. But he gambled. And the gamble failed.

Due to a lack of midfield giant, the midfield is now imbalanced (more on this next time) and, like when Michu picked up the ball for Swansea’s first goal yesterday, it leaves the defence horribly exposed. In Makelele & Gilberto, the importance of having a man between the defence and midfield was highlighted. The likes of Chelsea (Mikel & Ramires), Manchester City (De Jong/Garcia & Barry) and even Spain (Alonso & Busquets) started to play with 2. We went into this season without a proper one. With 2 men ‘capable’ of doing the job (Diaby & Arteta) but the most important one (Diaby) having the injury problems. It has left us exposed.

He chose not to go for Marouane Fellaini. He pulled out of the done deal that was Nuri Sahin. He decided that M’Vila’s personal problems weren’t worth working through.

Wenger gambled on Diaby’s fitness. The gamble has not paid off.

 The Striker Gamble

Olivier Giroud was bought to replace Marouane Chamakh. To be a plan B. A physical presence with technique. He was bought to be back up for Robin Van Persie. What he was not bought for was to be Van Persie’s replacement. When Robin left, Wenger took yet another gamble. He gambled that Giroud would be good enough to fill the Dutchman’s boots.

Giroud – 14 games, 4 goals

Van Persie – 15 games, 10 goals

Whilst Giroud has done a job. He clearly is not a replacement for Robin Van Persie. His performances have been befitting of a 2nd choice striker. Wenger’s judgement failed him again. When Van Persie left, Wenger should of gone straight out and bought a top class replacement. Whether this was Llorente. Cavani. Or A N Other. Failing to do this meant another failed gamble.

Wenger has made 2 gambles on striker position. Once he decided that Olivier Giroud was going to be number one, he then gambled that Podolski/Gervinho would make adequate cover as the number 2 striker. The goalless and chanceless game v Swansea highlights that not only should neither play down the middle, but playing them both on the pitch at the same time is often akin to playing 9 men. When Wenger made the decision to make Giroud number 1, he should of bought in some decent back up.

Kevin Mirallas, Steven Fletcher, Dimitar Berbatov. 3 players who moved after the Van Persie deal went through. 3 players who could of added strength behind Giroud. Could have backed him up. 2 established Premiership strikers. 1 talented European. Then you have Jermaine Defoe. He was looking for a way out at Spurs. Would he of improved us? Of course. Imagine him and Giroud up top together. He would have anticipated every knock down that no one else gets near.

Why did we not go for one of the above 4, or any other striker, to provide competition, back up, or whatever to Olivier Giroud. Again, he gambled. Again, he made the wrong decision.

Wenger gambled that Giroud would come good. Not just come good as a back up striker, but come good as a first choice striker. This gamble did not pay off.

Wenger gambled that Gervinho & Podolski could provide back up for Giroud. For the 2nd time, the gamble did not pay off.

 

Throughout all of this, I have been thinking, has Wenger just been unlucky, or should we now seriously be questioning his judgement? For me, for the first time, I am questioning his judgement. These were gambles that we all saw would not pay off. Gambling of fitness of players who weren’t fit is criminal. His lack of judgement rightly opens him up to criticism.

The question is, does Wenger still have time saved up in the ‘Good Faith Bank’ to make right his failed gambles, or did he use up all that time in the failed experiment?

Whilst I might look back at some of the options and laugh, they have not exactly proved Wenger wrong, it has been proved that the gamble Wenger took did not work. 4 years on from that blog and we are still talking about Wenger’s gambles not paying off.

It is time the board took a gamble and replaced Arsene Wenger.

Keenos

Follow @KeenosAFC

Over the years, Arsene Wenger has achieved many great things at Arsenal Football Club. That can never be taken away from him. He loved the glory. He enjoyed being last up and lifting the trophy after the captain. A ‘Look at me… Look what I’ve won’ guy.

Now the heat is on, he doesn’t want anyone to look at him and his supporters are defending him left, right and centre based on his achievements from over ten years ago.

In fairness, Wenger has a very good win percentage record and a better one than Ferguson for his first 1,000 games. What is never mentioned is that Ferguson inherited an awful lower table Manchester United and Wenger inherited an Arsenal side that had just finished joint 4th in the Premier League with many foundations set in place.

I have tried to give a balanced look at it. There is no point me comparing Wenger’s record against Gary Megson or Roberto Martinez – games we should be expected to win but ones we have managed to throw in the odd wobble against!

Wenger is often criticised for getting it tactically wrong on the big occasion. In Premier League games that matter – games against sides in the top half of the table.

In his first season, Wenger had problems in the big games. One win against sides in the top five – away at Newcastle – And, of course, he went out of the FA Cup at home to lowly Leeds United… managed by George Graham.

He didn’t win a game at Anfield until December 2001 even though Liverpool had become a kind of joke team of the late nineties with their ‘Spice Boys’ image.

When Arsene Wenger first came to The Arsenal he was 45 years old. An unknown manager with one French title, a French Cup, a couple of Japanese trophies, two sackings (one stated as mutual but it was a go or be sacked situation) and a relegation on his CV.

It should be noted that once he’d won the League at Monaco, he finished in the top three on three occasions before they plummeted to 17th and he was sacked. They, like Arsenal, got into the top three/four comfort zone. Wenger shunned the sacking by blaming bribery and corruption of one club – despite the fact fifteen other clubs were ahead of him in the table.

So is it a case of history repeating?

Is there a case that teams catch up with Wenger’s style and tactics and then work out how they can beat his sides?

I think people forget Wenger was a young manager when he came to The Arsenal. To put his age into comparison; Zidane is 43, Pep and Simeone are both 45. Is Wenger a good manager or was he a good manager at his time in his age group?

As I have said, Wenger has a good record against some managers including Pellegrini and Ranieri and had the two wins against the latter been reversed in 2003/4, Chelsea would have won the title. We may have been Invincible but Ranieri’s Chelsea were closer to us than we’ve got to the Champions in eight of the past ten season.

It should also be noted that Ranieri only had one season with Abramovic’s money. He took over at Chelsea in 2000 and got them back into the Champions League. I have included him in the stats to keep it fair against sides who regularly finish in the top 10, although I’m sure most of us thought Leicester would be struggling rather than winning the League!

What I have looked at is not to degrade Wenger’s record but to compare his record against the ‘Old Breed’ – for example; Sir Alex Ferguson, Pellegrini, Ranieri, Redknapp, Hiddink, van Gaal – to that of the newer breed – Pochettino, Klopp, Koeman, Bilic and the mid-age range managers such as Mourinho and Mancini. I haven’t put in Garry Monk either!

Has the new breed caught up with Wenger’s tactics and is there a pattern?

I have used Premier League games ONLY. The reason is simple.

• Pellegrini has lost to Wenger in the Champions League but has beaten him in the League Cup
• Ranieri has beaten Wenger in the Champions League
• Sir Alex Ferguson has beaten Wenger twice in the Champions League
• Sir Alex Ferguson has also beaten Wenger in numerous FA Cup ties
• Van Gaal has lost to Wenger in the FA Cup but beaten him in the Champions League
• Koeman has beaten Wenger in the League Cup

I will also point out that Wenger has beaten Klopp in the Champions League but to give him these couple of victories, I would need to include the above into the stats and it works out less favourable – trust me!

One manager not on the list but highlights Wenger’s poor away record against certain managers is Mark Hughes. In truth, Wenger’s record looks impressive – Eleven wins from eighteen games. Look closer and he hasn’t won an away game against Mark Hughes since Blackburn at 2-0 win in 2006/7. A record that includes defeats to a pre-mega bucks Manchester City, QPR and Stoke (twice) and draws at Fulham and Stoke.

There are those that will say “…But how many have finished above us…”. Whilst this can be considered, why not ask a slightly different question. “What if Wenger had a better record against these managers in a big game and had won against them more often? How many more times would he have won a title for The Arsenal or at least had a challenge until the final couple of games?”              

The above table seems to have a common theme.

Wenger seems able to work and get results against managers in their 60s – around his age range.

One thing to note is that eight of his wins against Redknapp came with Harry at a struggling West Ham between 1996 and 2001. Take those out of the equation and even that record looks less impressive with six wins achieved in nineteen games and two of those were against Queen’s Park Rangers.

Sir Alex Ferguson bucks the age trend – but this is his current age – not when he managed against Wenger aged 54 to 71. His age range is on a par with Wenger’s and of the ten wins only three were achieved at Old Trafford.

The older Wenger has become, the better Ferguson and Redknapp’s records became. Neither of them lost to the Invincibles. Wenger only won two of eight North London Derbies against Redknapp and lost three including the collapse from 2-0 up.

Mourihno is in the list at age 53 but remember when he first came onto the Premier League scene he was actually 40. He faced – and didn’t lose to – Wenger 10 times in this first period at Chelsea.

The remarkable thing is against managers aged under 55 at clubs you now expect to see around the top eight: Liverpool, Manchester City, Southampton, Tottenham, West Ham have all got a decent record against Wenger.

With Manchester City ditching their ageing manager for a younger model in the summer and Chelsea turning their attentions to a 46-year old, are Arsenal about to stand still and get caught up.

True, it doesn’t work for everyone Andre Villas-Boas has a record of one win and two defeats against Wenger but there are lots of one off coaches that fail for one reason or another.

If Mourinho does end up at Manchester United next season, Wenger and Ranieri could both find themselves steamrollered by this new wave of young managers.

The stats of Wenger’s achievements against them are not good. Records that get missed or hidden – not scored against Southampton in the last three games.

His win percentage in the Premier League is around 52%. Very good – you can’t fault that. Champions, however, tend to have a win percentage of above 60% indeed the Invincibles had a win rate of over 70%. This is how far he has fallen from grace.

His away record is shabby to say the least. Struggles highlighted earlier against Mark Hughes can go the same for Tony Pulis and indeed many of the managers listed. Home form keeps his win percentage high but it is your away form that is critical if you need to mount a serious title challenge.

Of the managers listed, Wenger has only beaten Ranieri, Redknapp, Pelegrini, Ferguson and Mancini on their own patch in the Premier League. Two have retired, one is managing abroad, one doesn’t currently have a job next season and the other has the freedom of Leicester and has managed to finish ahead of Wenger.

Wenger has not recorded an away Premier League win against van Gaal, Koeman, Pochettino, Hiddink, Mourihno, Klopp or Bilic albeit the latter two have only managed one season in the Premier League.

If Wenger stays on, which I’m sure he will, he will need to break this run if The Arsenal are to have any chance of a top four finish let alone a championship challenge.

One thing for sure is that the Wenger debate will continue and run on until he believes he cannot do the job or Stan decides that this is not the club he originally was introduced to in 2007 when he bought shares from Granada TV.

Add in another season and this could mean that he has to hand over a club to a new manager with no European football and an ageing squad which will by then include Cech, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Monreal, Cazorla, Giroud (all over 30) and Ozil, Sanchez and Walcott (within a couple of years of 30) – this is a man who wanted us to believe in his youth development.

As teams opt for younger managers with fresh ideas and impetuous, The Arsenal could be getting left behind. Clubs will spend big this season with the new TV deal with their fresh, young, hungry managers at the forefront of any battle and if he does walk in 2017/18 a new fresh, young, hungry Arsenal manager may only have the scraps none of the big boys wanted first time around.

It could damage this club, OUR CLUB, for seasons to come.

Glynn
Follow @SouthportDJ