Wen's Arsene Gunner Be Gone?

The big question for Arsenal is how long do you stick with Arsene Wenger? 

This week's 3-0 win over Milan merely papers over the cracks in what is yet another trophy-less campaign for the Gunners. A season of thoroughly inconsistent results has included an 8-2 defeat at Man U but massive 5-3, 7-1 and 5-2 wins over Chelsea, Blackburn and Spurs respectively. A thumping defeat in the San Siro may have been followed by a convincing second-leg victory, but the fact is that Arsenal have fallen short of the Quarter Finals, and are out of every competition by early March, with a lot of work left to do to qualify for Champions League football for next year. 


There is little doubt that Wenger and Arsenal's policies and philosophy are admirable in terms of investing in youth and playing attacking, attractive football. But what good is investing in youth if you then sell the young players when they have matured and have the experience and steel required (e.g. Fabregas, Clichy, Nasri)?

And if you look at the youth investment policy, how well does it stand up to close scrutiny? Exceptionally gifted players like Fran Merida, Denilson, Jay Emmanuel-Thomas and Mark Randall have all been sold/released despite showing great promise. Some of the best young talent that Arsenal are known for (Walcott, Ramsey, Chamberlain) have been bought for big fees (£9m, £5m, £12m) from smaller clubs, rather than genuinely brought through the youth set-up (notable exceptions are Wilshere, Gibbs and Frimpong). 


In some quarters they are admired for not spending big, and in others they are admonished for not putting the financial backing to the ambition of the fans. No-one is suggested they have spent in the manner of City, Chelsea, Liverpool or United, but the last time they didn't spend at least £10m on a player during a season was in 06/07 when Eduardo was the top signing for £7.5m. And don't think that all of those signings have been the youngsters with unbridled talent and potential: Arshavin £15m aged 27, Koscielny £10m aged 24, Mertesacker £10m aged 26, Arteta £10m aged 29, and as of today, Podolski £11m aged 26.

'98 FA Cup Final scorers - sold for
a combined profit of £40,500,000

They do collect big on a few players (most notably Overmars, Anelka, Fabregas, Nasri and Adebayor), but being a property developer is not really what most north Londoners want for their club. What difference then between Arsenal making a profit off such names and Southampton doing the same with the Ox and Walcott? 


In the last 20 years Arsenal have spent a net £21.6m (£17 of which was before Wenger), compared to Newcastle £99m, Spurs £175m, Man U £177m, Liverpool £226m, Man City £487m, Chelsea £516m*. No question then that financially Arsene has worked wonders to be competitive for so long, but which Gunner wouldn't gladly have traded another £100m or so for another couple of cups? It may have made the move to the Emirates financially viable but another Premiership title or two would have made Highbury perfectly inhabitable for a while longer.
*thanks to www.transferleague.co.uk for all the transfer spend stats. 

So would a win against Birmingham in last year's League Cup Final have made such a difference? Had Wilshere's left-footed hit dipped two inches lower and not struck the crossbar, all of the talk of the Gunners not having won anything for years would be redundant. Would any consideration of the great Arsenal Wenger being sacked consequently be dismissed as absurd? Similarly, is the discussion entertained purely because they failed to convert more than 1 of their 20 shots on goal?


In a time when managerial positions seem so fragile (just ask AVB, Gary Megson or Lee Clark), the likes of Ferguson, Moyes and Wenger are quite simply inspirational. Harry Redknapp is now 10th on the list of longest serving current managers in England, and he's been with Spurs for less than 4 seasons. Put it like this, Di Matteo is already climbing out of the relegation places, currently sitting 3rd bottom after a total of 4 days in charge. He'll be pressing for the playoffs soon. 


Of course the longevity of a manager is a positive thing for a club and for a chairman to show faith and consistency is fantastic and universally lauded, but is there a time to draw the line and recognise that no more progress can be made by the incumbent? How long can a policy of "building for the future" be sustained? Man U seem to do that and win the league while they're waiting. And what does it say for a club's ambitions when all the talk after being knocked out is of a "brave spirit" and "positive signs"? It sounds like the English national teams...


What it comes down to is the simple question; are Arsenal moving forward and becoming more competitive under Wenger or not? 




*I appreciate I've presented a pretty one-sided perspective on this but I am not actually convinced Wenger should go, just putting some things out there. Intrigued to see if any Arsenal fans want to have a say? Or Spurs/Utd/Chelsea etc. fans for that matter?!

A Welsh Grand Slam?

From the seal and porpoise-infested currents of the Pembrokeshire coast, to the peaks of Snowdonia, to the royally inhabited island of Anglesey, to the sprawling metropoleis of Rhosllannerchrugog, Llanfair Caereinion and Ystradffin, south through the Brecon Beacons into the urban centres of Cardiff, Swansea and Newport, a few weeks ago a gentle breeze began, swirling to a quiet whisper, growing louder each weekend, and now at a level audible across the land of the dragon, building to a crescendo and a mighty Welsh roar at the Millenium Stadium on March 17th...

"Y Gamp Lawn" "Y Gamp Lawn" "Y Gamp Lawn" "Y Gamp Lawn"

A straightforward win against the Italians this weekend will leave Warburton, North & Co. all lined up for the Grand Slam (I know my educated readership didn't need a translation of 'Y Gamp Lawn' but who knows who else might stumble on the blog and feel a little lost).
They've come through tough matches in London and Dublin, despite being second best for significant parts of both matches. Neither Ireland nor England took advantage of a Welsh sin-bin, and some poor decisions didn't help either host close out winning positions, but the World Cup semi-finalists showed a determination and skill to fight back and get impressive results in both matches. And winning ugly is part of being champions. Just ask that well known battling midfielder Samir Nasri, who knows about as much about winning ugly as Tim Henman.


After a strong showing in the World Cup, lots of talk discussed Welsh prospects for the Six Nations and if Graham Price is right, this team is on the verge of a great achievement, earned by a mixture of powerful attacking rugby, grit, determination and some lack in clinical finishing of their opponents. 


But let us not forget that Wales were lauded after a World Cup in which they actually lost 3 times (South Africa, France & Australia), and could easily have been heading home after a weak display against Samoa. It was Les Bleus that ended the dream in New Zealand and Les Bleus who could do it again on St Patrick's Day. In all likelihood the French will have beaten England in Paris and so will be vying for the Six Nations crown themselves. And after all, how many times have Wales beaten France in the Six Nations at the Millenium Stadium?


Once. 2008. After home wins over Scotland and Italy, and away wins at Ireland and England (sounding familiar?), they sealed the Grand Slam over the French. They'll need much of the same in a couple of weeks...

An English national team to be proud of please?

What is it about English national sport teams? Is there something inherent that makes us want to self-destruct, and demolish what last shred of hope of success we might otherwise have? Have the powers that be decided that if there is any chance, however slim, of us actually performing well at a major tournament, something must be done to disrupt it?

Twelve months ago England's rugby team were storming to the Six Nations with home wins over France, Scotland and Italy, as well as an impressive victory in Wales. The likes of Youngs, Foden and Ashton were setting the tournament alight with pace and power, while Flood & Wilkinson missed less kicks in total (3) than in the first match of the World Cup (5) against Argentina. It was with realistic optimism that we headed to New Zealand - expecting at least to threaten the latter stages. Instead, an embarrassment both on and off the field which ultimately led to the demise of an all-time England legend, Wilkinson, alongside the likes of Tindall, Moody and Easter. An ignominious end for those who have previously performed so admirably for us in the past.

And now we are celebrating gritty and unconvincing wins over Scotland and Italy as positive signs of rebuilding and a new era. However true it may be, it seems something of a shame to be having to talk this way about our national team, and so soon after we claimed the Six Nations title with relative ease.


And what of the mighty Three Lions? I don't think anyone is under the illusion that our national football team have the slightest chance against the likes of Spain and Germany in the European Championships this summer, whoever's in charge at the time. One shambles after another regarding the captaincy, with John Terry now twice stripped of the position, only exceeded in its absurdity by the state of our managerial situation. An Italian who clearly didn't want to be there and didn't exactly seem devastated to be leaving, not least after his position was so thoroughly undermined by the FA removing his captain without so much as a "what do you think Fabio?"

Where does it leave us going forward? There is such a clamour for an English manager, and Harry Redknapp in particular, that's it's hard to see how they FA could resist, even with the likes of Hiddink in the running. What we need is a sense of togetherness, a team unity and passion that's been absent from the national team disrupted by pathetic squabbles, ill-discipline and perpetual minor issues. Whoever can do that for us, I can say for us all, we'll be behind them. For me, I want Stuart Pearce but let's just see...

Murray to face Kazakh Kukushkin for the Quarters

Into the second week and Murray couldn't have asked for a much better last 16 opponent that Mikhail Kukushkin. The Kazakh world 92 had won an overwhelming total of 2 Grand Slam matches in his entire career prior to this tournament, but wins against Garcia-Lopez (66), Troicki (23) and Monfils (15) have rocketed him to a position he could never have imagined or hoped for a week ago. He now faces the biggest match of his career and a chance to seriously make a name for himself, and perhaps more significantly, claim enough points to climb 50 odd places in the rankings, and break the top 50 for the first time. 


Murray beat him fairly unconvincingly in 3 sets in Brisbane, in his first match of the season a couple of weeks ago so there's always the potential for a bit of trouble but realistically, in a match of this significance, Murray should crush him.


It's a bit like Chelsea (ranked 4th) playing Northampton Town in the FA Cup 5th round, after the Cobblers knocked out Rochdale (66), Cardiff (23) and West Brom (15) - you don't expect to see the League 2 relegation strugglers causing too much of a threat. It might be a different matter if Murray's defence consisted of the the tennis equivalent of David Luiz but fortunately he's more like the Chelsea of Mourinho than AVB.

Then again, Kukushkin plays his Davis Cup tennis in the World Group, the top tier, and will be up against Nadal et al. of champions Spain in February. Murray and Great Britain, in the European section of the 3rd tier, will be playing the Slovak Republic, including giants of the men's game such as Lacko and Klizan (yes I did have to look them up) - so maybe Mikhail should be going in as the overdog (not sure that'll catch on).

Should Murray overcome his unseeded opponent, it is highly likely to be JWT that awaits in the quarter final. The 2008 finalist and 6th seed will have the disadvantage of being French, something our Scottish hero seems to thrive on, as Llodra and Roger-Vasselin have found out to their misfortune. Nationality aside though, Tsonga will be a formidable opponent. I briefly touched on his strong end to 2011 last time out, and nothing so far this tournament suggests he is going to be anything less than extremely competitive. Although Murray holds a 5-1 head-to-head, JWT's win came at none other than the Australian Open, when the unseeded 23 year old from Le Mans powered his way past Murray (9), Gasquet (8), Youzhny (14) and Nadal (2), before losing to Djokovic in 4 sets. I shouldn't like to rule out Nishikori's chances on Monday but I can't help but feel the all important "second week" at this Slam is going to be a short one for the first ever Japanese player to get there.

Only minor shocks so far really (e.g. Raonic/Hewitt, Falla/Fish, Benneteau/Simon) and all the main men looking pretty comfortable. Sensible money seems to still be on Novak but cruising through early on doesn't really mean anything and this time next week the moment of truth will be on us. 

The Famous Four Down Under Again

Almost exactly a year on since my first blog post and I find myself returning after a festive hiatus from whence I began, namely tennis and the Australian Open.

Last year the (inaccurate) predictions centred around Nadal and Federer, and no big surprise they're in the running again. But who was to know that a wheat-free diet could lead to a defeat-free first few months of the season for Djokovic. The 2011 Aussie Open turned out to be the first leg in a somewhat memorable run and led the Serb to becoming the main man of the tennis world and most decidedly the man to beat. 
Back down under 12 months later, it's hard to see past the same old four again...


Novak Djokovic - The world number 1 (by a long way) goes in as firm favourite. He's not had a competitive warm-up tournament but did comfortably dispose of Monfils, Federer and Ferrer in the Abu Dhabi exhibition. His Grand Slam record of 25-1 in 2011 will take some matching but it's difficult to imagine that anyone could stop him before at least the quarters when he could meet someone like Tsonga or Del Potro.

However, Nole's fitness is always a factor to consider, and something often omitted from the story of last season. Taking nothing away from the greatness of the year, he did withdraw from 8 tournaments during the season (*Rotterdam, Monte Carlo, Queens, Cincinnati, Davis Cup SF, China Open, Shanghai, Paris) and pulled out here a couple of years ago with heat exhaustion. A different man these days maybe, but still liable to start feeling the pressure if anyone can get a set or two ahead. 


Rafael Nadal - The Spaniard has won a Grand Slam every year since 2005, but he goes into this season perhaps as off-form and fitness as we've seen him since the summer of '09. Although the venue for one of the greatest Federer-Nadal clashes, the Aussie Open hasn't been happy hunting for Rafa generally speaking. Only once other than that epic final has he even made the semis, and last year limped out sadly to countryman Ferrer. Reckless to ever write off the battling leftie but perhaps not surprising he's got the longest odds of all 4. 

Roger Federer - The Swiss comes into the tournament on the back of a pretty significant 21 match winning run, nearly half of what ND achieved last season. One could claim that he cynically protected it by withdrawing prior to a tricky tie against Tsonga but with only 2 mid-tournament withdrawals in his career, I don't think that really fits with his competitive nature. He's going to be a serious threat but everyone wobbles at some point in a GS and Roger seems to do it at somewhat crucial moments these days. He's gone nearly two years since winning a Slam and the next few weeks could be crucial to how the rest of his season, and career, will pan out. 

Andy Murray - The addition of Ivan Lendl to his backroom staff must surely be a big benefit. Read nothing into the win in Brisbane against no stiff opposition, it's on the Rod Laver arena that Murray's fate will be decided. Djokovic is younger than Murray and so the Scot can't hope to just outlast his rival - he needs to step up soon or risk his entire career being in the shadow of the Serb (and Nadal who's only a year older and had 9 GS by Murray's current age). Lendl lost 4 Grand Slam finals before his 1984 triumph at Roland Garros, and then went on to win 8 in total. If his new charge can do anything like that then it's safe to say it'll have been a good appointment by the British No. 1. Another chance for Murray to show he's got the mental and physical strength to last through the toughest test, in the first major of one of the most eagerly anticipated seasons in recent history.


Others to watch out for - Tsonga could be very dangerous indeed. A great second half to 2011 and a good win in Doha. He's going to make a very awkward QF opponent for one of the above. Raonic has just won in Chennai and could well cause a bit of an upset - he's likely to meet a top seed around R3 and if he can keep a lid on the UFE, is very dangerous. Tomic gave Nadal a bit of a scare last year, and although swept away by Murray in Brisbane, is inspired by an Aussie crowd and will certainly fancy his chances of making the latter rounds. And at some point, JMDP will be fully fit again, and the top 4 could become a top 5.

I can't wait...