Arsenal: Eased into the New Year


Good morning Positives,

A satisfactory result with the occasional hint of ‘good’ against Fulham, and a welcome salve to the bruising we picked up on Merseyside slightly less than  three days earlier.

Looking at the highlights again this morning the 4-1 result does not reflect the number of chances we created (16 shots inside the box and 9 on target)  although it does earn Rico the Emirates-visiting-keeper-of-the-season-so-far award. Auba on another day could have had 3-4 goals. The work of Sead and Alex Iwobi on breaking open the visitors for 80minutes of the afternoon was excellent. AMN again had a good afternoon.  It took to the 80th minute until we were really secure but going forward yesterday we were a potent force.

The first half we were a bit more jittery at the back, perhaps in reaction to Anfield. Was Mustafi unwell ? He did not look comfortable at the start and it was not surprise when he did not reappear. Fulham could have embarrassed us with a first half goal but for failed to hit the target with two scoring opportunities.

A straightforward week of preparation for Blackpool. Mindful of our humiliation  in Nottingham last season I expect Unai to field a reasonable starting line up and an experienced bench. Given the comments from the medical team it may be that Hector, Ozil and Nacho can use the tie to test their fitness. We shall see.

Enjoy the week.



Comment navigation

← Older Comments

73 comments on “Arsenal: Eased into the New Year

  1. Yep, short and sweet. Really like the pic used at the top by the way. What a sight.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Thanks Andy. I listened to the BBC London commentary which was pretty skewed in favour of Fulham. 2-0 up and cruising and a pretty obvious penalty not given: moments later a clear foul not given in midfield from which they score. So what might have been 3-0 and job done becomes 2-1 and a game to win all over again. It is by such seemingly innocuous tilting of the pitch that league placings are determined.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. You should have a look at the ‘foul’ on Torreira from which the visitors scored Tim. It is on the Arsecom highlights. It is the second Ems game I have seen a coming together and Lucas put himself over the thigh of his tackler and the referee has not been interested. It may have been a foul but referees are looking at the Uruguayan’s behaviour more closely.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I wish I was mature enough to a) not snigger when I see Arsecom and b) not immediately think that whether Torreira manufactured it or not it would have been given the other way had it been for any other side.
    Incidentally and Labo would confirm this no doubt a Capetounians request for Ice cream makes it sound as if they have a nasty case of piles.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. Was a worry of mine with Torreira from back in that time we were being heavily linked with him and I watched his compilation a number of times.

    He looked excellent, and I was very keen for him to join, but earning free kicks seemed a crucial part of his repertoire, and though on the vid they looked like ones you get the vast majority of time, as they involved putting himself between ball and opponent, I wondered ‘what if?’, i.e. what if he gets those much less often over here.

    Gradually I worried less about it once he joined- seemed it would be ok- he got plenty of free kicks initially, though missed out on a few as well, and even got lucky a couple of times I thought, at least in terms of refs not taking up some opportunities to kill him if they wanted to be harsh.

    But now let’s see. Old Trafford seemed a bit of a turning point for me. Aggression was upped and our mid’s getting less protection and more going against them.

    I still need to watch the one from yesterday again, but from that long view it sure looked like he had ball shielded and opposition player made contact with him before getting to ball.

    For me it’s a different decision for a ref in those situations depending on where it is on the pitch, and they know it.

    Far from your own goal they might think ‘hmmm, maybe, but maybe looking for it a bit…I’ll play on’, but when it’s other end of pitch and leads to team getting right in towards goal with a reasonable or good chance to score…it’s a different decision. I think it’s just common sense then to whistle. That’s what they normally do if it’s even a 50:50 call, and it looked more of an 80: 20 or 90:10 one to me (from that far view yes. I’ll get round to checking it later)

    Anyway, can’t find the vid I watched of him back in the summer, but this one has a few of those shielding ball/ winning free kick moments, and, I think, a shoulder to shoulder intervention in box I’m pretty sure would be called a pen against him here.

    The music, as always with these vids, is diabolical (why is that?) so mute prob best

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I f***** hate Talksport. I always have done right back to the 1998 World Cup. However in this one instance I may switch it on.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Stan is missing out here – no wonder we are short of cash;

    The price of fulfilling your, or your child’s dreams;

    Current Premier League mascot prices
    West Ham United £700

    Leicester City £600

    Tottenham Hotspur £405

    Wolves £395

    Crystal Palace £375

    Brighton £350

    Burnley £300

    Cardiff City £255

    Watford £250

    Bournemouth £185

    Free: Arsenal, Everton, Chelsea, Fulham, Huddersfield, Liverpool, Man City, Man United, Newcastle United and Southampton.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. No messing about A5, straight to point. Only saw game from shortly after Fulham scored and any trauma I had of Anfield immediately was a thing of the past. I’d just love Unai getting a settled XI because the top 4 sides are finding their mojo groove again and we need to stay close by. Big test vs Chelsea at the Ems soon.

    FH, I can indeed confirm. Lol. As an afrikaans speaking person and married to a Cape Townian, I sometimes don’t have half a clue what their locals are saying.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. A5 re that mascots… is that per child walking out with the players – that mascots?

    Liked by 1 person

  10. re: anicol comment 11.19am

    you may very well be right, but isn’t it odd that these same refs are not looking at Salah, Kane, Vardry, Alli, and many more, no its the Arsenal player they have decided to have a look at.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. It is Labo – I always thought being a mascot was a just a random, very special day out for the youngster and free – you or your parents wrote in and your name was picked out of a hat for an experience you remember all your life – how naive am I ?

    I hope AFC does not cash in. As with almost everything else in English ( and Welsh football I see) the match day mascots will only come from those who can afford a few hundred £.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. From what I saw from Saturday, and a small addition to my enjoyment of Wolves’ fine win, the referee was having a good look at Kane – cheating bastard that he is eddy.

    I agree it is disappointing that there is not more uniformity among referees on picking up diving and deciding which challenge is a “genuine” foul, and which has been “bought” by the player aiming to win the free kick or he penalty though. Unfortunately I do not think there is any easy way to pick it out for officials who see it once. Referees d at least seem to be aware of it though where two seasons back it was much less common, I think(!).

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Afternoon everyone hope youre doing well. Many thanks to anicoll5 for the hawk-eye speed view of yesterday. Took the best forward into the New Year.

    Things certainly feel better today than after the murky gloom aprés le floodgates opening at Anfield. Emerys Ark sails on through the pool of negativity and out to the Blackpool itself! Bloody Pooliverse! Is there no end to it?

    Seems like Fulham are after Cahill, Chelsea have spunked a load of cash off, but not sure it will do them much good.
    405 quid to meet up with a chicken! No fanks! Like old Jack Burton always says ” he that hangs around with farmyard animals he must be watched”.

    Heres to a 2019 where we win all we can.


    Liked by 3 people

  14. Faarrrrk! Re mascots. I thought it was perhaps for dressing up in that costume. But now…

    Always thought those kids were from an academy or school in the local community as part of their outreach programs. Greedy bastards.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Just hope the widely reported and under challenged words of that dinosaur Dyche have not influenced officials, we have got very little, verging on nothing since then, or am I giving him too much importance

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Why indeed was Mr Dyche not charged by the FA for his comments? Maybe it’s because they want his remarks to seem pertinent?

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Thought the mascots thing was outrageous, but only had in my head one mascot per game. My thinking was- what the fuck, that money is like a thimble full in the swimming pool of a prem team’s earnings

    If it’s more like 11-15 per game, I suppose that registers as bit of income, but still only just for a prem team. Still really poor from clubs.

    Maybe worst aspect of all,though, is that it’s just one more area in life where being wealthy gives an advantage or makes things possible that aren’t for those with no dough…and to bring that into this particular area, football mascots, ffs, is so uneccesary.

    Looked at that way, is it possible it’s not even primarily about earning a little for clubs, more a nice convenient system for making it easier for corporate class and wealthier punters to treat their little ones without the hassle of joining a large queue or even worse, a lottery system?

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Andy

    What’s your take then on whether it’s effectively a different decision whether or not to give a free kick in different areas of the pitch. e.g innocuous position with defence well in place, or very dangerous spot leading immediately to good attacking position?

    For me it’s a close cousin of penalty decisions, and the ever popular cry of ‘anywhere else on the pitch you’d get it!’, when it ignores the fact the consequences are massively different when deciding yes/no for a pen shout, as opposed to similar call elsewhere, and so a ref would always be right in general to be more reluctant to call close ones in the box.

    Top of my head, as well as this one is Xhaka at Goodison Park last year before Rooney goal, Hector being on end of a good ole barge out wide at Bournemouth’s place, and Mesut must have about 3-5 of them alone in his time here, starting with one in the first 5-1 at Anfield.

    Feels to me you can’t go wrong, prediction wise, with saying we will almost certainly be called back if there’s a hint of contact from us and we break into good position, while in the reverse they are often let go.

    On the kin theme, it feels like the brother to me of way advantage rule regularly used for fouls that look bookings or at the very least last warning jobs. Let em go and the booking may well not come; stop play and you pretty much have to card it if a yellow offence, and it also draws clear attention to the foul- so registers on foul count and totting up, with commentators, crowd, players. I feel- surprise surprise- advantage used differently with us, and that it’s predictable

    Keep an eye out for both over a season and the predictive model will work pretty well I think.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Before Andy gets back to me in continuation of this lively debate of ours which I think we manage to pull off without acrimony (hope so anyway!)

    This talk of Utd being close to Koulibaly for 100 mill or whatever.

    For some reason, that one would sting as much as any since the reality of our different spending power to the richer few has been apparent.

    Just ouch. That’s the sort of fee it takes now to bring in a near sure thing, top 5 in position in world, in that position. Ouch.

    We’d all love to see us do it, but it can’t happen, and the real kicker is that those richer rivals – City, Utd, Chelsea, PSG, maybe a few more- can do it independent of whether they have done particularly good work on the pitch, or off it in transfer market, over a number of years. While we could save all our pennies for a while with the idea of going for it big time, and still always be beaten by them at the last.

    That’s what I miss most about football before the mega money era. Even the rich clubs then were made to pay big time if they got splurges wrong- Liverpool in Souness time being perfect example, and further back there was virtually no limit to the damage that could be done, or at least I’m guessing that was case with things like Utd’s fall from heights of Busby years to relegation not so long after it.

    Oh well, dead and gone that sort of thing. Though if we and below get our deals wrong we can be hurt for a time by that.

    It could be worse, whatever applies to us on that front, must do so more to those with less, and that means most clubs.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. I think referees have become a bit more careful in awarding penalties in the past two seasons rich as, presumably at their coaching sessions, they review decisions that are mistaken as well as one’s in which they have been obviously conned. Edge of the box stuff though still seems hit and miss.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Anicoll

    Seemed case from Webb’s book that they do indeed do a hell of a lot of video analysis of various types- individual, group, with assessors,etc. Also now get dvd’s of every game with blow by blow ratings for each decision. Apparently unpopular as it is not ex-refs who do it.

    Think he said something about going through dvd of one game he was unhappy about at Everton for 3-and-a-half hours with an assessor. Made an early bad call or something then let crowd get in his head and was lost from there. Think their crowd one of the best at that when really in the mood.

    Another snippet, from different book, I think, was that they once had practice of having one of the refs up on stage each week to go over clips they selected, and it could cause a lot of tension. Something like that. Video nasty session or something was name used for it. Think it was controversial with them and they ended the practice.

    Also made clear there is a lot of informal chatting, as you’d expect, about favourite and least favourite players, those to look out for, go down too easy,etc. Remember thinking wtf when Webb put Barton as number 1 or 2 for his favourites. Hard to imagine endearing qualities with that guy.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Auba’s movement and positional play is world class unfortunately his finishing is worse than Harry redknapps mum at times. He was particularly wasteful against Fulham but it’s more important in games where we are not going to get many chances that he finishes better.
    Refs are hardly worth talking about nowadays they are that bad and very often struggle to get the basics right. Three minutes second half time added on was a joke yesterday and underlines one area where refs should lose influence.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. I know some some may be rightly cynical about the words of an agent, and articles from this source, but here’s what Mesut agent has to say about his commitment to the club, seems pretty clear cut to me, cannot see him going anywhere for the time being


    Liked by 3 people

  24. It’s ok to be skeptical of agents’ pronouncements; still, these are words worth heeding: “Unless you are on the inside and privy to what happens on a daily basis, it is best not to speculate.”

    Liked by 2 people

  25. Very true, those are wise words from his agent. Just hope we have a fit and firing Mesut Ozil with us for some time, don’t want to be losing him as well as Rambo, this team need it’s creatives and suffer without them

    Liked by 3 people

  26. A5 you defend everything done wrongly to arsenal this days. What is wrong with torreira putting himself between the player and the ball. The question is did Seri make contact with him before the ball? We have seen several penalties awarded when strikers just manage to put their leg between the keeper and the ball just when the keeper want to catch the ball without any intention of playing the ball. The question is always did the keeper touch the player. It is not the case of ref taking closer look at torreira but just that they wanted to prove he is not as good as everyone is saying he is.
    since the last time when arsenal players got three yellows for diving, how many of the ref has been that strict of divers? Let me even ask that how many players has the same ref booked for diving since? Agenda against arsenal is clear for all to see.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. It is a compulsion I have Layks – to defend the indefensible, to explain the inexplicable.

    In respect of Torreira I was commenting on why, perhaps, the ref did not give a free kick on what looked a foul. When I saw it first it looked as through the Fulham player had clattered our Latin powerhouse but looking at it again it was not so clear cut. As for the foul/loss of possession costing us a goal the ball was lost 35 yards out. There were 5-6 AFC players behind the ball + Leno. Kamara wasn’t picked up so it was not great defending. If the referee was at fault for he not giving a foul fine, but he was not the only one not doing his job.

    Right – I am off to support Rafa’s Army – HAWAY THE LADS

    Liked by 1 person

  28. on the mascots thing, I think all Arsenal’s mascots come from the Junior Gooners, and is one of the benefits of being in them, while at some clubs the position can just be paid for.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. I see some of the main stream media have decided on a new target at Arsenal, after years of hounding Wenger, they could not go for our head coach so soon, so the only other alternative had to be Kroenke, with lots of little comments to stir the malcontents in our fan base, and Henry Winter in particular is stirring it as much as he can. Some of the AFC bloggers of course are only too happy to oblige too. What a shower of cunts.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. the good news – chelsea just the 3pts ahead of us now

    the bad news – man utd just hte 3pts behind us now

    Liked by 1 person

  31. a few years back, Arsenal got grief for not spending enough money.
    More recently ,apparently they have been mismanaged and spending too much and received vilification accordingly.
    Now, Stan and the board appear to be putting a lid on big spending, at least for this Jan, or that is one interpretation at least, and grief for that is well.
    Certainly get the frustrations over Ramsey, but not sure how they win? Don’t spend, spend a lot, rein it in, there is always fertile ground when you are an Arsenal critic

    Liked by 2 people

  32. but thats the thing Mandy, none one cunt saying we have no money to spend, or that Stan is not making any money available this month haven’t got a fucking scooby, all I know is that our Head Coach said only yesterday that we could make one or two signings this month, and that the club is trying to get our targets. You do know that all this “AFC don’t have any transfer funds” has come form Tim not so nice but still dim Payton, the most Attention Seeking Twat of all attention seeking twats. He started it and the stupid bloggers and twitteratti have come up with their versions of it for the clicks and attention.

    Liked by 2 people

  33. Got to do my duty after talking about it so much.

    Just watched it on Motd and Torreira incident not what I thought.

    Gets a ropey ill-advised pass to him and takes a heavyish touch, moves to try get in front of Seri while Seri is probably making genuine attempt to reach it…and, the main thing, Seri does manage to reach out his right leg around side of him and, it looks like, get a touch on ball.

    From the two replays…I think no free kick was a reasonable call.

    Doesn’t change my belief refs almost always play safe from there and give defensive team a free kick, but still…it wasn’t what I felt almost certain it was.

    Liked by 1 person

  34. I watched a fair bit of the United game yesterday and enjoyed it much more than I expected to. It was more physically robust than I expected and I certainly didn’t feel United were done any favours by the ref who I reckon was bending over backwards to ensure a free flowing game. Are they perhaps under extra instructions to game manage when it’s on prime UK TV? Think if I’d been a Geordie I’d have felt we could have been given a couple of penalties, if a Manc I’d have pointed to two red card moments.
    United are now very much in the top 4 hunt, but having them competitive again with games to come against all those currently ahead of them could add real interest to what might be a fascinating second half of the season.
    One rule change I would like to see in the Premier League is a ten day gap between the first 19 games and the second round of fixtures: and it would only then be permissible for a club to change managers. It strikes me as unfair that some sides get to play against a demoralised team whereas others get to compete against a revitalised one.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. They may even be under extra instructions to avoid blowing the whistle every time a player goes to ground Tim ? Lovely moment last night in the first half was Rashford on the end of a solid shoulder from Lascelles, flung his arms out and toppled gracefully backwards. Mr Marriner shook his head and referred the young striker to RADA.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. Alright, who’s going to analyse that Swiss Ramble thing to help me out with the bits I don’t get?!

    Can see it being talked about a lot in coming days as ultimate evidence of what the bad, bad man Kroenke is doing to us.

    Main thing I’m interested in is the column Operations. I don’t get it. Our figure is 754 million, beaten only by Utd’s staggering 1307 (!!), with Spurs at 675. So far, so sounds about right to me.

    But Liverpool’s is only 341 and Chelsea’s a lowly 76 mill.

    So what are ‘Operations’, and does it, as appears to be case, not include money from tv deal? Or even from…season tickets and match day revenue (Chelsea have obviously made more from latter alone in ten years)

    Or is it (really showing my lack of expertise here)… a net figure?

    I don’t get it. Help me out here folks.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Does appear to confirm what I always thought. Glazers have taken out 800 million from Utd for loan and interest payments.

    Imagine what the bastards can do if they ever maintain what’s coming in and get that down to little or nothing!

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Rich, as you mention about Kroenke, I am sure the headline will be, Arsenal is the only club where the owner has put in feck all. Really strange and completely unreasonable for a proclaimed self sustained club! Think that is what Stan signed up to, tho others are now comparing us unfavourably with the LA Rams venture which is like comparing oranges with paper clips. Like bad sibling rivalry, crying over the perception someone else gets more love and more toys.
    I am sure others will read into this something about Wenger and Ivan’s wreckless spending , and Vic Ackers going through too many kits and laundry costs, indeed read that one blog has this week posted that a letter has been sent around the club asking the club employees to save money, so don’t rule out a reference to photocopying and WiFi costs!
    Sorry, I do recognise SR is massively respected and does a thorough job, it’s just what others with agendas will read into this.
    Unfortunately, Stan may have his critics but doesn’t need the PR of a tyrant who wants approval in the world at large, nor someone in need of washing dirty money, nor is he a puppet, willingly or otherwise for an unpleasant regime ( ok he donated to Trump, but to the Dems as well I think but doubt he is controlled by either) .
    So, unfortunately, Stan has no need or vested interest in competing with those prepared to lose billions, and he will run his club in an efficient manner, painful as the next few months may be in the case of one of our favourite players.
    If, as lots of Uber bloggers are suggesting, Stan is taking between 18 and 50 million out for the repayments on what he bought from Usmanov, well within his rights , but that could be another matter. However nobody has published a shred of evidence for this speculation, and some of the sums mentioned would be very self defeating in his stated aim of growing the club.
    Wenger is gone, all fire at the Kroenkes, and of course Ozil.

    Liked by 3 people

  39. As Mandy says it all very much depends on the reasons an owner may have for owning a club – to make money, to launder money or reputation, or to do it simply for the fun, however much it costs. Much the same seems to apply to racehorses.
    And another thing that puzzles me (because I do not understand the ways of business) is what benefit to Arsenal is it to be owned by Stan as opposed to, let’s say, Tim Payton.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. Kronk knows more about buying and selling and making? And unless someone can spill the beanos whose well within the clubs system, we only have assumption based on external evidence. Kronk seems to leave the manager(etc) alone, while Payton would be telling everyone what to do?

    Again what strikes me as being so odd if blokes like AW and UE are such terrible managers and the echelons of hindsight punditry are so right then why are they the managers then? I really mean it, if they know so much then why Arent they working their way up the system. Hindsight is the biggest bullshit ever? Even more nuts is watch AFTV punditry attack other professional pundits as to whose allowed to say what and when. Oh brother!


    Liked by 1 person

  41. Mandy, I must have missed a few tales of dastardly Kroenke.

    I thought only payments out were one or two around the 2 million mark a while back. I never thought too much about that at time as it seemed an acceptable level.

    The one i couldn’t abide, though I’d have to, is Glazer type stuff. Eye-watering amounts taken out, including, outrageously, large loans/ payments to his kids for God knows what.

    It could happen to us. Blew my mind how the Glazer thing went down with them able to take over a club that size all on borrowed money, leave the club having to foot the bill, while clearly dipping in for some cash for them and their family.

    Probably not quite as horrendous as Blackpool, whose owners simply took the vast majority of their prem money for themselves, but horrible nonetheless.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. Anyway, quiz to brighten the mood.

    What connects our painful cup defeats to Blackburn (quarter Fa Cup), Bradford league cup, and Blackburn league cup final?

    It’s not that they’re all B’s.

    You got it- Mr Mike Dean, our ref for Blackpool at weekend did them all.

    Also Bolton defeat back in 06 in cup, which I have no memory of, but imagine we didn’t like it up us in, and a 0-0 with Hull three years back which I’m guessing is when Alex Bruce got away with the ridiculous handball in his box.

    5th time lucky with him and B’s in the cup?

    Liked by 1 person

  43. * Birmingham league cup final

    Liked by 1 person

  44. Rich, that consultancy fee was all I was ever aware Stan took out of the club, and he stopped it after the uproar, though a couple directors stated that Stans company had helped make the club a hell of a lot more than a couple of mil in those years, being a pretty major sports investor who know a thing or two.
    Some of the usual suspects are implying, without evidence Stan will use the club to pay for what he recently took from Usmanov. The Glaziers taking money out of the financial behemoth that is Utd is one thing, but we run on much smaller margins, so if Stan took 20-50 mil out of AFC annually to pay for his takeover, that would hit the club, and his investment hard.
    There is no evidence Stan plans to do anything of the sort, though some are suggesting as the club is now private we would never know if he did, but I would imagine the likes of Swiss Ramble would trace it, IF he did.
    I have had my doubts about them in the past, namely they could get their profits by selling to someone unworthy of this club, but have yet to see anyone claim with anything that can be backed up , that the Kroenkes are anything other than responsible owners of a self sustaining club. Those Uber bloggers than cannot live with that always have a choice.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. On the subject of Usmanov I see his investment and association with Everton is it? is going really well.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. Mandy

    I still feel uncertain about Stan, and not just the childish part of me that wants money and a lot of it for the team.

    My thing is : I’ve no idea what he wants from owning a prestigious large football club who, in the current landscape, look likely to be battling for, say 3-6 spots in the league for the foreseeable future.

    Is that just an enjoyable challenge to him, while of course sitting on a very valuable asset should the day ever come when he would like to sell?

    That could be it, no mysteries whatsoever, with any seeming weirdness to it a result of it not being particularly in keeping with most ownership models, of clubs of our size at least.

    With zero to go on that says otherwise, really, my assumption is that is it.

    The interesting one for me is if things don’t go our way from here for a few years, and we miss out on CL for another 1, 2,3 years, and that hits commercial revenue and perhaps equally or more importantly leads to a lot of stay away fans for a fair proportion of games. What happens then?

    I don’t know probability of that short term doom scenario, but it doesn’t seem that outlandish. We could certainly miss out again this year. Hopefully that adidas deal is as reported and in the bag, but we can assume it’s a little less than would have been with CL qualification last two years, and similar applies to most commercial deals.

    There are of course different possibilities if it goes that way, with one being we break our rock solid habits and find extra money from somewhere, but another is surely if the value of club ever stalls and things aren’t going great on pitch maybe that’s when Stan looks to exit.

    We shall see. Fingers crossed we get back in CL soon (I’d say it’s less than 50:50 this year, supposing Utd’s recent form isn’t deceptive).

    There’s nowt to suggest the self-sustaining model will be changing soon, nor that Kroenke isn’t content to be here for a long time to come.

    Liked by 1 person

  47. I have every confidence in Stan, he is utterly dependable.

    His only interest in Arsenal football club is as a sound, long term business investment. He has no particular interest in on-field activity or personnel other than if it may add to or detract from his long term investment outcome.

    He has absolute confidence in the self sustaining finance model hat has been in use at AFC for 20+ years.

    He is a commendably hands-off owner who lets those he has appointed get on with their jobs.

    He has no interest in projecting himself as a public figure.

    No problem at all.

    Liked by 2 people

  48. Andy

    Might be being dumb here, but what does long-term business investment mean in that context?

    Does it mean owning now with an eye for selling at a judicious moment? Does it help, as a great asset to have as part of a wider portfolio, in business dealings, or stand alone not influencing anything else he owns/does?

    If the former, it’s fascinating for me to think of how he views our fortunes on the pitch.

    Wishing us well, no doubt, but without getting too drawn in or getting the ego too involved, as seems case for many an owner- ‘what they smoking’, etc.

    As I say, I can’t quite get a fix on it, but most likely there is no mystery to it and it’s pretty much what it looks like- though I still don’t get the aim if it is to cash in at some future point.

    When or why, given I don’t think it would alter his fortunes or lifestyle whether it is a little more or less at any point he sold?

    Liked by 1 person

  49. He has a range of sports businesses, all of which he has owned for years. He is not a trader but an investor. The billion he has has tied up in AFC he could get a much better return on elsewhere, but at a higher risk and with no tangible assets.

    If an absolute $$$ spanker of an offer came along for AFC or the Rams I am sure he would take a good look but he has no need to sell. He an Usmanov probably talked figures more than once but he is not cash poor.

    At 71 years old I think long term is lifelong and his involvement of the family suggests that there could be a Kroenke in situ for a long time to come.

    Liked by 1 person

Comment navigation

← Older Comments

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: