A few years ago I happened across a Coroner’s Report in one of the more respectable UK broadsheets. The subject of the inquest was the untimely death of a middle-age man who’d passed away whilst availing himself of the intimate attentions of an honest lady of the night. Called upon to give evidence, she had this to say (and it was brilliantly quoted verbatim in the paper). “He gave a great sigh, your Honour, and I thought that he’d come, but he’d gorn.” I always imagine Barbara Windsor delivering the line – she’d do it perfectly. I suppose one way or another it all boils down to beginnings and endings, comings and goings, and if that is true of life then it is certainly so of the summer transfer window.

Unfortunately right now there seems precious little to cheer about, but plenty of gloom to keep the doom brigade paradoxically cheerful.

Sagna’s departure was long expected, and although anticipated it still came as a wrench to see him go, especially as he was playing as well as ever.

Although few will have mourned the passing of Bendtner or Chamakh, many are now braced for the imminent departure of Vermaalen, and this will be a sadness. It’s a hard situation for him and the club: he wouldn’t want to sign an extension to play second fiddle to Per and Kos, and much as the club would like him to stay, it seems almost foolish to pass up the chance of a decent transfer fee to keep him as a potentially disaffected bench warmer. It’s a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.

Although this doesn’t really count, the decision not to sign Fabregas felt like another death, and was certainly mourned as such. Actually, I am wrong there: given that it is never nice to see your own playing for another it was more like a betrayal than a death. Jealousy is a powerful emotion, and predictably enough many turned on the club for seemingly having stood impotently by while a Portuguese lothario exercised his seductive charms.

Given all of that, the rumour recently circulated that Cazorla is on his way found plenty of fertile soil within which to breed and spawn discontent.  So in the space of a month, nay not so long, a little month, The Arsenal had gone from “Trophy winning side ready to embrace bright new future” to “Jaded Arsenal, happy to play second-fiddle Arsenal, congenitally unambitious Arsenal”.

Except, of course, that perception is a long way from the truth. Nothing has actually happened that any reasonably intelligent supporter couldn’t have foreseen. The club has the same players on its books, minus the eleven that have just been released, and it would be hypocrisy of the highest order for some to claim the decision to let Bendtner and Kalstrom go indicated any kind of weakness. We don’t know whether Arteta will ply his trade elsewhere (today’s latest rumour) just as we can’t know the status of any possible transfers, however much they have been touted in the press.

We can put two and two together and surmise that it is likely that we sign a right-back, but we are only guessing if we say with any certainty that we know who it will be. For sometime now it has seemed that Serge Aurier would be Bacary’s replacement, and conveniently he looked similar enough to satisfy all those who don’t really like change, but that rumour has now gone a bit lukewarm, and this, combined with the news that another reported target, Seamus Coleman, has penned a new contract with Everton, has started to cause panic in some of the supporting ranks.

Now throw in a few big money signings by the Manchesters and a home-bred exotic to Liverpool, mix with pictures of AW besporting himself on a Brazilian beach surrounded by bikini-clad babes and you have the makings of a perfect twitter storm. And all this still a few days before the transfer window actually opens, and two weeks before the world’s best players, some of whom you might hope to be genuinely Emirates bound, have done with the compelling side-show that is the World Cup.

In so far as I can know anything, I know that Arsene is keen to strengthen his starting XI and his squad.  I also know that although The Arsenal has a lot of money available it does not have unlimited funds and this will have a bearing on how the club goes about its business.  I think I know that a lot of scouting and a lot of negotiating will already have taken place, and if it has then I suspect at least one deal has already been done, but has yet to be made public. If it is the tradition to announce a new signing with a picture of him proudly holding his new shirt, then it makes sense to wait until he can do so with the blessing of the brand new sponsor, and this, as much as anything, could be the reason why Coleman has pledged himself to Merseyside.

In short, because I believe that the club is ambitious, and because I read between the lines, I remain as confident as ever that the club remains on an upward trajectory and is firmly committed to long term success. However, while it is all very well me thinking all of this it doesn’t do the club much good if a sizeable number feel the opposite, especially if some of those who do so are either influential bloggers or journalists.

In fact, far from it not doing much good, it can do active harm if The Arsenal brand becomes associated with a sense of tentative and parsimonious under-achievement. That is not what sponsors want to buy into, and very much not what the best players in the world want to sign up for. When will there be good news is a legitimate question to ask right now, and given that nature is all too ready to fill a vacuum, I would question how carefully the Public Relations Dept have been taking their responsibilities over the last three weeks.

There was a brief moment after the first round of World Cup group matches when everything seemed possible: Balotelli, fresh from damaging England, was surely ours, Campbell was like a shiny new toy and Aurrier was the newest assist-king on the block. All this, and we hadn’t even begun to decide between Bender or Khedira, Pogba or Vidal. Leaving aside for one moment the actual worth of these players, it was quite clear that Arsene did indeed know, and that once again North London was the sexiest place in the footballing world. It felt good to be a Gooner.

Ten days later, and that impression has faded ever so slightly and that is a pity, if only because I now find myself wasting time reassuring the faint of heart that everything is indeed all right, and feeling slightly irritated that the club doesn’t do more to reach out positively to its supporters. At times, in fact, it is as if it goes out of its way to disappoint and alarm, such is its seemingly blithe lack of concern as to how it is perceived.

I am certainly not suggesting that we should be privy to the intimate details of all our transfer dealings, for that would be absurd, but I do think that now we have heard all about the goings some reassurance that there will be the odd coming to look forward to would be nice. And if it could be Barbara Windsor who could whisper that everything was going to be alright and to just lie back and enjoy the ride, then so much the better.

Today’s post was by @foreverheady.

One of the hotter topics in cricket over the last fifty years or so has been whether a player should walk when he knows he is out, or whether he should wait for the umpire to give him out. However minimal the contact, however faint the edge, a batsman always knows when he has hit the ball.

The professional game used to be divided into “walkers” or “non-walkers” and it was generally accepted that to walk when you knew you were out, even if you suspected that the umpire would have given you the benefit of the doubt, was the highest form of sportsmanship, and showed a high degree of moral rectitude. Because cricket was not only old-fashioned, but also had claims as the quintessentially English game, there was an expectation that an amateur or a gentleman would walk, because that was the “right” thing to do, but that a professional would probably wait for the umpires decision. In short, you could trust a proper chap to do the right thing, whereas someone from the lower classes could not be relied upon to have any moral compass at all.

Except it was seldom quite as simple as that, for I knew a few players who had wonderful reputations and were held to be absolute paragons who would cynically trade on that reputation.  To establish a reputation as someone who would always give yourself out, but to then play on that to hoodwink the official at a critical moment is a pretty advanced form of cheating, but I saw it happen enough times to make me feel that the practice of “walking” should be removed from the game, and that all decisions should be left to the umpire.

If morality could be so easily manipulated, I came to believe that all moral judgements should be removed from sport. I have no time at all for those who claim the moral high-ground by dint of birth, status and schooling only to dissemble and gain advantage by unfair means. The law is the law, and better to stick to the letter rather than the spirit, if those that genuinely try to be honest are disadvantaged by those who don’t.  That is why I am so in favour of technology as it leads to better decision-making, and better decision lead to fairer results.

There is another article to be written about the whole issue of drugs and doping, and I have at times often wondered whether it would be better to just allow a total free for all, but that is for another day. For now though it is enough to say that sportsmen will always try to get away with what they can.

Rugby players learn quickly to play the referee, to work out what transgressions they can get away with, what laws a particular referee will not seek to enforce. So do footballers, and we know from watching The Arsenal how quickly rotational fouling is employed once a side senses they can get away with it. These are not on-the-field snap decisions:  coaches spend plenty of time briefing players on who to foul, where best to stray offside, how off-the-ball runs may be most effectively and invisibly blocked.

I don’t have advanced knowledge of all sports, but would bet my life that all sports have their own nefarious practices: as players we quickly learn the dark arts if we wish to survive, for few things are as competitive as professional sport, and without carefully drawn-up laws and efficient refereeing games soon become a jungle. And that jungle becomes red in tooth and claw if you rely on the players to interpret the laws equally fairly.

Which I suppose brings me quite neatly to that bite, which has caused predictable outrage, and an outpouring of moral relativism not often seen in such magnitude beyond A-level philosophy essays.

It seems to me that if you support Liverpool FC or Uruguay it is perfectly appropriate to claim that there are plenty worse things than a not altogether friendly nip that go unpunished: career-ending tackles and casually swung elbows have been paraded with enthusiasm as justifications for why biting an opponent is not that bad. Equally, if you do not support Liverpool or Uruguay, and especially if you feel that as an English-speaking white man you are the sole guardian of moral rectitude in a dangerously immoral and worryingly foreign world then the bite is seen as a mortal sin and one that can only be adequately punished by eternal banishment.  And I am not certain how those two positions can ever be properly reconciled, because both carry so much baggage with them that it is perhaps just best to acknowledge that sometimes there is no absolute right and wrong

What does interest me rather more is the way that just as most societies have their own set of taboos, so too do most sports and I find it fascinating to see what is and what is not considered to be acceptable. Biting, for example, is not especially frowned on in Rugby Football, and while it is probably best not to know everything that goes on in the scrum, I have seen enough nibbled ears to realise that cannibalism is alive and well in the Home Counties. But should a player stick out a foot to trip up a flying three-quarter then all hell breaks loose in the rugby world. It is just not done, and anyone that maintains such behaviour is soon hounded out.

Likewise in cricket: a bowler may legitimately seek to kill a batsman by bowling short-pitched bouncers , and this is seen as an acceptable and admired part of the game; should the same bowler seek to do so by not pitching the ball at all but aiming it full toss at the head then that is strictly off-limits.

A boxer may rain un-defended blows on his opponent’s head and reduce him to a vegetative state and he will be considered a hero: throw a punch below the belt and he’ll soon be cast as pantomime villain.

Footballers lie and cheat on a regular basis: they claim throw-ins and corners, they dive and simulate injury and this is not only all fine but actively encouraged.  They may seek to break their opponent’s leg, and that is OK too, but they must not punch, gouge or bite, for that is not OK.

Taboo trumps relativism, and societies (and the football society is no different) police those taboos strictly and seriously. However ridiculous and logic defying it might be, anyone that seeks to defend the breaking of a taboo will be seen to be so far at odds with the values of that society that all their opinions will, by extension, be deemed risible.

The point about Louis Suarez is not that what he did was particularly bad, but rather that he was unable to stop himself doing something he knew was considered wrong by the rest of his tribe: that he immediately sought to divert attention from his behaviour by feigning injury was proof enough to me that he realised he had crossed an invisible but all-important line.

Today’s post was given to us by  @foreverhaedy (Ex professional cricketer) 

England were supporting the Italians in the hope they could achieve qualification in their third game. Sturridge was sending messages of support to Pirlo and the rest via twitter…while the Daily Mail issued an article before the game between Italyand Costa Rica about how to behave when supporting Italy in World Cups, underlining the importance of pizza, watching lots of R.Baggio clips on Youtube and to abuse the ref as much as possible. Gary Lineker was also wearing an Italy polo shirt in the studio apparently…. bless him.

After the Italians defeat by Costa Rica (a defeat which may even cost them elimination from the tournament) the English started packing to return home after completing one of the worst ever campaigns in a World Cup in their 40 years of qualifying for it. This has not happened since 1962.

The english press approached this all with its normal routine default attitude.

They are trying every drama they can to show how to enjoy these eliminations. Just like the guy who has been rejected by the hot girl at the bar but acts above it…as if he dont care – only in their hearts and minds does he/they know how much suffering exists.

At this point we shouldnt ignore or forget how many bestselling books in the country have been written trying to explain and analyse England’s failures in world cups.

Obviously…the reasons vary from ‘penalty curse’ to more serious reasons but none of these books touch on the one single truth –England gets eliminated from tournaments because they don’t have a good enough squad.-Since whichever squad they bring will rely on two or three (maximum) of themost seriously over-hyped players in world football. Players who are hyped up by the powerful UK media that are without international experience, afraid, settled in their cocoons, who by and large full fill bit-part player roles in their clubs where the main guys pulling the strings are foreigners.

The English never had a GREAT world cup squad. Never. What they did have though was an identity ( hey jack…lol) . However this identity has been lost ever since the introduction of the Premier League.

Production of English players has gone down the drain with realistically only a foreigner (Wenger) doing the most to help England produce decent footballers who can pass , run,  are comfortable on the ball , know what to do and when.

The few english players that are genuinely good are paid excessive millions way beyond their actual value/worth and also get over the top -exposed in media. This over the top-exposure clouds peoples judgement on their ability. A goal from Rooney in a derby suddenly becomes huge news and shown over 130 countries, while a goal from Reus in a German derby might go unnoticed. That should not mean that the former is a better footballer than the latter.

The premiership is the richest league and most organised and profitable league in the world. A league that generates billions is no guarantee that it will have a great national team too. If the sheiks tomorrow go crazy and bring to Qatar all the greatest players on earth they will also have a super rich league but their national squad will still be a bad one. The english might think that since they can buy the best players and have the best league product they can do the same with the national team. That is not the case. International football requires work, sacrifice, lots of sweat, and individual and collective ambition. The only thing the premier league offers are over-hyped overpaid millionaires for the national squad. nothing else.

Off course all this happens due to some cultural traits also…like living in their bubble/microcosm , always thinking of being more important than they are.

In the recent past the F.A very optimistically  handed the keys to the national squad to McLaren after Errikson ( who took them to three consecutive quarter finals). A Manger the English media referred to as “McLown“. The F.A thought that a less dogmatic coach than the Swede was what was needed for the players to make the difference. Off course they were wrong. For Euro2008 they didn’t even qualify. Unable to beat teams like Croatia, Israel and Russia . Due to the fact that they don’t know who they are anymore( in a football sense at least).  They followed the opposite extreme of selecting big names and paying for a world class manager : Fabio Capello.The best and the best managed to create a salad that went to S.Africa in 2010 and was humiliated by Germany with 4 goals!

Their ability to drive national coaches crazy is unparalleled in football history. Hodgson is no genius, I give you that, but he did built a tough and solid Switzerland around Chapuisat before Hitzfeld took over and also built teams with tough defences in Inter, Fulham etc.. Alas even this lover of catenaccio couldn’t resist the pressure of the media and presented a team in Brasil with a joke defence and a midfield unable to support the strikers/forwards.

It is this dumb practice coupled with standard gung-ho naivety ( a draw with Uruguay would still keep them in the chase, while they were charging forward in numbers to win the game in ‘glory’..) that has eliminated them form the World Cup.

In the crucial game of the group the difference was made by Luis Suarez…an international superstar and world class player…not just an EPL superstar….there is a huge difference.

Regular readers will have no problem guessing who wrote today’s piece.

If you love football there is nothing like a World Cup especially if you have a national stake in the whole affair. Undoubtedly it is the spectacle of the best national teams on the whole planet, in a sport played universally,  competing on the world’s stage that brings out such intense global attention. My observation is it brings out the best and worst of human beings. The same spontaneous eruption of national pride in the achievements of footballers flying the national flag is also used to engender xenophobia and pseudo-patriotism. The world cup is notorious for the cynical manipulation by despots, military strongmen and assorted tyrants who have manipulated the event as a cover for human rights abuses and injustices.  It wasn’t long ago when dictators ruling Argentina, Brazil, Haiti and Zaire (now the Congo) sustained their rule by exploiting the achievements of their national teams. In contrast, news headlines today are dominated by marches and demonstrations in Brazil protesting against their government and FIFA combining to  rip off the country as billions are misspent on world cup infrastructure with FIFA guaranteed billions in profits at the expense of social spending on education and health necessary to raise the living standards of the people.

But I digress. What has been  interesting to me is how being a gooner in 2014 causes one to see the world cup entirely different from a fan simply reacting to the fortunes of the national team they support.  Only half-way through the tournament, but it is evident after surveying twitter and blogs, that most of us are using the tournament to answer one of the great questions that continue to divide the club during the past season:

 To Giroud or not to be?

 Despite scoring 22 goals and making 10 assists for club in all competitions last season, Giroud continues to be disparaged in many quarters as not being good enough for Arsenal. Two games into the group stages with millions of gooners pouring over the performances of the so-called world class strikers on show, the issue is far from decided. But Giroud has certainly done enough to justify Wenger’s faith in him. By providing the spark for France’s battering of Switzerland with 1 goal and 1 assist, the Gallic hitman has left many of his critics reeling. In fact Balotelli, the great “black” hope of the transfer whores has been so overshadowed by Arsenal’s Joel Campbell in Costa Rica’s match vs Italy plus the loanee’s outstanding performance vs Uruguay, the terms of the debate has seemingly changed. Many are now wondering whether the club give more importance to bringing back the Costa Rican as a pacy, powerful wideman or take the risk of spending big on the Italian with his risky past and seeming penchant for disappearing when the going gets rough.  Meanwhile his current club is already doing as Real Madrid attempted with Higuain last year. Apparently Balotelli’s transfer fee has gone from £25m to about £35m according to Metro (Yes I know how reliable they are). If Campbell continues to perform and Milan gets greedier we already know how this will end.

Meanwhile my English gooner friends are licking their wounds as Roy Hodgson’s northwest experiment with the Liverpool core failed miserably on the fields of Brazil. With nary an Arsenal player making the 1^st Eleven, it seems another English myth is worth challenging.

Today’s blog was given to us by one of the Foundling Fathers of Positively Arsenal, my good friend and ally Shotta Gooner   (@shotta_gooner )

Just how good enough is good enough? At what point does a player become Arsenal quality?  Who decides whether he is world class or just a squad player? And are these judgements set in stone, or can a player move from one state to another? These questions are prompted by two things, the first being a vague conversation I became involved in yesterday about Jack Wilshere, the second in light of the reaction to the possible re-signing of Carols Vela.

I am fascinated by Jack for a whole variety of reasons, and it is possibly easiest just to list them.

• He is only 22
• He has on occasions been hailed as England and Arsenal’s saviour
• He is capable of the most sublime football
• There is a touch of the street fighter about him
• He is a fans’ favourite
• He scored the best team goal that anyone will ever see
• Arsene Wenger has described him as one of the most talented young players he has ever worked with
• He has spent the last three seasons either injured or returning from injury
• He is no longer a favourite of all the fans and some don’t see him as an automatic starter either for The Arsenal, or, more strangely, for England

Not so long ago there would have been little debate about his quality, which would have been seen as top, top, or world class. He was our very own Superjack, and when much else in The Arsenal world was slightly rocky, that at least was certain. But now it would seem it isn’t, or at least it wasn’t to the person I was talking to yesterday, nor indeed to Stuart Pearce who pronounced that Jack wouldn’t kick a ball in the World Cup. I happen to think they are wrong, and maintain my belief that he is an outstanding talent, but the point of this post is not to argue his, or any other’s case (that can safely be left to Twitter and the comments section)but rather to explore what lies behind the judgments that are made about a player’s ability.

Clearly the proof of the pudding is in the playing, but often it is more than that, especially as only a very small number get to see players play for a full 90 minutes with their own eyes. For those that watch whole matches on the TV their view tends to be determined by the shots the cameramen choose to take, and by and large those shots follow the ball. If, say, a quarter of the value of a player to his team is what he does when he isn’t directly and immediately involved in the play, then it is clear that judgments are not based on the full story. Given that even more of those judgements are based on recorded highlights, and that those highlights rely heavily on editorial decision making, with all the bias that such selections inevitably entail, then we can see that most fans’ view of a player is already compromised. Throw into the mix the comments of pundits, who may or may not have an axe to grind (old allegiances run deep, and few past players are totally in love with their modern successors) and suddenly the claim that player X is not world class can be seen to be distorted.

The judgements become even more tainted of course when assessing the value of a transfer target, or when the player in question is being debated in the school yard (yes, I know school yards no longer exist, but what is a comment on football without an appropriate cliché), because then a kind of macho one-upmanship comes into play. Signing Vela is of absolutely no use to that kind of fan. He will not cost nearly enough money (anything under £25m these days is seen as a “Lol, poverty”), he does not come from a well-known club, he has already been dismissed as a failure once in his Arsenal lifetime, his YouTube videos are a little underwhelming, and perhaps most crucially of all, he isn’t talked about in reverential terms by those pundits who are persuaded to talk so glowingly by the agents they spend so much time with. If the dismissal of Vela can be accompanied with a sneering comment about Wenger dithering about in the bargain basement again then so much the better, especially if the twitterliverer of that comment can at the same time proclaim that only he properly understands just what players Arsenal need to even get top 4 again.

So Vela has no chance, and I suspect that a little like Giroud, even if he does come he will spend his life being criticised for what and who he is not , rather than celebrated for what he is and what he does offer. It apparently doesn’t matter that he has improved significantly, because whilst it is apparently fine to say that a player has regressed or hasn’t lived up to his potential, it is not allowed for anyone to improve. And it is that aspect that I find saddest of all, because I believe the biggest obstacle anyone can have to living their life successfully is to settle for a fixed and pessimistic mind-set. The whole basis of coaching is to help a player unlock his potential and find improvement, the whole point of training is to make progress from where you were yesterday. The best coaches dare to see the potential in players, the outstanding ones know how to help them unlock it. Choosing to adopt a growth mind-set is the most positive difference you can make to your life, whether you are a professional footballer, or gainfully employed in some other walk of life or simply waiting to leave school and to find a job that really suits you – or even, like me, just a student of the game.

If Vela returns he will be exciting, as will Balotelli (and the thought of him coming just makes me smile – I don’t think he will, but it would be kind of fun to see what happens if he does, and there is, in truth, only one manager on the planet who I would trust to get the best out of him).

Eighteen months ago, when Jack Wilshere was driving The Arsenal forward to a Third Round Cup victory over Swansea few would have imagined it was Aaron Ramsey who would make the most progress over the next year or so – but he did, and it was due to his courage and determination, but also to the unshakeable and visionary faith of his manager. I would not offer you any odds at all on Arsene Wenger helping Jack, or any of the others he chooses to sign, unleashing that potential too. And while this may well come back to haunt me, I do want to finish by saying that fitness permitting, I believe that Jack Wilshere will be as good a player as we have ever seen at The Emirates.

Today’s post was penned by  @foreverheady

This interesting post is by our friend Sav.

My first memories of  ‘the world cup’ are from 1990.

To this date I am not sure if its a ‘real’ memory, or one of those you imagine you had by piecing together what you were told of the events that transpired.  As I was only 4 years of age, the details are vague regardless.

Well the stage was set.

World Cup Final.

West Germany vs Argentina.  A rematch to boot!

My father and his brothers were watching the match with such an intensity as I had not yet seen in men.  They were literally on the edge or over the top of their seats, barely able to contain themselves at the prospect of this, football’s golden trophy.   And all I wanted to do was watch cartoons.  Well, we had one of those old TVs, the ones before remotes – and I edged ever closer, eyes flitting between spectacle and spectator, waiting for my chance to change the channel.  My nerve broke and I went for it and changed the channel – only a split second passed and I changed it back as they let out a roar of anguish!  I wanted to watch cartoons during the world cup final.  To this date I am amazed at my utter lack of perspective.

Well by the time 1994 popped up, I had started to follow football.  And by 1998 even I could see that Zidane fellow was quite good.  2002 was during my exams but I remember that goal for Ronaldinho and the final that Brazil won.  The last worthy Brazilian side in my opinion.  2006 came and I stood amazed as France somehow did not win.  Everyone points to Zidane but the turning point was Viera going off (cramp wasn’t it?) – his driving runs from midfield were opening up the Italians.  It was only a matter of time.  Bloody football, eh.  2010 finally came and this time I saw Africa host a world cup.

And after you have indulged me with my incoherent rambling, I shall endeavour to get to my point – eventually.

I am a South African by birth and as such I – along with all of Africa – found great pride to see the 2010 World Cup awarded to South Africa.  I also found it very interesting.  Brazil 2014,  Russia 2018,  Qatar 2022.  These appointments only confirmed a trend.  A trend it seems started under Havelange and carried on by Blatter.

FIFA is an odd beast.  I will admit that I have not gone into in-depth research – but altruism and idealism married to corruption is an odd combination.

I shall outline my contention first and then attempt to show evidence.  Basically, I have come to believe that FIFA under Blatter has a specific goal – maybe not the main goal, but specific nonetheless – of integration.  Integration of regions into the global fraternity.  Getting awarded a world cup does not just affect that particular country – its affects the entire region.  National pride, regional pride – but more than that, a sense of  ‘we have made it’  –  ‘we have arrived’, as it were.

To truly understand why this matters to developing regions requires a history lesson that is not really necessary.  It is also a very touchy topic.  The gist is that Asia, Africa and the other developing regions were demoralised.  There was – and perhaps still is – a very real sense that they were/are not equal to those fortunate enough to be born in western Europe or America (or Canada/NZ/Australia – lets not forget the Commonwealth).

The developing world was and is growing economically but they had need of a morale boost, a way for the everyman (and woman) to feel they belonged in the global community.  A question of belonging, of self confidence. Besides FIFA, I do not see a single organisation making any attempt to address this pressing issue that is so important to the future of all humanity.

East Asia got their boost in 2002.

Africa was recognised as being capable in 2010.

Brazil is an emerging an economic power and 2014 confirms that status to their people and perhaps is a message of hope to all South America.

Russia hosting the cup in 2018 is an indication that they belong in Europe and not ostracised – although goodness knows how the recent events in Ukraine effect all that.

And 2022 in Qatar.  CORRUPTION!!  They bought it!!  Complain, complain, complain.  What balls does it take to give the world cup to a muslim country in the era of  ‘the war on terror’.  The Arab world, the Muslim world, has been villified from the shores of the Atlantic to the plains of Pakistan.  What does a world cup in Qatar – a stable country amidst an unstable region – say to the region.  Surely, a message of hope and of integration and confidence that the region will one day overcome its current strifes.

What’s the point?

Well, I see a trend.  Sure, FIFA are looking at expanding markets and building revenue.  But what about the people?  How do they feel to host a world cup?

In 2002 I was in high school in New Zealand and many of my good friends were from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Singapore, let alone Indonesia and Thailand.  They took immense pride in the Football World Cup being played in east Asia.  It was as if they had been accepted into the global fraternity in a very real and tangible way.  Shown to be equals in a way that the everyday man and woman on the street could appreciate.

2010 in South Africa was the same.  And now Brazil 2014.  Although, I daresay Brazil’s organisers have been somewhat the architects of their own demise.  But the trend is there.  Football as integration.  Football as a tool for global equality.

FIFA have previous in these matters.  Germany won the world cup against Hungary after WW2.  It gave a confidence boost to a demoralised West Germany.  Beaten in war, all their young men dead or in a gulag – the country cut in half.  How badly did they need a ‘win’, any win?

It would seem that winning the world cup is a great confidence booster for a nation short on confidence.  And even being awarded a host of a world cup brings about self confidence for entire continents.

What do you think?

Well it appears that Arsene has passed on the opportunity to re-sign the prodigal son. His most likely destination being the bus depot (That’s Chelsea where they park buses-oh forget it then)

Here is what I had to say last week

“The great Cesc Fàbregas debate rages on, fueled by idiots like me who tweet about it and write blogs about it.

Will he leave Barcelona ?

Do we want him ?

Do we need him ?

Is there a buyout clause-how much is it ?

Does Arsene want him ?

Would he disrupt the team spirit ?

Should we go for him just to stop someone else getting him ?

Would he “kill” Jack ,  Aaron, AOC  or anyone else ?

Is he injury prone ?

Is he slow ?

And on and on and on go the questions.

Just like the Arense in/out debate, there is a full spectum of opinions. The fan base is divided .

Least we forget , this is a player that forced his way out of the club.

Arsene did not want to sell him and he had a long contract. The team had been built around him.

Arsene had trusted him to lead us forward in a very difficult time. He was key to the future of the team and the club. We were forced to sell him at less than the perceived market value. It was him who did the forcing.

At the time it was a crushing blow to everyone at the club.

He knew his importance . He knew the love the fans and staff felt for him, yet he forced his way out.

I don’t care a jot that he wanted to go home, win things and play with his mates. He let everyone who loves the club down. He chose to do that. Him, and him alone.

I care even less that he is savvy enough to bang on about his love for Arsenal, for me its just rhetoric. Its like a man who leaves his loyal and loving wife and goes back to his first love. Its poor form and he let us down.

He let me down, ! I was gutted .

Did he go on strike? I don’t know ! No one outside the club does. But I do know that Nasri played and he didn’t. Yet two days after he left he was playing with his first love, running around like a spring lamb.

Am I bitter? You bet your life I am !

However.

He is a fabulous player. He would be a huge asset to us now.

He could cover for Ozil and Ramsey(or alternate ,if you would rather) .

He would make us more dangerous going forward, score and assist as a given.

I believe that before he left he was the best player in the league, he was that good. He would be up there again I have no doubt.

Still, until the questions asked at the top are answered , its a redundant debate.

For the record though, if buying him did not adversely effect the purchase of players in positions that we have a greater need , I would be happy to see him back at the club.

My hypocrisy knows no bounds.”

It looks like Arsene has answered some of those questions and the conclusions he has drawn dont suit a huge swath of the fan base.

Many want the little Catalan cherub back , and cant see any excuse for the club not returning their sweetheart to their loving embrace.

For eight years almost all of us ,man, woman and child adored him. And why not ? He played his heart out with every different set of players that passed through the club.

Sometimes he had players around him that could help him mount a decent challenge on cups and titles. sometimes he had do drag lesser players behind him. But he always gave his best.

He loved us and we loved him.

Then he decided he wanted to go home. Let me repeat that , he wanted to go home

When he wasn’t simply bid farewell and good luck he made it happen. He forced his way out.

Under normal circumstances that would have been enough for most of us to feel sufficiently betrayed to lose our love for him. But  three summers ago were anything but normal circumstances.

Three summers ago we were in full divided camp mode.

People wanted to blame Arsene , Ivan, Stan and the board for anything they could.

Who could blame our little Spanish darling for wanting out of a club like ours ? They said !

In other words he reaped the benefit of the prevailing mood.

Instead of blaming him for leaving us in the lurch, he became justification to attack Arsene and the club.

In my view, he made his escape relatively unscathed.

Finally (well for today at least) If he ships up at a hated rival, I wont blame him for that. I don’t care what he has said about loving Arsenal and hating others. I don’t think he can be accuse of hypocrisy. If we have had the chance to sign him, and we have passed, he is free to peruse his career anywhere that is best for him. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but hey-ho.

Good luck too him (bar twice a year).

Today we have a guest post from Seebs  @arse_or_brain

The ARSENAL collective has long been able to stretch its tentacles across all terrains of this greatly undulating earth, only now in greatly enhanced numbers. So there is no surprise that opinions will differ from time to time however the vastness of the differences is surprising. I’m not sure whether its nature or nurture, as in many cases, but do know the so called civil war has not just two sides , people are approaching from all angles.

There are many complete aresholes that just like moaning and would moan if we won the league every year, these are just very sad people and some of these even give the youth team shit. To slag off sixteen year olds that are often playing against a sides on average a year older and who are brought from all over Europe on big wages is lunacy. Our hale end graduates should be supported at all cost as their assent to the top is more difficult now than ever.
There are another group of the unsatisfied who been disadvantaged by the PL and sky and how football changed after Hillsborough and its acceptance for corporate rather than your traditional fan. This group are angry with the commercial world but their anger unfortunately is misdirected. The hatred of the ordinary fans by the government of the early eighties meant they could use all crisis and disasters to completely change the face of the working man’s game. The early interpretations of the Taylor report were designed to fade football away but as always the game was ready to fight back. When you are at your lowest you are susceptible to all sorts of evil and the devil that appeared was capitalism and the sale of the games soul. I do have some sympathy with this group until they dig at the manager, if they look at the bigger picture he is actually the salmon swimming upstream. The clubs status has depended on the success of the spawning and fertilization of the great mans ideas.
Then you have the group who have only seen the PL and are comparing Arsene with well….Arsene, obviously forgetting that early Arsene didn’t have to contend with the obstacles recent Arsene has had to climb. They assume money has no bearing on football and often use the old its still 11 v 11 and you still have to get them playing as a team. The trophies round the center of the stadium bear no relation to them, they believe chelski are the most successful London club and have always been in the top division. Apparently Ryan Giggs had played since the beginning of time and BoB Wilson just some ex-player.
Occasionally you will get the good old ARSENAL brigade who believe we were always the biggest club in the world and the gaps between the thirties to 48/53 and then to 71 and then to 89/91 and then to 98 just don’t exist. While Herbert Chapman’s legacy was to make us recognizable to even tribes in darkest Peru ( Patrick Barclays latest book is testament to this and well worth a read) the regular silverware and innovations stopped with the war. “THE ARSENAL” still had massive standing without ever really collecting the glory.
Obviously one of the worst groups, the ones who will believe absolutely anything tv, radio or the red tops tell them. After reading the headline Arsene Wenger ate my hamster you’re not going to think he’s a nice bloke are you. I hear the agenda biased media load the gun only for some lunatic with a red and white label to run around firing it off in all directions. Strange how their ideas always come just after a media suggestion although they think it is completely unique. Maybe there is something in this conception lark after all. Once again I have sympathy for this group but for a completely different reason…. it just worries me they have the vote as recent elections have shown.
As Passenal has previously commented some people will go to the game just to moan and some have literally been brought up this way, in the years since the move fans think this is a natural way to support your club they have been taught it, the more you criticize the more knowledgeable you are about your club and therefore the bigger supporter you are. If you shout out your not fit to wear the shirt it appears you have the knowledge to know what players have worn it in the past and you care so much more than any player ever could. This I believe is an unfortunate by-product of the move and the new entrants to regular ARSENAL whether they had been fans for a day or years. A different dynamic was definitely born with the new stadium.

After years of not going to away games the first day I went back to old Trafford I couldn’t believe they didn’t sing, it was deadly quite until they scored. chelski couldn’t even sell out their ground in Romans first years and so really in a way we shouldn’t be surprised about the discontents at our place however when you managed to acquire tickets to 75% of Wembley and get outsung from the start by a couple of northerners that’s when it gets embarrassing. When I first went to away games it felt like I was amongst a small group of gladiators fighting a massive army and our voice and our songs were weapons, even when the bottles came reigning in. To be outsung by a small group of other supporters was unthinkable.     Fights among ARSENAL fans were reported at both final and semi final and although I thought this was a modern phenomena the ARSENAL historians at A.I.S.A have told me different as apparently the gents between the wars were partial to fisticuffs.
One final thought is the sudden change of attitude of those fans who said silverware was more important than fourth place until our defeat to everton and the abyss was being starred in to, amazingly Thursday nights didn’t seem so palatable.