Come now, sw. We've all had a drink.
Perhaps you can help me out as to why the following critique is the ranting of a half-wit:
Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain was offered no new contract, or contract talks during the last year - the penultimate one of his contract. Partly because of this, it is reported, by the end of the season he had made up his mind that he wanted to leave the club and made this quite clear on a number of occasions. He also made it clear that he wished to play in midfield.
At this point AW suddenly announced that AOC was one of the most important players in the club, and for England, and wanted him to be a key component of his future plans, although he did not mention whether these plans included AOC playing in central midfield. AOC said again that he wanted to leave.
On the pitch, our right wing back was played out of position (and underwhelmed), and our shiny new left wing back (who looked good in pre-season) was played in central defence (with another left wingback as two of our remaining CBs are not good enough for the squad) so that Ox could play as right wingback. We lost the match and the next game the response was to drop Kolasinac (and Lacassette) and keep the want-away Ox, whose performances had not been too super, in the team in a position he doesn't want to play. We got spanked four nil and it might easily have been seven.
Now it seems AW has accepted that Ox is not going to stay and agreed to sell him to Chelsea, but they won't play him in midfield either so he refuses to go there, so we offered him to Liverpool who aren't offering us enough money, and now we have a day and a half to sort something out.
All this for a player who has said he wanted to leave while last season was still going on.
None of this suggest mental illness to me :shrug:
I'm just tired of the hyperbole and intemperate language. It feeds off itself. There are people on this board who have been calling aw a ***** for 10 years - now they're becoming apoplectic.
Like Antifa, Trump and identity politics, we live at a time when it would do a great deal of good if everyone sat down and thought quietly for a moment about exactly why they are so outraged.
This £180 grand is a figure plucked from someone's imagination. You have absolutely no idea if it is anywhere near true.
You have absolutely no idea what he will want from liverpool or Chelsea.
You have absolutely no idea what Liverpool would pay him.
You've just put a load of random imaginings together and used them as a stick with which to beat the club :shrug:
Other than this, your argument is cogent, reasoned and entirely factual.
He stated quite clearly that he is not going to retire and that he will either be here or somewhere else managing a football team.
What we can be reasonably sure of
1) He is motivated to manage
2) He has no other interests
3) He has no one at home.
4) His new contract came with a pretty good raise
5) He easily won the battle of the restructure with Gazidis
What we can (possibly) infer
1) His reputation has taken a dent from his last contract renewal to now.
2) He had no other offers from anyone else.
3) He has free reign to do what he wants on the football field without interference
the above, if true, would make the decision quite easy tbh.
That's fair enough, but it doesn't invalidate the critique, which just focuses on one player's contract situation, and there are many others. If a highly paid and powerful executive at any other company presided over such a scenario, he would surely recieve some flak.
I personally have no wish to get angry about football. It ain't worf it. Especially when there are more important things to worry about, like a new leak in the flat. I did get a little bit stressed watching the Liverpool match though, It wasn't pretty.
Noted.
However, and I say this as a relatively new quinquagenarian and one who normally can brush over football as being just the game it is - having seen the game on sunday and watching other issues unfold at the club we all support a small amount of "little girl knickerwetting" is almost understandable though obviously not cool.
You kind of skipped over the use of the word allegedly didnt you. Well done, you.
I actually hoped we had deliberately offered him loads to **** up a chance of him going to Liverpool as part of some spiteful, childish revenge for their stupid comment over the whole suarez offer. I had hoped we had served a stone cold dish of revenge.
I doubt it. That would require planning :)
Do you not sonetimes suspect, though, that the club's interests might - just might - be better served by a change? Two more years of this can only hurt the club's reputation. We've always applied certain principles to players about this being The Arsenal and us having a certain reputation and image to maintain. If a manager's continued presence is threatening to tarnish those things (whether it's his fault or not) should we not apply the same principle?
I don't see much hysterical little girl knickerwetting.
I see a bunch of people who support Arsenal Football Club asking valid questions and making valid points, supported by reasonable assumptions and facts, about the performance of the manager of Arsenal Football Club.
I then see these same people being accused of hysterical little girl knickerwetting. :shrug:
What this thread really needs now is Monty.
Charles has done his best to be the counterpoint but his heart really isn't in it. Not really in it.
Monty would bring a new level of obsequiousness and we might really be able to kick on from here.
:shrug: Don't try to drag me into your little boys' pissing competition. You lads can carry on trying to outdo each other in the extremity of your language to decry every aspect of our club, and I hope that saying the naughty words gives you the little chubby you seek.
I shall remain, dignified, on the sidelines, watching you all with a small, supercilious smirk. I call it 'doing a Harvey'.