Arteta Jumps Ship, Luck Of The Draw, Geopolitics & More: Weekly Thoughts

Mikel Arteta to Arsenal

By the time you read this Mikel Arteta will most likely be the new manager of Arsenal, unless the two clubs involved are still haggling over compensation. I’ve read a lot on Twitter about City being too soft yet again in letting Arteta go to Arsenal. It ties in with the feeling that City are soft with everything they do, most notably in allowing nasty journalists to write whatever they want about the club, and our failure to ban such journalists (most of whom don’t come anywhere near the ground) from the club premises. But whilst we are all a bit in the dark (for now) about what Arteta is allowed to do according to the terms of his contract, there is really no point in City standing in his way. They will appreciate the opportunity that he has been afforded, and like a footballer demanding a transfer, it is usually best for all parties to accept the request. The terms of his contract may well show Arsenal to have acted in an unacceptable manner, and City may well be in their rights to demand a seven-figure compensation fee, but that does not change the fact that they cannot force an employee to stay, and nor should they. Having an unhappy employee helps no one. It may even help City one day to have Arteta gain work experience elsewhere.

As for the support staff that may or may not follow him, the same applies. City are not a soft touch for not making staff stay, not that they can anyway I imagine. It’s getting tedious reading it to be honest. Staff move like this all the time, especially so in any other industry in the world. Football is unique of course, but beyond the different issues of managers and players swapping clubs, it is more normal when discussing background staff and all others that keep the club functioning on a daily basis. And if some support staff want to go with Arteta, they have a right to. You wouldn’t be calling City soft if they allowed you to change jobs as you desired. Why they’d want to go with him is the real puzzle here, but maybe they’d just prefer to live in London. Anyway, feel free to take our physios.

Contract clauses could have prevented this I guess. Clauses that stipulate that staff leaving for managerial posts cannot raid the club they leave, but I’m generally OK with allowing free movement and for staff that want to leave doing so. The club will get someone else in and will survive. They may well take the staff of another club, and assumingly no one will shake their heads at the softness of the raided club. Still, the news of City being blindsided by this whole affair is rather baffling. After all, we all knew Arteta was in the running for the Arsenal job since the day after Unai Emery was dismissed, so has no one at City thought to ask him what his intentions were? Pep says he has spoken to him about it, so who knows the real truth here? As always we rely on conflicting and varied reports. This is a loss for City though, no doubt about it, though there is every chance of someone else stepping in and allowing City to carry on as before with no major impact. After all, last year Jurgen Klopp lost Zeljko Buvac, and it does not appear to have hindered results that badly. Far from it. But City’s success comes not just from the manager and his squad. It is truly a team effort, and Arteta is thought to be a huge influence on team affairs. He is key to training and to many of the little tactical tweaks made during matches. Nevertheless,  there are always pros and cons to such a move. A new assistant brings new ideas. The team has not been firing on all cylinders, and like Alex Ferguson used to do, rotating assistants can keep things fresh and innovative on the training field. Domenec Torrent took with him a certain expertise in set pieces that City certainly lack right now, at both ends of the pitch, and a new guy might help on that front. But probably not Torrent himself unfortunately.  Whatever the truth of the situation, we do not know the ins and outs of the contract Arteta had at City, the relationship and possible gentlemen’s agreements he had with Pep, and what has been said and done. Thus, without the full facts, perhaps it’s best to lay off assuming City have just rolled over and had their tummies tickled once more. If a journalist said something similar, we’d be all over them.

As for Arteta, he is both unlucky and lucky to be offered and take the Arsenal job. Unlucky to be taking over Arsenal in their current state, and I am not hopeful for his chances to be honest. But in a way it was an offer he could not refuse, and this relates to how he is lucky – by getting the chance to manage such a big club without any prior experience. Good luck with that, you’ll need it.

Arsenal & Politics

Manchester City’s board members will no doubt agree, that Arsenal have not covered themselves in glory recently. After Mesut Ozil spoke out about China’s treatment of its Uighur Muslim population, as he has every right to do, the club decided to release a comment commenting that it remains apolitical, and refused to back their player’s stance. That’s not surprising, and I wouldn’t expect City’s owners to do any different. This is what happens when clubs are businesses above all else. Arsenal simply could not afford to show any morals, and plenty will accuse our owners of the same. After all, it seems weird that criticism of City’s owners revolves around where they are from, rather than dedicating more attention to the part-stake that originates in China, from a company with clear state links. What the Chinsese state gets up to is of far greater concern than anything that the UAE rulers do, not that it is a competition.

And this is where Liverpool enter the story. I have no problem with them playing in Qatar, it is not their battle to fight, and it is not hypocritical of them to swap hotels due to migrant worker concerns. But the point is, you can attack Qatar et al from outside with nowhere near the comeback. Thus when Nicholas McGeehan inevitably piped up to compare the actions of Liverpool and Arsenal, he rather missed the point. The economic and “other” power of China clearly prohibits most from speaking out, because of the inevitable retribution that will occur. The Houston Rockets discovered this, and Arsenal would if they spoke out. Arsenal could and probably should have said nothing, as they did when Hector Bellerin offered his pre-election thoughts. Premier League clubs receive about £9m per season from China for TV rights, but the fall-out from criticising China goes beyond mere numbers. Its economy will soon dominate globally, if it does not already, and its economic might underpinned by autocratic rule and a 1+ billion population gives it free reign to bully, pressure, lobby and gets its way on a regular basis, and make anyone who crosses them pay the penalty. It’s not right, it’s depressing, but it is how the world works, and football is no different it seems to the rest of the world. Even as a City supporter, I would prefer football stripped of its enormous wealth, but it will never happen, so it is pointless even mentioning it. No big club will speak up against China, even if you think they should, especially a club that has taken money from the Rwandan regime. In fact, no one of real influence will, and China will continue along the same path.

Liverpool and lambs to the slaughter.

And so Liverpool’s kids managed to cover themselves in glory whilst also getting thrashed, if media reports are to be believed. That’s quite the achievement. Liverpool were faced with quite the dilemma once they reached the quarter final of the Carabao Cup. And right from the get-go, it should be stated that this is not the same as the dilemma faced by Manuel Pellegrini when City had to face Chelsea and Dynamo Kiev in quick succession. The FA Cup match was on the Sunday, the Champions League match on the Wednesday. Pellegrini was understandably outraged at the decision to move the game from the Saturday, and the FA’s repeated failure to help teams in European competition, but I am still torn to this day whether what he did was acceptable. Throwing youth players to the wolves certainly wasn’t pleasant to watch, though the team is probably not as weak as your memory may suggest. It was nevertheless a team that stood precious little chance of getting a result at Stamford Bridge, even if they put up a good fight for a while, before fading.

The situation with Liverpool is different, and I do have sympathy for Jurgen Klopp, if such a thing is possible. This situation could have been easily anticipated even before the season began. Klopp could have split the teams and ferried the players left behind to Qatar in time for the final, but with a few injuries currently, it was never really viable. The truth is more likely that the whole affair played perfectly into Klopp’s hands. After all, after discussions ended, it was Liverpool that proposed and thus agreed to play both games this week. Klopp doesn’t want to be in the Carabao Cup, and was probably privately seething when they won their penalty shoot-out against Arsenal. He doesn’t care for it, with bigger prizes available, and this allowed him a route out before the duress of a two-legged semi-final. He pretends to be angry, the club become martyrs, and Aston Villa get to a semi-final. Everyone’s a winner. Especially Harvey Elliott, who proved beyond any doubt that he is better than Messi.

Manchester City v Real Madrid

Not surprisingly, City’s last two cup draws have not been pounced upon by the conspiracy theorists of Twitter. City’s “luck” has run out, and Real Madrid will be an immense test. In an article we released yesterday, Dan Larsen argued here that the draw could actually benefit City.
I am not inclined to agree, apart from the fact that beating Real Madrid will give the players the confidence boost and belief that perhaps they have lacked in the past. And as City tend to lose the games we least expect, then who knows? The past few years, English teams and the away goals rule have proved to be the clubs greatest foes.
But no, for me it is not a benefit to get tough draws. And if, as the argument goes,  tough games prepare the side for more tough games, and thus increasing the chances of finally winning the tournament, then how do City prepare for this tie, after a relatively gentle group stage? Being top seeds prevents such preparation as there’s less chance of a glamour tie in the group stage. The argument works by getting a top team in the group game, City get practice for harder games ahead, assuming they qualify. But by getting a tough team in the Round of 16, that argument rather fritters away, and as top seeds, the group stage rarely prepares teams for what lies ahead.

February/March/April.

Pep is never going to “put the kids out” for league matches if the title is beyond the club’s reach. So please stop suggesting it. Thanks in advance.
#scrooge