David Dein's own Goal

gunners-need-steel · Post by **gunners-need-steel** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 5:16 pm

Magic Hat wrote:How about giving part of his Â£75 million to the board? The reason Dein is blamed for Sven (good choice, way too high wages) is he recommended Sven as he did Scolari, the Fa just bungled it badly rather then Dein though, the two managers were good choices.

Dein has a decent record with picking managers and makes a good Director of Football but getting who Arsene tells him too and I thank him for that but it needs more. Like checking the background of your buyers and good plans like Ashburton over Wembley.

Common now, Magic .. how is he supposed to hand this money over ? In what context ? .. convene a meeting and say: ' hey folks I made a mistake here, and I will now hand over all this money I earned for selling my shares just so I can prove to you that I really do mean well ... ' ...

I am sure Usmanov himself will not be wanting a wave of negative publicity, and would be eager to pull out .. which all elads me to believe thata hasty retreat will happen .. soonish ..

Wearing my more sceptic hat, frankly I am wondering whether this is not awell laid out plan to get silent stan in ... ie, the outcry would be so loud against usmanov, that silent stan acquiring their stake would become an extremely attractive alternative ... these guys are too smart to be caught with their pants down like this ...

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:36 pm

excuse me a minute, into-the-red and cus-geezer while u aim the next stone at David Dein .. wont be long now, and u can go back to ur new found DD-bashing hobby ...

Its common in society for the masses to not think for themselves and to just flow with the tide .. its the DD bashing season, so some jump in and try to outbash the others ...

hmmm.....new found hobby? obviously haven't been paying much attention to this forum over the summer because I have been carrying the 'good riddance' argument since April. For me it's been David Dein bashing season since 1992.

As for not thinking for oneself, well the pro-Dein camp on this forum tend be 'well Dein says he has the best interests of the club at heart so it must be true then'.

Really independent minded that!

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:53 pm

I wont even comment on the ridiculous comments about whether AW has been great .. or whether GG has been great and who has been greater .. the context of that argument is nonsensical, and I dont see how it applies to the current topic.

What??? Point out where I questioned whether Wenger has been a great manager, or that George was greater than he, at least bother to read my comments properly.

The argument put forward is that Dein's appointment is the single greatest thing that's ever happened to Arsenal and therefore the man is beyond criticism. That's ignoring that Arsenal were already in a relatively strong position in the mid 1990s and the success that followed was not a miraculous about turn in fortune for the club.

Arsenal have been in a strong position in English football since 1987, the wheels were set in motion by George Graham, Dein had no part in his appointment and no real input in the reason for his success and therefore is taking a grossly disproportionate amount of credit.

Anyways, seriously, give the man a break .. if he has made a mistake/miscalculation, we are interested in seeing what he does now to remedy the situation ...

Do me a favour. Dein is many things, naieve he ain't.

He would not have handed his most valuable commodity over to anyone. He was careful enough to negotiate a role for himself while selling his share, he wouldn't have done so without looking into Uzmanov's background.

Magic Hat · Post by **Magic Hat** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:59 am

Common now, Magic .. how is he supposed to hand this money over ? In what context ? .. convene a meeting and say: ' hey folks I made a mistake here, and I will now hand over all this money I earned for selling my shares just so I can prove to you that I really do mean well ... ' ...

Not all of it, even just a small bit, tell the club, by press if needs be "I will give Â£30 million (just an example here doesn't have to be that much) to the club, no strings attached to do with as they please. If they refuse, it goes to charity"

Wearing my more sceptic hat, frankly I am wondering whether this is not awell laid out plan to get silent stan in ... ie, the outcry would be so loud against usmanov, that silent stan acquiring their stake would become an extremely attractive alternative ... these guys are too smart to be caught with their pants down like this ...

Given this wouldn't be the first time Dein has been caught out and that it seems Dein got kicked away from our USa shareholder, I would be surprised if it was such ae ploy.

donaldo · Post by **donaldo** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 9:59 am

To all the Dein bashers please answer me this one question.Which other members of the board in 1996 had even heard of Arsene let alone wanted him to become manager?That was why Dein was a visionary.Remember the headlines Arsene Who?.I want one of the Dein Bashers to tell me if it hadn"t been for Dein would Arsene Wenger be our manager.

I not saying Dein is an angel. I am just judging him on the facts of what has happened on the pitch since he joined the board.And no one can deny that success.According to the likes of Cus Geezer Dein has done nothing at all for the club,which is just bollocks.Even if all he did was bring Arsene to the club that was not good enough for you Cus.

As for the Â£75 million he has made selling his shares where were the other buisnessmen queuing up to buy shares in the club in 1983.When Hill-Wood advised him against buying shares in the club saying "Only a madman would invest in a football club" Wrong again Mr Hill-Wood wrong again

into the red · Post by **into the red** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:08 am

Donaldo, we all know Dein brought Arsene to the club, and we are all grateful to him for that. The subsequent success was down to Arsene, and it is he who deserves the plaudits. However, because Dein can claim the credit for that decision, a long time ago now, it most definitely does not make him right about a takeover of the club, the principal beneficiary of which will be David Dein. Arsene does not seem keen either, there is no evidence at all that it is required, or that it will lead to greater success. In fact it could be a very bad thing. Dein is not Arsenal, though he loves to give the impression that he is.
If anything the heart of the club is Arsene, and I would trust his judgement completely. He sees no reason to rock the boat, he does not want high roller type owners, he is very conscious of the history and soul of the club, and does not want to see it scrapped and sold off to the highest bidder. If the club requires more cash in the future, there are plenty of ways, given Arsenal's strong postion, that that could happen, without selling us down the river to russian gangsters or people who have no knowledge or appreciation of the club's history.
Dein has let his massive ego and his pique at being thrown out get the better of him. He is not essential to Arsenal, Wenger is. Far from being the man to keep Arsene at the club, I can quite easily imagine a very principled man like Arsene walking away if unscrupulous odious racketeers were to get control of the club, for their own political and financial reasons. Why on earth take the risk of destabilising the club now, just as things are looking very good for the future? There is no gain, and everything to lose.

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:14 am

To all the Dein bashers please answer me this one question.Which other members of the board in 1996 had even heard of Arsene let alone wanted him to become manager?That was why Dein was a visionary.Remember the headlines Arsene Who?.

Would you like me to ask them personally? unfortunately I do not know them personally so I can't.

As for myself, I personally had heard of Arsene Wenger. The bright young English managerial prospect in the mid 1990s was Glenn Hoddle, who was appointed England manager by the time Wenger came to Arsenal and in numerous interviews at the time had cited Wenger as the biggest influence on his career, also rumours that Hoddle would bring him in as technical advisor.

His Monaco side, which included Klinsmann and Weah had also reached the semis of the champions league in 1994 against AC Milan which was shown live on ITV at the time.

The newspapers headlines may have been 'Arsene who', but then again they were mainly tabloid newspapers so why expect any depth of knowledge there.

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:42 am

Far from being the man to keep Arsene at the club, I can quite easily imagine a very principled man like Arsene walking away if unscrupulous odious racketeers were to get control of the club, for their own political and financial reasons.

I agree with this totally.

I believe the central reason that Wenger has stayed with Arsenal for so long is the level of autonomy a manager gets in England, in comparison to say clubs like Real and Barca.

Uzmanov is a friend of Abramovich and a very Abramovich like character. The only dilution of English boardroom attitude to managerial decisions has been at Chelsea, where Roman has allegedly been interefering with Jose's transfer dealings, e.g. Ballack/Shevchenko.

What makes us think that Bertie Big Bollocks from Russia isn't going to want to emulate his buddy Roman after a few bad results, or if we fail to win the Champions League in the next few seasons? I can't think of anything that would be more likely to make Wenger book the next flight out of Heathrow.

And all thanks to the man who takes the credit for him being here.

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:55 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ars%C3%A8n ... troversies

This is interesting.

After Bruce Rioch resigned in August 1996, GÃ©rard Houllier, the then technical director of the French Football Federation, recommended Wenger to David Dein in the summer of 1996

So despite being Wenger's friend for many years he needed the opinion of Gerard Houllier before appointing him, what about his own great superior knowledge of the game in comparison to the rest of the board?

*Although I admit Wikipedia is far from a reliable source. After all Bruce Rioch didn't exactly resign did he?

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:01 pm

When Hill-Wood advised him against buying shares in the club saying "Only a madman would invest in a football club" Wrong again Mr Hill-Wood wrong again

So Hill Wood is a buffoon for failing to see the potential of satellite television, which wasn't going to be launched for another six years?

into the red · Post by **into the red** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:26 pm

Also let us not forget that it was Arsenal that saved Dein from financial disaster. Fiszman bought his shares, lent him money after his sugar business went down, and they kept him on the board. So Dein has far more to thank Arsenal for than they have him. And how does he repay the board? Try and engineer a coup with Kroenke behind the board's back. Then Kroenke won't ally with Dein because Dein demands control, so he has to run off and find the first 'no questions asked' pimp he can. If you wanted to take control you could have hardly made a bigger mess of it than Dein has, given that he was in a far more favourable position before he tried manipulating things in his favour. It beggars belief that anyone can think this is a fit person to run the club. Arsenal have made Dein financially, his job enabled him to be influential at the FA and in Europe. Yet he chucked it all away, and now comes slithering back to regain what he had already, but with highly dubious backers. Arsenal were the making of Dein, he should be down on his hands and knees thanking them, instead of trying to upset the entire enterprise. And if he is so great, why has he made so many enemies in the club and at the FA?

donaldo · Post by **donaldo** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:13 pm

As i said in an earlier post I dont think Dein is an angel. But he is not a devil either.Its like the scene in the Life of Brian when they ask "what did the Romans every do for us".

Yes everything that has happened since 1996 on the pitch is down to the great Arsene Wenger but i hate to keep repeating myself WENGER WOULD NOT BE OUR MANAGER IF IT WASN"T FOR DEIN.

Dein is successful because Arsenal are successful.And we are successful because we have the best manager in Europe who was appointed by David Dein. I rest my case.

into the red · Post by **into the red** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:28 pm

Er, that's not a case, it's blind faith.

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:56 pm

Its like the scene in the Life of Brian when they ask "what did the Romans every do for us".

well no not exactly.

In that scene they came up with several examples of what the Romans 'done for us', you've just listed one.

And according to http://myarsenalfc.blogspot.com/2007/07 ... ng-at.html this site also, rumour has it Wenger was suggested to Dein by Gerard Houllier.

into the red · Post by **into the red** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 3:15 pm

So Gerard Houllier should come and take over Arsenal, then, since that is the logic of the Dein fan club.