Squeaky Bum time in the Old Trafford boardroom (16/1)

[gooner.ed]

http://www.onlinegooner.com/exclusive/index.php?id=501

usual thread starter… Granted this is not entirely new info, but the desperation to be top club in the money league and thus massage the figures slightly is a fresh development, showing United are worried by Arsenal’s progress on and especially off the field. I know most United fans would rather not have the Glazers in charge, but are those that you know actually aware of the financial situation? That almost all of the profit the club make is used to pay off the interest only of the huge sum of money the Americans’ borrowed to buy the club. The only possible business plan they can ever have had in mind was to increase the value of United, sell it at a profit and ride off into the sunset with the cash. All well and good as long as they can find a buyer…

[ak111]

I'm a United fan. The whole of football is prey to avaricious capitalists, not just ManU. No chairmen are philanthropists, they are in it for money, prestige and privilege - and that includes Arsenal's directors. The financial situation is almost immaterial. United are the biggest club in England, maybe in the world, and despite our 26-year wait for league success, we still had the aura of being the biggest club with the furthest global reach. United may cast an envious eye on some of Arsenal's players and especially the bargain-basement knack Wenger has of recruiting them, but the only thing United (and the fans) worry about is Fergie's departure. But I bet you fear Wenger's departure even more. After all, without Fergie United will still be the biggest. What are Arsenal without Wenger? An exquisite stadium in London and little else.

[Seven Kings Gooner 1]

To the United fan I will quote the great Arsene "Everyone thinks they have the prettiest wife at home"

[SPUDMASHER]

ak111 wrote

United are the biggest club in England, maybe in the world,

There are many clubs that can claim to be the biggest etc. It all depends on what your yardstick is for measuring them.

E.g. If it's unofficial fan base, yes you might be the biggest. If it's official fan base you are not.
If it's FA Cups, yes your the biggest. If it's champions league wins you are not.

We can all claim to be the biggest and best in some way. It's just that some of us cannot be bothered with 'I've got a big willy' type games.

The media make most of the claims about Arsenal, not Arsenal.

[Cus Geezer]

United are the biggest club in England, maybe in the world, and despite our 26-year wait for league success, we still had the aura of being the biggest club with the furthest global reach. United may cast an envious eye on some of Arsenal's players and especially the bargain-basement knack Wenger has of recruiting them, but the only thing United (and the fans) worry about is Fergie's departure. But I bet you fear Wenger's departure even more. After all, without Fergie United will still be the biggest. What are Arsenal without Wenger? An exquisite stadium in London and little else.

Oh dear they're back are they.

Firstly.

You have more "fans" we have more members - reason being? Our global fan base is not content with it's armchair and actually want to go to the ground. In some ways it's because more people would rather holiday in London than Manchester.

P.S. Why would we fear Wenger's departure more - before Wenger George Graham won the title. Before Fergie - even during the first six years of his reign - no one won the title for United since Busby in 1965.

In fact who was the third from last Man Ure manager to win the title? You're going back before WW2, with us it's only 1971.

If this is news to you, it's probably because it's the days before you got a satellite dish and probably spent your time watching American Football on Channel 4 in your Romford semi.

[Red Gunner]

I'm a United fan. The whole of football is prey to avaricious capitalists, not just ManU. No chairmen are philanthropists, they are in it for money, prestige and privilege - and that includes Arsenal's directors. The financial situation is almost immaterial. United are the biggest club in England, maybe in the world, and despite our 26-year wait for league success, we still had the aura of being the biggest club with the furthest global reach. United may cast an envious eye on some of Arsenal's players and especially the bargain-basement knack Wenger has of recruiting them, but the only thing United (and the fans) worry about is Fergie's departure. But I bet you fear Wenger's departure even more. After all, without Fergie United will still be the biggest. What are Arsenal without Wenger? An exquisite stadium in London and little else.

You won 7 titles before the Ferguson era and 9 with him; we won 10 titles before Arsene's era and 3 with Wenger. I think this means; you will miss Fergie more than we will miss Arsene Wenger. Also you should not forget that you have lost your proper board therefore losing fans' influence on the club as well, while Arsenal have not.

[ak111]

I would like to say, firstly, London is a massive city, dwarfing Manchester, yet our stadium is BIGGER and has always attracted more fans to it, even before the advent of satellite dishes. By biggest, all I mean is supported by the most people. The delusion that United is only supported by people from the Home Counties surely counts in favour of the notion that United is the most widely supported. I can say categorically that if you watch an Arsenal game in a pub in Manchester, you will hardly ever have an Arsenal fan cheering. Whereas, in London, watch any ManU game and their fans are very much in evidence. Arsenal are regional (albeit that region is London!), United are international.

Secondly, I think you'll miss Wenger more because Arsenal as a team is completely built in Wenger's image and, I believe, only he could manage the team that is assembled here to anything resembling success. Whereas, United's team is already being sculpted in the image of another. Do you really think it is Fergie that likes the Portugal flavour that much?

Both teams are pretty much screwed when the managers leave. At least, if the exodus of foreign players leave our respective clubs with falling fortunes, we'd still be able to field a team.

Regards

[Red Gunner]

Both teams are pretty much screwed when the managers leave. At least, if the exodus of foreign players leave our respective clubs with falling fortunes, we'd still be able to field a team.

I don't think they will be "screwed", I think Wenger and Ferguson will find worthy successors to their jobs. If Abramovich leaves Chelsea than they are “screwedâ€

[Cus Geezer]

I would like to say, firstly, London is a massive city, dwarfing Manchester, yet our stadium is BIGGER

Dur! ........Hampden Park used to be Europe's biggest stadium, so that would make Queens Park the Europe's biggest club for most of the 20th century would it?

and has always attracted more fans to it, even before the advent of satellite dishes. By biggest, all I mean is supported by the most people.

Dur ! (part 2)......people who buy a bit of merchandise like a calender or a mug are not "fans" they are consumers. Fans are people who get off their fat arses and get to a game at least one in a blue moon. And as pointed out we have MORE MEMBERS.

The delusion that United is only supported by people from the Home Counties surely counts in favour of the notion that United is the most widely supported. I can say categorically that if you watch an Arsenal game in a pub in Manchester, you will hardly ever have an Arsenal fan cheering

Dur ! (part 3).....also supports my above claim. Arsenal fans are not people who support a team from a city that they have no association with and have never set foot in.

Whereas, in London, watch any ManU game and their fans are very much in evidence.

Yes they stand out. They have their eyes a bit too close together.

Arsenal are regional (albeit that region is London!), United are international.

And as you've pointed out we've got people who support Arsenal in Ireland (which as you say is dur....like another country innit!). Or are you labouring under the delusion that the Republic of Ireland is in Kilburn?

Secondly, I think you'll miss Wenger more because Arsenal as a team is completely built in Wenger's image and, I believe, only he could manage the team that is assembled here to anything resembling success. Whereas, United's team is already being sculpted in the image of another. Do you really think it is Fergie that likes the Portugal flavour that much?

1) What the fuck are you trying (but are obviously too unarticulate) to say?

2) Seeing as Wenger is nearly a decade younger than Fergie I'd say you've got more to worry about there than we have.

Both teams are pretty much screwed when the managers leave. At least, if the exodus of foreign players leave our respective clubs with falling fortunes, we'd still be able to field a team.

Regards

Right.

Forsee a British withdrawal from the EU and a blanket ban on foreigners do we? Unless that suddenly becomes a likelihood your final point is irrelevant xenophobic bollocks.

If there's an exodus of foreign money and foreign consumers I think we'll outlive you matey boy. [/quote]

[Cus Geezer]

I would like to say, firstly, London is a massive city, dwarfing Manchester, yet our stadium is BIGGER

Dur! ........Hampden Park used to be Europe's biggest stadium, so that would make Queens Park the Europe's biggest club for most of the 20th century would it?

and has always attracted more fans to it, even before the advent of satellite dishes. By biggest, all I mean is supported by the most people.

Dur ! (part 2)......people who buy a bit of merchandise like a calender or a mug are not "fans" they are consumers. Fans are people who get off their fat arses and get to a game at least one in a blue moon. And as pointed out we have MORE MEMBERS.

The delusion that United is only supported by people from the Home Counties surely counts in favour of the notion that United is the most widely supported. I can say categorically that if you watch an Arsenal game in a pub in Manchester, you will hardly ever have an Arsenal fan cheering

Dur ! (part 3).....also supports my above claim. Arsenal fans are not people who support a team from a city that they have no association with and have never set foot in.

Whereas, in London, watch any ManU game and their fans are very much in evidence.

Yes they stand out. They have their eyes a bit too close together.

Arsenal are regional (albeit that region is London!), United are international.

And as you've pointed out we've got people who support Arsenal in Ireland (which as you say is dur....like another country innit!). Or are you labouring under the delusion that the Republic of Ireland is in Kilburn?

Secondly, I think you'll miss Wenger more because Arsenal as a team is completely built in Wenger's image and, I believe, only he could manage the team that is assembled here to anything resembling success. Whereas, United's team is already being sculpted in the image of another. Do you really think it is Fergie that likes the Portugal flavour that much?

1) What the fuck are you trying (but are obviously too unarticulate) to say?

2) Seeing as Wenger is nearly a decade younger than Fergie I'd say you've got more to worry about there than we have.

Both teams are pretty much screwed when the managers leave. At least, if the exodus of foreign players leave our respective clubs with falling fortunes, we'd still be able to field a team.

Regards

Right.

Forsee a British withdrawal from the EU and a blanket ban on foreigners do we? Unless that suddenly becomes a likelihood your final point is irrelevant xenophobic bollocks.

If there's an exodus of foreign money and foreign consumers I think we'll outlive you matey boy.

Now can the idiots of the global village fuck off back to their own forum?

[ak111]

(but are obviously too unarticulate)

I believe the word is inarticulate. Irony?

To Cus.

I don't understand your first point. Hampden is the national stadium of Scotland. Old Trafford is one of two stadiums in Manchester. Old Trafford is the BIGGEST domestic football ground in England. More fans visit it. Most are the fans are United fans. Therefore we have the most number of fans watching our team live. I believe the word is "Dur".

also supports my above claim.

No, it doesn't. Manchester, being a smaller city than London, has fewer people who can claim a geographical attachment and yet we still have the largest number of fans watching the game locally. Therefore a higher proportion of local fans must support United if you compare it to Arsenal's locality, ie London. My point is that there are United fans in London and the Home Counties AS WELL AS in Manchester, whereas the converse isn't true. I never said Arsenal had NO fans outside London, I was merely pointing out that United have more. I'd keep very quiet about fans from Ireland's fans if I were because United and Liverpool absolutely dominate the country in terms of fan base.

With regards to the issue of membership. The reason Arsenal have more members (if this is even true) is, I suspect, logistical. For a fact, I know someone who put their name down two years ago for a season ticket (and only members can do this) was assigned a place for this season at the Emirates. I don't know for a fact, but I've been told the waiting list at United is over SEVEN years. Therefore, becoming a member of Arsenal is more likely to prove successful in actually being able to watch a game live. There is more of an incentive to being a member in this case.

Wenger is nearly a decade younger than Fergie

I take your point. But I'm surprised you are not worried about Wenger leaving. I can't imagine Arsenal doing as well with the players you have without him. Would Cesc have signed for Tottenham just to play in London? I doubt it. He's playing for Wenger's Arsenal, not a (potentially successful) London club.

your final point is irrelevant xenophobic bollocks

It's not xenophobic to realise the reason players from abroad are here, like all migrant workers!, is because there's money here. The more successful a club is, the more money there is to spend. My final point was that if foreign players left our respective clubs for greener pasture, United would fare better because we actually have some English players. For every foreign player like Henry, who is attached to the ethos of the club, there is a player like Anelka, who is in it for the cash. Players who come through the youth system (not Barcelona's youth system) will always want to represent the club, no matter the fortunes of the club. Have Arsenal a better traditional of youth players making the first team than United? I think not. Though Wenger does favour youth players, they are not London's youth players, they are global players. It's admirable in one sense, after all it's about developing talent, but it's still reliant on attracting foreign players to the club and that is bound to the economics of football, which is sad. (United are guilty of this as well.)
If English players don't matter, then why is Ashley Cole's betrayal greater than Diarra's? Could it be that there is something satisfying about local lads making your team? Local lads playing for the club. Now, is that more of a United thing or an Arsenal thing?

Anon.

[Cus Geezer]

It's not xenophobic to realise the reason players from abroad are here, like all migrant workers!, is because there's money here. The more successful a club is, the more money there is to spend. My final point was that if foreign players left our respective clubs for greener pasture, United would fare better because we actually have some English players.

And of course English players wouldn't leave should foreign club pay more?

As had happend in the 1980s, you know when Ray Walkins left you for AC Milan....oh sorry talking about a pre-Sky era, probably lost you there!

For every foreign player like Henry, who is attached to the ethos of the club, there is a player like Anelka, who is in it for the cash. Players who come through the youth system (not Barcelona's youth system) will always want to represent the club, no matter the fortunes of the club.

er...Ashley Cole?

Have Arsenal a better traditional of youth players making the first team than United? I think not.

Depends on how far you wanna go back

like 1989 when our side built around the youth policy won the league and Fergie threw money around to sign anyone to keep his job

like 1979 when a side build around our youth policy won the cup (hahahaha!!) and you seemed content on poaching players from Leeds e.g. Jordan, McQueen

like 1971 when we won the double with a side build around our youth policy without premiership money and 23 years before you managed it.

Again pre-Sky era so probably lost you again.

If English players don't matter, then why is Ashley Cole's betrayal greater than Diarra's? Could it be that there is something satisfying about local lads making your team? Local lads playing for the club. Now, is that more of a United thing or an Arsenal thing?

No you tool his betrayal was because he joined bitter rivals Chavski, we have no rivalry with Pompey.

Now fuck and find your own forum

[ak111]

Cus:

You betray yourself.

I believe you opened the door to your forum by having a comparative article between United and Arsenal.

Firstly, once a young English player from a club establishes themselves in that club's first team AND THEN moves on to further his career seems reasonable to me. It just underlines the value of youth development at the local level.

Ray Wilkins? Who? Didn't he used to be a Sky pundit?

Fergie did buy players in '89, but equally he also went round to a 14-year-old's mum's house to ensure the signing of a local talent. Kid by the name of Giggs. He remains loyal to the club. A concept Arsenal supporters may not be familiar with now.

'79. Just after we were relegated but maintained our support. A generation after our youth team won the cup, the European Cup. Sorry? Did I lose you there?

'71. Before I was born. No idea what went on. Good record for Arsenal that year it seems. I'll see your double, match it, and raise you a treble.

Chelsea Arsenal's rivals? I thought that would be Tottenham? Cole went to a club who paid him more money. Arsenal and Chelsea aren't arch-rivals. It's like saying Blackburn and United are arch-rivals. It takes about the same time to get from one ground to the other. Are Leyton Orient also your "rival"?

It's strange that you seem to foam at the mouth rather than address some of the points raised about your club, especially the reliance you have on Wenger's tenure and almost total imported youth talent.

Too complex for you to think about? Maybe you don't foresee yourself supporting the club at that point in the future when this policy may matter?

[South-African-Gooner]

Hi - you guys are hectic!!!

To go off topic - maybe - and to add my view if no-one minds.

Here in rsa we got the zombie followers of Man U & Liverpool as it is all over the world but Arsenal's fan base is growing yearly. A reason for so many Man U fans here is because when we were exposed to EPL Man u were the team to beat as was Liverpool to many. Everyone chose the winning team and from then onwards people followed the masses and had no original bone in there body - and till today that is probably why Man u will have so many fans - kids cant help what there family and society forces onto them - thats sad.

If someone had to take a poll to see how many "die hard fans" each team had in rsa Man u would win hands down - only because of all the years of peer pressure and need to join the "cool kids" by supporting the winning team.

Where as Arsenal supporters love Arsenal - beautiful football - beautiful team - beautiful way of life - always head held high when wearing an Arsenal crest.

There was a point here - but I lost it in just realising that Man U is like Hitler & his axis - bunch of wollys.

Again a tad off topic - LOL

[ak111]

the zombie followers of Man U

If someone had to take a poll to see how many "die hard fans" each team had in rsa Man u would win hands down

Despite the zombie reference, and as long as we can still count zombies as people, this does in fact confirm the ManU-have-the-most-fans theory I was pushing.

True, Arsenal do play the beautiful game, but it wasn't always so. "1-0 to the Arsenal" was a George Graham-era classic. Even Liverpool lost their pass-and-move ethos under Houllier. ManU's style of play, maybe not as beautiful?, is still thrilling and dynamic and is tied to a HISTORICAL ethos at the club, which was taken up by Sir Alex and not initiated by him, unlike at Arsenal where Wenger's flowing approach to football was pushed by him.

This is one of the reasons I originally posted. Are there any Arsenal fans who are worried that Wenger's style is so linked to the man that when he leaves, there is a real danger of mediocrity?

Israel invited ManU (not Arsenal) to be part of their celebrations to mark their 60 year anniversary. So I think comparisons to Hitler may be wide of the mark. We are, alas, comparable to a giant corporate machine, but the product that this was and continues to be built on is real quality with the aura of greatness, even in defeat, death, relegation and under-achievement. That's why we're the biggest.