I didn't want to hi-jack another of Frank's threads...

Cockerill's chin · Post by **Cockerill's chin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:49 am

Let's say you need a new tv because yours is shot

Was it PHW? I thought he used a knife?

olgitgooner · Post by **olgitgooner** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:05 am

Oh great. Another fucking board thread.

And the top prize for being the most boring person on the planet goes to........drumroll........usfuckingmarty. Seriously, get a fucking life.

Cockerill's chin · Post by **Cockerill's chin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:11 am

I think we are getting close to a compromise here USM.

If you are willing to concede that AW owns some of the blame for our sharp demise then I think it is a step forward.

I don't think there are many here who place the blame solely at Wenger's door. We know the custodians made vast personal fortunes from the club while neglecting the squad investment. Blame passes between Wenger and the previous shareholders fluidly.

Kroenke has paid top dollar for his shares. Surely you can see that, to acquire those shares, he could not have spent the last two years being a dissenting voice amongst the "custodians" he had to court?

The only way we can judge if the direction of the club has changed for the better is if Kroenke has the motivation to sack AW if we do not genuinely challenge for the league but still manages top four.

Cockerill's chin · Post by **Cockerill's chin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:41 am

As a concession to show I understand your frustration USM

, I can see the futility of sacking AW if a managerial replacement will have to operate under severe financial constraints.

Unfortunately for AW, he has placed his rhetoric so closely with the self-serving model that he can never be part of the solution to our current problems. As the adage goes if you are not part of the solution, then...

I used to be worried that if AW goes then his cult status amongst the squad would mean a mass exodus. Seems silly now.

Wenger needs to go. If the problem persists then Stan becomes the centre of fan attention.

stg · Post by **stg** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:42 am

THE BOARD-wanted to make more money by moving to a bigger ground.
THE BOARD-thought the could make a % profit on redeveloping the old ground(this figure would of been more than the top end price offerd to them by the building developers) but due to the market crash didnt make so much
THE BOARD-once moved into new ground found themselves at intrest from highend investers and due to internal wrangling, death and shareholders wishing to sell we are at the stage we are now.

WENGER-being a stubben old goat wanted to do things his way
WENGER-Wanted to show the big spenders that you dont need to splash millions
WENGER-Being to loyal to his players and unable to change things

This in my view is a simplistic view of what has happend to Arsenal over the past 6 years. Everybody involed at The Arsenal can take the blame at some point. The Board, the manager, the players, backroom staff etc etc etc

In the end it comes down to your interpretation of what has been said by board memebrs, ex board memebrs, managers, players, ex players and manager, supporters groups and uncle Tom Cobbly and all.

So USM you can bang on as much as you like saying it's the board but you aint gonna change the minds of the people who blame Wenger. So called realists you anint gonna change the board blamers or the AKB supporters. Everybody has their view and that is what forums are for but to keep going round and around and around and around and around and around and around it's getting silly now

northbankbren · Post by **northbankbren** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:14 pm

I have to agree that babu was pretty spot on. Wenger and The Board are one in the same.

I still dont get what us is supposed to have proved?

What evidence? Of What?

Post by **flash gunner** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:21 pm

LDB wrote:The thing with USMartin is that you are either with him 100% or you are a stooge of the board. When he first arrived on this forum he got some quite positive responses but it quickly became apparent that hes an obsessive incapable or unwilling to view a situation in anything more then the 1 dimension which suits his narrative.

Spot on LDB

and wheres your evidence Marty

TeeCee · Post by **TeeCee** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:38 pm

Now he stole this property and you agreed to take it from him - were happy to do so in fact, even would have paid him for it if you had to. Are you also guilty of burglary?

No, you are guilty of handling stolen goods!! Why wouldn't you say to your mate 'Where did the TV come from'....'How comes you don't want the TV' etc etc

Babu · Post by **Babu** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:26 pm

TeeCee wrote:
Now he stole this property and you agreed to take it from him - were happy to do so in fact, even would have paid him for it if you had to. Are you also guilty of burglary?
No, you are guilty of handling stolen goods!! Why wouldn't you say to your mate 'Where did the TV come from'....'How comes you don't want the TV' etc etc

Yeah, if a 'mate' of mine turns up with a flat screen TV for me because I helped him avoid a kicking after a match then I am going to be pretty sure that he's nicked it, or that it's extremely dodgy.

I could ask him whether it's hot or not.

If I ask him and he says 'No' then I have two options: believe him or not.

If I believe him and take it and the old bill come around I get nicked for handling stolen goods. FACT!

If I don't believe him and don't take it then no problems.

Now if I ask him whether it's hot or not and he says 'Yes' then I also have two options: take it or not take it.

If I take it and the old bill come round I am still going to get nicked.

Obviously if I don't take it then nothing can happen.

Wenger is in effect 'handling stolen goods' whether he knew it or not, and he would need a pretty good Brief to get him off - or a corrupt Judge.

Wenger is guilty. Hang him!

( only joking about the hanging bit. Just in case. But a 15 without parole? Yeah, OK ).

Babu · Post by **Babu** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 3:29 pm

USMartin wrote:
Let's say you need a new tv because yours is shot, and a mate shows up with a brand new tv he happens not to need and gives it to you for helping him avoidung taking a kicking after a match.

PHW: Cheers for helping me out, AW. Here's a little something for your troubles.

AW: Thanks mate. It's kosher, is it?

PHW ( tapping his nose in a knowing manner ). Just take it. You earned it.

AW: Say no more, say no more! ( also taps nose knowingly ).

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:50 pm

Babu wrote:
TeeCee wrote:
Now he stole this property and you agreed to take it from him - were happy to do so in fact, even would have paid him for it if you had to. Are you also guilty of burglary?
No, you are guilty of handling stolen goods!! Why wouldn't you say to your mate 'Where did the TV come from'....'How comes you don't want the TV' etc etc
Yeah, if a 'mate' of mine turns up with a flat screen TV for me because I helped him avoid a kicking after a match then I am going to be pretty sure that he's nicked it, or that it's extremely dodgy.

I could ask him whether it's hot or not.

If I ask him and he says 'No' then I have two options: believe him or not.

If I believe him and take it and the old bill come around I get nicked for handling stolen goods. FACT!

If I don't believe him and don't take it then no problems.

Now if I ask him whether it's hot or not and he says 'Yes' then I also have two options: take it or not take it.

If I take it and the old bill come round I am still going to get nicked.

Obviously if I don't take it then nothing can happen.

Wenger is in effect 'handling stolen goods' whether he knew it or not, and he would need a pretty good Brief to get him off - or a corrupt Judge.

Wenger is guilty. Hang him!

( only joking about the hanging bit. Just in case. But a 15 without parole? Yeah, OK ).

Babu the point is handling stolen property if you charged with that is not the same as being charged with the actual burglary.

The same holds true here. Obviously Arsene Wenger no matter how much he knew or did not know initially has chosen to work with the Board and cooperate with their efforts. There has no been no disputing that really for the last three years. But as you have suggested if not acknowledged this originated with the Custodians of the Club deciding to be custodians of their own personal interests if my suspicions are correct and again the facts we know including from another excellent Swiss Rambler piece Quartz posted don't suggest otherwise really.

And to me that makes all the difference because we are dependent on the Custodians of the Club acting as Custodians of the Club to be truly successful both on and off the ptich.

To me it is fairly obvious that they failed to act as Custodians of the Club over the past several years or at the very least ought to accvount for how they actually did act in that role while pushing the share price up to 12K a share before cashing in, given how none of them paid more than 2K a share on their holdings in the Club most paid far less than that and some paid nothing at all. When you add the fact that every last one of them was indepently wealthy on top of any profits form their investment in Arsenal, would cashing in at 3K or 5K or 7K and to say the AST or some less well-heeled but perhaps more genuine wealthy Arsenal supporters have been so bad for Arsenal or themselves?

Arsene Wenger certainly is complicit to some extent. The point is that his complicity does not nearly equate to complicity of the Board's for its decisions and the apparent motives behind them and should not be used to distratc form the Board's role and responsibility in this. That Arsene Wenger bears some complicity should not lessen the Board's or our skepticism of the Board and if my suspicions are founded our outrage at them. The most Arseene Wnegre is guilty of is doing what suited their interests whether he simply did so because he felt as an empoyess he had to as that is what employees do, whether he was willing to do so on his own, orr even if he was eager to try this and now had the opportunity to do so. If the Board hadn't wanted him to do it he would not have done it on his own.

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:12 pm

TeeCee wrote:So Wenger is lying to protect the board so that he can protect his job because he and his family would end up on the street? You have surpassed yourself with that stupid comment Martin. Not only is Wenger a multi millionaire many times over, there are a number of extremely well paid jobs he would walk into from working in the media, to managing or being director of football.
You have confirmed what everyone already knew, you are an obsessive, myopic man from the land of paranoia. I don't mean that offensively, I think you genuinely have an issue with Arsenal Football Club.

Let's be serious here a moment, you think that if Arsene Wneger were sacked at Arsenal for deliberately ppursuing policies that his Board did not support (and you clearly imply the Board would be delighted to have him spend more of the money and want him to) that he still would just have tons of jobs waiting for him after that.:et me guess Real would Sack Mourinho and Barca would let Guardiola walk then?

My point was not that that is his sole concern. Indeed giuven his personal mis-adventures one could argue it might not be a concern at all. My point was that byn doing what you suggest he has done he has put both his personal and professional reputations in and out of football on the line and also put his career at risk assuming you are correct about the Board's eagerness to invest more into the football team that he is ignoring, and that he already is mis-leading the supporters about all of that.

I am simply pointing out that it makes more sense logically to do something to keep your job than to lose it especially on his salary at Arsenal. Instead of trying to make me the issue answer that sentence right before this one. Explain how that is untrue

USMartin · Post by **USMartin** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:20 pm

Cockerill's chin wrote:
Let's say you need a new tv because yours is shot
Was it PHW? I thought he used a knife?

It was Colonel Mustard in the dining room with a candle holder

Post by **flash gunner** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:20 pm

U

S

M

A

R

T

Y

E

V

I

D

E

N

C

E

P

L

E

A

S

E

Babu · Post by **Babu** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:44 pm

USMartin wrote:
Babu the point is handling stolen property if you charged with that is not the same as being charged with the actual burglary.

To be convicted, the receiver must know the goods were stolen at the time he receives them and there was an intention to aid the thief.

I think Wenger knew the goods were stolen and wanted to aid the thief. Guilty as charged.

USMartin wrote: Arsene Wenger certainly is complicit to some extent.

Indeed. Hang him!

USMartin wrote: The most Arseene Wnegre is guilty of is doing what suited their interests...

And his as well. Because he got to have another go at his project.

He could have said 'sod this' and gone to any Club on Earth at that time, but no, he stayed and accepted it, and of course accepted an improved contract with a pay rise, so accepted bribes as well, and was an accessory after the fact, and quite clearly liable as an accomplice.

The crimes are adding up, Martin.

OK, an accessory is usually punished less severely than the principal offender, but morally Wenger is guilty, and even more so when he lied, deliberately misled the fans, and I'm guessing there is a chance to get him on obstructing the course of justice.

I know people in glass houses and all that, but...