armchair supporter wrote:QuartzGooner wrote:With respect to everyone, I take what Wenger or the board say about things with a pinch of salt.
The evidence shows we have bundles of cash in the bank, but owe a lot on the stadium, and have a number of squad players on high wages.
Wenger is to blame for how the money is spent, the board are responsible for how much Wenger gets to spend in the main, with the qualification that they cannot force Wenger to spend.
I agree Quartz. The fact that Wenger sits in on board meetings and they leave these matters to him due to his past success (both in terms of trophys and value for money) only re-enforces the view that
Wenger is responsible for where Arsenal are today,
look at the board members. I dont see that any of them have a clue about on-pitch footballing matters,
I agree to a point.
Wenger is primarily responsible for much of what the club does, but his total budget is set by the board.
There is a suspicion that the Arshavin deal was done without his say so, an isolated case though. That view is propogated by Myles Palmer on arsenalnewsreview, though if true I think it might have been a case of Gazidis proposing and making the deal, but Wenger having the final veto. I cannot believe the signing could have been done without any input at all from Wenger?
As for the board members' knowledge, one or two of them will have acquired knowledge along the way.
Ken Friar surely has picked up a thing or two over the years?
Richard Carr has been involved in the youth academy and it's precursors for many years, though I think he has no input at all into the first team squad. There was an interview with him in the Alex Fynn book about the Arsenal v Spurs rivalry "The Great Divide" published 12 years ago.
Peter Hill-Wood is probably sharper than he makes out, I suspect that his public image of a "bumbling old duffer" is part linked to nervousness about public speaking, part age, and part an act to throw people off the scent?
)
