Arteta critical regarding over 30 policy

[officepest]

Wasn't sure where to post this but the Guardian has a small interview in which Mikel has a bit of moan about our contract offers for the over 30s - see below.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... -contracts

"Mikel Arteta has questioned the wisdom of Arsenal's policy on contract extensions for older players, insisting that experience ought to be prized rather than penalised.

The club tend to offer only one-year deals to players over 30 and Arteta, 32, can expect nothing more when he opens negotiations on fresh terms in the summer. The midfielder, who signed from Everton in 2011, is under contract to 2015. He has made 123 appearances for Arsenal, scoring 15 goals.

"I don't value players by age," Arteta said. "Whether it is [Tomas] Rosicky or Jack Wilshere, I analyse many other things before age. Age can be an asset for the club. For me, a much bigger asset is someone who has played 125 games in three years compared to someone who has played 25, if he is 20 years old. That's my opinion.

"I understand the club point of view: 'Mikel is not a £25m player because he is not 22 any more.' But I know what else I can give. So it's to find the right balance between mentalities. We need to analyse and talk about it."

Arteta will make his views clear when he sits down with the manager, Arsène Wenger. "I know the history of this club with players over 30 and I don't know if they are planning to change it or maintain it," Arteta said. "I will give them my opinion. I will talk to them this summer and see what they want to do. I am only going to stay if they really want me to stay and I feel productive. The day I feel like I can't perform, I will be the first one to say: 'Listen, you have kids here, 20, 25, who are much better than me. It's my time to move on.' They're not going to have a problem with me with that".



Sounds like he's annoyed at our failure to tie Sagna down and that he's unsure over his long-term future, but the timing seems strange what with the Cup final looming. it could just as easily be a nothing conversation spun by the journalist I suppose.

[1989]

Arteta is a top man.

[clockender1]

note he says sitting down THIS summer, not next summer...

[Herd]

The whole Policy is a farce anyway .

He signed Arteta at 29 for 4 years so that in itself makes a mockery of the system .
Secondly how old was Silvestre when Wenger a paid a transfer fee and b gave him a 2 year deal 32 years Old !
He fucked Pires off because he wanted a 3 year deal but would have settled for 2 and we all know how shit Pires was !
Same season he allows Edu to leave over a few grand a week ,great ploy that one !
He almost did the same to Berkamp only Berkamp refused to leave for Fulham and accepted a pay for play deal bieng the legend he is !

Wengers principles can be flexible when it suits him and rigid when they are not ,Sagna is going for the money and I dont blame him !

[VAVAVOOM 14]

Good, I'm glad.

Our over 30 policy has always been such an asinine and short sighted practice; as Arteta said, age should be irrelevant: judge a player on their ability and what they can offer the club.

Look how much Man United have benefited from keeping their old guard around the club well into their 30s (Giggs, Scholes, Neville, Ferdinand). Their personalities and mentality off the pitch can help younger players more than anything.

[DB10GOONER]

how old was Silvestre when Wenger a paid a transfer fee and b gave him a 2 year deal 32 years Old !
He fucked Pires off because he wanted a 3 year deal but would have settled for 2

That always sickened me. How Wenger could look himself in the mirror after that is beyond me. How anyone could put the talentless Mid Op Transexual ahead of Bobby is just fucking ludicrous.

[goonersid]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.
Pires being forced out to accomodate the diving Reyes, was probably when I first turned on Wenker.

[officepest]

On the money, Herd.

When we signed the French Mekon a little piece of me died. Awful bastard.

I know Bobby did his ACL once he moved to Villareal and I'm pretty sure Edu had a bad 'un too but the policy on the whole is/was penny pinching idiocy.

[IW8Goalmachine]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.
Pires being forced out to accomodate the diving Reyes, was probably when I first turned on Wenker.

Same here that's when my Wenger support ended. Still enraged about Pires getting subbed in CL final

[DB10GOONER]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.
Pires being forced out to accomodate the diving Reyes, was probably when I first turned on Wenker.

Same here that's when my Wenger support ended. Still enraged about Pires getting subbed in CL final

I'm also still enraged that Bobby was subbed, and still enraged that tippy tappy no shot shit like Hleb played, and that a judas bastard like Cashley played 3 days after being on the piss with his chav besties, and that Lehmann the clown fucking ruined everything, and that Henry bottled two sitters, and that their winner was an own goal off the inside of Almunia's poxy fucking leg, and that Bergkamp didn't get on the pitch to score the 30 yard screamer to win it and retire in the fashion that his career deserved!

[clockender1]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.

yes, pity we don't have an Over 60 policy...

i read somewhere that statistically, most managers win 50% less after the age of 55, which is logical because the older you get the less you like change, and football is a changing game.

in general i get the over 30 thing, but it depends on position and usage - a CB or keeper should be able to keep going, so should a forward thesedays, especially if he's in great shape - like Suker was when we signed him at 31....

and anyway, the decision shouldn't be with the manager anyway. of course he can recommend keeping or letting a player go, but theoretically the manager should be busy coaching and preparing the team while the Board negotiate contract length.

its good to have some old heads in the squad, even if its on a pay per play basis.

[DB10GOONER]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.

yes, pity we don't have an Over 60 policy...

i read somewhere that statistically, most managers win 50% less after the age of 55, which is logical because the older you get the less you like change, and football is a changing game.

in general i get the over 30 thing, but it depends on position and usage - a CB or keeper should be able to keep going, so should a forward thesedays, especially if he's in great shape - like Suker was when we signed him at 31....

and anyway, the decision shouldn't be with the manager anyway. of course he can recommend keeping or letting a player go, but theoretically the manager should be busy coaching and preparing the team while the Board negotiate contract length.

its good to have some old heads in the squad, even if its on a pay per play basis.

For me, it's also about consistency. If that's what the manager truly believes and practices then ok, I can accept that (if not agree with it). But why one rule for Bobby, one for the Mid Op Tranny?

[northbank123]

He makes a good point re reliability - how many games has he played in the last 3 seasons compared to Wilshere? Its a good bet he will be fit enough to play more games over the next 2 as well.

The debate is realistically going to be tainted by the fact that after 2 excellent seasons for us Arteta has looked a bit pedestrian this season and not the key player he has been. Maybe that's justification for the policy, although I still think the way we treated Pires and in particular Bergkamp was a joke.

[DB10GOONER]

He makes a good point re reliability - how many games has he played in the last 3 seasons compared to Wilshere? Its a good bet he will be fit enough to play more games over the next 2 as well.

The debate is realistically going to be tainted by the fact that after 2 excellent seasons for us Arteta has looked a bit pedestrian this season and not the key player he has been. Maybe that's justification for the policy, although I still think the way we treated Pires and in particular Bergkamp was a joke.

True. Some idiots on here call Arteta shite since he arrived, because his standard has slipped a bit this season. But anyone with half a brain could see he was our most reliable performer for the previous two years. Also the fact he anticipates and positions himself well (rather than reacts and lunges in with the Hollywood tackles) ensures he doesn't stand out as much as some players on the pitch and makes people think he isn't useful. Idiots.

[kiwomya]

Yet it's okay for a senile geriatric failure to be offered a 3 year contract.

yes, pity we don't have an Over 60 policy...

i read somewhere that statistically, most managers win 50% less after the age of 55, which is logical because the older you get the less you like change, and football is a changing game.

in general i get the over 30 thing, but it depends on position and usage - a CB or keeper should be able to keep going, so should a forward thesedays, especially if he's in great shape - like Suker was when we signed him at 31....

and anyway, the decision shouldn't be with the manager anyway. of course he can recommend keeping or letting a player go, but theoretically the manager should be busy coaching and preparing the team while the Board negotiate contract length.

its good to have some old heads in the squad, even if its on a pay per play basis.

For me, it's also about consistency. If that's what the manager truly believes and practices then ok, I can accept that (if not agree with it). But why one rule for Bobby, one for the Mid Op Tranny?

Pires wanted first team football though, it wasn't just down to the one year deal. I'm not sure a two year deal would have made a difference.