The Wenger Out Debate

In the past week Skysports published an article it called the Arsène Wenger Debate where two journalists featured on the Sunday Supplement made their case for or against Arsène Wenger. Leading the pro-Wenger argument was Jeremy Wilson of the Daily Telegraph and I found myself heartily agreeing with what he said. Not because I am blindly pro-Wenger but because what he said made sense and I saw the logic in his argument. He was speaking from his heart and not with clicks in his mind.

I tweeted a screenshot of a part of his argument that I found particularly compelling with the internationally recognised sign for agreement on social media “this”. This is what I tweeted:

There seems to be this narrative that Arsenal have had 10 years of failure. They’ve not had 10 years of the success they had under Wenger before, but they’ve had years of failure that Liverpool, Everton and Tottenham would absolutely love to have.

They finish in the Champions League every year. They’ve built a new stadium, which means that they’re set for the next generation to be close to Man United and Chelsea – a lot closer than Tottenham, Everton and Liverpool are.

Is that failure? I’m not sure!

I was challenged by one person as to why I had not tweeted the other half of the argument made by Antony Kastrinakis of The Sun “for balance”. This knocked me dizzy. My head was spinning with incredulity and mirth. I’m a normal bloke with a moderately popular fan site and twitter account and this somehow meant I am supposed to be nonpartisan?

When did journalistic objectivity become canon for hobbyist writers? Did I miss a seminar on blogger conduct?

I found some composure and enquired why I should be impartial in my blogs for, afterall, I’m not required to be equitable in my reporting or views on particular events and surely any bias is subjective anyway.

Soon the conversation turned into one about balance which I found deeply ironic as I was being asked to be balanced for not reporting the anti-Wenger argument by someone whose timeline suggests they are anti-Wenger and where I could find no evidence of balance at all but alas I digress.

Upon being pressed I revealed I didn’t bother giving the out argument the time of day because it was so full of the prevaricate nonsense that the so-called “WOB” thrive upon. It was disingenuous, exaggerative, deliberately misleading and riddled with revisionism.

Here is the anti- argument in full:

When Wenger arrived, how many titles had Arsenal won in England? Ten.

How many titles had Manchester United won when Wenger arrived? Ten.

When Wenger arrived in England, Arsenal were as big as United, it’s as simple as that. They’ve built a new stadium, yes, but fans have been drip-fed mediocrity.

When you’re at a massive club you have to win. That’s why Real Madrid change managers like shirts. If you don’t win at Real Madrid, you get the sack. If you win, like Carlo Ancelotti does, you get a new contract.

Now Wenger has kept a massive club afloat, that’s what he has done. He has kept a massive club in the top four, but he has not kept West Brom in the top four. He has kept one of the top 10 clubs in the world in the top four in England.

Five years before he arrived they had won the title and had won two titles in three years. When he arrived the gap between United and Arsenal was not as big.

I didn’t say, by the way, that he must go, but I just don’t buy into the rhetoric that he has been successful. He has been okay, but he has not been successful.

Success means winning trophies year after year. He has won eight of them and one in a decade.

Why is that banner there on the day they win a match? Why are the fans divided? I’ll tell you why – it’s because they pay the most money in Europe.

They pay the most expensive tickets in Europe to be fourth in England and never go past the last 16 of the Champions League unless they play an average club, which they never do because they finish second to Borussia Dortmund, who pay in wages a fifth of what Arsenal pay if you combine transfers and wages.

I’m not saying he should go – Wenger and Arsenal are intertwined – but the rhetoric has to change.

This is precisely the sort of argument used by those who want Wenger sacked that infuriates me because there is nothing veritably compelling about it. It’s skewed revisionism manoeuvred with incredible prestidigitation to convince people the Wenger out agenda is the correct one and any extolling of Wenger is myopic and deluded. The irony never ceases to amuse me because the anti-Wenger arguments are, in large, the greatest collection of parochial bilge I’ve ever heard.

What Antony has written – brilliantly channelling the spumescent essence of the infamous WOBs we’ve all encountered – is revisionism plain and simple.

By comparing how many titles the clubs had won at that time he has suggested they were on equal footing which is deliberate misdirection and revision of the history of that time. It doesn’t take into account that United had won three of the last four titles or indeed that United had a lot of luck in winning the 99 title by one point which had they lost would have undoubtedly changed the course of history. Fine margins and domestic power have been completely ignored in favour of the greater impact of simple numbers.

The word ‘mediocrity’ irks me because it is used to stoke the anger of the fans and is bandied about with errant aplomb. Arsenal fans in the last 18 years wouldn’t know mediocrity if it slapped them in the face. Ironically many of the dissenters are old enough to know what mediocrity truly looked like pre-Graham and Wenger.

Then to enforce his point he suggests Wenger would get the sack at other big clubs because of his mediocre results declaring winning as the only currency for keeping your job by holding up Real Madrid as an example – a club in a domestic duopoly funded by incredibly rich men and poorer people’s tax euros and able to negotiate their own TV deals ensuring no other club outside of Barcelona can truly match them. Of course there are instances where the duopoly is broken but much like Blackburn in 1995 it’s often a flash in the pan. And suggesting Ancelotti got a new contract because he won stuff is cherry picking examples because Madrid have sacked many a manager after a trophy winning season.

And why suggest Wenger would get the sack elsewhere? If you put him in charge of a club like Madrid, Barca, Bayern, City, Chelsea or PSG do you think the man who built the Invincibles couldn’t smash the granny out of that league?

He makes a fair point about keeping us afloat but he then belittles it – keeping us in the top four has been vitally important and how much so may only be felt once he retires. Look at Leeds, Newcastle and Liverpool. Each have had varying fortunes in chasing the type of consistency we’ve taken for granted. And calling Arsenal one of the top ten clubs in world. By what measurement? I love Arsenal more than I can express but we are not one of the top ten clubs in the world and haven’t been for a long time – possibly even before Wenger’s time. Maybe not since Chapman’s time.

But then again how do you quantify what makes a club one of the top ten clubs?

He talks about how many titles we had won beforehand and in how many years and whilst I will never belittle or disregard the wonderful title winning seasons under Graham you have to consider the circumstances. In 1989 we won the title in the last minute. The finest of margins. It could easily have not happened. It is as historic as it is because of the dramatic climax. If we had 5 more games to play afterwards it would not be as famous as it is. It’s a wonderful moment of history we will treasure forever but we had to work bloody hard for that and literally won it in the last minute.

1991 saw my favourite ever Graham team. We almost went the entire season unbeaten, a 42 game season no less, and we played some incredible stuff that makes you wonder why Graham’s final year and half of “boring boring” Arsenal is remembered more readily. However, Liverpool were at the end of their domestic dominance and the league was very open. Arsenal deserved their title because they were the best team but you have to appreciate that unlike 1989 or 1998 or 2002 or 2004 there wasn’t a dominant team of multiple recent title wins for Arsenal to contend with.

Since Arsenal last won the league 3 teams have won the Premier League with each going through their own mini periods of dominance. It’s harder to win the league and that should be appreciated. Not accepted as an excuse for not winning but appreciated as a legitimate reason for it being harder.

He then goes along with the ticket prices angle which I think is so loaded it’s unreal. All Premier League tickets are too high but just looking at Arsenal’s basic price is lazy.

Antony said one thing I wholeheartedly agree with “He has been okay, but he has not been successful”. Success is subjective, in many ways we have been successful but in the currency of the game – trophies – we have not. We might be though. We’re the FA Cup holders, we can still win that. The league is nowhere near over – insanely unlikely but not over and I think a respectable second place and another trophy could be considered a successful season.

The Wenger Out argument is tiresome because it’s constant back and forth. I align more with the pro-camp because I can appreciate the underlying influences that starved us of trophies for so long. The manager is not blameless in that and he’d be the first to say it but it’s not all his fault. I can’t align with the Wenger Out argument because the arguments are full of revisionist factoids, misdirection and exaggerations that do nothing to convince me which is another bone of contention.

The Wenger Out crowd, that I come across at least, seem intent on converting people to their views and abusing those who do not yield. It’s proselytism.

If people said “I just don’t believe in him any more, I don’t think he can move us forward and I think we need a change as soon as possible” I would respect that with every fibre of my being. I wouldn’t agree with it but I would respect it. It’s an honest and refreshing opinion. It’s not loaded with vitriol or disrespect – it’s just candid expression of a deeply held view that playing well or winning the odd trophy cannot assuage. This sort of person is not a WOB, they are a sincere football supporter who has just come to the end of their affinity for their clubs’ manager.

To summarise – after a long rant – I don’t need to be impartial and my twitter feed or website are not bastions of balance and if people want to see a greater representation of cases for a change of manager they need to be less inventive with the facts and more compelling with their reasoning.

Thanks for reading! Please comment on this post, subscribe by email, share with friends and follow me on twitter (@thedanielcowan). Please check out the official NLIR Facebook page http://facebook.com/northlondonisredblog for news, views, freebies and more. 

Don’t forget to tune into the funniest Arsenal podcast around “Goonersphere Podcast“