| Wenger alone in theatre of absurd | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 5 2013, 04:40 AM (2,203 Views) | |
| cruyff_turn | Aug 5 2013, 02:29 PM Post #21 |
|
Administrator
|
0893, you don't have to be in a board room to look at the financial numbers over the past few seasons and realize that without selling players, the club was in the red. |
![]() |
|
| santry_gooner | Aug 5 2013, 02:38 PM Post #22 |
|
What qualifies as respecting your view? You mean agreeing with it, or ignoring it? I suppose I really should do the latter, then I remembered this was a message board. I know, crazy isn't it Kamleash? 0893s point got dismissed because it was open to be dismissed. Otherwise he should post it as a blog and disable comment. What he appears to want here is what Elnuk always wants - the contingent right to free speech. Say what you like but if anyone responds fly into an authoritarian rage... and you call me predictable. As there was nothing in your last post in any way related to the topic except for this: "Santry at least expands on his never ending love for Wenger. And apparently criticism of Wenger's methods is 'insulting'." So why did I actually open up a line of criticism of him in my post? You Kamlesh are a moron. You hang out with morons and you run along the same trammeled thought lines that they do. Admit it, you didn't read the article before you posted. Even the Piz "skims" articles. That one was a 90 second investment in giving 0893 the benefit of the doubt, and turned out, yet again to be damning of his dramatic licence with logic. Meanwhile I'm awaiting an actual response from 0893. |
![]() |
|
| santry_gooner | Aug 5 2013, 02:41 PM Post #23 |
|
In fact all of the data he requires is published online. Also, if he's a particularly bad accountant and cannot keep reading to the end there are numerous blogs and even shef who explained it previously. You are down to facts v a belief system. There isn't any point any more in having 0893 acknowledge facts. He simply wont. |
![]() |
|
| cruyff_turn | Aug 5 2013, 02:43 PM Post #24 |
|
Administrator
|
+1 Nothing wrong with 0893 being 0893, but Kam would have us believe he shouldn't have to answer for his comments? |
![]() |
|
| santry_gooner | Aug 5 2013, 02:48 PM Post #25 |
|
Fact: Chelsea outbid us for Mata and secured him for 23.5 million Fact: Our initial bid was for 18 million [or thereabouts] Fact: Had we stayed "in the mix" for Mata we would have still lost out, the only "gain" being that Chelsea would pay a much higher price. |
![]() |
|
| billabog5 | Aug 5 2013, 02:58 PM Post #26 |
|
Whoa there boys, don't let your emotions override common sense Arsenal have the most expensive prices in the prem, the 2nd largest stadium & are only behind Utd & possibly Liverpool in terms of Global appeal & merchandise sales By all means say Arsenal CHOSE not to spend a lot of money on players, but don't try the COULDN'T AFFORD to spend money crappola. How much did Arsenal receive for the sales of Cesc, nasri, Adebayor, Clichy, RVP, Song etc. ? How much of that was re-invested ? Utd still manage to compete in the market despite the supposedly crippling debt of the Glazers, so Arsenal could, if they chose , buy top quality players. The problem is Wenger is a stubborn cheapskate & he would rather Arsenal fans miss out on top players than compromise his principles . Edited by billabog5, Aug 5 2013, 02:59 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| cruyff_turn | Aug 5 2013, 03:00 PM Post #27 |
|
Administrator
|
The vast majority of sales you mention there were keeping Arsenal's heads above water, but they weren't making the club rich, according to financial statements. |
![]() |
|
| Gooner0893 | Aug 5 2013, 03:19 PM Post #28 |
|
Mata was available well before Chelsea got into the picture. Arsenal refused to match his clause amount and tried to haggle with Valencia and get him on the cheap. Chelsea came in and paid the amount and got the player. Who cares how higuaim is spelled? |
![]() |
|
| gunnerjunkie | Aug 5 2013, 04:00 PM Post #29 |
|
Arsenal activated the Mata release clause,dithered over signing him,and then the release clause date expired.Chelsea only signed him after the expiry date. Chelsea silly enough to pay 5-6 mill more than they needed to? Or Arsenal baulking at splashing out 18 mill? Edited by gunnerjunkie, Aug 5 2013, 04:00 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Gooner0893 | Aug 5 2013, 04:07 PM Post #30 |
|
Thanks for the correction Junkie. I remember now. He was available to be had before Chelsea jumped in. Arsenal did not want to spend an extra couple of millions for the player and kept haggling with Valencia. And then Chelsea came in and got the payer. We could have signed him long before Chelsea did. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |






9:26 AM Jul 11