• Arsenal Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • Radge2def Radge2def Apr 9, 2013 13:52 Flag

    The Real Manchester 'City'

    I personally have no problem with VP leaving. I think considering his age and aims he was right to do so. It was also fair for Wenger to sell him to Utd. He could have forced VP to go overseas but when Utd came sniffing Im pretty convinced Wenger bowed to VP's wishes reluctantly but without any malice and took VP's decision on the chin like the gentleman his is. VP has made a big impact for Utd this season (even if his form is currently suffereing) and yes I reckon Utd will think buying him and winning the league has made a 24mill outlay worth every penny. But Wenger I reckon has bought a 15 goal a season striker in Giroud. He has scored more than that already this season but I assume you mean 15 a season in the league? Im pretty convinced he can do that next season, problem is to win the league really you need a 20+ per season striker. Giroud gets dissed because we sold VP and bought him yet its not a fair comparison. Giroud I reckon is a vast improvement on Bendtner (who we all know has his days numbered at arsenal) A more consistent and deadly striker is still needed. Fingers crossed Wenger can find a 20+ goal a season guy for next season.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I agree with you that Wenger seems to be kind to his want away players and this might well be due to him being a "nice guy".

      Some times I have wondered what would have happened if we had made an example out of 1 or 2 want away players? What would have happened if we had sold Cesc to Real Madrid? Sorry Cesc you want to go? We sell you to the highest bidder. What if we had sold Nasri or Clichy to foreign clubs? What is we would have told them, sorry but we don't sell to direct competitors. Would RVP have hesitated and realized we would never have let him go to City or United? Would it have been easier to convince him to stay?

      Perhaps in the short run it would have cost some serious money to sell a player to a club he didn't want to go to or to have him spend his last year of his contract in the reserves. But would it have been a deterrent for future want-away players if they realized AFC plays hard ball and more often than not you don't get to pick your destination?

      Would Wilshire dare to try for a move to a PL contender 3 years from now if he saw AFC never sold to the PL competition? Would he not prefer to stay in the UK with Arsenal instead of having to learn Spanish?

      Guess we will never know for sure but sometimes I wonder if we could do with a tougher boss when it comes to giving players the transfers they want.

      • 1 Reply to Govinda
      • Fair enough, but as much as it might keep players it could work the other way and you could find it hard to attract players too due to your renowned nasty attitude? Not to mention keeping players against their will is 100% shooting yourself in the foot. It does you no favours and does them no favours. It basically turns into an act of spite on behalf of the manager/Chairman/Owner which acting out of spite for me is something I absolutely detest in certain people and I am very happy our manager is not someone who holds grudges and acts in a spiteful way.