It is somewhat strange, or maybe not, that very little has come out that is Arsenal related after we finally secured our first win of the season and then completed the signings of Shkodran Mustafi and Lucas Perez in the final days of the transfer window. Then news trickled in that Jack Wilshere has joined AFC Bournemouth on loan till the end of the season.
Before the news was confirmed by the club, there were a few very unhappy fans who also saw the permanent departure of Serge Gnabry to SV Werder Bremen as a betrayal of sort. But what does all the whining and moaning about Arsenal's transfer business mean?
For one, it shows we Arsenal fans are a hard bunch to please. In all those years that Arsene Wenger refused to buy experienced players but instead would invest in youth and cheap unknown players, all Arsenal fans cried out for experience. Some of those young players were really good (Fabregas, van Persie, Anelka) and went on to have fantastic careers, mostly after choosing to leave the club that brought them to the limelight. Some were not so good (Traore, Denilson, Bendtner). Some of those young players were really good but for a number of reasons, were unable to consistently convince the Manager that they should be starting every game. Players like Carlos Vela, Jose Antonio Reyes and Lassana Diarra come to mind. This is where the case of Jack Wilshere intrigues one slightly. You see, Jack is good. He is really good. He is so good no manager in their right minds will leave him out of the team if he was fit. Yes, there is the problem. Jack has not been fit for a few YEARS now.
Some players come back from injury and they pick up from where they left off. Not Jack. He often needs about 3-4 matches under his belt to get into the groove again. Well, the way Jack plays often draws hard tackles from opponents who are left very little option than to go in hard on Jack or they will become spectators in the midfield. This means by the time Wilshere has got the 3 or 4 matches he needs to be back to his best playing self, he has often picked up another knock, or a crack here or a tear there.
Wenger is notorious for patiently, and stubbornly, I might add, waiting for players he believed in. After the departure of Vieira in 2005, Wenger brought Abou Diaby in 2006, convinced that he was the natural successor in that midfield role. But as good and powerful as Diaby was, he was propped up on two matchsticks for legs. Wenger refused to buy the sort of player that would truly be the "new Vieira" in the hope that Diaby will overcome his injury woes and fulfill the undoubted potential we all saw in him. It took 9 years for Wenger to finally realize that this dream will not come true. Only after Diaby's departure did Arsene really start chasing players that have the sort of qualities resembling those we lost when Vieira left. The signings of both Mohamed Elneny and Granit Xhaka in 2016 shows Wenger is just finally ready to move on from the Diaby hope.
Back to Wilshere. Wenger has often been accused of overplaying Wilshere and sometimes even playing him when he was not fully ready. In the past few years, as Arsenal stockpiled midfielders, it became increasingly clear that even with his outrageous talent, Wilshere's frequent and long absences have become a luxury. Even with the departure of 3 midfielders (Flamini, Arteta, Rosicky), Arsenal still has an abundance of midfielders who are more than good enough.
So what would you have Wenger do? Keep Wilshere on the payroll in spite of not playing, as he did with Diaby for 9 years? As much as I liked Diaby, I thought it was irresponsible of Wenger to keep faith in one unavailable player for that long. And I would be even more disappointed if he were to repeat the same tomfoolery with Wilshere.
After Arsenal's self-imposed (or some people might say Wenger-imposed) financial restrictions in the aftermath of the new stadium, Arsene Wenger has slowly upgraded the quality of the squad. It is still arguable that the quality can still be increased, but that will likely never happen with Wenger in charge. We are slowly reaching the point where we are going to have some really good players sitting on the bench more than they should. To do that, you will have to kill the prospects of their moving away by pricing them out of the market. Can anyone reasonably argue that paying a player wages in the neighborhood of £150k/week to sit on the bench is justifiable if you win the Premier League or even the Champions League? Some people will argue it was not a bad idea. But if you consider what you would do if it was your own money, it does not sound that ingenious anymore, does it?
No comments:
Post a Comment