Arsenal directors - a shot in the foot?

Artic Cole
By Boris Mellor
June 7 2005

The general consensus of the know it alls that provide our daily fish and chip paper is that Arsenal have shot itself in the foot over the Cole affair. From that it must be concluded that Arsenal should have kept quiet about Chelsea’s illegal approach.

Of course we are not privy to the thought of the Arsenal directors, but then neither are the daily rags. So there could be another way of looking at the issue.

Before doing that let's consider what has happened to Spurs over the tapping of Arnesen, it is almost certain he will go to Chelsea. One reason Spurs haven’t acted yet, according to the press, is that they fear they might suffer from taking action in the way Arsenal has. It now appears that Spurs will negotiate for compensation, playing hardball and going for the highest possible amount. So Chelsea will pay a few million and get what they want. If I were a Spurs fan I would rather see Arnesen go to hell than Chelsea, and they could keep their dirty oil money. It also means that Chelsea will be able to return to WHL later for other players or staff. Just pay the price, money is no problem.

Chelsea has forced Spurs to sell Arnesen to them, against their will. Does compensation make that ok?

But this is about Cole and Arsenal, so let's suppose that Chelsea were not challenged, that the directors let it go. What would happen next? Well maybe Chelsea did not want Cole; but my feeling is they dropped him like a hot potato when they were caught out. But we will suppose they didn’t want him, so that’s ok then isn’t it? Well not quite, the precedent is set – it’s ok for them to tap up our players. It’s always happening apparently (they should know). So whose next for the visit? Henry, Vieira, Reyes, Van Persie? There again they might have taken on Cole, and once again who would be next? They are rich, arrogant and think the laws don’t apply to them. Let them get it away with it and they will do it again and again. The Arnesen case demonstrates that. If they were talking to Cole to find out what is happening at Arsenal, then they might be interested in knowing which players might want a move. In this scenario Cole is a stalking horse, not the real target. Extreme and paranoiac? Well it's Chelsea who claimed they were on an espionage mission.

So our directors must have thought this issue through – they can’t be idiots – they chewed it over for a week. They must have considered the real risk of allowing a player to consort with a major competitor. They must have known how dire the consequences could get. It wasn’t hubris that decided them; it was the need to defend the club, to stand up to the rich bully. They couldn’t take the risk of Chelsea coming back again and again. They decided to act in the long-term interest of the club. They might have believed that Cole was serious in intending to go to Chelsea. Not an unreasonable belief when the meeting is attended by the Chelsea Manager. Arsenal are not a selling club, especially to key rivals. So the directors would not consider haggling over compensation a viable option. Instead they wanted action against Chelsea to deter them. Ironically this site has had Chelsea fans claiming that Dein influenced the committee, and that’s why the punishment was so "severe".

Actually the club that has benefited most from the hearing is Chelsea. Firstly they got the hearing delayed until cup final week so as not to disturb their CL preparations, and to ensure they did not lose points. They have used the results to play mind games against the Arsenal dressing room spirit. Do we really believe Kenyon? True they have been fined, but Arsenal will lose millions over this. Only points deductions will scare them off. Once they realised they would not happen they got up to old tricks with Arnesen.

Yes the Ashley Cole affair is painful, and siren voices will say it could be avoided by doing nothing. As a result of taking action Arsenal has been given lectures on industrial relations, does anyone think Lauren would get so much support from the media? He might not be English, he might not be quite as good, and he is not a left back. But if he did anything similar we would be reading about the mercenaries. Funny how the English are immune from being mercenary.

Arsenal have stood up for their rights, but it is they who are punished – "might is right"- apparently. Meanwhile Spurs have learnt that it’s best not to stand up to the monsters of Chelski, but rather negotiate. Well Arsenal’s board has more guts than that, and it will be the beginning of a backlash against the stench emanating from West London. Will Chelsea try it on again with an Arsenal player? I think that is unlikely now 

Maybe Arsenal will sell Cole, and then sue Chelsea for any money that is lost due to damaged goods. Goods damaged by Chelsea. The Gunners directors might lose this battle, but they intend to win the war. It’s only round one.