The Beautiful Groan

Most clubs sign players for the here and now. When you read of a team’s summer signings, you expect a good number of them to be turning out come the first match in August.

Not Arsenal. Patience is the key for any young Arsenal signing, as this report shows. We’ll have a look at each of the current first XI in turn, to see just how long they’ve had to wait.

For all these players, they are counted as regular first teamers once they are undoubtedly first choice, i.e. if all players were fit they would not be dropped.

Manuel Almunia, 30

Joined: July 2004

First teamer since: August 2007, aged 30

Waited: 3.1 years

Almunia was signed three summers ago now, and since he arrived he has been thought of as nothing more than a backup. Some early mistakes only compounded that feeling, but he has improved immeasurably in the last 18 months, with some excellent cup performances last season helping him stake his claim for Lehmann’s spot. With the German making two high profile mistakes, Almunia got his chance and hasn’t looked back. He had reached 30 before earning his spot.

Bacary Sagna, 24

Joined: July 2007

First teamer since: July 2007, aged 24

Waited: 0 years

Sagna is an exception to the rule that Arsenal players often have to spend some time in England before becoming regulars in the first team. A surprising signing, he has displaced both Eboue and Hoyte immediately and effectively.

Gael Clichy, 22

Joined: August 2003

First teamer since: August 2006, aged 21

Waited: 3 years

Clichy struggled in his early years at Arsenal for two reasons. Firstly, he suffered a series of long term injuries that threatened his long term development, not to mention his lightning speed, and secondly, a certain Ashley Cole was in his way. No disrespect to Clichy, but if Cole was still at Arsenal, he would probably still be the first choice, and perhaps established as the best left back in the world. But greed and arrogance took him to Chelsea, where he has never appeared the same player, a hubris his career will be remembered for over his ability. His chance thrown away was an opportunity to Clichy, who has grasped it with both hands after patiently waiting his turn. It is incredible to think he is still only 22.

William Gallas, 30

Joined: August 2006

First teamer since: August 2006, aged 29

Waited: 0 years

A rare signing under Wenger, in that Gallas had just turned 29 when he arrived as part of the Ashley Cole deal last summer, he was thrust straight into the first team, an unsurprising decision given his experience, but struggled with injury in his first season. Nevertheless, he was first choice when fit, but it is only recently, after over a year at the club, that the real Gallas is shining through.

Kolo Toure, 26

Joined: February 2002

First teamer since: August 2003, aged 22

Waited: 1.5 years

Toure arrived as a utility player, making his early appearances as a manic midfielder, who chased and harried everyone in sight. It took him precisely one appearance against Chelsea to become a crowd favourite, helping Arsenal come from a man and a goal down to earn a draw with an energy filled display. He played a decent number of games in 2002-03, but it wasn’t until the unbeaten season that he became a regular at centre back, having filled in across the back and in midfield. Now, it is almost impossible to imagine him anywhere else.

Cesc Fabregas, 20

Joined: September 2003

First teamer since: August 2005, aged 18

Waited: 2 years

What is there to be said about Cesc that hasn’t already been said a million times? Youngest player, youngest scorer, etc, he stepped into the massive void left behind by Patrick Vieira in the summer of 2005, aged only 18. The media instantly wrote the team off, so Cesc went and became arguably the best young midfielder in the world. Now, you can take the word ‘young’ out of that sentence and it still rings true. Undoubtedly, having joined the club at 16, Fabregas would’ve expected to wait longer than two years to become a regular, but his talent and application saw to that.

Mathieu Flamini, 23

Joined: July 2004

First teamer since: August 2007, aged 23

Waited: 3.1 years

Still only 23, Flamini was on the brink of leaving Arsenal this summer, due to a lack of regular first team football. His most extended run came two seasons ago, but it was at left back with Cole and Clichy regularly unavailable. Wenger convinced him to stay, and he is proof that patience can pay off, because his early season form has seen him firmly established in the team for the first time.

Tomas Rosicky, 27

Joined: May 2006

First teamer since: August 2006, aged 25

Waited: 0 years

Signed prior to the World Cup, Rosicky looked like a bargain when he scored two fantastic goals in the early stages in Germany. But his time at Arsenal has been hit by continual niggling injuries, a shame given that when fit for a few games, he looks sharp and dangerous. A rarity in that he went straight into the first team, Rosicky, at 25, was also quite experienced for a Wenger signing.

Alexander Hleb, 26

Joined: June 2005

First teamer since: August 2006, aged 25

Waited: 1.2 years

Hleb played a decent amount in his first season, but Pires, Reyes and Ljungberg restricted his opportunities and he could never be considered a first choice player. But with the departure of Pires in the summer of 2006, Reyes also leaving on loan, Hleb stepped into the breach to become much more of a regular starter. Much of his second season was disappointing, with his clever passes rarely finding their target, although, given that his targets were often Baptista and Aliadiere, that may not have been his fault. This season, he has been a revelation.

Robin Van Persie, 24

Joined: May 2004

First teamer since: August 2006, aged 23

Waited: 1.3 years

Van Persie arrived with a big reputation, and an apparent desire to learn from his countryman Dennis Bergkamp, in his final season. After the Dutch master’s retirement, Van Persie became first choice alongside Thierry Henry, only for his season to be curtailed by injury.

Emmanuel Adebayor, 23

Joined: January 2006

First teamer since: August 2007, aged 23

Waited: 1.6 years

Adebayor is now a first team player for the first time, because although he played much of last season, Henry and Van Persie were always the premier pairing when fit.

Average age to become a first teamer: 23.9

Average waiting time to become a first teamer: 1.5 years

Average waiting time to become a first teamer, of those not signed to step straight in: 2.4 years

So there you have it. If a young player is signed by Arsenal, aged anywhere from their teens to about 22, they should not expect to be automatic first choice for around two and a half years. And that’s only for the best ones – some don’t make the grade at all.

There are those who want instant results, those who write Walcott and Eduardo off after a few months. These figures should be taken into account before doing so – a signing, especially of a young player, is a long term investment. It took Clichy three years to break through, Hleb was poor in his second season but everyone is now glad he’s still around, and as for Flamini? Who would’ve been upset to see him go in the summer? Yet now he is an inspiration in the middle of the park, three years after arriving at the club.

This is a lesson to players such as David Bentley, who could’ve made it at Arsenal, but didn’t have the patience. It takes a certain young maturity to fit into the system, a quality that Wenger also values.

Another surprise is the lack of players Wenger signs with the intention of putting them straight into the first team. Gallas and Rosicky were instant first team players, but both struggled with injury in their first season. In fact, only Sagna, of the current first XI, spent the first three months of his Arsenal career in the team, without a hitch.

That is something to consider when baying for players to join. Wenger rarely makes signings to fill a perceived gap. Sagna was an exception this season – it is unusual for the manager to spend money on a player and place them straight into the side on a regular basis. In other words, he doesn’t satisfy the instant gratification crowd that over the past two seasons have claimed he is past his best.

Compare this with Chelsea, who have seven players in their first XI who were there the day they were signed (Cech, Cole, Carvalho, Belletti, Essien, Lampard, Drogba), Man Utd, who have six (Van der Sar, Ferdinand, Vidic, Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez), and Liverpool, with at least four (Reina, Hyypia, Riise, Torres).

It is pretty clear from these numbers that the rest of the top four buy players with the express plan of improving their team instantly. Arsenal play the game an entirely different way, signing players so that they make an impact a few years later. In that way, Wenger is always two to three years ahead of us. We see a gap in the team forming, only to realise that he plugged that gap two years ago, and the selected player is now ready to step up. It is this forethought that is now bearing fruit.

I would suggest that Wenger’s plan stretches ahead for the next few years. He probably knows what his squad will look like in three years time, and already knows which positions need reinforcements at that point.

No other manager could have achieved what Wenger has achieved. Be grateful he is manager of our football club.

The shortest managerial reign in England’s history came to it’s inevitable end this morning as Steve McLaren was unanimously fired by the FA.

Watching last night was a surreal mix between an extremely painful yet hilarious experience. All the time, while being gutted that we’d miss out next summer, I had that comforting feeling that at least McLaren hadn’t got away with it. This had been such a disaster from the start that we surely could not delude ourselves any longer.

Oh yes we could.

Steven Gerrard thinks we played well last night. David Beckham thinks we were unlucky, and most bizarrely, Frank Lampard was awarded man of the match when for the first half, I wasn’t sure whether he was even on the field.

It was the manner of the defeat that made the team a laughing stock, and provided a stark contrast with Croatia, who, although a decent side, are no world beaters. They passed effectively, kept possession, whereas half of the English side were struggling just to get the ball under control.

Bilic was animated, encouraging and instructing his players, while McLaren sat passively under an umbrella, watching cluelessly as his players imploded in front of him, playing a predictable and repeated game of ‘play a few simple passes on the halfway line, then lump it forward’.

England’s only hope now is that this will be looked back upon as a turning point, the moment at which the players realised they aren’t the world beaters they are made out to be, and the FA figured out that the game in this country is in turmoil. The Premiership is thriving, but at the lower levels, and the youth levels in particular, the wrong kind of teaching is taking place. In Spain, fifteen year olds have learnt to love the ball, wanting it and using it effectively. In England, those same players are taught to run around manically and get rid of the ball as soon as possible.

No doubt there will be an analysis of where it all went wrong, and after a couple of days of blaming McLaren and the players, the media will, as ever, convince themselves that the players are still awesomely talented and it is the fault of someone else. Probably the foreigners.

Until then, let’s hope that those Chelsea ’superstars’ play as badly for their club as they did for their country last night. They weren’t alone, in fact only the much maligned Peter Crouch played respectably, but it is incredible to see them look so good most weeks and then so inept last night.

I’m just so glad none of those players are playing for Arsenal week in, week out. They simply aren’t good enough.

Can someone answer me a very simple question - why should anyone feel any differently about the respective talents of Stsve McLaren and the England team now, than they did before Saturday’s surprise win for Israel?

On Saturday, the papers were full of debate about whether McLaren should get sacked, coupled with an analysis of where it all went wrong. Many came to the conclusions that a) McLaren is an average manager who found his level at Middlesborough and should never have been allowed to get the job, and b) our players are perhaps not the collection of world beaters we claim them to be.

The arguments are compelling. McLaren is essentially a poor man’s Sven, ironic given how quickly people wanted rid of the Swede, while Gerrard, Lampard, Terry and Rooney, our most gifted players, look shadows of their club selves playing for the national team, away from the excellent support of their more talented teammates.

It seemed that, at last, English football might look inwards for the problem, rather than finding something or someone else to blame. There would of course be moaning about the plastic pitch and Johnny Foreigner, but the voice of reason would have to win out. And with the experiment of plumping for the best available English manager deemed a complete disaster, maybe sense would finally prevail.

And then, out of nowhere, Croatia and Russia both lost. Suddenly, the players were being talked up again, as one of the favourites for next summer’s tournament.

First off, that smacks of arrogance, as if qualification is already assured, when a point against a very decent Croatian side is still required. But do we not learn? We haven’t got near a final in a long time, and the brand of football we play is uninspiring and not in the slightest bit threatening.

But what confuses me most is that, listening to Five Live, they are now praising McLaren. What for? He has done precisely nothing since those same analysts were against him.

It seems to me that the most impressive thing McLaren has done since be in charge is simply to be in the right place at the right time for his get out of jail free card.

Nineteen games, fifteen wins, four draw, no losses.

Quite an impressive start, really.

But I think we should be very careful over what this leads us to believe, and even more wary about how the media are interpreting this quite frankly astonishing opening to the season.

Before the season began, we were written off - absolutely caned by the press who almost to a man predicted we’d be out of the top four. I said at the time that it was complete garbage and stuck to it. Now, of course, with everything going so well and the papers seemingly needing to see everything in black and white, we are champions in waiting, the ‘new invincibles’.

It is a phrase I do not like. And it is a burden I think the players do not need. Wenger spoke earlier in the season about being surprised at the speed of improvement from last season to this. He expected it to happen, but not this quickly. Now some may think he was simply trying to take the pressure off the team, but I think he was being genuine.

I imagine he thought Cesc would score ten this season. Not by the end of October. I imagine he predicted an improvement in Hleb, but not by this margin, and I doubt even Wenger himself could’ve foreseen how Flamini would make a spot in the congested centre of midfield his own.

There is no doubt in my mind that Wenger knew he was building something special, but for it to come to fruition so early has been nothing more than a wonderful bonus. We are still not favourites for the league, which is quite right given how ominous United look and how experienced they are.

But this side will improve. Whatever happens this season, good or bad, will take their knowledge of the game further, and make them stronger yet for the next challenge, which is where Wenger perhaps envisaged trophies.

Of course it would be a disappointment to fall away after such an amazing start. But what I am saying is this - if things starts to go badly, do not react how the media will, by writing the club off. Take how you feel now about this growing side, and stick with that faith. They are going in the right direction.

There will be blows along the way. But we can take them. We are Arsenal.

Coming on for your first Champions League appearance, having been playing in the Championship only last season, and scoring the final goal in a rampant seven goal rout that would see the world take notice of your team - you’d think that’d be the dream of any youngster, wouldn’t you?

Well, it didn’t seem to be enough to raise a smile on the face of our young Danish international, Nicklas Bendtner. While the team celebrated and enjoyed the end of a spectacular performance, Bendtner jogged away from goal, with not so much of the hint of happiness.

Why?

We all know Bendtner rates his own talent very highly. Nothing wrong with that, and although he has made a few comments to the media, there’s nothing enormously controversial in there, especially when you compare it to, say, Jens Lehmann.

As a result of this confidence, he feels ready to play regularly for Arsenal. I’m sure he understands that he isn’t first choice, but his eyes probably lit up when Van Persie picked up his injury. With Eduardo struggling to adapt to the pace of the Premiership, he probably thought this was his chance.

And it may yet be. But after Eduardo failed to make an impact against Bolton, what Bendtner probably didn’t expect was to be upstaged last night by a man even younger than he is, who has only made cameo appearances on the wing this season.

But upstaged he was. He did make his point with the final goal, but his celebration was so muted that he looks decidedly grumpy alongside jubilant teammates.

Or maybe he just isn’t the smiley type.

Last week I ranted against various national newspapers for their blinkered, biased and just plain stupid views on the reasons for our resurgence this season.

I received an extremely defensive email from a reader who had missed the point slightly, thinking that I was slating all opinion columns, and indeed all forms of media, including blogs, fan sites and more. My ire was aimed more at newspaper columnists who feel the need to ‘tow the party line’ of their particular paper, losing all sense of perspective and common sense with every word they write.

But it got me thinking. What do we read, and why do we read it? Why am I making that distinction, that I enjoy reading blog opinions yet frequently find national newspapers so utterly infuriating?

The answer is pretty simple.

Newspapers are there to sell copies. And writing a column about how Henry was a wonderful player but that his departure had altered the balance of the team in a way that is currently beneficial does not sell papers to the masses. Slapping a huge headline on the backpage slating the legend does. That is disheartening in itself.

So each paper has an angle they present on any given story. All writers are expected to (mainly) adhere to this angle. Are all Daily Mail writers xenophobic idiots who think that no-one born outside Britain should dare ever have a job in this country? Probably not, but this is the impression that comes across, targeted at readers who feel the same way.

Does everyone who works at the Express think that Diana should be on the front page of the paper every day? Again, probably not, but if she disappeared, so would their readers, and most importantly, so would their sales. Similarly, not every sports hack at the Sun thinks Kaka is off to Chelsea for 100m and Arsenal are about to spend 30m on another striker, in fact perhaps none of them do, but is that going to stop them printing it? Of course not. It’ll sell.

But the internet is a diverse place. If a site is not created for purely financial reasons, then there becomes little point in falsifying stories and writing something that you simply don’t believe in. Of course there are exceptions - you only have to glance at Newsnow to see sites that attempt to draw you in with dramatic headlines, only for the content to either be ridiculous or entirely unrelated. Their currency is hits, perhaps for sponsorship, perhaps for ego, but either way it helps no-one, because you’ll only ever visit the site once.

True blogs, however, are an entirely different kettle of fish. They attract loyal followers, readers who are interested in another person’s opinion, whether theirs is related or not. When reading someone’s true opinion, it is natural to agree more with some statements than others. Does that make it a bad blog? Not at all, as long as it is true to the writer. Those that we read most often (mine are to the right) are chosen not necessarily because we agree with them more often, but because we consider their opinions interesting.

Because that is exactly the point - football fans do not agree with each other. And I’m not just talking about supporters of different clubs, because few fans read blogs away from their own team, unless they are of general interest. No, I’m talking about fellow fans of your own club. How many Arsenal fans do you know with differing opinions of Senderos? Of Hleb? Of Bendtner’s attitude? Of who should be between the sticks? Of the captaincy decision?

These are only current examples. But at any given moment, you could find yourself another Arsenal fan, find plenty of common ground, and plenty more to debate about. Which is precisely what we love to do. Do you find yourself in the pub with friends, at a match, or in fact anywhere, engaging in a lively debate on the merits of a given player, performance, or newsworthy item? I know I do, probably boring any non-football fans to death in the process.

This debating process is available on a blog, in a section common to all - comments. The blog author frequently checks and responds to these, so if you want a friendly debate, you can generally get one. Is that not exactly what we’re after when reading the opinions of others? That beautiful combination of seeing them say something you agree entirely with, and then make another point that you have a slightly different spin on?

At the end of the day, we are fans. We are not in this to become successful journalists, to make money, or to write dramatic stories which bear no resemblance to our beliefs. We are here to share our opinion.

The point is - we have our own unique take on the game, and on our club. And if we hold an opinion close to our hearts, we will staunchly defend it.

A newspaper hack who does not believe in what he is writing can never achieve that.

Stay true.

There is no doubting that Arsenal have got off to an absolute flyer this season, but how much does that tend to indicate the overall success of a season? Let’s look at some history:

2006/7

Arsenal’s first six games : Villa(h) 1-1, Man City(a) 0-1, Boro(h) 1-1, Man Utd(a) 1-0, Sheff Utd(h) 3-0, Charlton(a) 2-1, 11 points, final position 4th

Man Utd’s first six games: Fulham(h) 5-1, Charlton(a) 3-0, Watford(a) 2-1, Spurs(h) 1-0, Arsenal(h) 0-1, Reading(a) 1-1, 13 points, final position 1st

Even on a three game winning streak, Arsenal were behind Man Utd from day one, and never got closer than this. Ten goals in three games from the eventual champions set them off and running.

2005/6

Arsenal: Newcastle(h) 2-0, Chelsea(a) 0-1, Fulham(h) 4-1, Boro(a) 1-2, Everton(h) 2-0, West Ham(a) 0-0, 10 points, final position 4th

Chelsea: Wigan(a) 1-0, Arsenal(h) 1-0, WBA(h) 4-0, Spurs(a) 2-0, Sunderland(h) 2-0, Charlton(a) 2-0, 18 points, final position 1st

There’s a good start, and then there’s Chelsea’s start from two years ago. It put massive pressure on everyone, and in the end no-one got close to them.

2004/5

Arsenal: Everton(a) 4-1, Boro(h) 5-3, Blackburn(h) 3-0, Norwich(a) 4-1, Fulham(a) 3-0, Bolton(h) 2-2, 16 points, final position 2nd

Chelsea: Man Utd(h) 1-0, Birmingham(a) 1-0, Palace(a) 2-0, Southampton(h) 2-1, Villa(a) 0-0, Spurs(h) 0-0, 14 points, final position 1st

The exception. Arsenal got off a flyer with a special performance against Everton and an amazing comeback from 3-1 down against Boro, but Chelsea kept up and then sped past when the form dipped. I still maintain that winning the Premiership this season was Chelsea’s finest hour - they were absolutely relentless.

2003/4

Arsenal: Everton(h) 2-1, Boro(a) 4-0, Villa(h) 2-0, Man City(a) 2-1, Portsmouth(h) 1-1, Man Utd(a) 0-0, 14 points, final position 1st

Chelsea: Liverpool(a) 2-1, Leicester(h) 2-1, Birmingham(a) 0-0, Blackburn(h) 2-2, Spurs(h) 4-2, Wolves(a) 5-0, 14 points, final position 2nd

The top two after six games were also the top two at the end of the season, but of course Arsenal maintained this form throughout the entire campaign, remaining unbeaten, while Chelsea lost seven games and finished well back.

So a good start is imperative if you want to be challenging for the title, Man Utd’s 13 points from six games being the weakest start by eventual champions for some time. A word of caution is that we started in similar fashion three years ago, but finished miles behind Chelsea when all was said and done.

I tend to find a truer reflection is found in comparing the results you’ve had against the previous season, to see just how much you’ve gained. After all, we all know the fixtures have been kind so far, so just how good a start have we had?

2006/7: Fulham(h) 2-1, Blackburn(a) 1-1, Man City(h) 1-0, Portsmouth(h) 3-1, Spurs(a) 3-1, Derby(h) 5-0, 16 points

2005/6: Fulham(h) 3-1, Blackburn(a) 2-0, Man City(h) 3-1, Portsmouth(h) 2-2, Spurs(a) 2-2, Watford(h) 3-0, 14 points

Arsene Wenger is right to ensure that everyone keeps their feet on the ground, as we’re actually only two points better off than in the corresponding fixtures from last season, replacing Derby with Watford, as the two teams that will come bottom. It was not these fixtures that cost us so badly last term.

Forthcoming fixtures:

West Ham(a), Sunderland(h), Bolton(h), Liverpool(a)

Last season:

West Ham(a) 0-1, Bolton(h) 2-1, Liverpool(a) 1-4

But now we have a chance to right a few wrongs. West Ham did the double over us last season, and the performance at Anfield was an absolute shocker. The next four games, including another home game against Sunderland, give a huge opportunity to put a big gap between Arsenal of 2006-7 and the Arsenal of today.

Let the good times continue.

In other news, financial results have been revealed to counter everything Dein has been saying recently about Arsenal requiring massive investment. We are officially the richest club in Britain, with Wenger having an enormous transfer fund, should he need it. To read more on this, I suggest you take a look at both Arseblog and Gunnerblog for excellent analysis of the story.

It’s a good day.

I couldn’t really let today go by without mentioning Jose Mourinho’s dramatic departure from Stamford Bridge, and what it might mean to the club and the Premiership moving forward.

There is a certain sense of irony that at the beginning of the season, the press were having a field day claiming that Arsene Wenger would leave Arsenal, and his assembled team would break down, leaving the club in oblivion. Of course it was all absolutely ridiculous, but that won’t stop them using the same sensationalist tactics down the road in West London.

There is no doubting that Mourinho leaving will shake Chelsea to the core, and will unsettle a number of players. However, I don’t think for one moment there will be the mass walkout that some papers are already predicting, with Lampard, Drogba and Carvalho all being tipped to swiftly follow the manager out. Much like when Wenger leaves, there will be some changes as a new manager puts his stamp on the club, and over the first year a couple of players may decide to draw their Chelsea careers to a close and move on. And they will be replaced.

Of course, that scenario isn’t interesting enough for the media, who just want to print ‘Crisis!’ and ‘Turmoil!’ whenever they can.

But that isn’t to say that this is not bad news for Chelsea. It is. Mourinho may have been one of the most dislikable managers ever to walk these shores, but as a tactician and man manager he was up there with the very best. Some may say that he bought the title, but as many Real Madrid managers will testify, collecting players and then moulding them into a cohesive team is an extremely difficult job. Every player at the club now believes he is a superstar, and superstars don’t often like change.

Mourinho made Chelsea incredibly difficult to beat, and he infused a siege mentality in the team which led to so many fightbacks - they just didn’t know how to lose. Witness the comeback against us at the Emirates at the end of the last season - a goal and a man down in the second half, they battered us.

Many are already writing his apparent successor, Avram Grant, off. Clearly the media don’t learn that just because they know little about a man, doesn’t mean they have no talent. Our own manager was proof of that, and Grant comes with a decent reputation from his time in Israel especially.

But this is a wholly different animal. He is friends with Abramovich, so he is likely to bend to his wishes more often that Jose did. Shevchenko can expect more playing time. But at the same time, there may be some resentment around the club, and the fans are ready to lash out if things don’t go to plan. For me, the job is now a poisoned chalice - it is a practically impossible task to achieve the same level of results as Mourinho while appeasing Abramovich with attractive football. The players have to learn a whole new style - can they do it? Do they even want to?

The timing is also extremely odd. With a crunch game at Old Trafford on Sunday, they will go one of two ways. Either they will act unsettled and get rolled over, or Mourinho’s siege mentality will live on and they’ll shock United. I suspect the latter, especially after their awful performance on Tuesday - they have a point to prove.

It has been a bright 24 hours for Arsenal. It has been a disheartening 24 hours to be a Chelsea fan. This season gets more interesting by the day.

It couldn’t last. Amongst all the delight around Arsenal’s stunning start to the season, there have been more rumblings going on in the background.

And so, as revealed earlier by ANR and investigated by Gunnerblog, it became apparent that Alisher Usmanov and his Red and White holdings company had purchased enough shares to take them to around 21% ownership of Arsenal Football Club. Now only Danny Fiszman owns a greater slice.

That news is concerning in itself, given the shady background of the company and the apparent single-minded ambition of David Dein. Working in Arsenal’s best interests becomes a lot more difficult to believe when the timing of such actions brings such a swift end to euphoria. At best, it’s a dent in what has been a glorious week. At worst, it is deliberate destabilisation.

But even more concerning was the price of the purchase, placed anywhere between 8.5k and 10k a share, way above the trading price. Usmanov really wanted those shares.

So the question is, why? No doubt we will shortly be fed the same rhetoric about the company raising their stake, but not preparing for a hostile takeover, so should we believe it? Absolutely not.

Purchasing shares from a business perspective is one thing. Usmanov may have believed that the share price would rise, and he could make a quick buck. But he is purchasing the shares for a price well over the odds. Either he thinks the shares are about to boom, in which case he would struggle to find a seller, or he has entirely different plans.

And I think it’s fairly clear that it is the latter. With his stake in the club rising, eyes will now turn to Stan Kroenke, who has decisions to make. He purchased his shares for around 7k each, so with Usmanov paying such inflated prices, the American could walk away tomorrow with a healthy profit in his back pocket. The question is - what does he want?

Suddenly the option of getting Kroenke on side with the board is a wise one, which makes Peter Hill-Wood’s dismissive remarks about him a few months back seems a touch premature. Were he to sell to Red and White, they would become the major shareholder and a very serious threat.

I find myself hoping that Stan Kroenke can work with the board to find a way to reject this new attack. Two months ago, I couldn’t imagine myself saying that.

This one is going to run and run. And it’s going to get ugly.

After a couple of days of searching and scouring for reputable reports of transfer costs, double and triple checking in places, I bring you the total price of every Premiership starting XI from the weekend.

And there are a few surprises in there. Enjoy.

20. Reading - 5.678m:

(Hahnemann - free, Murty - 700k, Ingimarsson - 175k, Duberry - 800k, Shorey - 25k, Fae - 2.5m, Harper - 400k, Gunnarsson - nominal, Hunt - free, Lita - 1m, Doyle - 78k)

Showing just how good a job Steve Coppell is doing, his entire XI over the weekend cost one third of Darren Bent. Admittedly, they got hammered.

19. Derby - 7.975m:

(Bywater - 225k, Griffin - free, Malcolm - free, Davis - 3m, Camara - free, Todd - 750k, Fagan - 1m, Oakley - free, Mears - 1m, Pearson - 1m, Howard - 1m)

Like Reading, Derby’s team cost peanuts, unlike Reading, they’re going to finish so far bottom that the team in 19th will wonder what that tiny dot in the distance is.

18. Blackburn - 17.9m:

(Friedel - free, Emerton - 2.2m, Samba - free, Nelsen - free, Warnock - 1.5m, Bentley - 4m, Savage - 3m, Dunn - 2.2m, Pedersen - 2.5m, Santa Cruz - free, McCarthy - 2.5m)

While Blackburn are certainly not many people’s cup of tea, there is no doubting that on a financial level, they are doing superbly. How anyone can get hold of McCarthy and Santa Cruz, neither beyond their peak, for a total of 2.5m is beyond me.

17. Birmingham - 19.25m:

(Maik Taylor - free, Kelly - 750k, Jaidi - 2m, Ridgewell - 2m, Parnaby - free, Kapo - 3m, Muamba - 4m, Djourou - loan, Larsson - 1m, Forssell - 3m, Jerome - 3.5m.)

You look at this side and it looks worse that Reading, despite costing four times as much.

16. Bolton - 19.85m:

(Jaaskelainen - 100k, Hunt - free, Meite - 4m, Cid - 1m, Samuel - free, Speed - 750k, Nolan - free, Alonso - loan, McCann - 1m, Diouf - 5m, Anelka - 8m.)

With most of the money spent on three signings, you have to say that any success Bolton have this season is well earned. Of course, they’ve looked atrocious so far, and might finish lower than this 16th suggests.

15. Wigan - 22.05m:

(Kirkland - 2.5m, Melchiot - free, Granqvist - 750k, Bramble - free, Kilbane - 2m, Landzaat - 2.5m, Brown - 1m, Scharner - 2.5m, Koumas - 5.3m, Sibierski - free, Heskey - 5.5m)

While many think Wigan spend nothing, they’ve actually splashed out a reasonable amount on their side, without actually getting a lot of quality to show for it. Koumas and Heskey costing nearly 11m between them? You can get Reading, twice over, for that.

14. Portsmouth - 24.45m:

(James - 1.2m, Johnson - 3m, Pamarot - 2.5m (part of 7.5m deal with Davis/Mendes), Distin - free, Hreidarsson - free, Lauren - 500k, Muntari - 7m, Davis - 2.5m (part of 7.5m deal with Pamarot/Mendes), Taylor - 750k, Utaka - 7m, Kanu - free.)

The wheeler-dealer that is Harry Redknapp is something of an expert at not spending a lot on players. They will finish a lot higher than 14th, although they’ll have to play a lot better than they did on Sunday.

13. Fulham - 26.775m:

(Niemi - 2m, Bocanegra - free, Konchesky - 3.25m, Stefanovic - 1m, Baird - 3.025m, Smertin - free, Davies - 3m, Davis - 4m, Dempsey - 1.5m, Bouazza - 3m, Kamara - 6m)

Another side who, unnoticed, have actually spent a reasonable amount on their team, but how many in that list look overpriced? I’d say around half.

12. Sunderland - 27.09m:

(Gordon - 9m, Nosworthy - free, McShane - 2.5m, Higginbotham - 2.5m, Collins - 140k, Leadbitter - free, Yorke - 200k, Etuhu - 1.5m, Wallace - 250k, Chopra - 5m, Jones - 6m)

If Sunderland come 12th they’ll be delighted, but they’ve spent the money that suggests that they now should. The forward line is surely massively overpriced, but the record signing of Gordon may be what keeps them up.

11. West Ham - 29.225m:

(Green - 2m, Neill - 1.5m, Ferdinand - free, Upson - 6m, McCartney - 1.1m (valuing Clarke at 500k), Bowyer - free, Noble - free, Mullins - 625k, Etherington - 3.5m, Ashton - 7m, Bellamy - 7.5m)

Dean Ashton + Craig Bellamy + Matthew Upson - 20.5m? And you wonder why Arsene Wenger doesn’t buy many British players. Add to this total the phenomenal wages West Ham offer, and the fact that Parker (7m), Faubert (6.1m) and Ljungberg (3m) are missing, and West Ham can be a 40m team.

10. Middlesbrough - 30.25m:

(Schwarzer - 1.5m, Young - 2.5m, Woodgate - 7m, Wheater - free, Taylor - free, Boateng - 5m, Rochemback - 4.5m, Arca - 1.75m, Downing - free, Mido - 6m, Aliadiere - 2m)

Into the top ten now, and we break the 30m mark thanks to some serious Boro spending. Before McClaren was hired as England manager, people were touting his achievements, but he spent a fortune at Boro (including the now departed Viduka and Yakubu) without getting anywhere. Is it any wonder England look rubbish? Here, the combined fee of 8m for a lazy Mido, and a brittle and not very good Aliadiere doesn’t look like good business.

9. Newcastle - 30.75m:

(Harper - free, Taylor - free, Rozehnal - 2.9m, Cacapa - free, N’Zogbia - 250k, Smith - 6m, Geremi - free, Butt - 2m, Milner - 3.6m, Owen - 16m, Viduka - free)

Staying up north, Newcastle spend 30m despite having five free transfers in their side. In fact, on some days, where they field 6m Joey Barton, and 6.5m Jose Enrique, they’ll pass the 40m mark.

8. Man City - 34.4m:

(Schmeichel - free, Corluka - 8m, Richards - free, Dunne - 3m, Garrido - 1.5m, Ireland - free, Johnson - free, Hamann - 400k, Petrov - 4.7m, Elano - 8m, Bianchi - 8.8m)

Four players through the academy and City still come out at nearly 35m. With Bojinov injured and costing nearly 6m, they are another club who could easily hit the 40m this season, especially once the chequebook returns in January.

7. Arsenal - 35.72m:

(Almunia - 1.5m, Toure - 150k, Senderos - 2.5m, Gilberto - 4.5m, Clichy - nominal, Rosicky - 6.8m, Fabregas - free, Flamini - 270k (comp), Hleb - 10m, Van Persie - 3m, Adebayor - 7m)

Who needs money when you can assemble this team for less than the profit made on the Anelka, Petit and Overmars transfers? Hleb comes in as the most expensive (throughout the squad) at 10m, while picking up Toure, Clichy and Cesc, arguably the three top performers at the moment, for a week of Michael Ballack’s wages, has got to be some of the best business ever performed.

6. Aston Villa - 37.5m:

(Carson - loan, Mellberg - 5m, Knight - 3.5m, Laursen - 3m, Bouma - 3.5m, Agbonlahor - free, Reo-Coker - 8.5m, Barry - free, Young - 9m, Moore - free, Carew - 5m (estimate, swap with Baros))

Coming in above Arsenal are Villa, who after the weekend most of the Premiership has a liking for. There are three frees and a loan deal in there, but the signings of their English players especially has risen the price of their side. For a club with a reputation for not spending, they do like to splash the cash around a bit.

5. Everton - 47.8m:

(Howard - 3m, Jagielka - 4m, Yobo - 5m, Lescott - 4m, Baines - 5m, Arteta - 2m, Neville - 3m, Carsley - 1.95m, Pienaar - loan, Yakubu - 11.25m, Johnson - 8.6m)

As we move into the top five, we take a massive jump of 10m up to Everton, whose first XI over the weekend cost nearly 50m. Everyone knows about the money spent on the forwards, but they’ve spent a serious amount on the backline too. No doubt if the Toffees so well this season, they will be praised for their successes, but with this sort of chequebook activity, they should be up there.

4. Spurs - 53.6m:

(Robinson - 2m, Chimbonda - 4.5m, Rocha - 3.3m, Kaboul - 7m, Bale - 5m, Malbranque - 2m, Huddlestone - 2.5m, Jenas - 8m, Lee - 1.4m, Keane - 7m, Berbatov - 10.9m)

Another leap is made to Spurs, who spent well over 50m on a side that have looked poor all season. Their backline is shocking, yet somehow it cost them over 20m, while Jenas at 8m is ridiculously priced. And this is the price of the side WITHOUT Darren Bent in it, the 16.5m striker not making the team. No wonder Daniel Levy’s pissed off. They’ve spent like a top four club, but they aren’t going to be one.

3. Liverpool - 86.5m:

(Reina - 6m, Finnan - 3.5m, Hyypia - 3m, Agger - 5.8m, Arbeloa - 2.5m, Pennant - 6.7m, Mascherano - 1.5m, Alonso - 10.5m, Babel - 11.5m, Torres - 26.5m, Kuyt - 9m)

Now we’re playing with serious money. A massive leap of over 30m between fourth and third means that Liverpool are closing in on fielding a side costing 100m. You could argue that a couple in there are overpriced, but in reality Liverpool have simply bought a side over the last two to three years. Not many sides can afford this, but results will now be expected.

2. Man Utd - 91.5m:

(Van der Sar - 2m, Brown - free, Ferdinand - 30m, Vidic - 7m, Evra - 5.5m, Eagles - free, Hargreaves - 17m, Scholes - free, Nani - 14m, Anderson - 16m, Tevez - loan)

No surprise to see United up here, even though they had three academy products in their side, and with Tevez arriving on loan, he doesn’t count as anything either. Not only that, but replace Eagles with Ronaldo, and Tevez with Rooney, and you’ve got a side costing more like 135m. Some say they don’t financially compete with Chelsea, but they do with their first team. They just lack the depth of the Russians. Not everyone has a multi-billionaire, most have to earn their cash.

1. Chelsea - 145m:

(Cech - 7m, Belletti - 3.5m, Terry - free, Alex - free, Ashley Cole - 16m (estimated Gallas’ worth at 11m, based on Chelsea’s original offer of 16m), Wright-Phillips - 21m, Makelele - 16m, Essien - 28m, Malouda - 13.5m, Mikel - 16m (12m to Man Utd, 4m to Lyn Oslo), Drogba - 24m)

But of course, Chelsea will always come out on top of this list. Terry and Alex cost nothing, but they still manage to have a side costing nearly 150m. This, of course, tells only half the story - with the likes of Carvalho and Shevchenko not even making the team, plus all the money they’ve lost in transfers (Geremi cost them 10m, then they let him go on a free), they are living in a completely different financial world to everyone else.

But look at some of those prices. How many of those players could be replaced with someone else of the same ability, costing far less? The only bargain in there is Cech, and even he cost 7m. Financially doped indeed.

——-

So there we have it. Liverpool, Chelsea and United put out sides costing between 80 and 150m, and ours cost 35m, less than Villa’s. And the only way you can make that more expensive is to put Sagna in, so you hit 40m.

But even then, the side is far cheaper than Spurs’ or Everton’s, and when Newcastle, West Ham and Man City empty their physio room, theirs will be even higher, pushing us back to around 9th in the price list.

It has been said many times that Wenger has money to spend. Some have calulated it, based upon his past budget and the transfer profit he has made this summer. It usually comes out around the 30-35m mark.

So that is to say, over the course of a few years, with that money, he could assemble this Arsenal team all over again. That does not take into account the fact that we are profitable from the ground now. It does not take into account that Wenger has an uncanny ability to sell his players for more than he paid for them, even when he has had their best use.

In short, under Wenger we have absolutely no financial problem. With his ability to forge a squad, he will never need to ask the board for cash they cannot supply. There is plenty there for a considerable number of his type of signings. And with him poised to sign a new contract, that is the way it will stay.

So, put simply, Alisher Usmanov, we neither need nor want your money. You made an orange man very rich for his own personal gain, but for the football club, you are not required. Now kindly piss off.