Arsenal, Tottenham and Vampire Weekend

Walcott, don't you know that it's insane

Don't you want to get out of Cape Cod?

Out of Cape Cod tonight?

Walcott, Vampire Weekend

It's the North London Derby tonight. 

It's been a long time since our infamous 4-4 draw last season. That was a watershed game for us. Before that game, we were still a good side. Although we'd sold Flamini and Hleb and strangely, their replacements had been doing well enough that we could be considered a title contender. I think we were 2nd or 3rd at that point. 

But after that 4-4 draw, the wheels came off. We had a lacklustre run of draws and defeats that we didn't really break until February, when Theo Walcott came back and we bought Arshavin. After that, the damage was done. We were stuck with the uncomfortable realisation that, despite Wenger's silky PR skills, the Arsenal weren't good enough to win the league.

A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. The team's changed formation. We've sold Toure and Adebayor, and picked up Vermaelen and Arshavin. Song's realised that he's a much better footballer when he runs instead of jogs. And the rest of us have realised that we're going to keep treading water until either this bunch of kids come good or.... I don't know.

In the meantime, other clubs are improving. Aston Villa gave us a scare last year with a very consistent season. Man City's going to be a serious threat, either this year or next. And even Tottenham are getting uppity and thinking of themselves as our equals. 

The automatic reaction to this idea is derision. Peter Hill-Wood's statement at the AGM ("we don't consider them as rivals") brought laughter from the shareholders, and with good reason. Tottenham have been serial under-achievers for most of their history. I don't think they've beaten us in a league game since I've started following the Arsenal. 

But if you start comparing the teams, man for man, you might be surprised. Who would you take from the following: King and Woodgate vs Gallas and Vermaelen? Gomes vs whichever Arsenal keeper has fucked up the least? Palacios vs Song? These are the areas which have been neglected for the past five years, and it shows. Going forward, we're as talented as the best in the world. Going back, and we're as good (or bad) as Tottenham. 

It's a sobering thought. 

Another sobering thought is Vampire Weekend. I don't like all this newfangled music that the kids play nowadays. It's strange and weird. I'd rather snuggle up in my flannels and listen to the grunge of my youth. But I like Vampire Weekend. I like their Upper West Side Soweto - whatever that mean. And I like how they write allegorical songs about Theo Walcott and Arsenal's inability to get out of "Cape Cod". 

Personally, I like to consider their Cape Cod reference to be about Plymouth, and how the Pilgrims' gauche attempts at colonisation eventually founded a country as diverse and dynamic as the US. And I think Vampire Weekend are comparing America's humble beginnings with Arsenal's humble, fumbled attempts at Premier League dominance. The Pilgrims had problems planting corn. We had problems with a player with corn-rows (i.e. Adebayor). And like the Pilgrims, we've got to get out of Cape Cod - or I'm going to go fucking insane following this Club. 

All in all, Walcott is a very good allegorical summary of Arsenal's current situation. And to think it came from a bunch of college kids from New York. What will those crazy Yankees think of next?

I want to buy an iMac

My desktop PC has been dying over the past couple of years. When I turn it on, it wheezes like a sick old man with emphysema. It chugs along gamely whenever it's overloaded (three windows of Firefox usually overwhelms it). And it takes ages to turn off, as if it knows that it doesn't have much time left.

Lately, I've found myself cheating on my desktop. There's an Apple Store near my house, and I've spent an increasing amount of time admiring their wares. I love the iMacs. They're so sleek and stylish, and who cares if they don't have the grunt of a Wintel PC? There are more things in life than graphics cards and processing power. The iMac is beautiful - so beautiful that it inspires people to take photos of their computer and post it on the internet.

Whether that's the proper way of expressing affection for a machine is another story altogether.

Still, I have reservations. I bought my MacBook about a year ago, and I have great affection for it. For the six months I was in Europe, it was my constant companion. It stored my photos, my music, my journal. It booked my flights and my accommodation, and it was the gateway to my life back home.

But now that I'm home, I don't use it that often. The limitations of a Mac can be stifling. Personally, I prefer a Windows system where I can see where everything is and how everything runs. Macs don't seem to give you that option. And I'm worried that once the thrill of buying an iMac dissipates, I'll be left with another Apple computer that won't let me organise the things the way I want or won't run the programs I like.

I suppose I could make an analogy to our 2-1 win against Liverpool in the Carling Cup last night. Incidentally, I looked up the result on an iMac in the Apple Store. And the new Mighty Mouse is an amazing piece of technology that I had an urge to pocket it and run for the doors.

Anyway, Arsenal is like the new 24-inch iMac - its beautiful lines and elegant design are coupled with underwhelming performance. Ramsey and Merida gave great performances, and looked like world-beaters, but you couldn't rely on them for a whole season. They just don't have the stamina to go the distance.

Liverpool is like a PC that's been cobbled together from various parts - while it gives you better performance, it lacks any sort of aesthetic appeal. After all the money spent this year, you'd think Benitez would've had a shinier team. After Torres and Gerrard, Liverpool looks a bit like a beige box.

I'm a bit disenchanted with the Carling Cup now. Beating Liverpool doesn't seem that big a deal, because you know it doesn't matter. Only the Premier League and the Champions League matter. The kids are good in patches, but Wenger doesn't think they're ready for regular spots. The real test comes with Spurs on the weekend, when players like Diaby and Eboue have to front up to their lacklustre performances and start putting the effort in.

Whatever the case, I think I'd better buy an iMac anyway. It's only about $2000 nowadays, and I won't really use it for much except for Internet and Championship Manager. It'll be awesome to watch the Arsenal play on a shitty 2-inch Internet stream on a new 24-inch iMac monitor. And as Arsene Wenger has shown with his Arsenal sides over the years, performance isn't everything and sometimes beauty is worthwhile for its own sake.

From the AGM

"We haven’t got $500 billion to put into the club, but I suspect that we will be challenging — but I don’t consider Tottenham and Aston Villa rivals. I am very confident and any worries about Champions League income are unlikely to be the case.”

- Peter Hill-Wood, who isn't worried about threats to 4th place

It was AGM night in England last night. And of the many splendored things that Peter Hill-Wood said that night, that quote was the one that really pisses me off. It's such a snobbish, stupid, smug, self-absorbed, self-satisfied thing to say.

I don't understand why Peter Hill-Wood is sneering at Tottenham and Aston Villa for spending money in order to improve the quality of their teams. That's what football clubs do, Peter. Just because Arsenal sell their players for large amounts of money and don't reinvest the funds, it doesn't mean other clubs do the same. For ambitious clubs, they seek to add players to their squad every year in order to improve it.

I don't understand why Hill-Wood thinks he's got a right to be superior. In case he hasn't noticed, we have finished 4th or 3rd for the past four years. We haven't won in five years. We've stagnated. What's worse is that there hasn't been any sign of ambition from the Club to achieve more than 4th place and a Champions League place. For a club the size of Arsenal, that's pathetic.

And finally, I don't understand how Peter Hill-Wood got it in his head that 4th place is some sort of "prize" that we should be celebrating. For a club of our size, 4th place and CL qualification is the minimum. Celebrating that is madness, like jumping for joy when you get out of the bathtub because you managed not to drown yourself. I had a look at the club's profile on the official site, and nowhere on the list of our Premier League achievements does it list our proud record of 4th, 4th, 3rd, and 4th.

The other significant news from the AGM was that Stan Kroenke was asked about his intentions with the Club and he said.... nothing. Under the rules of the Takeover Panel, all public statements against a future bid must be unambiguous, or he'd be prevented from a formal move for six months. I hope the following prediction is ambiguous enough for Stan's liking - in the next six months, we're going to see a giant bust of Kroenke in the Emirate's forecourt with a motorised mouth which speaks "In Stan We Trust", and flaming eyeballs which shoots flaming eyes at gooners who dare to suggest that 4th place isn't good enough for a Club of our stature, or that certain Wengerish transfers are a bit geriatric.

And Arsene Wenger spoke about his confidence that we're going to win something this year:

“This year I am convinced we will win a trophy. It will come down to how resilient, consistent, intelligent and united we are until the end because there will be tough times. There will be periods when it will be difficult, but we have to show our strengths that have always made this club special. This team is now ready to go for it and I am convinced we will perform throughout the season.”

We've heard this before, Wenger. Why don't we just get through Christmas before we make any rash promises, hey?

On financial doping

"And this will be one nation under the dollar, with justice and liberty for none."

- The Simpsons, from the Mr Lisa Goes To Washington episode

I've a confession to make - I rarely have the time to watch the Arsenal anymore. What with working six days a weeks, daylight savings, and an incredibly slow Internet connection, I just don't have the inclination. Whether that means I should continue blogging about a team I'm no longer watching is a question for another day. Or maybe I should just spring $70 a month for Foxtel and record the matches.

Anyway, the morning before the Birmingham match, I read an article about their recent acquisition by Carson Yeung. Turns out Alex McLeish will be handed £40m in the January transfer window to turn his side into a mid-table table side. The article makes pretty clear that that £40m will not do a lot - it doesn't allow Birmingham to acquire a better class of player, it just inflates the price of mediocre players. This will put pressure on other relegation-candidates to find rich owners in order to compete with Birminghams. And this will eventually turn the Premier League into a collection of 20 expensive indulgences, each artificially supported by a rich sugar daddy.

When you consider that the combined debt of all 20 Premier League clubs is £3.1b, it's a frightening scenario. No wonder Arsene Wenger is so adamant against "financial doping".

Anyway, I've been watching highlights of the Bundesliga, and it's not bad value. The play isn't as dynamic as in the Premier League. There aren't as many stars. And technically, it's much inferior to the fare served up in La Liga or the Premier League. But still, to watch the crowds in the stadiums and the commitment on the pitch, it makes me wonder if there isn't something more to football than technical quality.

The Germans have gone down a different route with their league. Instead of surrendering their league to rampant capitalism, they've restricted the quality of their elite clubs to better preserve the integrity of the competition as a whole. I've found this website which explains the areas in which the Bundesliga has been organised than the Premier League. The pertinent points are that: (1) there's a cap on the price of tickets, meaning that season tickets are within the grasp of ordinary fans; (2) there's a ruling that no one individual can own more than 49% of a club, meaning that sugar-daddies can never blatantly impose their will on a club; and (3) teams are actually solvent, instead of mired in transfer-funded debt.

The sacrifice they've made is that the Bundesliga is no longer competitive with the elite clubs of Europe. Look at the Champions League, and you see that even Bayern Munich has slipped into the second tier of clubs. Ribery, the best player in Germany, will surely leave for Real Madrid, Man Utd or Barcelone next season. Wolfbsburg, the Bundesliga champions, would be a long-shot to reach the quarter- or semi-finals.

But still, it's a choice that seems a lot more logical than what's happening in England, where clubs are being swallowed up by idle, profligate businessmen. It's okay in the short term, but we've seen with West Ham and Portsmouth what happens when a wealthy backer goes belly-up. And a lot of other clubs are tethered to financial ruin in a similar way. Maybe it's time to diminish the quality of the Premier League, in order to preserve its integrity. Or maybe I should subscribe to Foxtel and hope that my $70 a month will somehow find its way to a coffers of a struggling Premier League club to hep them survive.

Chocolate-powered Arsenal

"Pressure is very big and has always been. We do not play for tablets of chocolate, we play for trophies and that is what we want to win."

- Arsene Wenger, on Arsenal's new focus on trophies and not candy

This year, we're playing for trophies, not tablets of chocolate.

Is this an admission that in the previous four years, we have been playing for tablets of chocolate? Is this the reason why we took our eyes off the trophies and began a youth policy that doesn't seem to come to fruition? It kind of makes sense. Maybe Wenger thought that with such a young squad, candy bars would be a better motivational goal than shiny metal trophies. As with Pavlov's dogs, he'd sit the team around the dressing room after a win and hand each member a chocolate bar. Then they'd associate the winning mentality with chocolate, and after a while, they'd get into that winning mentality by just showing them bars of chocolate before a big match.

Of course, because chocolate is so ubiquitous, it soon got out of hand. Players who were super-hungry for that winning feeling would just gorge themselves on chocolate instead of playing hard on the pitch to get that feeling. That led to a whole heap of self-satisfied players who didn't feel like they had to work hard on the pitch to get that winning feeling. And that led to a bunch of unsatisfying, horrible performances by the Arsenal. And now, Wenger's come to the conclusion that Pavlovian conditioning isn't the best way of motivating a football team. So we've reverted to putting an old-fashioned carrot in front of the players - trophies.

I think this is a sign that things are looking up. It's depressing to watch a team that plays for candy. They play sweetly when things are going for them, but when the pressure's on, they turn soft and gooey and not particularly pleasant. Last year was a nadir in terms of chocolate-powered Arsenal. This year, under the steely eye of Tom Vermaelen, we can hopefully play for something more than just candy.

We're playing Birmingham next. Again, it's a game we should win. It's been said before that the trick of winning the league is to get maximum points against all the lesser teams. We're always going to drop points against the Top 4, but as long as we win the winnable matches, we'll still be in contention. The key is to win the matches, not just draw. Drawing these matches is two points lost, which is almost as bad as three points lost for a loss.

Mannone should start in front of Fabianski and Almunia. Fabianski is an exciting young 'keeper, but much of that excitement is due to the fact that he's so recklessly dangerous. It's fun to watch him sprinting out of the box and chasing after the ball like a mad dog playing fetch, but it's not good for the heart. Mannone's been a bit more dependable in the games he's started this year. And unless Fabianski and Mannone are injured, Almunia shouldn't play for Arsenal again. Never ever Almunia again.

Also, I like it that Mannone's still young enough to be motivated by a big tablet of chocolate. Just don't eat it all at once, Vito, or you'll get a tummyache.

PHW's "relaxed" about a takeover

"It does look like he is edging towards a takeover, which I would welcome. I have not asked him if that is what he plans to do, but I am very relaxed about it. If it was to happen, I don't think you can expect any big changes because he seems to like things very much the way they are."

- Peter Hill-Wood, about the prospect of a takeover

A couple of days ago, Kroenke bought another 90 shares at £8,500 per share, taking his overall stake in the Club to 28.9%. He's edging closer to the 30% needed to trigger a mandatory compulsory takeover. As Myles Palmer said "he now needs only 645 more shares to take him to 29.9% . Then Stan will probably stop buying shares till the end of the season."

In light of this news, Peter Hill-Wood is "very relaxed" about the idea of Kroenke buying the Club. He "doesn't think" there will be big changes because Kroenke "seems to like things" the way they are. He's being very nonchalant about the future of the Club. In other words, he's telling us that if it happens, when it happens, how it happens, whatever happens it'll be sort of, maybe, probably okay.... he thinks.

To me, it's not a particularly reassuring statement. It came from a man who, two years ago, famously said that "we don't need his money and we didn't need his sort" at the club. Hill-Wood doesn't mince words when he speaks to the media. He says what he likes, how he likes - even if some of what he says is xenophobic, inane crap.

So why has he changed his stance?

Why is he prevaricating and qualifying his statements?

I think it's because Arsenal is being eaten alive by two very hungry billionaires, and Peter Hill-Wood has woken to the fact that there's sweet FA he can do to prevent a takeover. And the Board's anointed Kroenke as the lesser of two evils. And Hill-Wood's just realised that, after insulting Kroenke in all the major papers two years ago, Kroenke might not be too well-disposed to him when he's in charge. So Hill-Wood's decided to say something like that to curry favor with Kroenke so that he can retain his honorary Chairman of the Board title in the event of a takeover.

All hail our new insect overlord.

Personally, I think it'll be a shame if we were bought outright by one person. I like Kroenke and think his presence on the Board is of great benefit, but I wouldn't like to see him owning the Club outright. I prefer the status quo, with a group of major shareholders (some with a long association with the Club) running the Club. It gives us the assurance that if one person decides to sell, we've still got some continuity at the Board level. If Kroenke buys us outright, then sells us us in five years' time, there's no guarantee that the next owners will be competent custodians of the Club.

But then again, as Peter Hill-Wood has learnt in the past two years, there's sweet FA we can do about it. Kroenke and Usmanov are eyeing the Club, have the money to buy it, and are going to make a bid when they think it's time. All we can do is put on some lippy and a nice dress, cosy up with our new owners, and hope it's not going to be too bad.

Wenger for the Nobel Prize

I was shocked when Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. I felt it was premature. He's only been in government for 8 months, and hasn't had time to much. It's even more remarkable when you realise that nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize closed a few days after Obama's inauguration. 

There were reasons for it. The committee cited the new mood in global diplomacy, and Obama's efforts in nuclear disarmament. And people have suggested that the prize was given as encouragement to Obama to stay the course, and to push for the reforms that the US require. 

But I suspect that there's another reason behind it, one that many of committee would be embarrassed to admit. I think Obama has become a symbol upon which we can project our hopes for the future. There's a lot wrong with the world at the moment, and for some reason, we seem to think that Obama can solve the problems. It's silly to think so, but we all need hope in something. I think the prize was given to Obama speculatively, as if by bestowing upon him the rewards of great deeds, Obama will perform the great deeds that would earn those rewards.  

Then again, the Nobel Peace Prize has always been slightly speculative. It's not like prizes for physics or chemistry, where theories have to have been established for years before a prize is awarded. The peace prize has often been handed out as an encouragement, to draw recognition to activists who are fighting against the odds and without much outside help. Often, it's not so much about success (how can you award someone for an abstract noun?), as it is about the effort. 

Anyway, in the spirit of speculative Nobel Peace Prize nominations, I'd like to nominate Arsene Wenger for the 2010 prize. He's got a lot of characteristics that the Nobel Prize committee are looking for:

1. He's transformed the most conservative, Establishment club in England into a bastion of progressive thinking and innovation. We're the only club that doesn't try to appeal to the insularity that grips English football, and I think Wenger has played a huge role in that. And I reckon Arsenal hoodlums are the most cosmopolitan of all the British football thugs. 

2. He's incredibly optimistic about the ability of people to better themselves - think of how many chances he's given to this squad, and the number of times he's come out publicly to support them. And think about the number of players he's let go because they would have more opportunities to improve themselves elsewhere. And he's an advocate of free movement of people. 

3. He's knit together a polyglot, multinational team that's a shining example of the benefits of globalisation. Over the past 13 years, it's pretty obvious that Wenger looks at people, not passports. There are about has many nationalities as people in the squad, and remarkably, they all get along - aside from the odd head-butt on the pitch. 

The only fault I could find with him is his relaxed attitude towards child labour. We're a club that actively targets 16 year olds as potential employees. In what other field (other than fast-food franchisees) would this be condoned? It's a slipperary slope from giving a 16 year old a football contract to giving a 6 year old a job in Laos sweatshop. 

Still, I think Wenger would be a worthy candidate for the Noble Peace Prize. Granted, it'll only be speculative at this stage. Wenger hasn't done anything with this squad yet. If he could only win the frickin' Premier League, he'd be a shoe-in. But if Obama could win it after 8 months in the office, why cant' Wenger win it after 13 years as manager?

Who's our next manager?

"I have a very strong relationship with this Club. But I always believe the most important thing in the Club is that everybody does what he is paid for and not the rest. If they consult me I will give an opinion but I certainly will not name the next manager because that's not my job and I wouldn't like to do anything other than my job."

- Arsene Wenger

Arsene Wenger won't do anything other than his job.

After observing his activities in the past five years, therefore, Wenger must be paid to be the manager, the head scout, the CEO, a board member, a stadium planner, a financial adviser, an accountant and the Arsenal's main PR spokesman. That's a heck of a job description. No wonder he's on £5 million a year.

One of the problems of the past five years is that Wenger has been doing too much at the Arsenal. It is a coincidence that our transfers dwindled in the time between the sacking of David Dein and the hiring of Ivan Gazidis? I don't think so. Since Dein left, Wenger has been focused too much on off-the-pitch matters, such as balancing the books, negotiating contracts, and developing Arsenal change rooms along feng shui principles. And during that time, our squad has been allowed to stagnate.

I hope this statement is a sign that things are getting back to normal. Ivan Gazidis may be a mouthpiece for the Arsenal Board, but he's effective at his job and he's taking the off-the-pitch pressure off Wenger. I hope this arrangement works out. It's time that Wenger concentrated his efforts on on-the-pitch matters, such as landing our first Premier League title in over five years.

That said, it would be interesting to speculate on our next manager. I assume that when he retires, Wenger will take up some sort of advisory role at the Club. And I assume that the next manager at Arsenal would be someone who shares Wenger's football philosophy and his parsimoney. However, there aren't many established coaches who would accept a position like Arsenal manager, if Wenger is still at the Club in some capacity.

Which leads me to suspect that the next manager will be an inside appointment, someone understands the crazy principles of Wengerball. Wenger's been on record saying that some of his old players have the potential to be Arsenal managers. He's mentioned Henry as one example. And I'm sure Tony Adams, Martin Keown or Dennis Bergkamp would have an interest in managing Arsenal.

However, I've another target in mind. From my Football Manager 08 saved game, I know that Patrick Vieira has the potential to be an excellent manager. After taking over from me at Arsenal, he won two Premier League and three Champions League titles in the space of five years. He then managed France to a World Cup win. He was an awesome player, and he turns into an awesome manager.

Maybe that's the real reason we've been linked to him in January?

Why aren't the Socceroos on free-to-air?

Most gooners don't like the international break. Some object to it on a philosophical level, and believe the idea of the nation-state to be an anachronism in a globalised world. Some object to it on an aesthetic level, and believe it shouldn't take precedence over the higher-quality football played by the Arsenal. And still others object to it out of paranoia, and believe international matches are part of a conspiracy by FIFA officials to injure our players and ruin our chances of "winning" 4th place.

Personally, I quite like the international break.

It's a chance to see what the Australian players have been up to. I've followed the Socceroos half-heartedly since the World Cup qualifying loss to Iran in 1997, and I've watched this current crop for a while. Unlike England, Australia has never produced more than six or seven "international-class" players at a time, so our teams tend to be static. Because of this, players tend to emerge early and you tend to follow them throughout their career.

I've seen the rise of Harry Kewell and the squandering of his early promise. I've seen Viduka rack up the goals with Celtic and Leeds. I've seen the class of Bresciano, and was absolutely gutted when the calcio scandal scuppered his chance of joining a top club like Milan or Juventus. I've seen Scott Chipperfield went from being a bus driver in Wollongong, to an NSL title with the Wolves, to a belated career in Europe and a World Cup appearance with the Socceroos.

Lately, though, I can't follow the Socceroos.

Foxtel, the local pay-TV company, has bought the rights to all Socceroos matches. Suddenly, I have to fork out money to watch them play. And it doesn't seem right to have to pay to watch Australia play. I reckon the right to watch the Socceroos play football on free-to-air TV should be a constitutional right. And in actual fact, the Federal Government has already passed legislation to preserve free-to-air access to significant Australian sporting events.

So why is it that the Socceroos can only be shown on Foxtel? I suppose the rub is the word "significant". Soccer isn't a "significant" sport in Australia. And therefore, their matches aren't "significant" enough to warrant free-to-air broadcasting. It irritates me no end, because I'd quite liek to see how the boys are shaping up for the World Cup.

In other news, Barcelona sporting director Txiki Begiristain hasn't ruled out bidding for Cesc Fabregas in the January transfer window:

"He's a player who fits the Barca profile. He was born suckling on football here and one day he will end up playing at the Camp Nou. I am sure."

Who said nothing happened during the international break? Excuse me, I'm going to have to lie down. After the shock of that article, I'm feeling a trifle dizzy.

Hleb regrets leaving Arsenal (again)

“I regret leaving Arsenal. I was playing every week for one of the most exciting sides in Europe. I was being guided by one of the best coaches in the world in Arsene Wenger. I owe him a great deal. No player ever gets worse under Wenger. I developed a better all-round game under him. I became more robust physically.”

- Alex Hleb, regretting leaving Arsenal... again.

On a slow news day, Alex Hleb has spoken again about how much he regrets leaving Arsenal. At the time, given the protracted nature of the transfer, I got a bit annoyed at him. We'd come so close to winning the Premier League, and then within the space of a few weeks half our midfield deserted us for more glamorous European clubs.

But with the benefit of hindsight, I don't think he should be regretful. If you've supported Barcelona all your life, and one day they show an interest in you, you've got to go. Especially if you're 28 and it's the last chance you'll ever get to play for Barca. If it doesn't work out, so be it - at least you had the guts to take a chance. After all, the only things you should ever regret in life are the chances you didn't take.

I don't think we ever appreciated Hleb as much as we should have. I admit I was one of those who would shout "SHOOT!" at the computer screen whenever Hleb had the ball. And I was pretty blase at the prospect of him leaving, and pretty excited about Nasri coming in as his replacement. I didn't think we'd miss him that much.

But over the course of last season, I've realised what a great asset we lost when we sold Hleb. We lost a great dribbler, a creative force on the right and a guy who can retain possession. And it's that last bit that's really hurt us. Since we sold him, we haven't had anyone who can hold onto the ball while we transition between attack and defense. And we haven't had anyone who would soak up pressure in tight situations.

But would we have him back if we could? I don't think so. Since Hleb's departure, we picked up Nasri and Arshavin. We've switched to a 4-3-3 to compensate for the loss of Flamini's motor, the weakness of Denilson and Song, and to accommodate our wealth of dinky little attacking-midfielder-forwards. Hleb would still be a good fit for the side (aside from Arshavin, we still don't have anyone who can retain possession), but it's pointless to regret the transfer. We have to move on.

As Nick Hornby once said about Liam Brady, we never did replace him satisfactorily, but we found different people, with different qualities. Obviously, Alex Hleb's no Liam Brady, but you get my drift.

Villa y Silva, por favor

"Now a section about asking for something. The simplest way to do this is by naming what you want, and then saying please."

- from my Learn Spanish CD

Lately, I've been thinking about learning Spanish. I like the language, I like the culture and I really like the football. One of my dreams in life is to do the Camino de Santiago de Compostela pilgrimage, and spend a month walking across the north of Spain. Another is to live in Barcelona, learn Catalan and shout independence slogans at dictatorial Madridistas. A third is to spend six months backpacking through Latin America. I doubt I'll ever do any of them, but I know that the first step for all these dreams is to learn Spanish.

So I'm starting with an audio book. It's pretty basic stuff, but I think I need some time to wrap my tongue around the pronunciations before I attend a class. And for this lesson, I'd like to say one thing to Arsene Wenger: David Villa y David Silva, por favor.

We need them both. David Silva is an awesome dribber with great ball-retention. Bung on out on the wing and we've got another Arshavin. David Villa is a lethal striker who, inexplicably, wasn't been bought by Real Madrid or Barcelona this summer. He's better than Benzema, he's better than Ibrahimovic, and he'd definitely better than van Persie, Eduardo and Bendtner. Can you imagine a forward line of Arshavin, Villa and Silva? My mind goes blank when I do. Too many misfiring neurons and too much acetylcholine in the synapses.

There are other players we require. At the top of the list is an experienced goalkeeper, a central defender, and a defensive midfielder. We're actually pretty well stock with creative, fragile playmaker-wingers and pacy central forwards. But still, Villa and Silva are better than what we have now, and they'd make us so good going forward that it really wouldn't matter that we've no one at the back.

I know it won't happen, and I know it's a gross conflict of interest with my newly anointed second side, but I still wish it would happen. What's the use of being the most financially buoyant club in the world if you can't splash out on superfluous signings every now and then?

Por favour, Senor Wenger.

The Return of the Libero?

"But looking further ahead, there is also another player who has space, and that is one of the centre-backs. A single central striker is marked by one central defender, leaving the other one as a spare man. Of course that is useful defensively, but there is no reason why the extra player should only be useful defensively... Why shouldn't that extra defender stride forward into midfield as the likes of Franz Beckenbauer and Ruud Krol once did?"

- Jonathan Wilson, on the evolution of tactics

Is Vermaelen our new libero?

I got this from gunnerblog. It's such an interesting idea that I decided to steal it. I don't think they'll miss it much. Anyway, the idea is that the evolution of tactics has to do with finding and exploiting space. At the moment, most teams play some form of 4-5-1. Which means that the spare man in the team is often the second central defender. At Arsenal, that spare man is Thomas Vermaelen. And what is a young man with time on his hands going to do?

If he's Vermalen, he's going to roam up the pitch, a la Beckenbauer, Krol and the liberos of old. He's been doing well in the role this year. He's comfortable on the ball, has an eye for goal, and is defensively hard. We could do with someone like that in midfield.

So what's the implications of Vermaelen as a libero? I suppose it means Clichy and Sagna have to be more defensively minded. It'll be crazy if we turned into a 1-3-3-3, with only Gallas staying back as a defender. It means Song and Denilson have more help in midfield. Song can drop back to centre-back to cover Vermaelen. He's had practise with it, what what Kolo Toure's rampaging runs and Gallas' attacking proclivities.

So far, we've been good going forwards. Vermaelen's top scorer, and that's got to be due in part to his relaxed defensive duties. But we're poor at the back. That's down to a combination of an inexperienced goalkeeper, really complacent defending from the full-backs, and inadequate protection from the midfield. But there's the start of something special here. Vermaelen striding forward to bolster the midfield has possibilities that should be investigated.

Arsenal under Wenger has always been about crazy attacking football. So why now the return of the libero?

Arsenal 6, Blackburn 2

"When we are confident we have a flow that looks like the goals will come at any moment and from anywhere. There is something in the side that is lighthearted and enjoyable to watch. Why? Because they enjoy to play together and that for me is the most important."

- Arsene Wenger, after the match

For a 6-2 win, we were remarkably shaky.

Going forward, we cut Blackburn to ribbons. On the wide Emirates pitch, our superior touch and control really made a difference. Rosicky and the Owl played well on the wings, Cesc was brilliant in the middle, and van Persie was involved and looked good in the centre-forward position. We scored six goals, and we could easily have had more.

Going back, we were a bit of a shambles. We got lucky. We conceded weak goals. We conceded the lead twice, but were able equalize both times. Our pressing game was good when it lasted, but but committing so many players forward, it left us swamped at the back. It's a bit bemusing when you win 6-2 and you dwell on the defense, but that's the Arsenal way - we like to put on a show at both ends of the pitch.

One curio is that Vito Mannone has been in the first team a number of games now, and he's doing fairly well. Yes, he makes mistakes, but he's young enough to learn from them. Considering the competition, he's certainly done enough to keep his place when Almunia and Fabianski recover from their injuries.

It's going to be an interesting few weeks. Any chance that Almunia's "chest infection" will linger over into January, at which point he'll be transferred to a Spanish club for "health reasons"? The milder climate in Spain must be much better for the lungs, you know.

Lots Of FourFourTwo Articles About Cesc

I've been browsing FourFourTwo, and it's remarkable to see how many articles there about Cesc Fabregas. I thought I might share a few with you:

Fabregas Flattered By Xavi Plea - in which Cesc says "thanks, but no thanks" to Xavi's open invitation to join the Barcelona Globetrotters in their mission of world domination and Catalan independence.

Fabregas: Rosicky Is My Best Bud - in which Cesc says that he likes hanging out with Rosicky, playing Playstation and watching movies. And, in what is possibly a tongue-in-cheek dig at Wenger, he hails Rosicky's return as "just like a new signing".

Fabregas: Wenger Is God - in which Cesc says that we fans regard Wenger as God. I take objection to that. I don't think Wenger is the Messiah - I think he's a very naughty boy for not spending our transfer budget.

Fabregas: Arsenal Must Find Ruthless Streak - in which Cesc says that touch and control is vital if we're to beat Blackburn this weekend. I'd add that a continent defence, a world-class DM and an international class goalkeeper would also pretty handy.

Cesc Hails Arshavin and Vermaelen - in which Cesc observes that experienced, quality signings ARE a boon for the team. Let's hope the Arsenal take the logical next step and buy a few more quality experienced players to plug our other gaping holes.

All these articles were written either yesterday or today. In case you're wondering, there's no point to this article, by the way. I'm just bemused that so many headlines have been given over to Cesc Fabregas stories, since posting one big article on Fabregas would've sufficed.

Oh, and after watching bits of the Friday morning Valencia - Genoa Europa Cup match, I've decided that Valencia will be my new second club. They have a great passing style that's played with pace and attacking flair. In many ways, Valencia play football the way that Arsenal want to play. Two of my favourite players, Silva and Villa, play for Valencia. And the Mestella is my favourite football stadium (yes, I liked it better than than the Emirates).

It was a tough decision because it's so tempting to support Barcelona right now; with Barca you're almost guaranteed trophies. Valencia are in the unenviable position. They're the nearly-men of La Liga. They play great football with very little prospect of ever winning anything. They're crippled by a stadium debt and they struggle to hang on to their best players. They're a lot like Arsenal.

I knew there was a reason I liked them so much.