Arsenal More Class Or Less Ambition Then Chelsea? By Dan Smith
Chelsea didn’t need to sack Frank Lampard to convince me how ruthless they can be. This is the club who got rid of the man who ended their 50 year wait for a title the moment he failed to retain it.
12 months after winning the Double, Carlo Ancelotti was informed in the tunnel at Goodison Park his services were no longer required.
Conte lost his job after failure to retain the Premiership title.
AVB and Scolari didn’t even last a season.
Sari was in a unique situation of his last game for the Blues being lifting the Europa League trophy (although it’s believed him leaving was a mutual agreement).
Not just did Frank Lampard play under the majority of those managers, he’s been reported to have held major influence in the dressing room under each of them. In other words, he knew how his employers operate.
If you work at Stamford Bridge, any coach will get financially backed both in terms of their own salary and in the transfer market. The consequence of that is a demand of high standards.
For many, the reward is worth the risk, the worst-case scenario is you get a massive pay off.
Yet to Chelsea fans this will be like shooting Bambi! It’s the equivalent of us sacking Thierry Henry or Liverpool Gerrard.
Purely based on being a legend, sentiment would demand that they get longer than 18 months and one window to prove yourself, especially when you did achieve the criteria set in your first year without spending a penny.
You can’t help make comparisons with Arsenal’s current situation.
Like our London rivals, we hired a rookie (Lampard had 12 months experience) based on him being a former player for us.
Arteta’s legacy can’t be compared to Lampard’s. One won every domestic honour possible and is the greatest scorer in their history, the other’s prime was at Everton.
Yet it’s Lampard who is given his P45 first, despite doing better in the League.
Lampard qualified for Europe’s elite competition, Arteta advanced to UEFA’S ugly cousin.
Lampard finished 4th, Arteta our worst position in 25 years, 8th.
Even the day he leaves, Lampard departs with Chelsea above us.
So how can Edu say Arteta’s doing a ‘great job’, when Chelsea (a club we should be competing with) sack their boss for midtable ‘not meeting our expectations’.
There are readers who feel I pick on Stan Kroenke, ask what more he can do and what I expect from him.
Some manipulate the stats to show that Kroenke’s net spend has been bigger then Roman Abramovich’s over the last few years. In reality that’s because Chelsea have been better at selling talent for big prices.
If you compare the ambition of the two billionaires, it’s night and day.
Not happy being so far behind Liverpool, one responded by investing almost 200 million in the squad, the other approx. 80 million.
In life you should always try to be the best version of yourself. That’s all I ever want Arsenal to be.
Yet our owner doesn’t care where we finish because he’s guaranteed to get his TV revenue.
Look at the two business models.
Mr Abramovich would have ordered this sacking because he wants Chelsea to win things. What’s our owner doing to help improve our worst start in decades? Make it a priority to slash the wage bill and only authorize loan signings!
The Russian essentially has a zero tolerance to failure. He spends 200 million, he expects a title, if not he will bring someone else in and spend again.
Our equivalent only cares about making money.
That’s why the likes of Chelsea and Man United are almost guaranteed to be Champions before we will be, because they will keep throwing money at the wall until it sticks.
Don’t get me wrong I’m not wishing Arteta to be sacked. What’s the point while Stan Kroenke owns the club?
Chelsea have again showed a lack of class treating a man who captained them to the European Cup this way. I don’t want Arsenal to be that way.
You could argue if you hire a manager to learn on the job, it wouldn’t be fair to give up on the man you appointed for making mistakes.
Yet I can’t help but see the comparison. Chelsea sack managers but spend money. We don’t sack managers but … don’t spend money.
When I hear that Chelsea simply think it’s unacceptable to be in their position in January, I can’t help but ask why are we not thinking like that?
I would say Man United have the balance. When Ole’s had his sticky moments his club gave him time and backed him. For example 12 months ago they brought Fernandes who got them into the top 4. Again compare that to our current transfer policy.
Arsenal have more class then Chelsea, but does this again prove they have more ambition?
Be Kind In the Comments
Dan