Opting out of Arsenal - The media’s agenda behind the transfer sagas

One interesting aspect of this Robin van Persie “transfer saga” is that it has made clear to me, as never before, the specific agenda of these “transfer saga” media campaigns where Arsenal fans are concerned.

Specifically, this is the attitude that they want Arsenal fans to take (which has never been stated so openly in any other “transfer saga”):

“The bloke can score goals. Apart from that, he is no different from the man who delivers your or my pizza. It’s only about money, nothing else…and Arsenal will only keep their top players when they are able to pay what Man City can. Until then, get used to seeing the annual exodus.”

So, that’s what they want from us. To get used to the “annual exodus,” and not let any of it bother us. Specifically, where fans are concerned, it would appear that the agenda of the “transfer saga” (i.e. what they want us to do) can be summed up in some manner similar to the following:

1) Don’t look closer than what’s reported in the media

2) Don’t respond emotionally to player exits

and

3) Once a player announces his “desire to leave,” take no proactive action to affect the outcome. Just accept that he’s gone.

Up until now, I’ve been responding to “transfer saga” campaigns with the implicit assumption that the campaign was intended to cause me to take some kind of action; for example, to turn against the Club, or to actively reject a certain player and force an exit. However, looking more closely, that doesn’t seem to be the case. Rather, it appears to me that these “transfer sagas” that we see in the media are actually intended to keep Arsenal fans satisfied with superficial information, and un-involved in whatever else might be going on behind the scenes.

Or in other words, they’re telling us: “Look away, move along, nothing to see here.” And unfortunately, I think this aspect of the campaign has been quite successful where Arsenal fans are concerned. Specifically, I think that Arsenal fans are (or have been until now) allowing the media to control our perceptions about these “transfer sagas,” when we should be looking more closely and asking questions.

Which isn’t good. Because if they want us to look away, then it’s in Arsenal’s best interests for us to look more closely. And if they want us to accept our players leaving with resignation, then Arsenal needs us to care, and to take an active interest in keeping our players. And more particularly, we need to look more closely at exactly why it is that these players are deciding to leave Arsenal in the first place.

Because I’m not going to lie. The following “news reports” from this RVP “transfer saga” have left me completely unnerved:

——————-

“Arsenal have six weeks to sell RVP and bed in a replacement before the season starts. Much better than last year, when we lost Nasri and Fabregas after the season had started.

Well done, Arsène and Ivan. And well done for running the club as it needs to be, and not as one prima donna wants it to be.

But honestly, we have no idea of what goes on behind closed doors. Let’s hold on to the abuse for the moment. Let’s hear both sides of the story. And if Van Persie is being a mercenary like Nasri, he isn’t worth our abuse anyway.

Loyalty is dead.”

——————

*That last part is the photo caption, and appears underneath a photo of Arsène and Robin together.

Example 2:

————-

“As with the thunk-thunk-thunk of your childhood pets dropping dead in succession, you’d think you’d have become used to it by now.

“It happens almost every summer these days that Arsenal lose a star player. Patrick Vieira, Thierry Henry, Emmanuel Adebayor, Cesc Fàbregas, Gaël Clichy and Samir Nasri have all left since 2005… This year, it’s Robin van Persie’s turn to ride off into the sunset.”

————

Example. 3:

“We here at Pies are… intrigued by [Robin’s] new grey locks. Maybe the stress of leaving Arsenal has prematurely aged the (now) silver fox-in-the-box?”

———–

Example. 4:

“The problem is that Arsenal have previous. United and, particularly, City will know all about the Fabregas and Nasri sales. They will be happy to wait. Arsenal cannot afford to.”

I really don’t know what to say in response to the above “news reports” other than “what the hell?” However, I do think that these reports certainly have some extremely nasty connotations, which indicate to me that it’s time for Arsenal fans to be taking a closer look at what’s really going on behind the scenes of these “transfer sagas.”

So, let’s begin doing that by taking a closer look at the Cesc and Nasri “transfer sagas” from last summer. Recall that the version of events that fans have received from the media is that both Cesc and Samir ultimately “forced” these transfers on Arsenal; Cesc with his “desire to return to his boyhood club,” and Samir with his “desire to earn more money.”

The following are some of the news reports from the RVP “transfer saga,” and how they have referred to the previous departures of Cesc and Nasri:

“The loss of Van Persie carries the same desperate implications that came with the departures of Fabregas and Nasri. Wenger swore that he could keep the players he saw as the future of the club, then found himself scrambling desperately to fill some of the empty spaces in the last days of the transfer window.”

“The manager’s plans were thrown into chaos last summer when he attempted to keep Samir Nasri and Cesc Fabregas but saw both leave.”

Let’s think about this. Arsène Wenger “swore that he could keep” Cesc and Nasri, but failed. And he “attempted to keep” Cesc and Nasri, but they left anyway. Theoretically, Arsène Wenger has the power to decide which players he keeps and which ones he doesn’t. So, how could Cesc and Nasri leave against his wishes, thus throwing his plans for the season “into chaos?”

Specifically, if Arsène wanted to transfer Cesc or Nasri, or knew that he was going to have to transfer Cesc or Nasri because the player was “unsettled,” couldn’t he have planned for it in an orderly way?

First, let’s consider the question of whether Arsène really was planning to keep these players and had his plans disrupted, or whether he was planning to transfer them all along.

Cesc was transferred on 15 August, after the first match of the season (Newcastle) had already been played. Cesc hadn’t played at all in the pre-season and didn’t play against Newcastle, because Arsène Wenger said that he had “injury” concerns. In the media at the time, the fact that Cesc wasn’t playing was portrayed as related to the “transfer saga” because Cesc was too “unsettled” to play (or something like that).

At the time Cesc was transferred, there were only 15 days left in the transfer window. And it seems that, if Arsène Wenger had been planning to transfer Cesc, or wanting to transfer Cesc, he would have done it before then. If Arsène had kept Cesc into the season, it appears that he was intending to keep him throughout the season. And if Cesc was so unhappy and “unsettled” that Arsène couldn’t play him in the pre-season, it seems that he would have transferred him during the Summer. Also, Arsène had not bought a replacement for Cesc.

Considering all of the above, it seems to me that Arsène, going into the season, was confident that Cesc was both willing to and emotionally capable of playing for Arsenal, and was planning to keep him. So, I believe that these circumstances are consistent with the idea that Arsène “attempted to keep” Cesc, and then somehow “failed” to do so 15 days before the close of the transfer window.

But on the other hand…. How does that make any sense?

The following is what we know about the circumstances of the transfer (and it’s not a lot):

“Reports of the deal surfaced at halftime of the first leg of Barcelona’s Spanish Super Cup match against Real Madrid on Sunday, which ended 2-2.

“The club announced Fabregas’ departure just before 10pm last night – half-time of the Spanish Super Cup first leg between Barcelona and Real Madrid at the Bernabeu which finished 2-2 – with Fabregas already en route to Spain.”

“The Spanish champions later revealed, on their official website, that Fabregas will undergo a medical at Barcelona Hospital at 0700 BST on Monday, before undergoing a further test at Barcelona’s medical centre at 0930 BST.”

So, 15 days before the close of the transfer window, on a Sunday night when Barcelona had a match, Barcelona and Arsenal reached an “agreement in principle” for the transfer of Cesc Fabregas. Cesc was already in the air, and Barcelona announced that Cesc would be taken directly to the hospital the next morning. Cesc was presented as a Barcelona player the next day.

And the reason that this supposedly occurred was because Arsène Wenger suddenly realized that Cesc wanted to return to Barcelona, and that it would be wrong to keep him at Arsenal for the remainder of the season.

Right…..Personally, I’m having difficulty in understanding how Arsène Wenger would suddenly reach this conclusion in late August, at a time when transferring Fabregas was going to be damaging to Arsenal’s season, but not before.

Likewise, the version of the Nasri transfer that appears in the media narrative similarly defies all logical explanation:

“The France midfielder trained with Arsenal yesterday morning as they prepared for the second leg of their tie with Udinese, looking to defend a 1-0 advantage and secure another season of Champions League football.

But instead of travelling to Italy, Nasri made for Manchester for a medical.”

So, Samir Nasri was training with Arsenal in the morning, and was apparently a planned part of Arsenal’s team that was going to travel to Udinese. But then, a transfer was suddenly agreed, and Nasri was taken directly to the hospital in Manchester. The supposed reason for this was as follows:

“Nasri is a situation where the player didn’t want to extend his contract with the proposals he had somewhere else…What kind of commitment can you have when the player is not there long-term?”

I’m sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. The morning before Arsenal travelled to Italy to face Udinese, Arsène Wenger suddenly realized that, since Samir had decided not to renew his contract at the close of next season, then there was no point in keeping him for the remainder of this season because he wasn’t “committed” to Arsenal? And Arsenal fans are supposed to believe this?

The following is the announcement that appeared on Arsenal’s official website regarding Nasri:

“Arsenal can confirm that they have agreed terms for Samir Nasri to move to Manchester City,” said a statement on the Arsenal club website. “The 24-year-old midfielder, who has spent three years with the Gunners, has been omitted from Arsenal’s squad which flies to Udinese this afternoon and instead will travel north for a medical.”

I chose to highlight the actual wording of Arsenal’s statement here because, contrary to the narrative reported in the media, Arsenal did not include the portion about Nasri training with the Arsenal squad that morning. Rather, Arsenal merely said that Samir had been “omitted from Arsenal’s squad which flies to Udinese this afternoon.” Which would appear to suggest that Nasri might actually have been elsewhere at the time that the agreement was announced. Just like Cesc was “already on a plane” to Barcelona, at the time when his transfer was announced.

But the question that hasn’t been answered here, regarding Cesc in particular, is where exactly was Cesc before the transfer was announced, if not at Arsenal? Where was Cesc before he boarded this plane to Barcelona? For example, at the conclusion of the Cesc “transfer saga,” Cesc supposedly made the following statement:

“I am sorry I couldn’t say anything for the last two and half months, Arsenal would not allow me to talk, I was disappointed and upset about that but it had to be like that. I still have, personally, a great relationship with them and I am disappointed to have maybe lost [the affection of] some of the fans. I am sorry I couldn’t say anything…”

So, why exactly couldn’t Cesc say anything for two and a half months? Because Arsenal refused to let him? That sounds shady to me. And there’s also the following:

“CESC FABREGAS is planning to release a recorded goodbye to Arsenal supporters as soon as his protracted move to Barcelona goes through….

Providing Arsenal sanction the deal, Fabregas will be on his way to the Nou Camp and People Sport understands he is considering recording a video farewell to Gunners fans in which he will thank them for their support.”

So, consistent with how the “transfer” actually unfolded in the end, it appears that this news report (from 31 July, 2011) was already aware that Cesc would be heading to Barcelona whenever the transfer agreement was announced. Or in other words, it was known in advance that Cesc wasn’t at Arsenal. But if Cesc wasn’t at Arsenal, then where was he?

And before anyone jumps on me for being a “conspiracy theorist,” I’ll go ahead and say that I know that the implications from the following news report are completely far-fetched. However, I do at least want to draw attention to the fact that the Mayor of Cesc’s hometown in Spain apparently claimed that Cesc had been kidnapped during his “transfer saga.” Unfortunately, I can’t find this statement in its original context, so I don’t know what it was really all about (for example, I don’t believe that the Mayor actually accused Arsenal of being the party who “kidnapped” Cesc, or whatever he might have said happened):

‘Cesc Fabregas is experiencing a kidnapping’

But anyway, taking all of the above into the account, I can’t think of any way to conclude this article, other than to ask:

What the hell is really going on in these “transfer sagas?” And even if Cesc wasn’t actually kidnapped, then where was he? And where is Robin now (can we see him, just to make sure he’s alright)?

And most importantly of all, I believe that we, as fans, should be keeping a closer eye on whatever might be going on behind the scenes in the Robin van Persie “transfer saga,” along with all other such “transfer sagas” that are presented to us in the future. Because whatever it is, I’m forced to the conclusion that Arsenal fans are most definitely not getting the real story.