Feed on
Posts
Comments

And so to the Stadium of Stone. It has been a while. Memo to self: check with TTG whether anything significant happened in the meantime.

To a certain generation of ‘holics, our visitors on Saturday will forever be Dirty Leeds, from when we were scrapping with Don Revie’s side to be top dog in the early 1970s. Yet, even though this game will see second play fifth, Daniel Farke’s Leeds is of a different cut and still re-establishing itself in the Premier League.

After 16 turbulent years outside the top flight, Leeds returned for the 2020-21 season with Marco Bielsa’s high-octane football. Three seasons and several managers later, Sam Allardyce was officiating the last rites of relegation. 

The German Farke, who had taken Norwich up from the Championship twice and down once, took over that summer, a few days before the NFL’s San Francisco 49ers’ venture-capital arm took control of the club. As those of Scottish persuasion will know, 49ers Enterprises are also part of the controlling consortium at Glasgow Rangers. At Leeds, their minority investors include Red Bull, the company that turned a Thai energy drink you likely have never heard of, Krating Daeng, into a global brand.

Before last season, Farke brought in nine new players, all aged 25 to 28, to add the strength, size and experience his newly promoted side would need in the Premier League. For this season, he bought less extensively and spent the bulk of his money on two 23-year-olds. 

One was James Trafford, who arrived from Manchester City for £40 million, a record for an English goalkeeper. The other was centre-back Tarik Muharemović, the most prominent scion of that Balkan footballing family. He cost £30 million from Serie A’s Sassuolo. At the other end of the age scale, 29-year-old winger Harry Wilson was picked up from Fulham on a free.

Farke’s flip

Last season, with Leeds again in the relegation zone, Farke switched from a back four to a back three. The change turned Leeds’ fortunes around, and they finished in a relatively comfortable 14th place. 

Farke has stuck with a back three this season, arguing that Leeds’ play is not yet dominant enough to revert to a back four. Their 45.8% share of possession this season is the sixth-lowest in the league.

In away games, Farke tends to favour 3-4-2, though not consistently. I suspect we’ll see a flat 3-5-2 at the Ems to bolster some Brighton-inspired pressing and force us to attack wide. Either way, Leeds will defend compactly and be well-organised, although in his pre-match press conference, Farke insisted that parking the bus does not work against teams of our quality.

Leeds have conceded three goals so far, or 0.6 per game, the joint-fewest in the league. Yet their defence has been overperforming — or riding its luck. Their xG against averages 1.3 goals per game. No keeper in the league has made more saves than Trafford so far.

Dogged defending has mitigated some of the shortcomings of an attack reliant on going long and direct, as evidenced by seven goals in five games and only two big chances created per game; only four clubs have done worse.

Three of their seven goals have come from set pieces, the highest ratio in the league. If top-scorer Dominic Calvert-Lewin (3 goals) is shackled, it is difficult to see where their goals will come from, especially if Wilson is absent.

The opposition

Trafford, whose seemingly predestined journey to being England’s number one has had several false starts, should be between the sticks. 

A hamstring injury sidelines Leeds’ stalwart Wales defender Joe Rodon. Thus, the back line will likely consist of Nico Elvedi, a 30-year-old Swiss international acquired from Borussia Mönchengladbach in the summer, with Muharemović to his left and, to his right, Luton’s own James Justin, who arrived unheralded in 2025 from Leicester City but has established himself as a versatile ever-present.

In-form skipper Ethan Ampadu, another of the club’s Wales internationals — he played every minute of its four Nations League games, so is hopefully cream crackered — will anchor the midfield alongside either or both of Anton Stach, an Energiser Bunny who was recalled to Germany’s squad for the Nations League, and Japan’s Ao Tanaka. Tanaka would be the one to drop to the bench if Farke starts with four in midfield. 

Sweden’s Gabriel Gudmundsson should provide width on the left in either formation. Wilson would be the first choice for the opposite wing. However, he missed all of Wales’ Nations League games due to a quad injury and faces a late fitness test. With fellow Wales winger Daniel James again injured, Jayden Bogle will likely start if Wilson cannot. 

Calvert-Lewin will be up front. He was the league’s joint fourth-highest scorer last season with 14 goals, the same as our own Big Vik (a fifth of them against Leeds). Fine form in the second half of the season earned Calvert-Lewin a recall to the England squad, but his club form has been fitful this season. If Farke opts for a 3-5-2, Calvert-Lewin will likely be partnered by Swiss international Noah Okafor, whose move to West Yorkshire has revitalised a sputtering career in Serie A.

For his bench, Farke has the burly German striker Lukas Nmecha, who came up through the Man City Academy but was sold to Wolfsburg for €8 million as a 22-year-old in 2021. He can also call on Brenden Aaronson, the USA attacking midfielder who can’t quite force his way into Mauricio Pochettino’s starting XI and needs Farke to play 3-4-2-1 to have a chance of starting for his club.

Other attacking options include two wingers, the fitfully dangerous Italian, Wilfried Gnonto, now back from a loan spell at Fiorentina, and the promising Jean-Mattéo Bahoya, who is on loan from Eintracht Frankfurt and is being carefully blooded by Farke; he has played just one PL minute. Bahoya faces a late fitness test after straining his ankle while playing for France’s U-21s.

Farke is far less well covered defensively. DM Ilia Gruev and centre-back Jaka Bijol are working their way back to match fitness after injury. Both got plenty of minutes for their countries during the interlull, but neither is likely ready to start. That leaves mainly Melvin Bard, a left-back on loan from Nice. He was brought in on the transfer deadline after Rodon’s hammy went ping against Brentford. 

. 

The Arsenal

Three long weeks ago, our unbeaten start to the season ended jarringly at the Amex. In their pre-match press conferences, Arteta reflected on how the team’s identity fell apart, while Farke, though impressed by how Brighton’s pressing dismantled it, also noted that we could have won that game; we fluffed our key moments, whereas Brighton’s all went their way. 

Regardless of whether that game was just ‘an awfully bad day at the office’ (© Dino), re-establishing normal service on Saturday is non-negotiable.

Picking a starting XI is tricky, given the opacity over how much our injury list has shrunk from its peak of nine. William Saliba and Christos Tzolis are definitely out, and Kai Havertz and Ezri Konsa likely so. Of the walking wounded, Declan Rice is being carefully managed, but Max Dowman, Piero Hincapié, Cristhian Mosquera and Ben White are declared available. Up to a point, Lord Copper.

With half an eye on the midweek CL game against Lille, my guess is:

Raya
Timber, Mosquera, Gabriel, Calafiori
Rice, Lewis-Skelly
Saka, Ødegaard, Madueke
Gyökeres

Leeds are unbeaten this season, though they have won only two league games. We have won four and need to make it five on Saturday, and trust the Scousers keep C114y honest on Sunday, to return to the top of the league.

We were still at Highbury the last time we lost to Leeds at home in any competition. That was in 2003. Mark Viduka scored Leeds’ 89th-minute winner. A teenage James Milner was on their bench, and some venerable ‘holics had barely turned fifty.

We will likely spend much of the game battling to thread a path through Leeds’ defence, while remaining vulnerable to counter-attacks or set pieces. An early goal would settle nerves on and off the field. We won the corresponding fixture 5-0 last season. A 2-0 home win feels more like the order of the day this term.

Enjoy the game, ‘holics, near and far.

My Arsenal Nemesis

 

This article is about those whom we, as Arsenal supporters, loved to hate, or at least, fear. The players who would invariably punish us or behave so badly against us that we viewed them with a mixture of dread and dislike. I asked a number of Holics who they saw as our Nemesis and they gave these fascinating replies. I start with my own recollections of an ancient foe.

Alan Gilzean by TTG 

When your Arsenal supporting memory stretches back to 1958, and given that in the ensuing, nearly seventy years, Arsenal have occasionally had some shocking sides, and if you can believe it,  some shocking defenders in that time, it’s not surprising that there are quite a few attackers who inflicted considerable harm on us. In trying to search back through my memory bank, I thought of two who caused me great displeasure in my teenage years.

I originally opted for the late Bobby Tambling of Chelsea, who loved Highbury and was regularly able to score against us. When Peter Simpson recently passed on it was noted that Tambling notched four goals at Highbury in  March 1964 in Peter’s home debut when ‘Stan’ was allocated the task of marking Tambling. 

But in the end I’ve opted for Alan Gilzean who is also sadly no longer with us. BtM can fill in the early details of Gilzean’s career when he played in the exceptional Dundee side that put much of Europe to the sword in the early nineteen sixties. We eventually raided Dundee for Ian Ure but the Spuds purchased Gilzean in 1965. They got a much better deal than we did! Although Ure did win us Quiz Ball!

Gilzean was years ahead of his time – an unlikely looking striker, follicularly challenged at an early age, like all the best men, he was in 2026 terms, a false nine. He had the most subtle and educated touch and was superb in the air. He scored six goals against us in North London derbies and most were match winners. I have sour memories of him heading winners against us in 1968 and 1970 at White Hart Lane when we had been the better side and of him gliding across the Highbury pitch in a comfortable 2-0 win for the Spuds in 1967. 

He formed a very potent partnership with Jimmy Greaves. There was no chance that Tottenham would struggle to score with those two upfront. He combined elegance with an illusory power. He would fit into many top European sides now. How Scotland would love to have Alan Gilzean upfront instead of Lyndon Dykes! 

I understand from my Arsenal playing contacts at that time that Arsenal and Tottenham players would have joint drinking sessions at a pub in Southgate, each week. Imagine such a thing nowadays! Their information suggests that Gilzean more than held his end up in the drinking stakes as Jimmy Greaves confirmed in his autobiography! He didn’t acquit himself  badly on the pitch either! 

C100 has memories of a more modern nemesis, one that many will recall with a mixture of pain and respect. 

Didier Drogba by C100

When TTG asked me to contribute to this interlull piece about who was my most feared opposition striker, I had to think. Erling Haaland? Harry Kane? I’m not old enough to remember Jimmy Greaves. I did think about Mark Hughes but in the end decided not. Instead, my mind went back to the middle and late noughties. After the Invincibles season there was suddenly another new kid in London. Roman Abramovich was, as David Dein said, parking his tanks on our lawn and firing £50 notes at us.

With his new ebullient manager, Jose Mourinho. Chelsea spent Abramovich’s money well. He built a team by that old Bill Shankly principle of “build the spine of the team up the middle”. So he had Petr Cech in goal, John Terry at centre half, Michael Essien in midfield, and up front, the tall (6’2”), powerful striker from the Ivory Coast, Didier Drogba. He joined Chelsea just a few weeks after we got our gold Invincibles trophy, in July 2004. Between then and 2012 he won everything with Chelsea. The Premier League, Champions league, FA Cup and League Cup. He came back in 2014 and won the league again. And during all that time he tortured Arsenal and our centre backs.

I seem to remember that he seemed especially partial to Philip Senderos. His powerful style was very difficult to play against. He played against Arsenal 15 times in various competitions. In those 15 games he scored 13 goals and finished on the winning side 10 times (how different to the current record of his old club). He was just the supreme striker, great in the air, powerful, quick, a real presence on the field. I hated watching him play against us.

Off the field he was an admirable man, driven to improve the quality of life in his home country of Cote d’Ivoire. He set up the Didier Drogba Foundation in 2007 to improve health and education in Africa. He founded hospitals and schools. He supported the empowerment of women and fostered community spirit via sports facilities he founded. He won many philanthropic awards and recognition.

But my word, he was a great striker.

BtM recollects an even more recent threat. A man still plying his trade successfully but no longer in North London 

Harry Kane: The One That Got Away by BtM

He joined the Gunners’ academy in 2001, aged just eight, but after one season, apparently, we’d seen enough. 

Yes, Arsenal actually had Harry Kane. 

And then we released him. 

According to our former academy director Liam Brady, the young Kane was “a bit chubby” and “not very athletic”. And so began Harry Kane’s extraordinary love/hate relationship with Arsenal — first in, and then very quickly out, of the red and white. 

If only someone at Hale End had possessed a crystal ball. 

There are certain players who seem to have one particular opponent they simply cannot stop scoring against. For Harry Kane, Arsenal has been that opponent. 

For years, whenever the fixture list announced Arsenal v Tottenham, there was one question that immediately entered the minds of Gooners everywhere: 

“Is Kane playing?” 

Because Harry Kane had a habit of turning the North London derby into something resembling a personal appointment. It wasn’t simply another game in the calendar. For Kane, it often looked more like an opportunity to add another chapter to Arsenal’s misery. 

Long before he became Bayern Munich’s prolific England captain, Kane had already established himself as one of Arsenal’s most persistent tormentors. In 19 appearances against the Gunners for Spurs, he scored 14 goals — an extraordinary return of almost three-quarters of a goal every time he faced us. 

And these weren’t goals that merely padded his statistics. 

Kane repeatedly delivered in the biggest fixture of the season for Tottenham: the North London Derby. 

He scored his first Premier League goals against Arsenal in dramatic fashion in January 2015, scoring twice as Spurs came from behind to win 2–1. 

It was, unfortunately for Arsenal, the beginning of a remarkably productive relationship between Harry Kane and one of his favourite opponents. 

The Emirates became something of a personal hunting ground. Kane scored five times at the stadium, a joint record for an opposition player, matching Jamie Vardy and Diogo Jota. 

Five. 

Against us. 

Perhaps we should have just put up a sign saying “Harry, please score elsewhere.” 

Then, in 2023, came the news Arsenal had been waiting for. 

Kane left Tottenham for Bayern Munich. 

Surely, finally, we could escape him? 

He was off to Germany. Problem solved! Red North London could breathe again. 

Not quite. 

Harry apparently hadn’t received the memo. 

Drawn against Arsenal in the Champions League quarter-finals in April 2024, Kane returned wearing the colours of Bayern Munich. His reception was predictably hostile. 

The outcome, however, was painfully familiar. 

With Bayern trailing, Kane stepped up and converted a penalty to put the German champions 2–1 ahead at the Emirates. 

Arsenal eventually rescued a 2–2 draw through Leandro Trossard, but Kane had done it again. 

Of course he had. 

It wasn’t merely another goal. It meant Kane had now scored 15 times in 20 matches against Arsenal, continuing his extraordinary record despite changing clubs, countries and colours. 

And there was another particularly unpleasant sting in the tail for Arsenal. 

Bayern won the return leg 1–0 at the Allianz Arena, eliminating the Gunners 3–2 on aggregate and reaching the Champions League semi-finals. 

For Gooners everywhere, Kane’s record against Arsenal tells a dispiriting story. 

He wasn’t simply a prolific striker who happened to score against us. He repeatedly produced when the stakes were highest in one of English football’s fiercest rivalries. 

And then, when given the opportunity to face Arsenal again in completely different surroundings, thousands of miles from North London and wearing a completely different shirt, he simply carried on where he had left off. 

Kane failed to add to his goal tally in last season’s Champions League tie, but Arsenal have drawn Bayern again this time around. 

So, come October 21st, there is every chance that one question will once again be at the forefront of the minds of Gooners everywhere: 

“Is Kane playing?” 

And perhaps that is the most galling part of the whole story. 

Because Harry Kane wasn’t some unknown kid who emerged from a footballing backwater and suddenly appeared to haunt Arsenal. 

We had him. 

We saw him. 

We assessed him. 

And then we let him go. 

It is a very great pity that, back in 2002, the Hale End Academy director’s job didn’t come with a crystal ball. 

Because if it had, the intervening years might have been very, very different — for Harry Kane’s trophy cabinet, Arsenal’s trophy cabinet, and quite possibly the blood pressure of every Gooner who has ever watched him line up against us. 

CER has a slightly different take on the person he didn’t like us to face. This one didn’t score against us but he inflicted plenty of damage!

Graham Roberts by CER 

Let me start by saying that I haven’t entirely taken leave of my senses. I appreciate that Roberts was hardly Beckenbauer or Baresi. It was as much what he signified as he trod the turf in the early 80’s as what he actually did on it. With one exception, which we will come to. 

Roberts was a lumbering centre half of the old English school, in the tradition of Jack Charlton and Mickey Droy – centre halves who made Sam Allardyce look cultured. Released by Southampton and then by Portsmouth, he played in non-league football before being picked up by Them at the end of the 79/80 season. They had some very good players at this time. Ardiles and Villa spring to mind, as well as Glenn Hoddle. The timing is important. We had just played 3 FA Cup finals on the spin, and while not being brilliant, we too had some fantastic players in that period. Unfortunately, lack of ambition being shown by the Board resulted in the great Liam Brady, in the top 2 or three of the best Arsenal players I have ever seen, leaving for Juventus in May 1980. A year later, Frank Stapleton, one heck of a centre forward, left in acrimonious circumstances for Man United, unsatisfied, as his countryman had been, by the stasis at Arsenal.  Stapleton was replaced over the next 3 years by a collection of bumbling dinosaurs in John Hawley, Ray Hankin and then Lee Chapman. These three could not have found their own backsides with both hands. 

At the same time, Roberts’ arrival coincided with one of the Marshdwellers’ periodic, but short-lived, ascents from the primordial slime, winning consecutive FA Cups in 80/81and 81/82, as well as the European Cup Winners Cup in 83/84. They even had the temerity to win the 80/81 FA Cup semi-final – always played at a neutral venue – at Highbury. Remember that back in 1977 they had been relegated. This unwelcome metamorphosis was something of a shock. At this time, despite being an Islington boy, I was at school up in Enfield – further north and very much Sp*rs territory – and routinely had to suffer the slings and arrows shot by my school mates the vast majority of whom were Sp*rs fans. This was not fun. 

The nadir of this excruciating period occurred, for me, on New Years day 1986. In those days, one of the North London Derbies was reserved for Boxing Day or New Years Day. This year the game was at Highbury. These games were always blood and thunder but this game in particular took it to new highs.   As my moniker would indicate, I and my mates enjoyed standing in the Clock End. However, for derby games, it was given up to Them, so we had to stand in the North Bank. It was from this vantage point that I saw Roberts make one of the most cynical and heinous tackles I have witnessed in person. Charlie Nicholas – the Glaswegian darling of Highbury at the time – was attempting to break down the left wing, 25 yards out from our penalty box, on the East Stand side.  Roberts, seeing what was happening, charged, rhino-like, over towards Nicholas, who seeing it coming cleverly pushed the ball in front. This would not deter Roberts, a player for whom the term antediluvian could have been invented, and he simply ran full-pelt into Nicholas. Now Roberts must have been 6’1” and 15 stones.  He struck Nicholas with such force that he was quite literally thrown sideways over into the crowd. This must have been at least a 6-foot sideways distance so you can imagine the force deployed. Now at the time, this side of the ground was low to the pitch. Not only that, but it was called “The Schoolboys” as those under 16 could get in there for half the price of the North Bank.  Nicholas slammed into the poor unfortunates there. There could have been serious injuries to both player and youngsters, but fortunately there weren’t. As if to show that PGMOL or whatever they are called this week, is absolutely no improvement on what went before, Roberts wasn’t even booked. 

Roberts cleared off to Glasgow Rangers in 1986. The timing was perfect, as on 4th March 1987 in the second leg of the League Cup semi-final, a now Roberts-less Sp*rs capitulated to a Rocky Rocastle goal, at The Lane, sealing our victory and paving the way for our ultimate victory that year at Wembley. Of course, the cherry on the cake was that at half time the Sp*rs stadium announcer belted out details of how their fans could get tickets for the final. Spursy! Balance had been restored and all was once again good with the world

We close this look at those we have loathed and lost (or in Kane’s case , temporarily mislaid) with Bathgooner’s look at one of our most implacable and irritating opponents 

Wayne Rooney by bathgooner

I chose to write about Wayne Rooney as Arsenal’s Nemesis (I prefer to use the term Bête Noir) because of two episodes that remain deep scars on my memory of watching the Arsenal over many years. Although there are several candidates for that title, these Rooney generated scars remain the deepest and least healed.

In early 2002, there had been chatter in the football media about a ‘boy wonder’ at Everton. On 19 October 2002, Arsenal visited Goodison as Double-winning Champions on a 30 game Premier League unbeaten streak. Freddie Ljungberg opened the scoring in the 8th minute and another routine victory seemed to be on the cards but Radzinski equalised for Everton after 22 minutes.

The game seemed to be heading for a 1-1 draw when Moyes threw on 16-year old Wayne Rooney in the 80th minute. Nine minutes later, a high ball forward found Rooney 30 yards from goal. He took the ball down sweetly, had two more touches then unleashed a curling right-footed shot past Sol Campbell and over the outstretched arms of David Seaman. The ball clipped the underside of the bar and nestled in the net. That goal ended Arsenal’s unbeaten run and appeared to knock the team’s confidence to a ridiculous degree causing them to lose their next four matches. It also briefly made Rooney the Premier League’s youngest goalscorer and launched his Premiership career. Arsenal finished that season in second place, 5 points behind Ferguson’s United with whom they had, almost exclusively, been boxing and coxing for the title since 1998.

By 2004, Rooney had decamped to United and on 24 October, Arsenal visited the Old Toilet not only as defending Champions but also as ‘The Invincibles’ with a proud unbeaten run lasting 49 games. Just one more unbeaten game and they’d achieve the 50-game milestone. There was little doubt that Arsenal’s achievement of an unbeaten season rankled in Manchester, rendering the atmosphere hostile and the game ferocious with the execrable Mike Riley failing to deal with several, now notorious, violent challenges from the home team who saw brute force as the only way to constrain Arsenal’s fluid passing game. The match remained goalless until the 73rd minute when Rooney drove into the right side of Arsenal’s penalty area. As Campbell closed him down and extended a leg, Rooney dived. Riley immediately pointed to the spot without pausing for thought. TV replays showed minimal to no contact but this was long before VAR. Van Nistelroy scored the penalty and celebrated wildly, reflecting, no doubt, on his Keown-celebrated miss the season before. Arsenal threw everything into getting an equaliser but were caught on a breakaway in the 93rd minute when Rooney sealed a 2-0 win with a tap-in. Of course, it didn’t end there, this officially sanctioned episode of grand larceny was followed by Pizza-gate, but that is another story. 

That result derailed Arsenal’s attempt to defend their title. Before this match, Arsenal had looked unstoppable, winning 8 of their opening 9 games. Whether through the shattering of their sense of invincibility or poisoned by a massive sense of injustice, Arsenal’s form collapsed and they won only 2 of their next 7 league games, allowing Mourinho’s Chelsea to overtake them and win the title by 12 points.

Thus, this whiny Scouse twerp had contributed significantly to thwarting Arsenal from retaining the title on two separate occasions.

Rooney went on to play for United for another 13 years becoming their all-time leading goal scorer with 253 goals in 559 appearances and he did win a few trophies. He played against the Arsenal 35 times and scored 15 goals , making 7 assists. Towards the end of his playing career, Rooney acquired the highly appropriate soubriquet of Shrek and, no doubt at huge expense, a very strange hairstyle.

After a one season swan-song at Everton and a brief spell at DC United, he moved on to coaching. Rooney has repeatedly proved his inadequacy as a coach at every club that succumbed to the temptation of employing him in order to garner some publicity: Derby County (85 matches, 28% wins); D.C. United (54 matches, 26% wins); Birmingham City (15 matches, 13% wins) and Plymouth Argyle (25 matches, 20% wins). I suppose one has to admire his determination, tenacity and mural dyslexia.

Now that even he has recognised that his attempts to coach have hit the buffers, and despite his frequently incomprehensible attempts at communication, Wayne Rooney has recently been appointed to the Match of the Day panel of pundits and seems to be the physical embodiment of the modern decline of the BBC. Although, it has been suggested, with reference to a modicum of apocryphal evidence, that Wayne may actually be a secret genius but does not possess a way with words.

The Season so Far

This extraordinary interlull – a three week break, just weeks into the season has massively interrupted the flow of the club game. There has been the extra hiatus caused by the C114y scandal, but before that broke we’d actually played some football! Including the Community Shield, we’ve played seven games, winning six. Sadly, the one most in our minds was the most recent one – the Brighton debacle. We were interested in soliciting views on how our readers felt that things had gone so far. An audience of Holics is as fair and balanced as you get and we asked several of our regulars what they thought of the season so far. We’ve solicited opinions from Ollie, Gunnersaurus Stunt Double and Noosa, so it will be a very international review of events so far ! 

I began by asking how they viewed our form so far: 

How have we begun the defence of our title? Better or worse than you expected?

Ollie – I am a demanding chap after last season and the transfer window, so the Brighton result changed my view from ‘as expected’ to ‘slightly worse’. I will caveat this with ‘but perfectly fine’. Especially as, penalty incoming or not, I am not convinced 115 can continue their current charmed life, in the same way (but in a different style) Liverpool couldn’t last season.

Noosa – I’ve never thought of us as defending our title. That kind of suggests that it’s ours to lose whereas to my mind every season starts anew, with likely different challenges this time around. We simply have to win it all over again.

Two points more than at the same stage last season would suggest we’re off to a good start, although the Brighton game, hopefully a bad day at the office, now gives pause for reflection, which I hope is not lost during the three-week interlull. I’m sure that Arteta and his team will find the answers should other teams try and replicate Brighton’s approach.

An ongoing concern is how we satisfy some of our senior players with both starts and minutes, Merino, Zubimendi, Eze spring to mind. I’m interested in how MA manages this moving forward.

GSD – We’ve begun our title roughly as expected. Dropping away points at Villa or Sunderland was possible, but we did enough to get the wins. Brighton was just an awful day at the office. It happens! But 12 from 15 points seems about right, and we’ve played much as expected. Although, even though we have not scored as often as I’d like, we’ve looked more fluid than I thought we would so early in the season. 

Do you think we are playing more attractive football this term? 

Noosa – Yes and no. Some nice stuff against Citeh and Coventry, grinding it out against Villa and Sunderland, at times against Chelsea and clearly not against Brighton. A real mixed bag and, Sunderland penalty apart, no goals from set plays which is a surprise. 

Attractive football is good – winning is better. 

GSD – I definitely think we are playing more attractive football and I think there is plenty more to come. I’m excited to see us score more heavily than we have so far.

Ollie – It was certainly my hope that we would. And overall (again excepting Brighton…), I would say yes, a little. Helped in no small part by a fully fit again and confident Ødegaard.

What do you think of the new signings? 

GSD – I’m very impressed with Tzolis, extremely happy with Konsa, and think Bruno could be just what we need. And even though he’s not close to the first team at the moment, I like Meslier and think getting him on a free is shrewd business.

Ollie – Very encouraged by Tzolis, positive play and contributions. Can still improve but promising, especially for the price we paid, which counts as ‘bargain’ these days.

Bruno G has shown what he can bring with progressive passing, and shots, that fantastic Sunderland shot was both a relatively ‘unusual’ Arsenal goal and massively important in the context of the match. Brighton showed his limitations though, but let’s hope he gets fully fit and sharp and stays fit after fitful beginnings.

Did we sign anyone else? Meslier, I guess, but he hasn’t yet played. I don’t count Hincapié as a new signing. Very happy with Konsa. He is no Saliba, but high quality, and as the on/off repeated injuries to most of our defenders show, was also a very necessary signing.

Noosa – I wasn’t bothered either way that we missed out on Vinicus Jr, there were plus and minus points in my opinion. 

Tzolis seems a solid workhorse although I wish he’d go outside more. I think that Rogers would have been an upgrade.

Konsa is a solid buy who needs to keep developing a stronger relationship with Gabriel – both standing off for two Brighton goals!

In respect of squad depth now, lack of minutes suggests that Viktor has fallen out of favour in which case a new striker may be required to better challenge or complement Kai.

If Benny Blanco and Timber continue their now long-standing injury woes a new right back may be needed.

What do you think we still lack, if anything, in any positions?

Ollie – Speed and precision at the front. Despite his erratic end product, Martinelli offered an outlet in some situations that I don’t think we have anymore (I know Havertz is, in fact, deceptively quick, but he has a different position/game). Losing both Trossard (you could consider Tzolis being the equivalent, if slightly less technical replacement) and Martinelli felt one too many. 

Noosa – Precision, of course I mean, more of a ruthless goalscorer, something it is not abundantly clear (IMHO) Gyökeres won’t be in this team. Brighton may have been a collective failure of multiple individuals, but that miss from Havertz confirms he’s not quite lethal either.

GSD – I’d still like to see us get a top left-winger. And a new striker. As a squad, we lack pace, so definitely more of that too.

Who has particularly impressed you this season ? 

GSD – I ’m sure I won’t be alone in singling out Martin Ødegaard. I wrote in the pre-season about how I would like to see the captaincy transitioned to Rice this season. If Ødegaard maintains his form (which easily guarantees his place in our first eleven on the biggest match days) then I’ll row back hastily on my previous assessment. He looks the player I feared we’d lost, and I bloody love him!

Noosa – Raya, again, although with a couple of brainfades thrown in. 

Rice, again. A surprising number of minutes already given previous exertions. 

And most importantly, we’ve got our captain back. We are simply a better team when MØ is in form. 

Ollie – Calafiori. Maybe my new favourite player. I just like his slightly chaotic style, the way he pops all over the place, being skilful enough to make it count in the opposition half too. I hope he stays fit.

MLS. I know it’s a crowded area but I hope he can now play regularly in midfield. Proper Gooner too.

Ødegaard? Yes, definitely, though in his case it is more a return to the form we knew from a couple of seasons ago or so.

Now hoping for an injury-free interlull and the squad feeling refreshed and hungry for the next run.

TTG – We are living through an extraordinary period both in terms of the strength of our own club and the incredible upheaval that we are likely to see in the Premier League this season . Our status as champions is massively satisfying to contemplate but as the Brighton defeat showed we are in a very challenging league and need to maintain standards . A three week interlull has not helped continuity or helped the season to develop a rhythm. When Premier League football resumes, it will be interesting to see what happens on and off the pitch. We are most grateful to our three correspondents and hope that, when football resumes, the Arsenal can drive forwards towards success both domestically and in Europe.

Our plans for a nostalgic Arsenal interlull have been rather overtaken by events following Friday’s initial announcement about the commission’s verdict on Manchester City’s 115 ( or possibly more) charges. It has provoked huge debate around the football world, albeit a rather uneven debate. Some of the calls I have heard broadcast from C114y fans have bordered on the farcical. One caller suggested this was a massacre of the Manchester populace akin to Peterloo! One challenged Andy Goldstein to tell him one thing that C114y had done wrong, seemingly not realising that they had been handed down a verdict that found them guilty of almost every charge; charges that were around three years old. Another suggested that “We will do what we always do – circle the wagons and win the title,” all delivered in charmless Mancunian tones with a cynical cackle to boot. 

So, where are we and what might this mean for football and what might it mean for Arsenal? This is a summary of what the Premier League released on Monday in a redacted report of the findings of an independent commission. 

The Findings of the Commission 

The independent Commission appointed to hear the Premier League’s case against Manchester City has found the club guilty of all the charges relating to serious breaches of the League’s financial rules over nine seasons, from 2009-10 to 2017-18. It also found City guilty of three of the four charges relating to its alleged failure to co-operate with the Premier League’s investigation. 

The case arose from 115 charges brought by the Premier League in February 2023. The allegations covered two broad areas. The first concerned the accuracy of Manchester City’s financial reporting, particularly revenue from sponsorship agreements, operating costs and related-party transactions. The second concerned alleged failures by the club to assist the Premier League’s subsequent investigation. 

The Commission’s central finding is that City used a series of ‘sham’ commercial contracts which did not represent the true financial arrangements between the parties. According to the Premier League’s account of the findings, these arrangements artificially increased the club’s reported revenues and reduced its reported costs. Some sponsors were apparently required to contribute only a small part of the amounts recorded in their contracts, with the club’s ownership group, Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG), supplying the much larger balance. 

The effect, according to the Commission, was substantial. Had the arrangements been recorded accurately, Manchester City would have exceeded both the Premier League’s spending restrictions and UEFA’s financial rules by a very substantial amount. The Premier League says the arrangements affected more than £900 million of revenue and costs. The Commission therefore rejected the idea that the disputed accounting arrangements were merely technical breaches, concluding that the club intended to circumvent the rules. 

The Commission also found that City submitted misstated accounts and failed to disclose the true position of its finances to auditors and football regulators. In addition, during the Premier League investigation, the club was found to have breached its obligations to co-operate and to act in the utmost good faith. Three of the four alleged failures to co-operate were upheld. The Premier League says the Commission found that City made concerted efforts to obstruct or frustrate the investigation. 

These findings are particularly significant because Manchester City has consistently denied wrongdoing. Following publication of the findings, the club said it was disappointed and surprised and maintained that it was innocent of the accusations. City has stated that it possesses a “comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence” supporting its position and intends to appeal, arguing that the Commission’s decision contains “material errors of law, principle and fact”. 

Importantly, the Commission has not yet imposed a punishment. The Premier League’s rules give the Commission wide discretion, including the ability to impose fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions. Any sanction will therefore be a separate and potentially very consequential stage of the process. 

Manchester City also has a right of appeal to an independent Appeal Board. That Board can uphold the decision, overturn it or vary the Commission’s order. Consequently, the findings announced this week represent a major stage in the case, but they are not necessarily the final legal position. 

The Premier League has described the case and the decision as the most significant disciplinary matter in its history. Nevertheless, several issues remain unresolved, most importantly, the sanction and the outcome of any appeal. The full Commission decision has not yet been published and the continuing proceedings remain subject to confidentiality requirements. 

In essence, the Commission has accepted the Premier League’s case that Manchester City systematically breached its financial rules over a prolonged period and deliberately concealed the true financial arrangements behind some sponsorship and expenditure. The next major questions are therefore what punishment will be imposed, whether City will succeed in its appeal, and what consequences – if any – the findings will ultimately have for the club’s historical results, titles and European participation.

Let us look at those three issues with a view to getting the opinion of Holics examining the case:

What punishment should be meted out?

The independent Commission’s findings against Manchester City are potentially much more consequential than an ordinary financial-rule breach. The Commission found that City had used “sham” commercial arrangements, misstated accounts and significantly breached Premier League and UEFA spending limits over all nine seasons examined. It also found City guilty of three of four alleged failures to co-operate with the Premier League investigation. 

However, no punishment has yet been imposed. The sanction will be considered at a separate hearing before the independent Commission. City also has the right to appeal the findings, with the deadline currently 2 October. An appeal would be heard by a new three-person Appeal Board, rather than by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, to whom they have no right of appeal. 

The obvious potential sanction is a very substantial points deduction. There is no established tariff for conduct on this scale. Everton, for example, received a 10-point deduction for a much smaller PSR breach, subsequently reduced on appeal to six points. City’s case is fundamentally different in both the duration and the nature and scale of the alleged financial manipulation. Consequently, any points penalty cannot sensibly be calculated simply by applying the Everton precedent. 

A points deduction could potentially be applied to the current season, although the precise timing would depend upon the sanction and appeal process. A sufficiently large deduction could have consequences for City’s league position, including the possibility of relegation. That is a possible consequence, not a decision that has been announced. But many commentators feel even this may be inadequate punishment. 

Another possibility is a substantial financial penalty. The Commission has found that more than £900 million of revenue and costs were affected by the arrangements. The eventual sanction is likely to take into account not merely the financial scale but also the Commission’s findings concerning deliberate conduct and the club’s failure to co-operate. 

There is also the much more complicated question of past Premier League titles. If the Commission’s judgements ultimately survive appeal, the Premier League could potentially seek retrospective sporting consequences. Reports have raised the possibility of titles being removed or seasons being retrospectively altered, but, as yet, there has been no ruling that City’s titles will be stripped. Such a step would raise extraordinarily difficult questions about whether runners-up should become champions, how prize money should be treated and whether other clubs could bring financial claims

The new Independent Football Regulator (IFR) is an important additional factor, but its role needs to be understood carefully. The IFR has statutory powers concerning the suitability of owners and directors. It can assess whether an incumbent owner or director remains suitable where it has grounds for concern, and, in appropriate circumstances, can require an unsuitable owner or director to leave or disqualify them. 

Might City succeed in their appeal ? 

Despite the apparent bullishness of Ferran Soriano, C114y are in a very deep pit. Presumably, their ‘irrefutable evidence’ was used in the original hearing and signally failed to impress the commission. The word ‘sham’ is used no less than eight times in the report published yesterday  and specific reference is made in the judgment to the ‘Disguised Funding Scheme’ set up by the club to mask payments from ADUG . There is also the matter of the unreliability and dishonesty of some of the witnesses put forward by the club. They will not be recalled. Thus, for an appeal to succeed the club has to produce significant new evidence that fundamentally strengthens City’s case and overturns the judgments made by the original Commission. I am inclined to agree with Jamie Carragher (not words I often write!) that Soriano is indulging in gaslighting. 

The original Commission took considerable time to consider the evidence and have been painstaking in their evaluation so unless it can be proved that they have made significant errors, or C114y produce evidence they did not share with the original Commission it seems highly unlikely that the Commission’s judgment will be substantially reversed. This is the opinion of a couple of legal friends and tallies with the view of Stefan Borson who seems to be one of the leading authorities in football’s financial / legal space.

What are the likely consequences? 

This is the hardest area to predict with any certainty and any suggestions I make are pure speculation. 

Firstly this is likely to become a very strange season. The atmosphere when C114y are playing away will be very hostile. At the Etihad the wagons may indeed circle but there will also be C114y fans disgusted at the state of the club. It will be very hard for C114y players to sustain their form and motivation throughout a season when whatever the outcome of games, they may be relegated anyway. 

Any appeal may apparently take several months to be fully completed and the final judgment to be given. It is not yet clear whether sanctions will be announced before any appeal. The Premier League has said its intention is for the full process, including any appeals, to be concluded as soon as possible. Lisa Nandy, the Sports Minister echoed this when interviewed yesterday. 

So, I would expect the League to want the sanctions process to move forward rather than to wait for potentially many months for the appeal process to be completed. However, we don’t yet have a published timetable saying that the sanction will definitely be announced before the appeal is heard.

There is a precedent for sanctions and appeals being dealt with separately. In Everton’s case, for example, the club’s two-point deduction was imposed and then appealed, with the Appeal Board subsequently varying the punishment. 

My view as to an appropriate punishment if any appeal fails is that it should fall into several parts:

1. C114 y should be expelled from the Premier League. Their dishonesty and cynicism towards the competition merits very severe action.

If they are expelled they would have to apply to join the EFL at the bottom of the pyramid (Division 2) and if accepted, must work their way back up. 

2. A significant fine should be levied. A fine is the least important aspect because the owners of this club have almost inexhaustible cash reserves, but it should reflect income illegally gained leaving individual clubs to pursue claims for compensation although a class action could still follow. It might be a very substantial sum indeed.

3. The club should surrender all honours it has won during the period under review but the titles should not be reassigned. They should be categorised as ‘not awarded’ simply because it is too difficult to reassign them accurately. 

4. The Independent Regulator should order a change of ownership and the club should be sold. It may follow that the Regulator eventually bans Nation States from owning League football clubs but that is for another day. 

These four  steps would effectively destroy the club, stripping it back to the lowest league status, taking away titles won in the era under review (whether the Premier League extend its investigations from 2018 to 2026 is a moot point), effecting a change in ownership and reducing a once proud club to Ground Zero. It should however be a clean and honest club for the  first time in eighteen years. 

What thoughts do other Holics have? 

We are interrupting our discussion on the Great Divide to examine the breaking news brought to us this afternoon. News that may have implications which have lasting impacts on English football.

I begin by quoting from Ornstein in this afternoon’s Athletic: 

“Manchester City have been found guilty on almost all of the charges relating to breaches of the Premier League’s financial regulations.

“The sanctions have not been decided, with all possibilities remaining on the table, and City are expected to appeal.

”City have been found guilty on all but one of the 115 charges, according to sources briefed on the matter who spoke anonymously as they were not authorised to do so publicly. They were first charged in February 2023 following a four-year investigation.

“A City spokesperson told The Athletic: “The Premier League process remains ongoing, with significant elements to be completed, and subject to strict confidentiality. As such Manchester City FC’s position remains consistent with the club’s statement of February 2023.

“The club has diligently respected due process for eight years on the basis the Premier League board and executive would behave as an independent, impartial and fair minded regulator, free from partisan influence.”

This is an issue which we have fervently debated on here for three years . When they were first charged, had an immediate early verdict followed we would probably  have won two further titles. Last season, we beat them without any points deductions, with Pep Guardiola in charge, and in the face of the arrogance that seeps  out of every pore of a club that is about to be disembowelled after persistent infringements over eleven years – and nobody has formally investigated their potential guilt over the years beyond those covered by their charges. 

This is probably the biggest scandal in English football history and the litigious nature of C114y (we’ve amended their moniker to reflect the number of charges apparently proved by the tribunal) has meant that blogs and media outlets have been very reluctant to speculate about their guilt and what would happen if their guilt was proven. I first read of their alleged wrongdoing in emails published by Der Spiegel around eight years ago. The culture engendered in those emails was repulsive, cynical and deeply arrogant. But was it a genuine reflection? It would now appear that it was. 

Some people I’ve spoken to are still uncertain about whether this is reliable. It is from Ornstein who works for an organ of the New York Times. Can you imagine them not checking its veracity before publishing? In C114y’s response you can sense the shock and defensiveness about where they go from here. Division 2 might be an appropriate destination. 

There are also those of a pessimistic nature who still expect C114y to get away with it –  “like Chelsea it will be a slap on the wrist”.

May I quote from the excellent Magic Hat on Twitter to answer this: 

“For those thinking Man City will get a lenient punishment like Chelsea did, that simply won’t be the case.

“The PL convinced an IC Panel that Chelsea (a) did not gain any Sporting Advantage, (b) they were no longer owned/run by the perpetrators, and (c) they were very compliant (even self-reporting).

“Man City’s case is the opposite of those 3 factors:

1) They gained a monstrous sporting advantage. Hundreds upon hundreds of millions over PSR limits.

2) They are still owned / run by the people that did it.

3) They have gone to extreme lengths to avoid justice. They hid it all (only an email hack caught them – the rules could not).

“They refused to comply with the investigation.

“They committed perjury at CAS.

“Henry Winter also agrees. 

“Fining a club as wealthy as Manchester City would be pointless. If their appeal fails, it has to be a points deduction leading to relegation.”

If I might say so, I have always understood the reluctance to believe that C114y would be found guilty and severely sanctioned. It was almost too good to be true that the only serious rival to us in the Premier League might suffer a huge points deduction. But the Premier League passed the point of no return when they committed to charging a club as rich and litigious as City. If those charges had failed, it might have led to the resignation of the whole management structure at the Premier League and left C114y untouchable because of their money and power. I’ve always believed that ultimately C114y would be blown to bits . 

What that might mean may take a while to decide. C114y might try to drag things out, appeal and try every legal trick they can to delay things. But now they face the court of universal opprobrium, of national indignation and fury and disgust. What if their team bolstered by £400 million of players whom they might not have legitimately acquired does win the League? Who will accept it as a fair and valid result? Law suits will pile up and if they hope to deflect and overturn 114 charges (and rumours suggest there may be more in the pipeline ) surely they will eventually have to suck up their punishment or become the pariahs of English and European football. But of course they are that already! 

C114y – it’s taken a long time but the game is up. Football knows what you did and who you actually are. You will find that sympathy is in very short supply.

Older Posts »