Football is a game built on emotions at the best of times. Understandably the view of the majority of Arsenal fans is that the club should have done more and still should do more to keep hold of Robin Van Persie.
As the clubs top scorer and captain his loss would send the wrong signal to prospective signings and the club but is the risk of giving Van Persie the contract he really wants worth the risk financially. I'll cut to the chase I don't believe Arsenal's footballing ambitions or lack there of are what triggered Van Persie's statement about not signing a new contract. There are two elements to this supposed ambition the first relates to the acquisitions Arsenals have made this summer and how the quality compares to other seasons. This season the club have signed two international strikers Olivier Giroud and Lukasz Podolski in a clear attempt to relieve some of the scoring burden from Van Persie's shoulders. Both players are established internationals with clear scoring form in their respective domestic leagues. Crucially Giroud is rumoured to have turned down a move to Chelsea clearly showing that Arsenal are competing properly in the market. All indications are that Arsenal are not finished yet with the club heavily linked to the highly rated defensive midfielder Yann M'Vila. These players compare favourably in terms of pedigree when compared to last years striking additions Park Chu Young and Gervinho. The second relates to the teams ability to win trophies. The teams form from a difficult 2010/11 season to the 2011/12 season was a clear improvement despite the loss of key players through transfers and injury. With a substantial outlay on transfers already this summer and key players like Jack Wilshere to return hopes should be high of ending the seven year trophy drought. The financials of the deal are the reason Van Persie has made his statement and it is an insult to the intellect of Arsenal fans to say otherwise. I don't blame Van Persie for wishing to provide for his family but lying about his reasons for wanting a transfer is disappointing in the extreme.
Moving back to the original question should Arsenal bridge the difference between the current offer and the offer Van Persie desires. My opinion is a firm no. To begin with the offer they have made a 50% pay rise to make Van Persie the clubs record earner allied with a significant signing on fee is a fair offer for a player with excellent form but a proneness to injury throughout his career with the gunners. The increased cost of matching Manchester City's potential offer doesn't stop with Van Persie and could negatively impact the clubs ability to compete in the future. I'll expand on this I believe dismantling their current wage structure for Van Persie's needs would have an incremental effect on the wage demands of every player Arsenal negotiate with both internally and externally during the period of Van Persies contract. Next season Arsenal will be looking to extend the contracts of their defensive lynchpins Alex Song, Bacary Sagna, Kieran Gibbs and Wojciech Szczensy and increasing their wage expectations for a player who may potentially be injured does not seem like good business. Incidentally the star signing Van Persie supposedly wants would also re-evaluate his wage demands to be in line with the best player at the club. Financial Fair Play is another reason why paying more than you can afford is not a good idea. Without the option of creating a campus around the stadium ala Manchester City, Arsenal cannot afford to gamble on the future as much as they are being asked to for a player with an injury record like Van Persie's. Finally the club have fought the good fight on financial discipline and organic growth and by compromising here they have far more to lose than to gain.
If Van Persie wants to go from being the key player in a team to a squad player at another team that is his decisions and its clearly not primarily for footballing reasons.
No comments:
Post a Comment