Claudius wrote:
Lagos, you cannot absolve Stan of blame. You are completely right that it is Wenger who has left money in the bank, failed to develop a coherent identity, failed to coach defense for most of the past 6 years, etc. However, he has not done this once or twice. He has done it season after season after season. And he has been allowed to keep repeating these mistakes. That we are going into the final days of transfer window with no business only 2 years after United pummeled us 8-2 is a joke. If United were to face us this week, they could quite easily put 4 past us, maybe more. It is up to Kroenke to put an end to the madness. He too is a villain in this piece.
what I am saying in regards to Stan is this, lack of interference and a promise not to take out dividends is exactly what Stan promised and exactly what he is delivering. it's what people wanted and it's what they got....more of the same, no interference except to improve the commercial side. The club was until recently for all intents and purpose still run by the old guard with the old buffon at the helm and even now with Sir Crisps it's effectly more of the same, so really are we blaming Stan or our decision to vote for more of the same? Afterall most fans wanted Stan for that reason of continuity!
I suspect Nina knew at the time she was voting for more of the same, after all she would have made more money with Uzi, but I can imagine she took little interest in our affairs just happy to hobnob and sit on the board look in the direction of PHW or Dein or Fizzman for how she should vote and as such when the time came to make such a critical decision she chose the path of least resistance. Imho she should just take her money and sail away. I say that because she seems to have had a change of heart, why didn't she didn't think it through when she sold? the fact that she is blaming Stan to me is passing the buck, she's just another Wenger apologist refusing to lay blame exactly where it should be. The board we have now is an extension of the board she served on, things would have been done the same way if Kroenke had not come along so why is she now criticizing it from afar?
I never wanted Stan, Stan promised no interference and that's what we are getting, We haven't spent (or have mispent) the money we have so we don't need Stan's money or Uzi's. Blaming Stan is just a case of buyer's remorse, so why the call for Uzi? Our problem isn't money! ...... because it turns out we need interference, direction, we need ambition, the sort only an egomaniac like dear Uzi can deliver.. It turns out a football club is not about balancing the accounts, it turns out we need owners who's connection with the club is not just financial but someone who (in addition to any financial gain) wants to win as badly as the fans!
