Yeah as long as they hire and fire well and don’t take money out or saddle the club with stupid debts.
Not even. As owner he doesn’t have any accountability towards anyone.
Well he could also decide to close the club. Of course he can do anything he wants but if we are going to judge him, you have to start somewhere.
That’s my point. We can judge him all we want but it has absolutely zero consequences. Hence I found it funny when I read people said Kroenke needed to be there. LOL.
Well that is different. Of course there aren’t any consequences… no one is arguing there are. It is irrelevant point to even raise. The discussion is about what is fair and reasonable to judge.
I’d agree with you that appearances are hardly relevant as you could point to countless “activist” owners across sports who are big “fans” and are also horrible and largely hated… look at Mike Ashley and Dan Snyder (US Wash Redskins) for classic examples.
Reaction if Kroenke had been there “Look at him showing up when there’s some freebies from UEFA to be had. Moustache cunt”.
6 Likes
No accountability means he can do what he wants until people stop going o matches.
He might own Arsenal, but he isn’t the club.
He’s not even a supporter or a football fan.
He doesn’t even go to matches.
The club isn’t the players, the manager, the stadium, the shirts, the sponsors or the owner, because they all change.
The only constant is the supporters, and they are the club.
Kroenke is just a shyster who happens to have bought us, as a business, and we are just an investment in his portfolio.
Until he goes, we aren’t going anywhere but down.
Let’s hope next time he goes on one of his elephant hunts, one of them is quicker and smarter than him.
If that happens, I would gladly subscribe to his disgusting Hunting TV Channel, just to watch him being flattened by one of his targets.
1 Like
“Bet he didn’t have any troubles getting there, the rich cunt”
In a totally unrelated note:
Josh was there apparently… Bet he didn’t have any troubles getting there, the rich cunt.
3 Likes
You don’t have a lot of trouble getting anywhere if you have your own private jet.
Spot on and depressing.
70 million down the tubes on Mustafi and Xhaka. I’m sure that many on the board could name 20 players that we could have had for those funds that would have improved the team quite a bit. Hell, even average signings with those funds would not have resulted in the calamity that is and was those two. Can easily tie 10 points (or more) dropped this season due to a direct brain dead error from the calamity twins.
Issue is that even if Stan/Josh/the board/whomever authorizes some spend to improve the squad, I have little faith in what players they will buy. We know that Arsenal will never have unlimited funds, but the club can’t swing and miss like w/Xhaka and Mustafi without ramifications.
While the owner may not really care or hell, maybe he cares a bunch, the structure of the club and the “backroom” making decisions has been in a tailspin the last few seasons. Really need the recruitment team (just Raul at this point?) to pull some rabbits out of a hat.
3 Likes
Just execute like Spurs and Pool have… Our netspend and wages dwarf Spurs and Pool got bargains to help them on their way with Salah and Mane.
1 Like
Yep, the on field woes are directly tied to having Larry, Moe and Curly running the back office, having a mixed record at best on new signings and a diabolical one on player sells.
Has this been sorted now? I want to believe that Raul and co. have the wherewithal to turn around a poorly run back office. Gotta get the asset buys and sells much more right or I don’t think that the table position will improve much.
1 Like
Spurs are in a CL final, and I’m sure it has very little to do with the ambition of their owner.
Liverpool are in a second CL final, and as far as I’m aware FSG haven’t invested a ton of money for transfers either.
Address Book Raul is running shit now. He should be the one getting judged, like Ivan before him.
So far Stan is a silent investor. Nothing in, nothing out but we were not spending money before he became majority shareholder.
Stan and sons’ only real job is to fire Raul if he’s not delivering. I think they’ll probably fail at that when the time comes, but it hasn’t come yet.
1 Like
They have injected a substantial amount to be fair. Based entirely on that chart I’ve seen posted on here twice, @someone post it again
2 Likes
I could easily be wrong on this…but as i understand it the majority of FSG investment has been on infrastructure…the new Kop etc.
Good point, think the chart was about money injected generally, not just for transfers.
But either way, it’s money injected at the end of the day. If the owners didn’t stump up for the infrastructure, they’d have had to compromise somewhat on transfers. Due to the money put in, they could have the best of both worlds.
Meanwhile we’re here being owned by a moustache cunt and acting like it makes sense for to supposedly have a paltry budget 
I know I’m still in “woe is me” mode after last night, but we really are a fucking joke of a club these days.
3 Likes
Our netspend is marginally higher than theirs in last 5 years.
Infrastructure is a foolproof way to increase the value of the club though and it’s an investment that will pay for itself without risk. As far as I know it was also a loan which is being paid back. I doubt they’d have thrown anywhere near the same amount just for transfers if they already had the stadium and facilities required.
Either way, Liverpool aren’t where they are because of a bigger stand or a training ground that isn’t finished yet. It’s been scouting and coaching which is two areas we’ve really been shit, but I don’t think it’s as simple as everything’s Kroenke’s fault.
1 Like
Probably just my stoned self, but I don’t get this part.
If they hadn’t needed a new stand they’d have kept the money in their pockets.
1 Like