Arsenal’s inability to sell their worst players
In the build up during the week of Arsenal‘s home game against recently crowned champions, Manchester United, it was expectedly a “Where are they now” of players sold in recent years and what they’ve achieved since, notably former Arsenal captain being dubbed “the difference” by the media in the Premier League title being Manchester red this year, instead of blue.
But I got thinking about the players who NEED to be sold but cannot be shifted. Marouane Chamakh, top goal scorer in Ligue 1 with Bordeaux before Arsenal signed him, starts of decent enough and is now on loan to West Ham & I’m not the biggest watcher of the Hammers, but does he even get into their match day squads? With Arsenal still paying a cut of his reported £65,000 a week, what is the point? And why kick up such a fuss on paying Walcott £90,000 per week if that’s the president you’re setting with the wages for players who are dire at the times. I think every football fan with a brain can agree that Walcott is £25,000 a week better than Chamakh, but he’s still not good enough to be top-earner at the club, but that’s for another day.
Another dead wood that needs to be cut is Andrey Arshavin, admittedly, the way he has been deployed by the team and regularly used in a wide area when everyone knew he wast that type of player before he signed means that the club are not entirely blameless in the situation. The Independent run a story earlier this month that he has become disillusioned with football and is ready to retire when his contract at the North London club expires but apparently his wages equate to £95,000 a week? I do not even need to explain the inconsistencies in Arsenals wage structure and the irregularities between starting players wages in contrast to players not even in the frame at all.
1 comment