Tooj Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Sir Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger both backed Kevin Keegan and Alan Curbishley's decisions to quit their jobs recently. Within a week of each other, Curbishley walked away from West Ham and Keegan quit as boss of troubled Newcastle. Both managers cited interference from above, and both Ferguson and Wenger hold them in high esteem for the decision to walk away. The Manchester United and Arsenal bosses were speaking together as they were guest of honours at a dinner for the League Managers' Association Benevolent Trust and Fund. "In the modern climate of young chairmen and very rich chairmen, you really need to be successful and you have to manage different things," Ferguson told Sky Sports News. "I admire Kevin Keegan and I admire Alan Curbishley as they went on a matter of principle, the principle being they are not in control of their team any longer - players were trying to be sold over their heads and so therefore they walked because it is a matter of principle and I totally agree with them." Wenger added: "The manager is the most important man at the club, if not why do you sack the manager if it isn't going well? "I believe our [Wenger and Ferguson] luck is that we could work with our ideas, and I know if I lose a game I have to look inside as that is where I can find the solutions." Money concerns The two also spoke about the continuing investment in the British game, which has been highlighted by Abu Dhabi United Group's recent bid to take charge of Manchester City. The group have claimed they will try and sign both Ferguson and Wenger's best players in Cristiano Ronaldo and Cesc Fabregas, and the Arsenal boss admits that big investment can destabilise the league. "New people are coming in for different reasons," added Wenger. "In England we had a generation of fans whose ambition was to buy the club of their dreams - those days are gone. "Now people are coming in for different reasons, maybe money or glory. "To have more money in the League is a good thing.....but the inflationary pressure of having too much money is destabilising for other clubs, it puts a huge pressure on their resources." Ferguson also suggested that a club needed more than money to be a success. "You can have as much money as you like but you can't buy every player," he said. "There is no guarantee that money gives you the best team." The two in the past have clashed, but they now seem almost close. "There is a much better understanding and mutual respect now," said Wenger. Ferguson concluded: "We've sat and shared a glass of wine and a meal on many occasions on coaching conferences in Geneva. "We've both [got] great teams and have had incredible competition over the last decade." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Well done to those two and they are completely right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest labrowski Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Well done to those two and they are completely right. Absolutely agree - perhaps now those who were quite happy to have a 'Continental' system(because its 'cool') may see that the 2 top managers in the Prem don't share their views... We may also hear less from ignorant fans of other clubs blaming both KK and NUFC fans for the club's current predicament - Ashley has messed up big time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Aye, but what do they know about modern football? They're a thing of the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Aye, but what do they know about modern football? They're a thing of the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Funny how Ferguson is saying this yet Curbishley is saying the situation was different and looks to be putting his name forward for the job. He added: "Kevin's situation has been linked with mine, but I think it's a little bit different to what went on. "I think Newcastle is something that they've got to sort out. "I don't know if I'm in their plans or not. At the moment I'm just sorting myself out, as you can imagine." http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11678_4164315,00.html I seem to remember Ferguson having a go at the club for sacking Allardyce too, he obviously knows best and we should have stuck with him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way our owner runs things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darth Toon Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Aye, because no-one else has thought of doing that before - the majority of clubs outside the top flight have little other option these days for starters. The big difference comes from the starting point, the attractiveness of the destination and the people doing the getting - we're way behind Arsenal on all points. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Then why use it as an example when it is so clearly different to the circus that is currently the SJP system? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Because we go about it in another way, we don't have a manager that's good enough to emulate Wenger so you brake the roles up within the club, we just need to bring in a manager that will work within our system and we can move on, Keegan clearly wasn't that manager which is the biggest mistake the club has made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Then why use it as an example when it is so clearly different to the circus that is currently the SJP system? I'll write it bigger since you've already missed it. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Then why use it as an example when it is so clearly different to the circus that is currently the SJP system? Wenger and Fergie have built up enough credit in the bank to be able to dictate buying policy to be fair. Our managers have been losing money on transfers wfor a long time so it was inevitable the brakes would have to be applied somewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Ashley only wanted to be like Arsenal in the way of not blowing big money on players, but as well all know for that to really work you need Wenger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Because we go about it in another way, we don't have a manager that's good enough to emulate Wenger so you brake the roles up within the club, we just need to bring in a manager that will work within our system and we can move on, Keegan clearly wasn't that manager which is the biggest mistake the club has made. In which case it's nothing like the Arsenal model at all in reality. Different system, different management style, different result. Developing and bringing through young players is something all clubs try to do - including us pre-Ashley - purely because it's cost-effective. It's hardly a radical idea, is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Ashley only wanted to be like Arsenal in the way of not blowing big money on players, but as well all know for that to really work you need Wenger. Precisely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Ashley only wanted to be like Arsenal in the way of not blowing big money on players, but as well all know for that to really work you need Wenger. Precisely. True, but you also need a world class recruitment team and connections with clubs worldwide. They might find a couple of youngsters from the Ivory Coast that are quality, but they've signed and released another 25 to get them. Wenger might have the final say and then be able to get the best out of these players, but he's not responsible for finding them all. I would say it is his ability to recognise a player's strengths and instill self belief that are his greatest strength. That and the style of football he imposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Because we go about it in another way, we don't have a manager that's good enough to emulate Wenger so you brake the roles up within the club, we just need to bring in a manager that will work within our system and we can move on, Keegan clearly wasn't that manager which is the biggest mistake the club has made. In which case it's nothing like the Arsenal model at all in reality. Different system, different management style, different result. Developing and bringing through young players is something all clubs try to do - including us pre-Ashley - purely because it's cost-effective. It's hardly a radical idea, is it? I didn't say it was a radical idea did I? The fact is this club over the last few years have forked out big money on wages for average older players that we can't shift as well as ignoring the academy, the club now want to go in the other direction and bring quality young players in that have their best years in front of them, they're also likely to be on smaller wages. At the same time they're looking to boost the academy (which will take time) so we can have better players coming through. No surprise to see people over scrutinise a comment on here though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlito Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Because we go about it in another way, we don't have a manager that's good enough to emulate Wenger so you brake the roles up within the club, we just need to bring in a manager that will work within our system and we can move on, Keegan clearly wasn't that manager which is the biggest mistake the club has made. We haven't got a Wenger so we put in a Dennis Wise over the manager's head? Yeah, that makes us much better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 I didn't say it was a radical idea did I? The fact is this club over the last few years have forked out big money on wages for average older players that we can't shift as well as ignoring the academy, the club now want to go in the other direction and bring quality young players in that have their best years in front of them, they're also likely to be on smaller wages. At the same time they're looking to boost the academy (which will take time) so we can have better players coming through. No surprise to see people over scrutinise a comment on here though. It was a rhetorical question. The intention is admirable. The problem is that you need to give a manager with outstanding judgement the final say on whether he thinks he can get those young players playing well, and then also a manager of outstanding skill to actually get them out onto the pitch doing it. Arsenal have both those men in Arsene Wenger. We do not. Nor did we in Kevin Keegan if some (including Mike Ashley and his staff) are to be believed. Which begs the question, why bring him back? That's not one I expect you to answer either btw, seeing as you've already said it was a mistake. The fact is that pretty much all successful models rely on the man who organises and coaches the team having the authority to determine his own pool of playing staff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted September 19, 2008 Share Posted September 19, 2008 Some Arsenal model mind. Especially when their own manager disagrees with the way it has come about. The Arsenal comment was clearly about bring through and buying youngsters as a model for the future, nothing to do with who goes out and gets them. Arsenal wouldn't have a model if someone was doing business above Wenger's head. But we haven't got a manager anywhere near the standard of Wenger so your point in irrelevant. I don't see what the class of Wenger has to do with it, I'm saying they wouldn't have a model at all if wasn't for a manager who works within it. As he says, that doesn't involve people signing players above his head. In fact you're defeating your own argument; why try emulate Arsenal when the mastermind of their model is vastly superior to what we have (your words)? How is it even possible? Because we go about it in another way, we don't have a manager that's good enough to emulate Wenger so you brake the roles up within the club, we just need to bring in a manager that will work within our system and we can move on, Keegan clearly wasn't that manager which is the biggest mistake the club has made. We haven't got a Wenger so we put in a Dennis Wise over the manager's head? Yeah, that makes us much better I'm happy with the quality of the players coming in, there was just not enough of them as we've got a pretty big building job on our hands, how much of that was to do with differences between manager and board behind the scenes is open to debate but I'd say it was a problem that's been dragging on for some time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now