- Arsenal make contact to sign Lille star Jonathan David
- Arsenal keen on signing Newcastle star Alexander Isak
- Arsenal ‘interested’ in signing Bayern Munich star Sane
- Arsenal showing ‘strong interest’ in signing Hugo Larsson
- Confirmed line-ups: Inter Milan vs Arsenal – Odegaard returns, Merino starts
- Arsenal predicted line-up against Inter Milan
- Arsenal eye move to sign Eintracht Frankfurt star Larsson
- Arsenal could attempt to sign Newcastle star Alexander Isak
- Arsenal to make a move to sign Mohammed Kudus
- Confirmed line-ups: Newcastle vs Arsenal – Gabriel & Timber start for Gunners
My Recurring Arsenal Nightmare
Despite warnings from Arsene Wenger, Guus Hiddink chose to play Arshavin on Wednesday away to Wales where he, most predictably, aggravated a groin injury which he had already worsened in Arsenal’s last league match at United. As if that wasn’t bad enough, Hiddink either ignored Arshavin or wasn’t paying enough attention to his situation by leaving him on the pitch for the full 90 minutes.
We can all appreciate Russia’s fight with Germany for the automatic qualification spot from Group Four, but did Russia really need to play Arshavin away to Wales to be able to get a result? Had it been a match with group leaders, Germany, it might be understandable if not any more excusable.
Why do we always suffer injuries to key players in what seems like every international break? We have lost Robin van Persie more than once to international break injuries, among many others. Nowadays we usually chalk it up to our seemingly unceasing bad luck with injuries in recent years. But this situation is different.
Everyone knew Arshavin had been carrying a groin injury since last season and that he had re-aggravated it at Old Trafford. Hiddink did not play him on Saturday home to Liechtenstein and said that Arshavin’s “condition [was] improving” and he was “getting closer to being able to play.” He also said, “Hopefully with some rest and intensive treatment we could get him ready for the Wales match.”
What kind of manager would risk his best player in a match against a team that poses no real threat? The kind of manager who will not need that player again immediately. The injury to Arshavin does not hurt Hiddink or Russia in any serious way because he is only expected to be out for a little over a week.
But in that time he will miss three matches for his club including the important trip to Eastlands and the first Champions League group stage fixture. For Russia, he likely will not miss a game because the next international break isn’t until the second week of October, by which time Arshavin should be totally fit again.
The problem, from an economic standpoint, is that this is a player who is being paid, by Arsenal, say, £75,000 per week. If he misses two weeks, that is £150,000, which in American money is approaching a quarter of a million dollars. Arsenal are now paying almost $225,000 to a player who can’t play because of the gross negligence of his national team coach.
Let’s not kid ourselves, football is a business and in no other business to companies loan out their best workers to do dangerous work which could result in an incapacitating injury for no compensation. That is just absolutely ludicrous.
And I understand the “When your country calls…” arguments and that was all well and good 20-30 years ago. But when you invest £15m on a player and then have to subject him to injury for no possible gain and frequently a loss, it is highly unfair to the clubs. In purely economic terms, it makes no sense whatsoever.
But, in a world where it cannot be changed, we should at least be able to hope for is international managers to at least show some respect for the clubs’ assessments of their players. In an ideal world, I would like to see Hiddink pay the club that money himself along with a note that says:
Arsene,
Sorry for being such a cunt.
Guus
ARSENE WENGER’S PRESS CONFERENCE (Clip)
[brightcove vid=38485488001&exp=271552671&w=450&h=335]