There is a range of available analogies, depending on your assessment of where Manchester United and Arsenal are at: The battle between two wisened grandmasters, who know that their senses have dulled but still find great honour in meeting their old adversary; two bald men fighting over a comb; two ageing adults squabbling over the television remote while, around the house, the youngster’s stream whatever they please on demand. Too generous; too harsh and too strained? Probably.
Between 1996 and 2013, Manchester United vs Arsenal was the biggest non-local derby match in the country. It was split easily into two mini-eras. Between 1996 and 2004, one of those two clubs won the Premier League title each and every season. Then the new money rushed in – first Chelsea, then Manchester City – but their historic advantages still pervaded. Between 2005 and 2013, both Arsenal and United finished in the top four every year. Since then, they have only both finished in the top four once. Even then, they were third and fourth behind Chelsea and City.
It is tempting to frame the decline of these two clubs around the emotional residue of losing dynastical managers. Arsene Wenger stuck around long enough to witness the decay from his own throne as the financial limitations of the move to the Emirates hit hard. At Old Trafford, Alex Ferguson’s fiefdom, his departure removed the thickest paper in English football from the walls.
When an overlord leaves, you lose more than one body; everything they touched, everybody they influenced, lost a small part of themselves too. Ferguson and Wenger, at their best, were great managers but also great connectors of people. Without them, every player felt a little less secure in what they were doing and who was telling them to do it.
Or perhaps the truth is a little less poetic. As much as Manchester United and Arsenal declined, did the rest just get better because they were at least as rich and twice as smart? Chelsea spent £310m in three seasons from 2004 onwards and then averaged £100m a year on transfer fees between 2010 and now. Manchester City have deeper pockets still.
To an extent, both clubs had it easier than Arsenal and United, established powers, because they were able to start with a blank canvas. Each committed to their own strategy: Chelsea changed managers frequently to appoint the best available gun for hire; City built the perfect man-made habitat for Pep Guardiola to flourish. Liverpool overhauled their scouting and recruitment system and appointed the perfect manager for their needs.
How to watch Man Utd vs Arsenal
- Date: Thursday 2 December
- Kick-off time: 8.15pm [BST]
- Venue: Old Trafford, Manchester
- Stream: Amazon Prime. Membership costs £7.99 per month or £79 for the year. Sign up for a 30-day free trial here.
- Pundit line-up: Simon Thomas, Peter Drury, Ally McCoist, Gabriel Clarke, Patrice Evra, Alan Shearer, Thierry Henry
But let’s not allow Arsenal and United off the hook here. They both became bloated, mismanaged, lost on the wrong path to the wrong destination. They lacked an identity because those departing dynastical managers were their identity and nobody spotted the impending power vacuum. In their place, responsibility and sway were afforded to the wrong people: super-agents, non-football experts, underperforming or ageing players, managers appointed with good intentions but for the wrong reasons.
Chelsea, Manchester City and Liverpool certainly got better, but Arsenal and Manchester United were complicit in the growing gap.
Now these two clubs are attempting to enter new eras. Arsenal went first, primarily because money was tighter and on-pitch results got worse more quickly. Mikel Arteta has his Emirates Stadium nursery; last weekend only two of the starting XI were older than 24.
Manchester United are far earlier down the path, having been unduly distracted by the headiness of romantic nostalgia, but have appointed Ralf Rangnick ostensibly as a fixer. The German will have a say in his own replacement, something that strays dangerously close to joined-up thinking.
These are clearly two different approaches; you might even argue that one is top-down (off-field influencer changing the mood) and the other bottom-up (young players becoming leaders and changing the culture). But what’s instructive ahead of Thursday night’s fixture is what unites them: both clubs have grabbed at a new identity.
Arsenal’s is built around youth and freedom of expression: young players, young manager, young coaches. Manchester United’s is a little more complicated, because for too long they remained captivated by the cult of the individual over the strength of the system. Their wealth and global draw, a clear advantage over Arsenal, persuaded them that they could shortcut past the hard yards. So what do you do when you’re lacking an identity on and off the pitch? Appoint a great idealogue to first oversee the team and then oversee the club.
There is some doubt that either or both of these new ages will work; they will certainly take time. We don’t know how good Arteta really is. We don’t know how resilient this Arsenal team can be. We don’t know how much power Rangnick will be afforded, how long he will stay if he isn’t given total control and how much you can make Cristiano Ronaldo press. And that uncertainty creates its own issues amongst supporters – when you have grown up with success you are not used to compromise or patience – and within the clubs themselves. It requires an acceptance of past mistakes and egos to be left at the door.
But that is what makes this fixture just as fascinating as it ever was. Not because it will decide the destiny of the title or even the desperate race for Champions League slots, but because it has become the perfect barometer of the mood. Manchester United and Arsenal can just about accept that they are not at the same level as Manchester City, Liverpool or Chelsea right now. There are far fewer excuses for not being better than each other.
from Football – inews.co.uk https://ift.tt/3dbf5e2
Post a Comment