Lamb, I am not punishing them but, none of them are moaning about their club (awash in cash) for making them stump for coaches to London. Why aren't they complaining about the Sheik nickle and diming them on this trip? I know what you are saying but they were not moaning about the overall cost of being a football fan, just blaming us for our piece of it. Paying the coachman 30 quid for a seat on his little bus was fine but 62 for a seat in our state-of-the-art multi-million dollar stadium was a bridge too far? And yes, I do know that we are getting screwed and I have agreed with your opinion of this and that the hurt is greater as we seem to pay more and more from our pockets for less and less on the pitch. I have said time and again that I do not disagree with their complaint, just that their club is a massive inflationary driver that will cause spiraling costs or sugar daddy buyouts as the only two options presented to any team. BUT the complaint needs to come from someone who wasn't celebrating the demise of responsible finances with moronic sheets on their heads and faked up money with the sheik's face on it. And yes, I know how the ticket scheme works and it has been in place before Stan ended Western civilization and pissed on Trafalgar Square. City moved from B to A when they bought a title, so sad. I am sure Chelsea did too back when they bathed in oil for the first time. I get your points. And as an Arsenal fan, you get to make them. But where were City fans worries about "fairness" when they used their new found wealth to poach player after player from us? Was that "fair"? Was that good for football? So, pricing them out of seats = bad. Them pricing us out of our own players = good? Sorry, someone else needs to make this complaint. Not them.
Because what they are paying is what we pay and, therefore, I care about prices (well, I care for those of you lucky enough to go often enough for it to matter but one day...). Lamb is spot on and I completely agree with him. Prices are out of hand and more so for us as we have new commercial deals, a positive cash flow from transfers and a diminishing product on the pitch. I just think the media are mindless douchebags for allowing the head of their supporters' group to make Arsenal the face of financial insanity in the league. Basically, that guy is the police captain in Casablanca who is "Shocked. Shocked!" to find gambling on the premises, right before he is handed his winnings from his night's wagering. How they feel right now, is how we felt when we found out that the price to keep our best players had also just gone up and it sucks. If they want to put their spending back to 2008 levels, we'll give them 2008 ticket prices.
but you're saying the fans must take the responsibility (or result) of a club's actions, when the fans have no say in those actions and little ability to change them. that this is "payback".....but it's the wrong target. if you want to do that then it's time the league brought in 51% fan ownership, THEN you can blame man city fans for man city's ridiculous "vanity project" spending.
I agree that Ticket prices are a concern for every fan who wants to preserve the heart and soul of the sport, if you will, and keep it accessible for the traditional fan. Our club is the poster boy for "greed" having the highest ticket prices in the world for heaven's sake. We have seen on twitter some STHs trying to get rid of their £123 tickets for this match. I want to be careful here that this doesn't sound like I am part of the let them eat cake crowd, but I also see Deaner's point that City fans being the messenger for the revolt stings us a bit. After all, they are already getting a subsidized experience at their club thanks to their rich benefactors. Well, we are not in the same position and every club is being put under pressure to generate revenue and spend to compete thanks to clubs like theirs. When they sing that we are their feeder club I doubt any of them have given a thought to where that money comes from to pay that player they got from us £200k a week. Well, after spending £1B of monopoly money, finally their club is among the elite in football and guess what? It is now a category A fixture and our club will soak them but at least not as bad as it soaks some of our own fans that paid for that £123 seat. A good start: http://m.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/jan/09/liverpool-manchester-united-ticket-prices
I think that with the NFL and their ridiculous prices (500$+ Face value for 1 seat), Arsenal aren't the highest in the world.
Not even close. I had seats for a New Orleans Hornets game that were $205. Lakers tickets reportedly go for $1000/game.
I still remember an article in my FourFourTwo mag, circa 2002/03, titled, "What Goes Up, Must come Down." It was about City's fortunes and misfortunes, and their promotions and relegations. It had plenty pictures of City fans crying or celebrating. I was about 13 years old when I got this magazine, and like many of you, think of City as a lowly team. I of course remember us routing them 5-1, and Anelka talking about how Arsenal were a better side than Man Utd and Chelsea. I also remember Henry's scorchers. Also, I remember when the likes of David James and Darius Vassell played for them, and how Arsenal fans cheered for them as they beat Chelsea and Man Utd on odd occasions. It's funny how things have changed, because the best thing I can remember them ever having was a decent stadium, and Pearce's little toy horse beenie baby. My point is, plenty of City fans have supported a very average club for many years, and didn't expect or ask for some rich d!ck to invest in their club. In fact, many of the travelling fans are probably the ones who were around before the recent success, so I don't think it's fair to take an approach in which we vindicate high prices. After all, despite rivalry and such, we are all common in being football fans.
Again, they had no problem with inflationary policies when it meant they were buying our best players. If they are too dumb to understand the longterm effects of their own club's actions, too bad. But they reveled in their nouve riche spending spree. And again, no complaining about that same sugar daddy making them pony up 30 quid for their coach ride down. We have bills to pay and their owner has none yet they come after us for what we charge? Our own fans pay those amounts all of the time and get to see a substandard product. If anyone gets to complain, it is us. Chelsea fans, Man United fans and whomever else is in A status doesn't moan on about this so, why do City followers get to be the champions of financial fairness in football. Get their own house in order first. Lamb, I know I am not making the rational argument and, were this any team other than City or Chelsea (yes, including United who do live within their much larger means), I would agree with you 1000% percent. But Britney Spears doesn't get to lament the decline in the quality of American music and City doesn't get to complain about financial craziness in football. Finally, the Premier League moving to the Bundesliga model is something I would support absolutely. I would jump at the chance to invest in my club. Hell, up the memberships by 10 pound each and make that 10 pound a share purchase scheme. More people would be members and the shares would rapidly get distributed for a truer supporter-club structure.
OK, they didn't ask for it but they reveled in it. Where were complaints about money in football when they bought Adebayor, Clichy and Nasri? Where were the concerns about the future of football when they bought their first title as an oligarchy? I find it hilarious that people have more concern for these fans splashing out 30 quid extra once a year, than the impact that their club (and a few others like it) is having on the game as a whole. Ridiculous money for every other club's best players is good but them paying an extra 30 quid a year is bad. That argument actually flies?
Is this the ticket thread? Great. I've got two Scunthorpe/Portsmouth tickets I'm trying to get rid of. I'll take $5 or a TGI Fridays gift card.
And when I said "I find it hilarious that people have more concern for these fans splashing out 30 quid extra once a year, than the impact that their club (and a few others like it) is having on the game as a whole," I was really talking about the media who have swallowed this hook, line and sinker.
Even if he is, there's no way he's starting. You know Wenger likes to ease returning players back into it. (I won't get excited about Diaby. I won't get excited about Diaby.)
Diaby is like an ice cream cone in July though so you might as well just go at it because, one way or another, it will end soon.
Diaby played well with the U-21s on Wednesday (went 65 minutes I believe). Though theres no way we'd drop Arteta I think Diaby and Jack would be our best 2 midfield combination
I have no doubts that Diaby will be great once he's back . . . until he attempts a shot again, then he'll be crocked for 12 weeks.
I'm sorry, I figured a statement including the word "WORLD" would include sports that are not soccer related. I must have been seriously mistaken.