₦airaland Forum

Captain Fantastic does it again.

We've got problems at the front but the MF has been doing extremely well with Diaby being the standout performer. Nasri is dropping too much into the MF and taking the safe option rather than running at the players and dribbling but Villa have kept their defensive shape well. Arshavin hasn't been effective and Dudu has been for want of a better word almost 'shocking'. Traore keeps on impressing in the left back position and its almost like Villa don't want to go thru him.

Cristalz is just displaying some bad belle because the villains flogged them at OT.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5179530#msg5179530 date=1261666999]I remember Ronaldo sprinting 24mph(38.6kph) before scoring the 3rd goal at the Emirates in last season's CL.
He is very fast!!![/quote]I agree Ronaldo is very fast, most people forget he has got longer strides than Theo, I was just stating the difference between the 2 measurement types. I'm not sure who is faster as Theo doesn't really use his pace well (Liverpool run aside). Lennon and SWP must also rank amongst the fastest.
Running styles can disguise how fast players actually are, for example most of us thot then that Finidi George wasn't fast but he was actually the fastest winger in Europe when he was in Ajax and was faster than Tijani Babangida but I'm sure most of us who watched them would find that hard to believe.

The speed Sauron quoted is different from the speeds on the Arsenal site. Those quoted by Sauron have been averaged over time but the speeds from the Arsenal site are from actual tests done periodically on the Arsenal players timing their runs from 0 - 40 meters.

allboyz:
HONESTLY, i dont belive CR7 runs faster than Theo. . . .


do they mean wit the ball or what?
let dem do a race without the ball. ,  maybe a 200M race to convince me!

Haba, how many players run 200m to score?  him wan dribble all the spectators for stadium? The tests are done over 40m.

illusion2:
I mean does Man City now have greater aspirations than Liverpool?

Yes they do, but they are even more clueless in charting a path towards their goals.

Keano never ceases to amuse me, all he has to say about Hughes' sack is that he should never have gone to Man City in the first place due to his manure connections.

[Quote]
Keane told Sky Sports News. "I think when you're involved with a club like United, as Sparky was over his career, you shouldn't go to a club like City. I think you should try and get employment somewhere else.[/quote]that chap lives in a world of his own.

The Three quickest Arsenal players revealed:

[Quote]
Theo Walcott is not only Arsenal's fastest current player but he has also broken Thierry Henry's sprint record at the Club.

In an exclusive webchat with Arsenal.com on Tuesday, Arsène Wenger revealed his quickest three players over 40 metres were Walcott, Carlos Vela and Armand Traore, with the Englishman pipping the other two on the line.
In fact the former Southampton striker has even snatched the sprint crown from his predecessor in the No 14 shirt.
"The fastest three players I would say are Theo Walcott, Carlos Vela and Armand Traore," said Wenger. "And yes Theo is the fastest.
"He has the record on 40 metres. I think it's 4.72 seconds or something like that.
"Thierry was very fast as well, 4.82secs. I don't guarantee [the time] but it is in this area.
"Certainly Theo could have been a 100 metre runner. But Carlos Vela is very fast as well and Armand Traore is not far behind him."[/quote]The only surprise for me in there is Carlito as he doesn't really use his pace much. I always knew Traore was fast but he pulls his hams too often and needs to work on this.

debosky:
Depends on who you listen to - some say Wenger wanted to buy, but was being stubborn over price. Some say it took AA23's personal determination to close out the deal, hence he flew into London to force the deal. Left to Wenger, I suspect he'd have let this deal slide, just as he let the Alonso deal slide for a less than a million pounds. Just to confirm that Wenger behaves this way, it is the exact same price stubbornness that made us lose out on Chamakh in the summer.

That deal fell through because Wenger refused to budge on price, not the board. The coach clearly has a stubborn streak and it can be highly detrimental.

I don't deny that Arsene has a stubborn streak, I doubt he would be this successful if he didnt'. But he is also a pragmatist and gets his man when he knows something is at stake (for Arshavin it was a tradeoff between the millions to come in through UCL participation while keeping the club attractive and the 17m to bring in Arshavin). He obviously wanted Chamak and actually might still get him. His statement about getting a cup tied striker sounds quite ominous for Bordeaux IMO.

v3:
I remember wenger coming out to say he had money & could be tempted to buy abt a season ago?? Arshavin'z case na "sharp sharp arrangment" of which it took some days. . .wasn't wenger's fault, na d agent wey wan chop inside prolong matter! personal agreement'z & terms were already agreed!

Arsene will never ever tell you there is no money, those managers who have good relationship with the board and are given a free hand never come out in the press about money affairs. Weren't Portsmouth telling us all a while ago that everything would be grand after the takeover within a takeover? we all know better now. Even Rafa with all the pressure isn't complaining about availability of money, he is allowing others in the know to make that excuse on his behalf.

And to be frank, its not really about whether there is money or not, if Arsene puts his integrity on the line to buy a player, the club would have to back him and find the money somehow but Arsene himself is a manager in every sense of the word and wouldn't make the club take unnecessary risks.

Hmm sharp sharp arrangement that took so long to arrange, Arshavin even had to forego some perks that were due him so that the deal could go through becos he wanted to leave Zenith at all costs. Arsene had initially wanted Arshavin during the Euros and Arshavin was aware of the interest but his stock soared afterwards and he had to cool down.

Arsene is a long term planner, he had his eyes on Verminator since he came with Ajax to the Emirates cup at 21, Verminator revealed in an interview that there was one of the scouts Arsenal sent to monitor him who used to hide in the bushes to monitor his training habits and his lifestyle. Cesc also revealed in an interview that he was shocked when he was told that Arsene had sent people to check on him 40 times before he was bought (as a 16 year old).

v3:
dudu,

AA23'z case was a hands-on-throat situation which he couldn't fight back. .he had NO choice but to succumb & it DID pay off. . .I'd have to admit that when it comes to unearthing talent, though some might wanna disagree. . .no one comes close to Wenger *hats off*. . .

I could go on and on but Verm's case is one helluva proof that sometimes you COULD get the good ones wiv little or nothing!

I stand corrected but Arsene wasn't forced to buy Arshavin by anyone but by circumstances (he realised our UCL place was under threat from Villa), he actually had to make the Board come up with the money (which wasn't really planned for) and that is why the deal dragged so long (He had Arshavin who also really wanted to come to us in an hotel for a couple of days while the financial details were being trashed out).

I remember a friend asking at the time if the board was counting pennies from a piggy bank  . He came into the season believing he wld have Rosicky back and also got Nasri to replace Hleb while allowing the likes of Walcott and Eboue provide cover on the wings.

I heard from the grapevine that he also had a verbal agreement with Rafa to buy Alonso to replace Flamini (at the time Rafa was lusting after Gareth Barry) and some people had actually seen Alonso at London Colney before lack of funds and inability of Rafa to get Barry scuppered the deal.

edoyad:
@V , if we're buying £25 million players who're in their early twenties , then i think to all intents and purposes  "Wenger's development" philosophy has been defeated. What moral  justification would we have to condemn what the Reals, Chelseas or Man cities are doing to football ? It just doesn't add up in my book or what do you think ?  

I wouldn't go so far as saying the youth policy is defeated, no matter how the media portray Arsene as some sort of fantasist, he is probably more pragmatic than 99.99999%  of the clueless lot who gave him that reputation and he does love to win (as he showed with Arshavin) last season. What he has stood against is throwing caution to the wind and living beyond your means, and I do believe he will be vindicated over time as a lot of those I term "reasonable" gooners now understand what he is about. Buying to replace RVP is what I term "Crisis management" and Arsene's hand is being forced.
TBH, there is no one who doesn't want to have Torres, CR7, Kaka e.t.c in their squad but there is also a bottom line to remember and Arsene is as good as you get when you want par for the buck. It is a pity the deluded media can't see that and portray him as living in some sort of dream land.

edoyad:
^  V3 The manner in which he presented it was what confused me. I was like, "yes  Becks was loaned to Preston, so what does dayo actually mean ?"  

@dudu, bringing a striker in their age bracket is what i hope AW will avoid. Why not go for a thirtyish guy like Trezeguet who's still hot but will wither in less than two years so as not to hamper our progression of strikers ?

I get your point but the issue is if Trezeguet can still deliver consistently at the level we need to. Its all about getting the results for us now as our boys seem to have come of age in all other areas of the pitch at present and we are possibly better placed at present than even Arsene thot we would be at the start of the season. We are not defending 4th place now but aiming for the gold.

I think Arsene will go for a proven player in the 24 - 28 bracket as he hardly buys older than that, its a pity about Dudu but the reason we're all set on getting a striker is becos himself and Bendtner haven't stepped up to that level yet.
I have complete faith in Bendtner getting there within the next 11/2 years but a little competition wouldn't do him any harm.

dayokanu:
Kindly confirm,
Was David Beckham loaned out to Preston North End
Was John Terry loaned to Notthingham Forest

I never thot the day wld come I would give DK a thumbs up.

@Ed and V3
Dayo is actually fighting our corner here as them 2 actually went on loan to those clubs and Tony Kroos is actually on loan at present to Leverkusen which is actually doing better than his parent club in the league.

From Arsene's statement, I'm now almost 100% certain he'll buy a striker in the transfer window because it shows his back is to the wall. I'll trust him to get us a gem like Arshavin as he has done over and over again. We are in a very good position at present and we should consolidate on it. I'm of the opinion however that the incoming striker will ultimately take Eduardo's spot and it seems he is the one to lose out in the transition to the 4-3-3. Arsene will definitely keep Bendtner and Vela as up and coming players who are also home grown.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169756#msg5169756 date=1261532661]Present crop? I don't think United have any players on loan in a Premiership side.
However, a young Johnny Evans took Sunderland FC to the Premiership and kept them above relegation waters in 2007/8.[/quote]isn't he lining up in your first team today? if yu credit Evans for going on loan (on what I assume must have been around 19 years of age) why then can't yu credit Wilshere for being considered worthy of the same opportunity?

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169756#msg5169756 date=1261532661]Excuses, excuses and more excuses.
Considering the fact that Aaron Ramsey never went on any nonsense loan, it is fair to say Ramsey >>>>> Wilshere.[/quote]Arsene is a man of his words, that was the assurance given to Ramsey and his family before he chose us ahead of you, remember you were meant to loan him back to Cardiff?

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169756#msg5169756 date=1261532661]Hahahaha. . . . . .Stop kidding yourself.
At his age, Rooney was leading England in Euro 2004.[/quote]Wrong, Rooney was 18 going on 19 at the Portugal Euros, besides  I've never argued the fact that Rooney is a special player or are you implying in any way that he is not?

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169756#msg5169756 date=1261532661]Loans can be arranged to any club. . . . .It has nothing to do with ability or age.
It depends on tie the parent club has with the club willing to take the player on loan.
Danny Simpson once played for Blackburn/Newcastle and he is shyte. . . . . Fraizer Campbell also lined up for Tottenham FC.[/quote]This is so untrue or every 17 year old on the street would be turning out in premiership colours, besides its not just about taking him on loan alone but the other statements he went ahead to make which he didn't need to. I don't recall whatever spud's manager who took Campbell to the Totts gushing as much about him when the deal was made. Besides, what is the tie between the spuds and manure?

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169756#msg5169756 date=1261532661]Ramsey stayed in Arsenal, why can't Jack Wilshere?[/quote]Majorly because their routes to the first team are different, also Ramsey is more physically advanced and can better stand up to the physical demands that Arsenal will come up against weekly.

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=362333.msg5169628#msg5169628 date=1261529431]He is not 17 until February, but his prodigious talent is the worst-kept secret in Mancunian football circles.
Ferguson is unlikely to blood the youngster this season, but Morrison, King, Cofie, Keane, Petrucci and Pogba are beginning to knock on the door.
If they fulfil their potential, and Ferguson’s faith in his Carling Cup kids is justified, then perhaps the bar will be have to be raised from the Beckham standard.[/i][/quote]You can easily detect a mancunian image maker when you read their writings, of all the youngsters mentioned up there, has any one of them played in the Carling Cup?

On a personall note, I do believe Morrison is an explosive talent, he has considerable individual skill possibly even more than Wilshere (at least from the you tube clips) but he doesn't have as much influence on games as Wilshere did at the same age, also he is yet to be tested at a level considerably higher than his age group and he is not exactly dominating games even at his age group.

Pogba however is getting very good reviews, I do hope they meet our bunch (Aneke, Ozyakup and Afobe) sometime during the FA youth cup this year so I can get a first hand look at them myself.

@Sauron
I couldn't resist the urge to bring to your attention this snippet which shows how highly Jack Wilshere is rated, here is what Owen Coyle the manager of Burnley had to say, please note the portions in bold:

[Quote]
"And although I am loathe to speak about other teams' players I think it is fair to say that Arsene Wenger knows the regard I have for the player (Wilshere).

"We had a chat and we will take it from there,'' said the Scot. "Arsenal have been blighted by injuries so there are things they may have to look at. I would also suggest there is more than Burnley that will be admirers of Jack Wilshere.
"He is a gifted individual who will continue to get better and I believe he will become an Arsenal regular and a full England international.''[/quote]We shall see by this time next year if Ravel Morrison would have broken into the Manure squad or if a premier league club manager would be offering to take him on loan to fight a potential relegation battle.

mukina2:
Dudu don't try posting it again till its untagged.

Pardon my ignorance Muki, but how will I know when this has happened?

awwhhh, I had something important to do at work.

Mods please help, there is something swallowing up a post I made about the ownership situation at Arsenal, Its being swallowed up as Spam I think.

I decided to do some research on the manouvers going on about Arsenal shareholding. This became all the more significant with Usmanov's recent statement requiring clarification of Kroenke's intention. It is very obvious there is a battle going on and I've taken the time to get some info on the current state of shareholding in the club. Here is how things stand at present from Wikipedia and other sources:

United States Stan Kroenke (29.9%)
Russia Alisher Usmanov (26%)
England Nina Bracewell-Smith (15.9%)
England Danny Fiszman (16.1%)
AST (Arsenal Support Trust) (3.5%) estimate
other small shareholders (8.6%) estimate

To take majority stake in the club, a single entity must have 50.1% ownership (This effectively gives them control of the boardroom as they can carry most proposals through on a simple majority votes decision)

As to the 30% milestone that is getting the media all excited and almost makes them pee their pants when Stan Kroenke purchases the next 0.0000001% of shares in Arsenal, what this means is simply that anyone who reaches the 30% mark is mandated by law to make a mandatory offer to buy up the rest of the shares in the club subject to certain conditions involving the highest price at which he purchased the rest of his shares within a 12 month period prior to his offer.

Quote from Danny Fiszman, Sep 2007
[Quote]
The Takeover Code is clear. Any individual or company (offeror) could make a bid for all the shares in Arsenal at anytime. Even if you didn't own any shares in the Club you could make a bid, provided, of course, you had the money in place. However, that does not mean that the bid would be successful and indeed, as the Board is committed to retaining its shareholding, a bid would be expected to fail. You are correct that 30% is a significant threshold. If a party acquires 30% of the Club's shares, under the Takeover Code, they are obliged to make an offer for all of Arsenal's shares but to reiterate, members of the Board are resolute and wish to retain their shares.[/quote]Note that this does not guarantee the success of such a mandatory offer if the other shareholders refuse to sell. This however would make the intention of this entity clear as to their final destination.

I decided to do some research on the manouvers going on about Arsenal shareholding. This became all the more significant with Usmanov's recent statement requiring clarification of Kroenke's intention. It is very obvious there is a battle going on and I've taken the time to get some info on the current state of shareholding in the club. Here is how things stand at present from Wikipedia and other sources:

United States Stan Kroenke (29.9%)
Russia Alisher Usmanov (26%)
England Nina Bracewell-Smith (15.9%)
England Danny Fiszman (16.1%)
AST (Arsenal Support Trust) (3.5%) estimate
other small shareholders (8.6%) estimate

To take majority stake in the club, a single entity must have 50.1% ownership (This effectively gives them control of the boardroom as they can carry most proposals through on a simple majority votes decision)

As to the 30% milestone that is getting the media all excited and almost makes them pee their pants when Stan Kroenke purchases the next 0.0000001% of shares in Arsenal, what this means is simply that anyone who reaches the 30% mark is mandated by law to make a mandatory offer to buy up the rest of the shares in the club subject to certain conditions involving the highest price at which he purchased the rest of his shares within a 12 month period prior to his offer.

Quote from Danny Fiszman, Sep 2007
[Quote]
The Takeover Code is clear. Any individual or company (offeror) could make a bid for all the shares in Arsenal at anytime. Even if you didn't own any shares in the Club you could make a bid, provided, of course, you had the money in place. However, that does not mean that the bid would be successful and indeed, as the Board is committed to retaining its shareholding, a bid would be expected to fail. You are correct that 30% is a significant threshold. If a party acquires 30% of the Club's shares, under the Takeover Code, they are obliged to make an offer for all of Arsenal's shares but to reiterate, members of the Board are resolute and wish to retain their shares.[/quote]Note that this does not guarantee the success of such a mandatory offer if the other shareholders refuse to sell). This however would make the intention of this entity clear as to their final destination.

Below is a quote from Keith Edelman (who has since sold off his own holdings by the way) in September 2007
[Quote]
The takeover of a company, loosely speaking, falls into one of two categories. The first is where a company or individual can bid to buy all the shares in a particular company from its shareholders with the Board's recommendation, this is generally known as a "Recommended Offer". The alternative method is without the Board's recommendation, this is generally known as a "Hostile Takeover". A company is taken over when 50.1% of all shares in the company are held by the buying party (either in the form of shares purchased or acceptances received) and at that point the buying party, would be able to appoint directors to the Board and would effectively control the company.

However, it is worth noting that sometimes a higher percentage of acceptances could be required if that is what has been specified in the offer. Also, all other conditions of the offer must be met, for example, passing the "fit and proper person" test under the Football Association Premier League Rules.[/quote]I think the most important thing to keep track of is the part to >50% holding, therefore the people who will determine the future ownership of The Arsenal in their hands are in the following order:

1. Danny Fiszman
2. Nina Bracewell Smith
3. The numerous small shareholders (which include Peter Hill Wood the current chairman and some other notable long term Arsenal supporters or supporting families)

The route to 51% will start with one of 1 or 2 selling off their holdings to one of Usmanov or Kroenke

At present, there is the Fizman/Kroenke alliance (with combined total of about 46% of the shares) the major power brokers in the club who support the board at present, then we Nina Bracewell Smith and Usmanov (who are not known to be in cahoots as they are a minority and wouldn't be any threat even if they combine) with a combined total of 41.9.

At present it seems most of the small shareholders are holding on to their shares and are actually members of AST (who actually exist to protect and preserve the existing small shareholders and are committed to the principle of multiple ownership in the club.)

There are 3 scenarios that can lead to a Takeover (Note the use of the word takeover and not ownership)

1. Kroenke convinces Nina Bracewell Smith and Fizman to sell to him (highly unlikely as neither of them is known to be in any financial distress and Arsenal is good stock to hold on to, besides for the Bracewell Smith family, its some sort of family heritage)

2. Usmanov does the same as Kroenke above (which is unlikely due to the aforementioned reason)

3. Kroenke convinces Fiszman to sell to him and then make up the remaining 4.1% from the 8.5% holding currently distributed amongst the small shareholders but out of the AST holdings (not so unlikely scenario and infact I think this is what he is currently working at, the unknown factor at present is if Fiszman is positively disposed to such an outcome)

Note that option 4 is also available to Usmanov but is probably not a viable option because he might stll fall short of a majority at 49% and will likely be beaten in a race for those shares due to current perceptions of him and support of the board for Kroenke.

Other important points to note:

1. An entity can take the club into single ownership and off the market if they attain up to 90% of the share, at this point the holders of the remaining 10% are obligated to sell their shares to him provided he meets certain conditions on pricing

2. An entity with up to 25% has a blocking stake (on certain types of decision) but not on decisions requiring just a simple majority. For example Usmanov has a blocking stake but has still been unable to get himself on the board because of the Board/Fiszman/Kroenke axis.

Quote from Keith Edelman
[Quote]Basically speaking, a shareholding of more than 25% can block special resolutions for unusual matters, like winding up the Company or changing its name. For all usual business and operational matters, such as electing directors, appointing auditors, buying and selling players, contractual and commercial matters or approving the financial statements, the Club only needs a majority of votes in favour. Therefore if Red&White Holdings acquired 25% or more of the Club, they would not be able to block or influence any standard business decisions. Furthermore, a party that holds less than 50.1% of shares would not be entitled to a seat on the Board. In effect, a blocking stake in the Club has no material influence.[/quote]My take on the whole issue is that Arsenal is not in immediate threat of a takeover by Kroenke, it will only make his intentions clear and give his opposers the opportunity to take steps at blocking him. This dynamic might change quickly however if Danny Fiszman or Nina Bracewell Smith decide to cash in (for whatever reasons) to him. Even if one of these sell out to him, there is doubt as to whether he will be able to make up the remaining >4.1% from the small shareholders who are many and are mostly members of AST who will not likely sell until someone reaches the 90% mark.

Sources: Keith Edelman's interview on the Arsenal.com site in September 2007, Wikipedia and other webpages.

I decided to do some research on the manouvers going on about Arsenal shareholding. This became all the more significant with Usmanov's recent statement requiring clarification of Kroenke's intention. It is very obvious there is a battle going on and I've taken the time to get some info on the current state of shareholding in the club. Here is how things stand at present from Wikipedia and other sources:

United States Stan Kroenke (29.9%)
Russia Alisher Usmanov (26%)
England Nina Bracewell-Smith (15.9%)
England Danny Fiszman (16.1%)
AST (Arsenal Support Trust) (3.5%) estimate
other small shareholders (8.6%) estimate

To take majority stake in the club, a single entity must have 50.1% ownership (This effectively gives them control of the boardroom as they can carry most proposals through on a simple majority votes decision)

As to the 30% milestone that is getting the media all excited and almost makes them pee their pants when Stan Kroenke purchases the next 0.0000001% of shares in Arsenal, what this means is simply that anyone who reaches the 30% mark is mandated by law to make a mandatory offer to buy up the rest of the shares in the club subject to certain conditions involving the highest price at which he purchased the rest of his shares within a 12 month period prior to his offer.

Quote from Danny Fiszman, Sep 2007
[Quote]
The Takeover Code is clear. Any individual or company (offeror) could make a bid for all the shares in Arsenal at anytime. Even if you didn't own any shares in the Club you could make a bid, provided, of course, you had the money in place. However, that does not mean that the bid would be successful and indeed, as the Board is committed to retaining its shareholding, a bid would be expected to fail. You are correct that 30% is a significant threshold. If a party acquires 30% of the Club's shares, under the Takeover Code, they are obliged to make an offer for all of Arsenal's shares but to reiterate, members of the Board are resolute and wish to retain their shares.[/quote]Note that this does not guarantee the success of such a mandatory offer if the other shareholders refuse to sell). This however would make the intention of this entity clear as to their final destination.

Below is a quote from Keith Edelman (who has since sold off his own holdings by the way) in September 2007
[Quote]
The takeover of a company, loosely speaking, falls into one of two categories. The first is where a company or individual can bid to buy all the shares in a particular company from its shareholders with the Board's recommendation, this is generally known as a "Recommended Offer". The alternative method is without the Board's recommendation, this is generally known as a "Hostile Takeover". A company is taken over when 50.1% of all shares in the company are held by the buying party (either in the form of shares purchased or acceptances received) and at that point the buying party, would be able to appoint directors to the Board and would effectively control the company.

However, it is worth noting that sometimes a higher percentage of acceptances could be required if that is what has been specified in the offer. Also, all other conditions of the offer must be met, for example, passing the "fit and proper person" test under the Football Association Premier League Rules.[/quote]I think the most important thing to keep track of is the part to >50% holding, therefore the people who will determine the future ownership of The Arsenal in their hands are in the following order:

1. Danny Fiszman
2. Nina Bracewell Smith
3. The numerous small shareholders (which include Peter Hill Wood the current chairman and some other notable long term Arsenal supporters or supporting families)

The route to 51% will start with one of 1 or 2 selling off their holdings to one of Usmanov or Kroenke

At present, there is the Fizman/Kroenke alliance (with combined total of about 46% of the shares) the major power brokers in the club who support the board at present, then we Nina Bracewell Smith and Usmanov (who are not known to be in cahoots as they are a minority and wouldn't be any threat even if they combine) with a combined total of 41.9.

At present it seems most of the small shareholders are holding on to their shares and are actually members of AST (who actually exist to protect and preserve the existing small shareholders and are committed to the principle of multiple ownership in the club.)

There are 3 scenarios that can lead to a Takeover (Note the use of the word takeover and not ownership)

1. Kroenke convinces Nina Bracewell Smith and Fizman to sell to him (highly unlikely as neither of them is known to be in any financial distress and Arsenal is good stock to hold on to, besides for the Bracewell Smith family, its some sort of family heritage)

2. Usmanov does the same as Kroenke above (which is unlikely due to the aforementioned reason)

3. Kroenke convinces Fiszman to sell to him and then make up the remaining 4.1% from the 8.5% holding currently distributed amongst the small shareholders but out of the AST holdings (not so unlikely scenario and infact I think this is what he is currently working at, the unknown factor at present is if Fiszman is positively disposed to such an outcome)

Note that option 4 is also available to Usmanov but is probably not a viable option because he might stll fall short of a majority at 49% and will likely be beaten in a race for those shares due to current perceptions of him and support of the board for Kroenke.

Other important points to note:

1. An entity can take the club into single ownership and off the market if they attain up to 90% of the share, at this point the holders of the remaining 10% are obligated to sell their shares to him provided he meets certain conditions on pricing

2. An entity with up to 25% has a blocking stake (on certain types of decision) but not on decisions requiring just a simple majority. For example Usmanov has a blocking stake but has still been unable to get himself on the board because of the Board/Fiszman/Kroenke axis.

Quote from Keith Edelman
[Quote]Basically speaking, a shareholding of more than 25% can block special resolutions for unusual matters, like winding up the Company or changing its name. For all usual business and operational matters, such as electing directors, appointing auditors, buying and selling players, contractual and commercial matters or approving the financial statements, the Club only needs a majority of votes in favour. Therefore if Red&White Holdings acquired 25% or more of the Club, they would not be able to block or influence any standard business decisions. Furthermore, a party that holds less than 50.1% of shares would not be entitled to a seat on the Board. In effect, a blocking stake in the Club has no material influence.[/quote]My take on the whole issue is that Arsenal is not in immediate threat of a takeover by Kroenke, it will only make his intentions clear and give his opposers the opportunity to take steps at blocking him. This dynamic might change quickly however if Danny Fiszman or Nina Bracewell Smith decide to cash in (for whatever reasons) to him. Even if one of these sell out to him, there is doubt as to whether he will be able to make up the remaining >4.1% from the small shareholders who are many and are mostly members of AST who will not likely sell until someone reaches the 90% mark.

Sources: Keith Edelman's interview on the Arsenal.com site in September 2007, Wikipedia and other webpages.

[Quote]

Diaby - I am ready to fill Song's shoes
Abou Diaby says he is ready to take on Alex Song's defensive midfield role when the Cameroon international heads for the Africa Cup of
Nations in January.
The Frenchman usually plays a more advanced role for the Gunners but with Song likely to miss up to six weeks of Arsenal action due to his international commitments, Diaby is one player who could step into the 22-year-old's shoes.

Song has been one of the most consistent performers in Arsène Wenger's side this season but Diaby says he would be happy to play a little deeper than usual if required in January.

"I'm ready for it if they ask me to do it," he told the Official Matchday Programme.

"I have done it before. It's good for me to be more aggressive and concentrate on the defensive side.

"I haven't heard anything about it yet though. As I say, I'm happy to play anywhere."[/quote]Why exactly does this induce some palpitations in my heart? can Diaby really be trusted with this role? Anyway, good spirit from Abou to take up the challenge and for the willingness to play anywhere, thats quite a show of loyalty to the club.

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Need some extra money for the festive period? Want to make some quick bucks without sweating? Just nominate and vote for me, send your proof of voting and your BIC/IBAN code to me then wait to be pleasantly surprised. You can also do some networking, build your up, mid and downstream, watch your earnings grow to previously unseen magnitudes. Hurry now while offer lasts.

Note: Terms and Conditions apply.

Here is what Arsene had to say about Diaby and what some of us saw in him, the good thing is that he is still improving as I saw him do some one touch passing against Hull keeping things simpler, such things as come with experience and gametime. I believe he is finallly starting to fulfil his potential. I was also pleasantly surprised to see on FM2010 that he also qualifies as one of our home grown players. Our roll call of Home grown players is impressive and only the ignorant ones felt we would fall foul of the rules. We are actually the best prepared club in the premiership going on into the future.

[Quote]
"I believe Vieira was more of a passer of the ball. Diaby is more of a dribbler, more offensive and makes more penetrating runs. Vieira was more of a constructor. They have a similar elegance and type of play but are not completely comparable."

One thing Vieira enjoyed in his early years was an injury-free run. According to Wenger, Diaby could do with the same.

"He had a good sequence of games before he got injured," said the manager. "Sometimes he gets strange injuries but had a good week of training last week, he looked strong and is now becoming a very promising player for us.

"I must say that he is a fantastic player to coach aswell. Every day you can tell him 'do that, that and that and then you can go home'. He will always do it and he will do more.

"What has been frustrating for him at times is that he works very hard in training and then gets injured."[/quote]Cesc, Diaby, Song, Vela, Denilson, Clichy, Traore, Gibbs, Walcott, Bendtner, Djorou, Merida are all home grown players. Now tell me what other clubs have this many home grown players of such stature in their ranks, we are basically producing our own team. Truly 'Arsene' Knows.

Dr Kitaun:
when y'all were screaming ARSENE KNOWS with the issue of strikers . . .no be here we all dey ? WHERE ARE THE FIT STRIKERS TO EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTE THE EPL CHALLENGE ON THE LONG RUN

Good enuff we won, but then its now time to be more careful !!!

Yu're being a bit unfair here, the only club that is possibly better placed than us in this regards is Chelsea and even then they can still go to places like Wigan and West Ham without getting results, Manure cannot afford to lose Rooney for half of the time we have RVP out before their season unravels.

We've got 2 strikers out to injury and we're still going strong: We've got RVP, Bendtner, Eduardo, and Vela as specialist strikers and we've also got Arshavin and Theo who can come in and do a job. How many good strikers of the quality people clamour for will come to sit on the bench and wait for RVP to get injured? I will only consider this point valid if you tell me who you want gone out of our top 4 strikers, if the quality of replacement will be that much of an improvement and if the 20+ million we need to get the quality replacement will be worth it in the long run (worth sacrificing one or 2 players who are established internationals for their country before clocking 21 while qualifying as home grown).

No2Atheism:
I disagree cus Gibbs has shown that he is better than Traore . . .

Has he really? I can only say he's had a smoother transition into the first team role but remember they are about the same age and Gibbs had initially gone on loan to Norwich in the 07/08 season. The Traore I see now who has played in the last 3 games has been very impressive and is a far cry from the one who had a torrid time against Sevilla in the 07/08 season UCL. More matured and composed.

edoyad:
Dudu read the links you left, that's what Le Boss is trying to do, revolutionize English youth soccer.
Who's that Chukwu Aneke ? The fresher appeared a couple of times on the piece like he may be the next ish, is he Russian ? 

A Nigerian born player who is considered as the next prodigy after Wilshere, he is not yet 17 but is about 6ft 2. plays a host of MF positions and has been described as "Technically Perfect" by Arsene when about 14 years old. He played in the Reserves recently against Fulham with  Dikgacoi and Andranik Temoyrian and basically bossed the MF against those 2 internationals though Fulham reserves won through a penalty against a largely U17 side captained by Sanchez Watt who himself is not yet 19.
On the down side, he was unable to get into the English U17 squad playing in the Elite group stage of the European U17 qualifiers though has scored playing for them in the past so its well within the realm of possibility for him to get a look in again.
He is definitely one to look for in the future and has the opportunity of the Academy league and FA youth cup to prove himself over the next 2 years but he will have to prove himself better than JET who I think is already being pencilled down for that Diaby/Vieira role.