Monday, August 29, 2011

8 -2, Arsenal?

I've been a proud Arsenal fan since like forever, way back in secondary school so long ago I can't even remember why I was a fan in the first place. I think I was drawn to their stylish manner of playing, bolstered by a rock solid defence. Yes, Arsenal used to have a good defence. Hell, Arsenal used to be a defensive and physical side. Much like Bolton is now. And it used to have a good goalkeeper. Now, why are these concepts so alien?

Maybe its because since the retirement of Tony Adams and David Seaman, since all those years, Wenger still hasn't found anybody to replace them. He's had a few pretenders, sure, but since those years, only Vermaalen has stood out as a real replacement. In between we've had clowns like Gallas. To Wenger's credit we've had very good fullbacks, Sagna and Cole, then Clichy, but some are gone now, because the club is in stagnation.

I really think Wenger is out of ideas. And even as the loyal fans stick to his track record, "In Arsene we trust" they say, the sad truth is this. He inherited a good goalkeeper and defence. He made one brilliant purchase at the point of his takeover, the midfielder Patrick Vieira, whom most Arsenal fans still remember fondly because he was such a phenomenal figure in the middle of the park. And Arsenal already had Bergkamp, all he had to do was buy Overmars and Petit, and the team was more or less complete.

But since then, since their retirements, he's been unable to figure out how to replicate it. It's been one way traffic. Wenger's renewal system has not worked. And despite the emergence of promising talent, it might seem that Wenger doesn't really get it right in the transfer market most of the time.

It's hardly his fault really, it is just that he hasn't figured out that maybe, the reason why his club were so successful in the start was because it was built on both old hands and new. And when a new generation of youngsters, most notably of them all Fabregas stepped up to the fore, there was still a solid core of veterans behind them.

A look at the current squad reveals just how much the youth policy has failed. The youths aren't stepping up enough, and there aren't any established old hands around to share their experience. The older players, like Arshavin, he was an unknown until he shone in Euro 2008, and the rest don't even earn a mention because they've been frankly, quite mediocre.

Fabregas has left, but he should have anyway because he would never have won anything here, not when he was expected to carry a team when he's barely 24. And Nasri, once the French player of the year, has ditched Arsenal for Man City.

This is effectively what Arsenal is left with. No senior players, youth players who are only too happy to hop onto other clubs when the big paychecks and a chance to win real trophies come along, and a manager who continues in his belief that he's still got it, when he hasn't had jackshit in six years, soon to be seven. Arsenal has become a feeder club, like Everton was for Man Utd, but even Everton's players like Phil Jagielka don't want to sign for Arsenal anymore.

The Arsenal fans often say things like "If not for Wenger, who else can we sign? Do you see a replacement?" They think that Wenger is Ferguson. Every club has changed managers, except for Man Utd, when results are not forthcoming. Just because Wenger has brought success, just because he's been around for a long time, doesn't mean that he's immune to being replaced.

The only manager who deserves not to be replaced is Ferguson, because he's still got it. I'm not saying that Wenger wasn't a good manager, he was, but perhaps, the modern game is moving too fast for him, and persisting with his style of managing isn't working. There are plenty of managers to sign, look at what Daglish is doing for Liverpool. It's just whether Arsenal is willing to break faith and sign them. And of course Ferguson doesn't want Wenger to leave, it would mean one less threat if he stays. He's such a wily bastard, don't you think he knows Wenger hasn't got it anymore. He's nice to him precisely because he doesn't see him as competition.

For one, Wenger isn't good at the transfer market in an age where the best teams all buy their best talents. Wayne Rooney isn't a Man Utd born and bred player. Neither was Ronaldo. Neither was Van Der Sar. Neither was Vidic. Most of Man Utd's best players were bought.

And look at Chelsea, or Man City, or Liverpool. They are all buying players. Top clubs buy good players. They don't save their cash, because there is no point in doing so. If you don't win, you don't bring in cash, and it becomes a tale of diminishing returns. If you keep winning, you never have to worry about cash.

Secondly, he's really bad at substitutions, but that may be because he doesn't have a deep squad to choose from, which is also his fault. But lastly, which may be perhaps the most fatal flaw, he seems immune to his own failings. The squad has been lightweight for a long time now, but he hasn't made the most obvious replacements to its spine. There is a reason why the changes are apparent, it's because they are actually needed. I find it amazing that Wenger was able to sell Fabregas and Nasri while staunchly believing that he didn't need to sign replacements for them. Those were the club's two best players. Where does Arsenal go from here?

Frankly, I don't know. I am a fan, but it's become too painful to support them anymore. I'm not quitting because they've stopped winning, I'm quitting because they look like they have lost themslves.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

CNA Twitter fail


Friday, August 26, 2011

email lol-fest

Here's what the email account brought up this week.

Dear Wei Li

Welcome to ClassACT, a monthly e-zine by Nanyang Technological University (NTU).

This month, we read about a new ratings system which awarded NTU 5 stars, making it the only local university to achieve this stature. With this new achievement, NTU enters the same league as other internationally acclaimed universities.

But that's not the best part. The best part was the article lead.

A new QS Stars rating system places the University in an international league of acclaimed universities such as Cambridge and Stanford...

Right. NTU's a fine university, but please do not compare it to Cambridge or Stanford. It's like trying to say the S-League is on the same level as the Barclays Premier League.

And it went on to make this assertion

NTU has been consistently ranked within the top 100 universities of the world in the last seven years.


Really? I seem to remember a recent Straits Times article that made the front page, about how NTU slipped to 174 in rankings. I'm pretty sure that wasn't seven years ago.

But of course, to be fair, I actually went on to do some background research on the QS Stars system. And I found out on the webpage itself - http://www.topuniversities.com/qsstars/home that the QS Stars system is not impartial at all!

Here's what the webpage writes

"QS Stars is the innovative new ratings system for academic institututions from QS. QS Stars was designed in response to institution’s needs requesting an evaluation that assesses all their strengths, using more comprehensive indicators in addition to those used in the rankings.

Learn how QS Stars is shaking up the global university ratings system and why universities are signing up to get their QS Stars."

And of course, NUS and SMU aren't in the system because they simply haven't signed up to get themselves accredited. NTU is the only university from Singapore that has been rated, not the first. Well, it is the first, but that's only because it was quick to buy in, not because of merit on its part whatsoever.

So actually, I'm not wrong at all in saying that NTU bought this rating to make themselves look good, and there's more than a little vested interest here in rating NTU well, because NUS and SMU would then scramble to get similar ratings too, resulting in more business for QS Stars.

By the way NTU, you didn't make the top 5 list of universities in Asia on the QS website. But NUS is at 3.