By Michael Sinnerton

Arsenal's unique take on ownership took another twist this week when the board, and its financial advisors, Rothschild, turned down an offer to underwrite a ‘rights issue' proposed by Alisher Usmanov. Days later Stan Kroenke, Arsenal's largest stake-holder, purchased 160 shares at £8,500 each, to his stake to 28.58%.

For those who don't know, if and when Kroenke reaches 30% he is obliged to make an offer for the remaining shares. The Uzbek must be frustrated at the board's seeming favouritism particularly when his ‘rights issue' seemed a relatively sensible proposal. The chief shareholder, and anyone else, would be able to buy ‘new' shares creating cash. The issue would mean Usmanov and other shareholders reaching into their piggybanks rather than plunging the club into debt. It was hoped around £150m could be raised, £60m of which would be made available to Arsene Wenger and the rest put towards the clubs reported £416m debts.

As David Conn points out in the Guardian care could have been taken to protect the stakes of smaller shareholders whilst providing an example to owners of the other big clubs whereby the benefactors invest real cash with no strings attached and no borrowing. As many of Arsenal's largest shareholders have made huge money selling shares, to Kroenke in particular, I think they should have been willing to give something back.

Ivan Gazidis claimed that Arsenal don't need the money, i.e. they are paying off the debt comfortably a bit at a time and don't want to overpay in the current inflated transfer market. But I'm not sure that's true, are Arsenal fans really happy to continue to invest in youth and, more than likely, end up 4^th? Wouldn't they prefer a big investment to give them the possibility of a real title challenge, particularly given the positive news announced this week?

With Van Persie signing a new deal and Eduardo and Rosicky potentially back as first team players Arsene has a hugely dangerous and talented bunch of attackers to choose from. Defensively (and I include the midfield in this) the team are miles short of Liverpool, Chelsea and Manchester United. Two or three top quality signings could see this Arsenal team really succeed (not necessarily to the detriment of the youngsters).

Do the fans want the club to push on or are they really happy being ‘just' great to watch but ultimately trophyless?

By Michael Sinnerton

Sam Allardyce wants to perform felattio on Sir Alex Ferguson. That's the conclusion I've come to after he initially suggested signing Michael Owen was too much of a gamble: "It's unfortunate for Michael but if you look at the last three years I cannot take a gamble on that." It wasn't that unfortunate for Michael in the end was it. Allardyce later went on say that Owen could be a very good signing for United. Strange.

This comes after Allardyce jumped on the back of Ferguson's criticism of Rafa Benitez's "game over hand signal". Despite having said nothing in the days after the game, Allardyce after Ferguson's outburst finally piped up, ""I was hugely disappointed by those gestures. I think they were disrespectful and quite humiliating. Having looked at them again this week, I think I'm right and ­everybody will see why I'm complaining."

Having written Owen off as too big a risk, Allardyce is hilariously eyeing Christian Vieri who is 35 (6 years older than Owen and with no Premier League experience. "He's obviously out of condition compared to the rest of the lads, but at this stage of the season, joining us in the pre-season shows a certain amount of commitment from him that he wants to try and play football again, and he fancies a go over here in the Premier League." Doesn't that sound like more of a gamble? I wonder who'll have the last laugh there.

                                    -      -       -        -        -        -       -       -

Carlo Ancelotti impressed everyone with his grasp of the language and sense of humour at his first press conference but the more shrewd observers among you will have noticed perhaps the best thing about Ancelotti is his commitment to the job. Already his scouting of last year's reserve leagues has seen Chelsea swoop for Ross Turnbull and Daniel Sturridge, big money moves for Nabil El Zhar and Febian Brandy seem nothing more than rumours at this point.

By Michael Sinnerton

Amir Zaki, football's Mr Unprofessional, wants to return to the Premier League. He may well still be able to do so but perhaps returning late from International duty five times in a row, might come back to haunt him. I kind of hope so.

Zaki has today claimed Aston Villa failed with an £11million bid to sign him in January. If that's true it casts some doubts on Martin O'Neill's judgement but it may well be just an attempt to get him some headlines at a time when it looks more likely he will be playing football for a lower league French club than anyone with profile in the Premier League. Zaki's arrogance and lack of respect towards Steve Bruce is enough to put any manager off, let alone his huge dip in form which points to Premier League defenders working him out. Good riddance to bad rubbish? Or a waste of talent that could prosper under the right guidance?

- - - - - - - -

Are Man City completely mad or genuinely onto something? Signing John Terry from Chelsea, to me seems an utterly impossible task. When Steven Gerrard almost moved from Liverpool to Chelsea he was moving from a team who he loved but were 4^th to a championship winning and potentially league dominating team. Terry, arguably more associated and in love with his club than Gerrard, would be almost moving in the other direction.

Perhaps City are just stirring and I don't think Terry would be move but it's strange that he hasn't come out to distance himself and end the speculation. At least Hughes and they owners have changed tack from simply attempting to buy any decent striker on the market. If they do manage to sign a couple of top-quality defenders, I still think City have the possibility to give the Big Four (possibly now the big 3 and a half) a real battle.

By Michael Sinnerton

Had a very busy day so sadly haven't managed to do a proper football blog today. Instead I thought I'd take the time to pay tribute to the greatest tennis player ever.

How lucky we are to live at a time when Roger Federer struts his imperial stuff. 15 grand slams tournaments in just 6 years; it took Pete Sampras 12 years to get his phenomenal 14. Federer returned to world number one today, admittedly partly in the absence of Rafael Nadal through injury, but also after coming back from two heartbreaking five set defeats to the same man. Those two defeats at Wimbledon and the Australian Open could have led to Federer retiring early, instead he battled back and won the French Open title for the first time and regained his Wimbledon crown.

A clay court legend, whose name sadly escapes me, rates Federer as probably the third or fourth best player on clay ever. He is just unfortunate to have met the best clay courter of all time in final after final at the French. When time judges Federer though, having survived Nadal's onslaught to win more grand slams he may be held in even higher stead than had he won three or four French Opens. Andy Roddick's name must be mentioned here, so wonderful was his performance today. Though it will be of little consolation to him, he won many friends today and even the harshest of judges wouldn't begrudge him success next year (or at the US).

Those of us of English or Australian nature have the Ashes to look forward to this week as football takes a slight back-burner but it won't be long before football's back on our front pages as Franck Ribery is forced to move to Chelsea or David Villa makes Barca's dream team that little more special.

By Michael Sinnerton

Dear Chelsea, please don't sign Andrea Pirlo.

I'm fed up with Premier League clubs signing slightly over-the-hill superstars. Singings like this create two problems, firstly the player having taken a season or so to acclimatise to a new league is generally too old or out of favour and therefore branded a failure and secondly the player is generally signed two or three seasons too late and is therefore well past their prime anyway.

This has happened at Chelsea, with varying degrees, to both Deco and Andriy Shevchenko and arguably to Juan Sebastian Veron at Manchester United and Fernando Morientes at Liverpool. My main problem with the signings, as well as the fact that they often turn out to be a waste of money, is that they convince the average fan that the Premier League is all-powerful. When Deco or Pirlo fail, fans who aren't up-to-date with football in Europe mark them out as average players who have succeeded because La Liga or Serie A is ‘weaker'.

Fans point to Diego Forlan's scoring record in Spain as a sign of weaker defences but fail to acknowledge the vast improvement in Fernando Torres' ratio when moving the other way. Some players will thrive in different leagues and some will take longer to develop. Simple points but ones that are perhaps worth remembering when discussing the attributes of different players and different leagues.

Andrea Pirlo used to be one of my favourite players, but his form this season has led to some poor performances for both AC Milan and Italy with one guardian columnists describing him as the biggest disappointment of 2008.

The point of this article is not to criticise Pirlo, but to praise him as one of the best midfielders of a generation and a unique and gifted playmaker. Any move to Chelsea though could see him remembered by some as another foreigner who moved to late and by others as a player who ‘just couldn't cope with the Premier League'.

by Joel Abraham

What the hell happened to Manchester United?

Some of us expected a thrilling final, and were left disappointed. It was, in truth, a trifle dull. The general consensus seemed to be that if Barca scored first, it would force United to attack and lead to a great game. Instead, the game looked over as soon as Eto'o scored. The Catalans defended through the art of possession, which does not make for exciting football. After all, if the opposition don't have the ball, they can't score. Xavi and Iniesta were at their majestic best, passing around the United midfield as if they weren't there, but the Barca performance wasn't so much spectacular as efficient. Two defensive errors, two goals. Guardiola's side are not dissimilar to Mourinho's Chelsea of 2005.

United seemed to crumble defensively under the pressure of the occasion. Ferdinand and Vidic were both at fault for the goals. The second was utterly horrifying. To allow Xavi of all players that amount of time and space to cross, and to leave Messi completely unmarked in the area was utter suicide.

Fergie blew it. They fell into the Madrid trap rather than following the Chelsea blueprint. Ferguson saw Barca's depleted defence, and subsequently tried to outgun them rather than stifle them. Chelsea showed us how to play against Barca, to hassle Xaviesta, to defend in numbers, to sit deep and crowd out the final third.

Last night, we got Michael Carrick v Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. Carrick is good, but not that good. Anderson lacks the positional discipline to be an effective defensive midfielder, and who knows where Giggs was supposed to be playing? That midfield trio might've worked had they been sitting in front of the defence and closed down the Barca midfield, with Anderson to chase, Carrick to cover and Giggs to intercept. Perhaps with Park in the deeper role instead of Giggs, United may have had more luck.

The front three of Rooney, Ronaldo and Park left United with no real striker, with Ronaldo demanding the ball at every opportunity, shooting on sight, and fading into obscurity as the match progressed. It could be argued that this trio were effective against Arsenal, but it was only effective because Kieran Gibbs fell over and Ronaldo scored a free kick. Perhaps Berbatov should've started centrally, flanked by Rooney and Ronaldo.

At half time, with the problem clear, Ferguson swapped Anderson for Tevez, which proved to be a poor decision. Tevez's first touch has been appalling lately, which one might attribute to lack of playing time, but his introduction certainly didn't help United. The man is clearly unhappy at the club. Rooney on the left wing is something of a mystery, it seems almost designed to limit his involvement in the game, and Rooney does not perform well in big games.

The system was set up to counterattack. The major problem with this being that if you don't score first, you're stuck. They let Barca play their football, which was sheer madness. United were unbeaten in Europe for two years because Ferguson stuck to a cautious 4-5-1. The man is not a tactician, but he is lucky enough to have such a good squad that he can pick the wrong team and still win. Barca, by all accounts, should not have been in the final, having rode their luck against Chelsea and profited from some truly appalling refereeing decisions. Yet United failed to genuinely test a side who had been for the most part outplayed by Chelsea.

Ferguson clearly thought his team was stronger and would win in a pure football face-off. Had Ronaldo scored any of his early chances and United won 1-0, then we'd be hailing Fergie as a genius. Unfortunately, there was such a gulf in class in the midfield battle that Barca were in control for most of the game. Against Xaviesta, the two best midfielders in the world, who've been playing together since they were 11 years old, United were powerless to resist.

Chelsea afforded Barca plenty of possession, but didn't allow them any penetration. This is how you beat teams who like to keep the ball. If you defend in numbers, the opposition will pass the ball from side to side for long enough that they run out of ideas and give the ball away. I said yesterday that if Ferguson set out his team to stifle Barca, United would win. Unfortunately for him, he did the exact opposite.

By Michael Sinnerton

Just a few thoughts that I’m not sure have been properly voiced by the media this week. Whilst it’s not a major story given the goings on at the bridge I would like to have seen more commentators pick up on the swings and roundabouts of Chelsea v Barcelona. Given that it’s generally accepted that a farcical refereeing performance cost Chelsea the tie, I can’t understand why John’s Terry’s late winner in 2005 (4-2) that put Chelsea through hasn’t been brought up. A clear foul on the goalkeeper by Ricardo Carvalho was completely missed by the referee and Chelsea went through as a result. To me that means both teams have perhaps wrongly gone through to poor decisions. Two wrongs don’t make a right but they sure do even things up.

Another thing that has probably been brought up more in Spain, and even Italy is Guus Hiddink’s record. During the 2002 World Cup his South Korea side were the beneficiaries of a similar number of ludicrous decisions against both Italy and Spain. Perhaps this added to the Dutchman’s calm persona having on the other side of the fence on more than one occasion. Hiddink, who I thought tactically got things pretty much spot on (at least until Barca went down to 10), is undoubtedly a great manager but a lucky one. It was his PSV side remember who won the European Cup without winning a game in the latter stages.

-              -              -              -              -              -              -              -             

by Joel Abraham

Barcelona v Chelsea

----------------Valdes----------------
Alves----Marquez------Pique-----Abidal
-----Xavi----Yaya Toure----Iniesta----
------Messi------Eto'o-----Henry------

----Malouda-----Drogba-----Ballack----
-----Lampard----Essien-----Mikel------
Bosingwa---Terry------Alex----Ivanovic
-----------------Cech-----------------

When Barca's frontline are unleashed, they can rip any defence to shreds, so Chelsea will have to be at their very best. Bosingwa could be the weak link for Messi to exploit. The clash of Barca's midfield artistry against Chelsea's gladiators will be an interesting one. Iniesta is in sparkling form, so Essien will have the unenviable task of shackling the Spanish playmaker. Hiddink will have to decide between Anelka and Kalou, where the Ivorian's workrate could be favoured. Lampard and Drogba could cause Barca's defence serious problems, particularly at set pieces, where Valdes is a liability and Chelsea have supreme aerial dominance. Hiddink may be content to bag an away goal and take the tie back to the Bridge. Barca will probably outgun Chelsea, but there will be plenty to play for in the second leg.

Man United v Arsenal

--------------Van der Sar-------------
O'Shea----Ferdinand----Vidic------Evra
Ronaldo----Carrick---Anderson----Giggs
----------Berbatov----Rooney----------

---------------Adebayor---------------
Eboue--Fabregas--Song---Nasri--Walcott
Gibbs------Djourou----Toure------Sagna
----------------Almunia---------------


United's goalfest against Spurs will send out a warning to the Gunners' makeshift defence. Rooney tore Spurs apart playing on the left, bagging two goals and three assists, so Sagna will have his work cut out. Gibbs could struggle against Ronaldo, but if the latter decides to roam then Arsenal may profit. Eboue could be picked for his defensive experience. Arsenal have something of a selection dilemma, with Eboue, Denilson, Diaby and Bendtner all possibilities for the last spot in the team. The rest picks itself, with Djourou set to replace the "injured" Silvestre. Expect a mobile, tenacious central midfield trio of Fabregas, Nasri and Song to press United high up the pitch, with Fabregas pushing up to support Adebayor. Nasri is being groomed in a new holding role in the midfield, where his energy, tackling and passing will be crucial to Arsenal's ability to hit United on the counter. A potential weakness could be Evra, who was given the runaround by Aaron Lennon at the weekend, and could be exposed by the pace of Walcott. Rafael da Silva is another option at right-back, whilst Tevez could be a better choice than Berbatov up front.  Arsenal usually get the better of United when Ferguson sets him team out to attack, so Arsenal might nick this one.

by Joel Abraham

Arsenal's season is over. They won't beat Man United over two legs. The FA Cup was their most realistic chance at a first trophy in four years, but after yesterday's poor performance, it's back to the drawing board.

Arshavin's omission made no sense. Wenger attempted to pack the midfield to stifle Essien, Ballack and Lampard. Chelsea's two goals came from Lampard being given too much time and space on the ball to pick out Malouda and Drogba respectively.

Walcott's goal was lucky. A deflected shot that Cech should've kept out. Arsenal got what they deserved. For all their possession, they created very few chances. Fabregas had a bad game by his standards, Diaby repeatedly gave the ball away, and Adebayor was completely isolated. The side were crying out for the creative, incisive passing of Arshavin, yet his introduction was far too late. 

The makeshift defence coped well for the most part, but Eboue should have stopped Malouda, Silvestre was emphatically beaten for power and pace by Drogba, and Fabianski should've done better with both goals. Kieran Gibbs again looked impressive, setting up the goal, but his double header against Ronaldo will show us if he's really up to scratch.

A familiar sight for Arsenal fans

The game was painfully similar to the Carling Cup final of 2007, with Walcott giving Arsenal an early lead and a late Drogba charge killing off the game. Will Arsenal ever learn to cope with this man? Every season he has single handedly beaten Arsenal: Community Shield 2005, Stamford Bridge 05/06, Carling Cup Final 06/07, Stamford Bridge 07/08, and now we have another game to add to his tally.

Would Almunia and Gallas have fared any better? Take a look at how they dealt with Chelsea's long balls during the league match at Stamford Bridge last season, and the answer is no. Didier Drogba knows he is too good for the Arsenal defence to cope with, and he is many, many times better than any of Arsenal's strikers. 

In short, it seems that Arsenal haven't learned their lesson. After three seasons of constant torment from the big Ivorian, they still can't deal with him. And in that time, Arsenal have failed to win any trophies. Coincidence? Unless they can defend against the world's best, then Arsenal will not win anything.

Rooney, Berbatov and Ronaldo await.

By Michael Sinnerton 

Wow. Those of us who thought that Chelsea v Liverpool (Part 5) would be "two tight affairs" and "not one for the purists" may need to be a bit more imaginative with future predictions. Although at least Barca came through as predicted, with a home win being followed by an away draw.

The wonderful 4-4 at Stamford Bridge meant that the tie everyone feared may well turn out to be the tie of the round (Porto v United pending). Guus Hiddink succeeded where Luis Felipe Scolari failed in really getting the best out of Gary Megson and Rafa Benitez. Perhaps Abramovich finally has the exciting attacking football he so desires, combined with a winning team and a manager he trusts and likes.

Too bad it's only for six months. Whisper it quietly but Chelsea fans, and maybe even players, have forgotten him.  Unless Roman can somehow persuade Russia's powers that be that Hiddink can job share successfully, whoever comes in next season may have shoes even bigger than Jose's to fill.

Chelsea's current surge has surely come too late for the Premier League and Barcelona must be favourites in Europe but Arsenal fans must be slightly fearful that a more than makeshift back-line will struggle to deal with Dr. Ogba and ‘Lamps' on this form. Hiddink's impact is such that ending the season trophyless would now be considered a failure. FA Cup winners' medals may not be what the Chelsea players wanted at the start of the season but I think that's how they will end it. Whether the veteran Hiddink can get the better of the young maestro Guardiola may well be another epic contest to savour but for now bring on Wednesday's quarter finals.