UNTOLD ARSENAL

When football clubs are run by money grabbing Americans who are intent on filling the club with debt while having no sense of what a British football club means to its supporters then two things happen.

One is the club ultimately goes bust, but meanwhile while this is happening, it alienates everyone and the supporters start revolting.

Both Liverpool and Manchester U are now in this position

When the Glazier Family took over Manchester Bankrupt they were not bankrupt - exactly the opposite in fact. Now they can’t pay the interest on their debts and unless an Arab or Russian firm buys them out, they will go bust simply because in this day and age, banks don’t say, “oh sure fine, no problems, you carry on, pay us when you can”.

When the take over happened a group of fans formed FC United - and they are still there, rising up the leagues. I have the highest regard for them because they stuck by their beliefs and did something. I have the same feeling about AFC Wimbledon.

But what of those who stayed behind? They have now reported Manchester Bankrupts to the Office of Fair Trading have sent official papers to the OFT.

The complaint starts with the awful compulsory cup scheme, which forces season ticket holders to buy tickets for didlly widdly cup games. The scheme this year excludes Carling Cup games but includes everything else. The supporters also claim that price rises contravene promises made by the Americans when they bought the club.

The complaints are:

Season ticket terms and conditions are in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999;

The automatic cup ticket scheme is in breach of The Competition Act 1998, Part II, Section 18(2);

Pricing policy is in breach of The Competition Act 1998, Part II, Section 18(2)(a).

Not to be outdone by this Liverpool Insolvency - a company in such a dire mess that it is looking that it might fall apart as early as next July, has now tried to register the liver bird as a trademark of the club.

The council has said no chance and lodged an appeal.

Of course trademarks and logos are important, and clubs and players do trademark what they can. Arsenal abandoned the old crest with the Latin motto because they could not protect it - which is why we got the new badge. But Liverpool has always gone further and has registered “You’ll Never Walk Alone” on its badge as its own, even though it was created by the fans.

The city council is taking legal advice over the trademark application and will lodge an objection. I am not an expert in this field - but from my perspective as one who tries to protect copyrights, trade marks and the like, I don’t think Liverpool Insolvency has a cat in hell’s chance. All they have done is alienated yet more fans.

Arsenal might have some problems on the field this season, but at least we are not trying to register Tower Bridge as a copyright (which would be the equivalent of Liverpool’s issue).

Copyright (c) Tony Attwood 2008 (thought I would put that in just in case Liverpool tried to nick it

The problem is, that means the next game for England.

On a different matter, one of the interesting things about yesterday’s little piece about the Lord Wenger leaving the club was the way the commentaries on the piece could be analysed. Including not just the comments that went up on the site, but also those I received directly, it worked out at something like this…

50% thought it amusing or downright funny (one reader burst out laughing at one line - I am most grateful to you sir, you brightened my day considerably, and I must admit the “Eboue because he is Eboue” line made me smile too, and I wrote it)

20% thought I was criticising Wenger - and virtually every one of those swore like buggery at me - which is fair enough - everyone to his own opinion

10% thought the piece was stupid, pathetic, childish, and made me look stupid, which I guess is also fair enough since presumably I have every right under Magna Carta to make myself look like a prat if I want to

20% criticised others for not getting the joke in the first place - and I must say although I don’t criticise I couldn’t quite get myself around the idea that the piece could be read as an anti-Wenger piece.

What’s clear (as it has been clear I guess since the very first joke was cracked - which makes me think, what was the very first joke?) is that most things which some think are somewhat amusing, annoy others. I thought the “Wrong Door” on BBC3 earlier this year was the funniest thing since Monty Python, but most of my friends never got the joke at all. I don’t think Mitchell and Webb are funny, but they get awards and stuff. I find the Tiny Fantasists down the Lane endlessly amusing. So it goes.

One thing I would disagree on however is that I didn’t think the piece was sarcastic. More, post-modern ironic I think. Perhaps we should debate this at length.

Anyway, what I do find fascinating is that while anyone who has absolutely nothing better to do than to read my ramblings from time to time will undoubtedly know that this is a blog that is totally pro-Wenger, covers football finance and indulges in what I (but clearly not everyone) consider to be humour, some readers come here for the first time and clearly get the wrong end of the stick.

I’m not sure what to do about this - should I post a health warning on each note? Maybe something like…

“Some of the pieces on this blog are meant to be funny. Because I am not a very good writer, and because different people’s senses of humour differ (probably due to evolutionary effects dating back to the New Stone Age) you might not get the joke, but that is more likely to be my fault rather than yours, and I am happy to take the blame.”

That should do it.

If you have been, thanks for reading. If not, well, I can’t think what to say.

Tony