Amid the flurry of transfer talk and deals of the last few weeks, one overlooked element to the evolution of the squad under Arteta has been the apparent focus on a British core—something we haven’t seen since late-stage Arsène when it was Wilshere, Walcott, Gibbs, Jenkinson, Ox, Chambers, Welbeck and Ramsey (Wales? Is that a country? Yes and no), among others who seemed to represent a return to dear ol’ Blighty after years of Arsènian francophonia. Arteta may be Spanish, but he’s resurrecting the good old days when a Briton was a Briton…
Relax. This ain’t some Brexiteering, anti-immigrant screed. We’re simply here to point out that this latest iteration of the Arsenal squad won’t have any problems with the homegrown rule (which stipulates that there must be at least eight “home-grown” players in a 25-player squad). As the picture above implies, we have five home-grown players in Bukayo Saka, Emile Smith-Rowe, Ben White, and Aaron Ramsdale—plus the impending signing of Declan Rice. Beyond those, we can add Eddie Nketiah, Reiss Nelson, and Rob Holding.
That puts us right at the minimum of eight home-grown players. With rumours of Nketiah and Holding being moved on or at least loaned out, The one wild card would be Folarin Balogun, Born on July 2001, he will turn 22 over a month before the opening game of the 2023/24 campaign and therefore must be registered in Arsenal’s Premier League squad as a homegrown player—if Arteta plans to integrate him into the first-team picture. That poses some interesting questions around Balogun’s future. If we’re to move both Nketiah and Holding out, that suggests that Balogun might have a role to play.
We’re not talking about a British core that includes the likes of Carl Jenkinson or Calum Chambers here. Balogun, Nelson, and Nketiah can each make legitimate claims to playing key roles (with apologies to Holdinho). We’re talking about a British core that is more than merely ticking off a few boxes. Saka, White, Ramsdale and Rice have the makings of world-beaters, and Smith-Rowe isn’t too far behind. We looked yesterday at a few academy products who’ve been making a case for for some first-team action. Amidst all of this signing and spending, it’s good to know that we’re also developing that home-grown talent.
Who knows? Maybe Cozier-Duberry or Nwaneri or Lewis-Skelley who’ll pop up in an early-season Champions League group-stage or League Cup match. In any event, it’s more than gratifying to see that we’re doing more than purchasing the glitziest players available; we’re also developing that home-grown talent that is so vital to the birthplace of the game itself.
I find the easy use of political asides in football blogs gratuitous and unnecessary. Your linking of ‘brexiteering’, (is it a word?), with anti immigration is lazy and offensive. I am a ‘Brexiteer’, so are an extremely large number of other British people. To many Americans it seems to mean something other than a desire not to be subject to the authority of an unelected bureaucracy.
I have had this argument on another US Arsenal blog and ceased posting there. Many there seemed to confuse Brexit with far right politics and Trumpism. I can only imagine that many there know little about European and British politics.
This is a football blog. It used to be said lightly that you should never discuss religion or politics. The result was usually falling out. Today, too many end up just vilified.
It is your blog and you can do what you like but I no longer trust ‘your process’.
consolsbob, I regret that my aside rubbed the wrong way. I don’t delve into politics here and only meant it as a light-hearted remark to suggest that appreciating a British core was not an attempt at indulging anything overly nationalistic. What the voters decide regarding the UK’s relationship to the EU is their business and, more importantly in this context, has little if anything to with football. I apologize for crossing that line.
Woolwich 1886 please ignore the nonsense above. Typical Brexiter gets a bit touchy now it has all gone wrong and shown to be a pack of lies. You carry on posting as you want.
Kevin, I appreciate the support but feel that consolsbob does have a point. As I explained to him above, I didn’t intend to take any political position for or against Brexit. I thought I was offering a mild, tongue-in-cheek quip to suggest that enjoying a British core need not extend to larger issues regarding the UK’s relationship to the EU.
This is exactly my point. I have no intention of putting you right on the subject of Brexit. This is a football blog if you remember. You personify those who denigrate others at the smallest opportunity by making ignorant and personal arguments.
My issue with John was dealt with. Your pettiness remains just that.
Thank you John. I don’t doubt your sincerity. If the likes of Kevin choose to persist in picking a fight, I will choose to post and read elsewhere. A second Brexit, if you will. All best.
Who’s picking a fight? I was just supporting the author’s right to comment as he wished. I do understand why you are so prickly about it though, it must be hard having to carry such guilt and embarrassment about supporting such a disaster.
Bye, Kevin. I will leave you to your EU dreams and flights of fancy. I suggest you visit a couple of actual political blogs, with your wit, acumen and intelligence you will have a fine time.
Kevin, let’s all please desist from the political issues I’ve stirred up. I’d like to keep this blog as friendly and as open as possible by focusing our energy on following this club and its players.
Consolsbob, Kevin, Jon, and any others still reading this chain….while I recognize how Bob might be reacting, regardless of any opinions I might have on the matters of Brexit, your former PM, our former President, climate change, Saudi football, the future ownership of MU, etc., I believe all of you may be missing the point of a chatroom or listserv, I e., an opportunity to voice one’s opinions on a topic in an informal forum.
Bob appears to be a strict constructionist ( whoops, I am getting political) and wants little or no deviation from discussing Arsenal with a smattering of (snide?) asides about City, MU, Spurs, etc. and no other discussion whether political, social, or even, I think, other sports related, e.g., England’s apparent inability to beat the Aussies at cricket (let alone the recent charges of racism leveled against that sport).
I believe this misses the point of having such a forum. While every discussion might begin with Jon’s opinions or rants, consider this to be an on-line pub, where everyone is sitting around nursing a pint of their favorite brew and commenting on the topic of the evening. Often, those situations lead to digressions into numerous topics, typically far removed from where the talk began. Assuming people of good will, everyone tries to respect the opinions of their mates around the table even if they might disagree. It is possible that an argument or fight might erupt, but that is soothed by another round and a shift in topic.
To get up and stomp out in a huff, is bad form, and is disrespectful of the entire conclave, but proves nothing more than having a thin skin.
I belonged to a listserv/chat room that eventually collapsed because the moderator chose to delete and suspend or bar opinions he felt were off topic, political, sexist, etc. Little by little everyone left and some went to form a new forum with no rules at all as to topics. Even there a few persons left because the discussions had veered too far from the original topic of a specific marque of Brit auto ( not to be revealed here lest I go off-topic), but the group survives after nearly twenty years. The secret, Bob, is to focus on why you joined up at the start and, primarily, in this instance, what they have to say about Arsenal, Arsenal, Kroenke, Arteta, etc., and not about Boris (which one you might ask?), DT, AQI, or whatever.
JMHO
Palladio43
I’ve asked Kevin to desist and hope you’ll consider doing the same. I appreciate your candor and wit and would miss it were you to pull up the tent stakes.
Why would I depart? My point was and still is, that, if you accept that there should be no reason that this forum is no different than sitting in a pub and arguing the fine points, as did the medieval theologians, as to how many angels can stand on the end of a pin, nobody should take offense as to anyone else’s opinions. I did not feel you crossed the line with your remarks, but maybe I am “battle-hardened” or, alternatively, I can tell when you (especially) are trying to inject humor into the conversation. Everyone else should do the same.