Tuesday, October 11th, 2011 « Untold Arsenal: Arsenal News. Supporting the Lord Wenger; coach of the decade

With over 2000 followers: Untold Arsenal on Twitter @UntoldArsenal

Untold Arsenal on Facebook here

Spurs-Arsenal Media Watch: Party in North London, but did the festivities obscure the facts?

By: Anne

*Much thanks to Shard for his contributions to this article.

While Arsenal certainly gave the media plenty to lament about following their loss against Spurs, the press coverage of the derby nonetheless managed to go overboard. Specifically, not one of the main stories that emerged following the match was primarily concerned with the football that was played during the match.

On that note, I’d like to begin by raining on the media’s party just a little bit, and covering what should have been one of the biggest stories of the match, but which failed to make it into virtually any of the subsequent press coverage. Yes, I’m referring, of course, to the Van der Vaart handball, which was incorrectly ruled a goal, and which ultimately cost Arsenal a point in the match.

And it’s not as if the media had no opportunity to cover it. The handball was actually one of the first subjects mentioned by Arsene Wenger in his post-match press conference. Arsene criticized the linesmen for failing to make the call, and also asserted that Van der Vaart’s handball was deliberate, and should thus have resulted in a second yellow card. Arsene made these comments during the following exchange (available on Arsenal Player):

Arsene:  (The loss is) frustrating as well because that first goal is hand ball… Their first goal is a handball…I wonder what the linesmen do in these situations?

Q: Have you watched the replay?

A: Yes. It’s a second yellow card as well because it is already a yellow card.

Q: Celebrating?

A: No, for handball. On purpose.

Q: They also said that Van der Vaart should have gotten a second yellow for going into the crowd?

A: I’m not a fan of that. I can understand it. The guy celebrates a goal and there has to be some spontaneous reaction when you score goals, but I feel the goal is not valid. The second goal, I feel we didn’t defend properly and we were punished for it.”

However, despite Arsene’s rather assertive condemnation of this officiating error that cost Arsenal a point in the match, the first big news story that emerged from the derby was as follows (courtesy of the Standard’s James Olley, on twitter):

“@JamesOlley : Altercation between Wenger and Allen at the final whistle. Wenger refused a handshake twice, Allen appeared to call him a c***…”

This same angle managed to emerge in most media outlets following the match, as is exemplified by the following report from ESPN:

“At the end of the game, Wenger appeared to have a row with Allen, with whom he had a spat after last season’s 3-3 draw, and the Spurs assistant first-team coach said on Sunday: ‘He refused to shake my hand. He says he didn’t see or hear me, but he’s two-bob, he is.’

Allen was accused of swearing at Wenger but added: ‘No, I didn’t call him any dirty word.’”

So, rather than choose to cover the football in the match, the press instead chose to run with the “playground fight” angle, reporting (with no small amount of relish) that Clive Allen had called Arsene a “two-bob,” and possibly a “c***” (although some controversy remains on the question of whether any actual naughty words were used during the alleged exchange).

However, Arsene Wenger actually denied during the post-match press conference that any such “altercation” had even occurred in the first place. Here’s what Arsene had to say on the subject:

“Q: Tell us what happened at the end with Clive Allen?

Arsene: Nothing.

Q: It wasn’t nothing, because we were quite close to it.

Arsene: Sorry?

Q: Didn’t look like nothing because we were quite close to it. You refused to shake his hand.

Arsene: I shook the hand of the manager and the assistant manager, how many people do I have to shake hands? Is that a prescription, or?

Q: But it seems that there were words exchanged…

Arsene: There were no words exchanged.

Q: When you beckoned him down the tunnel, what was that, was it just to say ‘what’s the problem, ‘or…?

Arsene: To?

Q: You appeared to beckon Clive Allen down the tunnel….

Arsene: There was no word exchanged.

Q: You did go back and shake his hand, didn’t you?

Arsene: Look, if the story of the game is Clive Allen, ask him. I shake the manager’s hand and the assistant manager and I can only repeat that.

Q: He seems to want to make himself the story?

Arsene: Exactly, you know…”

While the Wenger-Allen “playground fight” story is somewhat silly, and easy to laugh off (whatever level of truth it may or may not contain), some of the other questionable reporting following the match concerned much more serious matters; specifically, allegations that Arsene Wenger ruled out an Arsenal title bid on the season, and also on the subject of the conduct of Arsenal fans during the match.

Looking first at the question of whether Arsene actually ruled out an Arsenal title bid, the answer is (as would be expected) that no, Arsene did not rule out an Arsenal title bid at this early point in the season. However, that didn’t stop media outlets like Sky Sports from claiming:

“Wenger Rules Out Title bid”

However, here’s what Arsene actually had to say on the subject:

Q: Arsene, can you still win the league?

Arsene: That’s a question that…

Q: Do you think, in your mind, has the league gone? Do you still think you can win it?

Arsene: I don’t think like that. I think at the moment you have to set ourselves realistic targets and.to get into a Champions League position. To say today that we will win the league is not realistic. If we come back to a better position, at the moment, we are 12 points behind Manchester United and Man City. That’s not realistic to say today that you win the league, but we have to fight to come back into a better position. It’s a reality.

Q: On the other hand, can you see yourself dropping into the relegation zone?

Arsene: No”

Although I suppose that the above comments by Arsene are somewhat open to interpretation, it seems quite clear to me that Arsene was attempting to say only that questions about Arsenal winning the league were inappropriate at the current time. However, he did not rule out a title bid entirely, and actually indicated that such a bid would still be possible if Arsenal were to “come back to a better position.”

The second, more serious, allegation that the media appears to have exaggerated following the match, is more sensitive, and concerns the behavior of some Arsenal fans during the match.

At the outset, I want to emphasize that this story has been exaggerated, but not fabricated. And I want to make it very clear that my intent in making this argument is not, in any respect, to exonerate or condone any such behavior by the Arsenal fans involved, anymore than I would excuse the similar behavior by the Spurs fans who were involved.

It appears that there was, in fact, a small segment of the Arsenal fanbase who did engage in offensive chanting, apparently concerning Emmanuel Adebayor. There was also offensive chanting by some Spurs fans, which led Arsenal and Spurs to issue the following joint statement on abusive chants:

“Both clubs were extremely disappointed to hear the chants from supporters at yesterday’s game. Neither club tolerates foul language, racist chanting, homophobic chanting or any anti-social behaviour from its supporters.

We shall be working closely with each other to identify the individuals involved.”

Arsene Wenger also made the following statement on the subject during the post-match press conference:

“Q: There was some pretty disgusting chanting from both sets of fans, Arsene, were you disappointed by it?

Arsene: Yes, we respect everybody and we want as well to be respected.”

So, just to re-emphasize: I do not condone, in any way whatsoever, chanting by any fans of any football club, that is racist, homophobic, xenophobic, or that falls into similar categories.

However, at the same time, the media appears to have heavily emphasized the behavior by a small number of Arsenal fans in this regard, while finding the similar behavior of Spurs fans to be worthy of a much lower level of attention.

The following article in the Standard, headlined “Scott Parker wants offensive chants dealt with,” provides one of many examples of the above, and also of the manner in which the media appears to have exaggerated the conduct of Arsenal fans:

“Parker insists he did not actually hear what was being said at White Hart Lane…

However, the 30-year-old has been around long enough to know what goes on in football grounds and he does not believe it is acceptable for stadiums to be the last bastion of verbal abuse….

‘Just because you play for an opposing team doesn’t give people the right to abuse you. I didn’t hear it at the weekend but I have seen some of the stuff that has been written. If that was the case, the people who were involved need to be dealt with.’”

So, here we have Scott Parker offering a hypothetical condemnation of Arsenal fan conduct that might have occurred, but that he himself acknowledges that he didn’t actually hear.

However, the question that arises is, if the chanting at issue concerned such a small number of fans that it wasn’t even audible to the players on the pitch, does it truly justify the level of condemnation of the Arsenal fanbase that has arisen in the media as a result? Also, what was the news value of printing the above article in particular, when it apparently provides no new information on the subject that it purports to cover?

However, questions of chanting aside, the main point that I intend to make in this media watch is that, in all of the above stories that emerged from the derby match, the one aspect that is lacking is any reporting about the actual football that was played during the match.

And that’s a real shame, considering that there were a couple of stories about the football that should have been covered but weren’t. The first of these is the Van der Vaart handball, which was discussed above. The second was the foul by Assou-Ekotto on Sagna that completely changed the tone of the match, and which resulted in Sagna’s leg break.

And as has already been demonstrated by discussions on this blog, there are multiple points of view that could be taken on either of these two incidents. However, does this alone not signify, in and of itself, that these incidents were worthy of being covered in the media? And if that’s the case, why were these not the lead stories following the match?

Discuss.