Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger has said he feels let down by Bacary Sagna's decision to reject a 3-year contract in order to move to Man City, but can we really blame the full back? Should we really be surprised at what he did by moving on a free to a club that pays more?
A professional's career is so short, and can be ended prematurely by injury. Therefore, they have to take the best deals they can. Loyalty is important to us fans, but not so much to players. We should accept that.
The big question for me is why did we not tie Sagna down to a longer-term deal sooner, when we knew he was in the last year of his Arsenal contract? Then, if he wouldn't sign, why didn't we sell Sagna and buy a replacement?
Hopefully, we've learned our lesson and will now be selling Vermaelen, who's in the position Sagna was this time last year. Only Vermaelen is not expected to play a major part in our season, if he stays, whereas Sagna was integral.
One other thing that stuck in the craw a bit was when Wenger said Sagna was an unknown before he signed for Arsenal. It's true that Sagna wasn't a household name in the UK, but nevertheless it didn't stop Wenger shelling out £7m for his services. Also, I'm not so sure Sagna was so unknown given he was capped by France very shortly after making the summer 2007 switch to Arsenal from Auxerre.
Anyway, it's all about lessons learned and as long as we cash in on Vermaelen, then Sagna is just water under the bridge. Especially as we've got Debuchy now, it's all's well that ends well!
Sent from my iPhone