Arsenal: Yes, no Serge Gnabry a problem

Serge Gnabry showed more of his wide qualities on Tuesday night for Bayern Munich versus Liverpool. His not being at Arsenal is a problem, even if little could have been done about it.

Revisionist history is a common issue in modern society. People change what happened to suit their own narratives. There was a major recent debate about whether Winston Churchill should be considered a great man. He is a war hero, of course, but he also held some rather despicable views. Being English, we often tend to skip over the shady stuff and focus on the great parts instead.

Find the latest episode of the Pain in the Arsenal Podcast here — Huddersfield, abuse and a difficult question

The same happens in football all the time. An argument will be made and then history will be changed to suit the argument. Pele winning three World Cups is often used as a reason for him being the greatest footballer in history, but he barely played in one of them.

More from Pain in the Arsenal

• 3 standout players from 1-0 victory over Everton
• 3 positives & negatives from Goodison Park victory
• Arsenal vs PSV preview: Prediction, team news & lineups
• 3 talking points from Arsenal’s victory at Goodison Park
• Mikel Arteta provides Gabriel Martinelli injury update after Everton win

And I saw this in action involving many Arsenal fans on Tuesday night. Bayern Munich were playing Liverpool in the first leg of their Champions League knockout tie. This was the biggest game of the night, the main sporting topic of conversation on social media. So typically, when former Arsenal player Serge Gnabry started showcasing the qualities that make him one of the brightest young wide prospects in European football, many fans bemoaned the club letting him leave.

Many questioned why the Gunners kept Alex Iwobi and let Gnabry walk out the door. Others doubted Arsene Wenger’s eye for talent. More criticised the club for receiving such a small fee for such a talented player who is now starring on the Champions League stage. All of these arguments are based on revisionist history.

Arsenal did not let Gnabry leave. Wenger was higher on Gnabry’s talent than most people were, championing him from a very young age even when others were questioning his ability and attitude during extended injury spells on the sidelines. Iwobi broke into the first team in the dying stages of the season that Gnabry was sold. It was not an either-or case between the two.

Gnabry ran down his contract because he believed his career would be better served by leaving. He said that he would not sign an extension and forced Wenger to sell to Werder Bremen, a move that was pushed by Bayern so that they could sign him at a later date, as Wenger later conceded. Arsenal did not really have a choice. They had to sell.

Now, that does not excuse their mismanagement of his development in the years preceding that point, mismanagement that led Gnabry to believe that his career would benefit from leaving. But it does directly disprove many of the arguments that were being put forward by fans on social media during the match.

Losing Gnabry was a shame and, sadly, he is the perfect player to fill the wide needs of this current team. But just because people want to criticise the club for him not being there does not mean their criticisms are necessarily valid. History cannot be changed, however much people may try to.