Three Years of Dismay, Disgust and Paralysis

Arsenal have serious questions to answer, as Thomas Partey's case shines a light on extremely deep-set issues in the men's game as a whole.

When a North London-based Premier League footballer was arrested for sexual offences in July 2022, his identity became an open secret very quickly. Yesterday, exactly three years since that first arrest, his name and the accusations against him this became public knowledge. Thomas Partey will appear in court in August, charged with five counts of rape and one of sexual assault, put forward by three women.

The accusations against Partey have been a looming presence over Arsenal since then. He has been re-arrested several times over the course of the past three years, even while one complainant’s claims were dropped due to technicalities. Partey has played 108 games for the club in that time.

Arsenal’s approach became clear very quickly: pretend nothing was happening. It was clear for some time that he was persona non grata on the club’s social media pages, but that appeared to change in the wake of his October 2022 North London Derby goal against Tottenham Hotspur. It seems the reaction to that strike showed that enough people either did not know or did not care that they could carry on with relative normality — that itself is a damning indictment of Arsenal’s approach.

Dismay and Disgust

For those online, it was a regular point of conversation. For those less so, it seemed to be either unknown, disregarded or quickly forgotten. A sentiment I heard regularly in the stadium was along the lines of “I don’t think Arsenal would keep playing him if they thought there was much in it”. That was echoed online in the immediate aftermath by those claiming shock and disgust at the club, acting as if the accusations were breaking news in and of themselves.

While those claiming unawareness need think seriously about a few things, there is a deniability there that was given to them, and to Partey, by Arsenal’s hierarchy’s spineless, amoral process.

‘Innocent until proven guilty’ remains true and extremely necessary, of course. However, there were a great many options available to Arsenal between treating him like any other player and locking him up and throwing away the key before any kind of due process. By playing him regularly, acting as if nothing was going on, Arsenal actively bolstered the standing of someone with serious, credible accusations against them.

In some ways, the club have had their hands tied, legally speaking. On a base level, though, the nature of the alleged crimes stands above all else. It’s not comparable to being arrested for, say, fraud or burglary. The accusations were about him being a serious danger to people, and someone who used his status, power and reputation to keep fuelling those actions. The club responded by maintaining and even boosting his platform for that status and reputation.

The legal difficulties the club may have faced absolutely did not extend to being forced to continue playing and promoting him. They firmly did not require the manager to go out of his way to praise him in the press. They unquestionably did not mean they had to go out of their way to attempt to extend his contract when presented with the opportunity for a clean break.

Similarly, if Partey is eventually found not guilty, that will not be any kind of vindication for those running Arsenal — the fact it has reached charge level shows just how much they failed to take these accusations seriously, and that stain will not wash out.

Where strict action may have led to complicated legalities, Arsenal under Mikel Arteta have shown little qualm with icing players out, when necessary. Mesut Özil, Sokratis Papastathopoulos and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang were all found to be short of the disciplinary standards required in one form or another, and were frozen out before having their contracts terminated. Rather than comparing the levels of (alleged) crime, or to claim any of those players were hard done by, they serve to show that there were many options available to Arsenal when they have seen fit to drop the guillotine in the past, without crossing legal lines.

Paralysis

As above, it has certainly overshadowed following the club for the last three years. Every other week at the stadium, there’s been a player it stings to even acknowledge on the pitch. Moments that could have stood brilliantly in memory enveloped by the misery of his presence. A gnawing knowledge that any of the success that was so close would always have been tainted. Even from the tactics nerd perspective, a deep discomfort in discussing the inexplicable mainstay in one of the most important positions in the team.

Friends and I have discussed the issue a lot over the three years, and are no closer to an answer. Most of us have over 20 years of match-going to our names, had the club passed down through families, and taken it to where it is for us now — some mix of social vehicle, hobby and outright obsession. Surrendering a tentpole of your life is no easy thing.

Groups like Arsenal Supporters Against Sexual Violence have put in extremely admirable efforts, making their voices heard around games, enabling fans to sign an open letter and send messages directly to relevant people at the club with ease. But time and again, the club showed they were ready to ignore those concerned. Once more, I won’t pretend I’m any closer to an answer.

The Wider Game

When facing up to the reality of this situation and men’s football’s response, no progress will come from tribalism. Arsenal deserve the mound of criticism they will face, but they are far from alone. In 2023, the BBC found that, “seven out of the Premier League’s 20 clubs had players or bosses investigated by the police for sexual offences since 2020”.

Whether it’s Arsenal and Partey, or other clubs’ attempts to reintegrate a player whose horrific crimes were recorded and published online, or their regular invitations to former players who stood trial for domestic violence, or one extremely notable re-signing, or one club’s continued playing of a player under investigation while selling him to another Premier League team while that was outstanding, the men’s game turns a blind eye whenever it suits.

Similarly, you don’t have to be embedded in the industry to hear significant talk of more. Arsenal stand highest for their guilt in laundering Partey’s reputation, but it was baffling and unedifying to see how many media figures went out of their way to praise him for his performances. It was a collective effort from England’s football machine to grit their teeth and march through it all.

What this incident and others like it have shown incontrovertibly is that clubs cannot be trusted to handle these things on their own. Indeed, the opposite is clear: football clubs perpetuate the environments that, in effect, encourage such behaviour. As much any team creates bonds with their women’s sides, engages in trainings around the issues, and undertakes outreach, if they are ready to harbour someone accused of severe crimes without taking them seriously, they show just where their commitment really is.

We can’t go to billion-pound institutions for morality. They will behave like businesses and defend their assets as much as they can. Were Partey a free transfer in the lower ebbs of the squad rather than a £50million signing on north of £200,000 a week, might Arsenal have found some backbone? We’ll never know for sure, but the idea of his wages ‘going to waste’ for the remaining years of his contract undoubtedly featured in Arsenal’s decisions to behave as they did.

Directives on how to handle these situations need to come from high up. At the recent Football Supporters’ Association gathering, a motion was put forward for clubs to give players accused of sexual misconduct a no-fault stand down while investigations are carried out. The room voted massively in its favour, and hopefully the governing bodies take some cue from that.

Serious questions need to be asked at Arsenal about how this was allowed to happen for so long, and about their attempts to renew his contract just weeks ago. Those responsible must be made to answer publicly, though that will have to come at the conclusion of any trial. The fury at the North London side is a good start. Those in charge need to be scrutinised and, to some extent, made an example of in the court of public opinion.

They are very much not the only perpetrators and perpetuators, but they are an ongoing high-profile case, and have acted with cowardice bordering on active malice. If this can be a catalyst for bigger conversations and real changes in governance, then at least we will be able to look on this sorry time as a benchmark for progress.

Of highest importance in all this are the three women whose accusations will now be heard in court. They have endured three years of purgatory while Partey has been praised and celebrated in far too many corners. I hope, above all, that justice is served for them.