When Arsenal signed Raheem Sterling in the final minutes of the summer transfer window, it was pretty clear this was a ‘Hail Mary’ on the club’s part. They knew they needed another attacker to supplement the squad and the window came to a point where the club had a choice between Sterling and ‘nobody’ so they plumped for Sterling.
I think supporter expectations were reasonably modest. While the current iteration of Chelsea is not famed for its sensible choices, it is clear that Enzo Maresca was prepared to sideline Sterling for a reason. The deal became so economically favourable to Arsenal since Chelsea had absolutely no use for him and it seems no other elite club was banging down the door to come and take him.
As Arsenal fans, we have been somewhat burned by purchases from Chelsea, even if Kai Havertz and Jorginho have restored that balance a little. But ultimately, Arsenal have one of the best right wingers in the world and have never really had any support or cover for him, Sterling on loan, even a slightly faded version, was probably as elegant a solution as we could find.
I am one of those supporters who puts entirely too much stock in squad numbers but the choice to hand him the number 30 shirt, when more prominent numbers like 10, 14 and 16 were available always felt a little pointed. Sterling has no history with that shirt number and we know that Arteta puts a value on squad numbers from his comments when Emile Smith Rowe was handed the number 10 shirt when he signed a new deal in the summer of 2021.
Sterling made his debut as a substitute away at Tottenham in September and his first touch in an Arsenal shirt saw him dawdle on the ball and lose it unnecessarily. It quickly became clear that we weren’t even getting a fading Raheem Sterling. This was not to be a UK Gold style rerun, this was relegation to Bravo.
Against Southampton at home in October, Sterling lost the ball in midfield, Southampton transitioned and scored. Sterling didn’t regain possession but did chase the referee in the aftermath appealing a foul. We know how well by now Mikel Arteta regards such transgressions.
Sterling started the defeat at Bournemouth in October, which is really the last time he started a game of significance without injuries pressing a warm chamber at Arteta’s temple (even in those scenarios, Arteta has opted to play Russian roulette and select somebody else). The failure of the transfer has been brought into sharp focus by injuries to Martinelli, Saka and Havertz, stripping Arsenal’s attack down to the bare bones.
With better health elsewhere in attack, Arsenal probably could have hidden Sterling away. Because there are different types of squad player, there are young players using cameos to develop their talent. There are solid, dependable pros who can ‘do a job’ when required. There are players who are there to challenge for a starting role. Then there are guys who are there to take minutes away from players you value more highly.
Our American cousins might refer to these as ‘garbage minutes.’ Coming on on 75 minutes when you’re 3-0 up (or, maybe even 3-0 down) so that Bukayo Saka can get his feet into an ice bucket. An unloved, quickly forgotten goal and assist in a 3-0 win over Bolton in whatever they’re calling the Littlewoods Cup these days.
It’s not the role we would have envisaged for Sterling, it’s the bottom end outcome but, in that scenario, a loan player from Chelsea who won’t be your problem on May 26 can still be useful. What has been interesting is that Sterling’s failed sojourn at Arsenal has not really seen any bitter recrimination from Arsenal supporters.
In truth, I sense there has been more of a sadness (maybe even apathy, in fairness) at watching a once great player decline so markedly on our watches. Jonathan Wilson wrote a good piece recently about Sterling in the context of what tends to happen to players once they hit the 500 game mark. Maybe this could serve as a warning from history for the likes of Saka and Nwaneri.
Because the peak version of Sterling, or even a slightly diminished version, would really work in this team. Sometimes Arsenal are a bit ‘deliberate’ in their attacking patterns and they can lack the sort of threat and running power in behind that gives defenders the cause for anxiety farts during a game.
Prime Sterling would have provided the perfect measure of spice for an attack that can sometimes veer into salt and pepper territory. As an aside, I am confident that Arsenal recognise this. It seems they are fond of Benjamin Sesko and Nico Williams, who are both direct attacking threats in their own way. Martin Zubimendi is a strong, first-time passer too. All of this tells me that Arteta wants to get to the point more quickly when Arsenal attack.
I think the lack of outright antipathy for Sterling is for a few reasons. Chiefly, unlike with Willian for example, Sterling is on loan, so he isn’t Arsenal’s ‘problem’ after this season. Whereas Willian arrived with a three-year contract that always felt generous, it felt as though that recruitment misstep might have more long-term ramifications. It was also a signing made in the context of an under performing team where the previous right winger Arsenal had bought in Nicolas Pepe, also represented a significant economic failure.
I suspect that Arsenal fans have a lot of respect for Sterling’s career. He was never a player that Arsenal fans especially disliked, despite some of the damage he caused us over the years. And, let’s face it, he spent his peak years at Manchester City at a time when the club were not competing with them at any respect. It is easier to harbour admiration at that distance.
I think and hope too that the way Sterling was treated by sections of the British press gave us pause for thought in how we speak about him. I suspect Sterling would have been a useful training ground ally for Myles Lewis-Skelly in recent months as Lewis-Skelly comes to terms with how sections of the public seem to react to successful, young black footballers.
Sterling’s decline is also contextualised by the rise of Ethan Nwaneri, who has comfortably overtaken Sterling in the pecking order. But, again, I wouldn’t mind betting that Sterling has been a useful reference point for Nwaneri given the way Sterling burst onto the scene as a 17-year-old. I am sure Sterling can help Nwaneri prepare for some of the pitfalls that come with being a rising black talent. (It’s utterly tragic that this remains a consideration but we shouldn’t lie to ourselves about the evidence).
While I think Sterling likely lacks the intensity Arteta demands from his players, I don’t get the impression he isn’t trying. I just think his superpower, both on and off the ball, was his Ljungberg like burst in short spaces and it has left him. That explosiveness as a runner and a dribbler is no longer there and a skeleton of the player remains.
Ultimately, the public failure of this loan spell is more Chelsea’s problem than Arsenal’s in the long-term. I hope, at least, his presence has been useful to the real bright spots of the season from Hale End. There is no hiding that Sterling’s loan spell has been a failure but that doesn’t mean it has been entirely without its uses.
