Going into this summer window, Arteta made it clear that what Arsenal need in attack is a clear difference-maker who can raise the level of the attack to world-class standards.
The most obvious position for that type of attacker is LW, which is the main weak point in Arsenal’s attack. The club saw Vinícius as an opportunity to solve that problem and tried everything within their power to sign him. They were even prepared to offer him the sort of money they’ve never paid anyone before, but he ultimately renewed with Real Madrid.
If you’re having a head loss because Arsenal didn’t sign Mbaye, Barcola, Ndiaye, Bahoya or whoever else, you need to get your head checked.
The signing of Tzolis and having Eze already makes these types of signings redundant.
It’s a world-class difference-maker or nothing.
Simple as that.
The reason Dr. Chris Baryomunsi, Dr. Jane Ruth Aceng and other senior doctors fighting medical interns yet Hon. Joel Ssenyoni a non medic is fighting for medical interns is simple.
I have spent most of my adult life around doctors but they're the worst people who front "EGO" in every discussion.
That's why you hear most doctors get furious when a patient questions them. The whole medical life, the ties, the books and titles shapes doctors to approach most situations with ego even sometimes at the expense of lives and it takes a lot of practice for a doctor to redeem his soul and see things with clarity.
Trust me, Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows what he is doing is wrong, Dr. Jane Ruth Aceng did know she was wrong but to them this is a fight between intern doctors and their ego. These two doctors when they were interns did strike for the very issues interns are fighting for, so they know what they're doing but I can confidently tell you that they won't publicly say that they're wrong.
All senior doctors were paid during medical internship. I was paid, Dr. Chris Baryomunsi was paid, Dr. Omona was paid, Dr. Kiza Besigye was paid... Everyone you see Dr. And did internship in Uganda was paid for a reason and it is the same reason all countries do pay.
I don't blame the rest of Ugandans to fail to see this but fellow doctors well know all countries pay medical interns. All of them.
Kenya pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Tanzania pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Rwanda pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Ghana pays medical interns/house officers, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
South Africa pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Botswana pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Namibia pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Zambia pays medical interns, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Zimbabwe pays medical interns/ junior doctors, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
The UK pays foundation doctors, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Ireland pays intern doctors, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Australia pays intern doctors, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
New Zealand pays first-year doctors/house officers, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
The United States pays resident physicians, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
Canada pays resident physicians, and Dr. Chris Baryomunsi knows it.
This list goes on....
I'm sure, the ego of doctors still will affect and blind the decision in this yet it's going to affect the whole medical training.
🚨 Arsenal nearing total agreement with Newcastle United to sign Bruno Guimaraes. Desire among all parties to bring situation to close + deal now on course for completion - 28yo awaiting #NUFC permission to undergo medical & seal #AFC switch @TheAthleticFC https://t.co/FA65Uh0Nfr
Myles Lewis-Skelly will start this season feeling more confident. More importantly, he’ll start the season having a greater confidence from his manager.
Last season’s preseason, I thought he struggled to impose himself and I said it that he'd struggle to keep his shirt. Opportunities are hard to come by at that level, and it's probably a bit too ruthless that players lose their chance when they don't maintain their standards.
There was a game against Inter Milan last season in the UCL when his bad body positioning allowed a slide rule pass get past him. Arteta was using his body to demonstrate to the bench and did “phhhhh” like he was tired. You could tell he's a player they were teaching how to defend. The talent is incredible but I never thought he's a defender.
This season, he looks sharper, even more stable, and has the composure to always pick the easiest decisions before the bolder ones.
That boy will give everyone in that midfield a run for their money. He's going to play. Arteta showed that from the moment he was willing to play him deep into a title race and in the UCL final.
He trusts him better now, and that's not easily earned. Credit to the player too for his patience and believing it's nothing personal as many fans do.
A manager who gives you a chance at 17 and plays you in some of the biggest games of his career and yours can't suddenly dislike you. It's al about football and competition.
The world is a harsh place. No one notices your tears, your sadness or your pain. Only the Almighty does. But everyone jumps at the slightest mistake you make. Such is the nature of this life
This one is really dicey.
FIFA is registered as a non-profit association under Swiss law. Its 211 member associations own it. It pays no corporate tax in Switzerland. And right now, while the ink is barely dry on the 2026 World Cup final, it is in advanced discussions to sell a minority stake in its commercial operations to private investors, with JP Morgan acting as financial adviser and Thrive Capital, whose chief executive is Josh Kushner, expected to lead the investor group.
UEFA is responding. And I see reason with them. Their statement called it a crossing of a line and said the soul and governance of football are not assets to trade.
Let me explain what is actually happening here and why both positions are legally and commercially coherent at the same time.
The legal vehicle at the centre of this is called FIFA Forward Enterprise, or FFE. It is a FIFA-owned company that would consolidate all of FIFA's commercial rights, broadcasting, sponsorship, ticketing, licensing, and the operational delivery of FIFA tournaments, into a single entity.
Based on how things are proposed, FIFA would retain majority control and exclusive authority over governance, competitions, the match calendar, and all regulatory and sporting decisions.
Private investors would then hold a minority, non-controlling stake in the subsidiary, not in FIFA itself. FIFA says the proposal could deliver more than $10 billion in football development funding over the next four years.
Now here is the legal position.
Under Swiss association law, FIFA has broad autonomy over how it manages and commercialises its assets, provided it pursues its statutory purpose of promoting football and follows its internal decision-making rules.
Creating a commercial subsidiary and selling minority stakes in it to private investors is not categorically prohibited under any applicable law. FIFA already commercialises its rights aggressively through sponsorships, media deals, and licensing arrangements worth billions of dollars per cycle.
Placing some of that commercial activity into a valued vehicle and inviting outside capital is structurally an extension of what FIFA already does, not a departure from it. The proposal requires approval from the FIFA Council and the 211 member associations. That approval process is where the real legal constraints sit, not in Swiss corporate law.
What UEFA is objecting to is not the legality of the structure. They are objecting to the incentive architecture it creates once private capital is inside the tent. And again, that objection deserves to be taken seriously.
Even with formal majority control retained, private investors seeking returns will create ongoing pressure. They will request more matches, an expanded calendar. They will make decisions that prioritise revenue over player welfare or competitive balance.
Of course that pressure will not arrive through a boardroom vote. It arrives gradually, through the logic of what a return on investment requires. FIFA can retain exclusive authority over sporting decisions and still find that sporting decisions are shaped by the financial expectations of its commercial partners. Those are not mutually exclusive outcomes.
The legal permissibility of this structure is high if internal approvals are obtained. The binding constraints are member consent, political capital, and the risk that private capital incentives gradually reshape priorities even under retained formal control.
Football has watched that process play out at club level for thirty years. The question being asked right now, with genuine urgency, is whether the same dynamic should be allowed inside the institution that governs the game itself.
My name is Ajoje. I am a FIFA Licensed Agent and International Sports Lawyer. I write on the Law and Business of Football, a lot. Repost and Follow if you want to read more posts like this.
🚨 Arsenal reach agreement with Club Brugge to sign Christos Tzolis. Deal for 24yo left winger done at €40m asking price set by #ClubBrugge. Move in process of being finalised - Greece international wanted & prioritised #AFC move throughout @TheAthleticFC https://t.co/iYMBAjVc3k