Can anyone understand why Arsenal’s Cesc Fabregas would want to sign for Barcelona?

OK they were his boyhood team, but Everton were Wayne Rooney’s and he soon enough shook their dust off his feet.

Then again Everton were unlikely to win anything (in the short term) and I suppose Arsenal don’t look like doing that either. They certainly won’t if Fabregas leaves – and Nasri along with him. Barcelona regularly win competitions; for the moment.

But Rooney was a certainty to play for Manchester United – still is (if he can bring himself to do what his manager tells him, anyway.)

That would be far from the case if Fabregas returned to the Camp Nou.

Consider. He is a midfielder: and he wants to join the club with the best midfield in the world? To get a game he would have to supplant either of Xavi Hernandez or Andrés Iniesta both of whom are at the top of their game and unlikely to retire any time soon. The lure of playing alongside these luminaries – not to mention Lionel Messi – is of course strong and he would be returning to a club and a culture with which he grew up and is familiar. But he would be a small fish in a big pond, used most often as a substitute (if at all) whereas at Arsenal he is the main man, the team’s fulcrum, and much respected.

Be careful what you wish for, Cesc. The grass may not be greener back home.

Carling Cup; Final. Wembley Stadium, 27/02/11

This game showed that dodgy offside decisions are not restricted to Scottish lower league football. Even in real time, on television, it was obvious that Lee Bowyer was onside when Zigic played him in very early on. The television replays only confirmed it. A penalty and sending off would have been the sure result of a correct decision.

Had Arsenal gone on to win this game it would have been an injustice for that reason alone. But then maybe if they had gone down to ten men they would have rallied and Birmingham might have relaxed. As it was Birmingham stuck at it and reaped their reward through another Arsenal defensive mix-up.

Arsène Wenger seems to have a blind spot as far as defence is concerned. At Arsenal he inherited a good one but he doesn’t seem to be able to construct one himself.

Now that I’ve said that they’ll probably win the three trophies they’re still contesting this season.

There has been a lot of talk in the football world about “simulation” – or diving as it’s more commonly known in Britain – ever since the Eduardo incident in last week’s Champion’s League tie.

Arsenal’s manager Arséne Wenger has sought to defend his player on the grounds that Eduardo suffered a horrific tackle two seasons ago and therefore has a tendency to pull out of challenges.

Why, then, did you pick him, Arséne? (Do you not have a duty to protect him from such terrors?) Also, he won’t be much cop on the field if he goes around avoiding tackles. And hasn’t your saying so made him a target?

Much comment too has been made on the fact that had the referee spotted Eduardo’s dive he would only have received a yellow card. With the simulation charge and guilty finding he faces a two match ban. This is said to be unfair.

Which only goes to show how much bollocks the average football person talks.

For which is worse? Trying to deceive the referee and failing; or actually succeeding in conning the official?

The greater punishment is just. It ought to be higher for the latter.

After all, attempted murder is a lesser charge than homicide.