Home
LOOK back now and still can’t get my head around half of it; how, in the space of 18 months, the dream was undone so fast. It does my head in thinking about it all: the mess I found myself in, the storm that whipped up around me, the abuse of the fans, the charges laid against me. Overnight, they stopped singing my name and the party ended as abruptly as someone pulling the plug out of the wall. I became the treacherous Ashley Cole, the Judas of Highbury.
I was well down on the day when I drove into town to see Jonathan Barnett (my agent) at his offices. We jumped in Jonathan’s Bentley and he told his driver our destination: the Royal Park Hotel. It was Thursday, January 27, 2005.
We walked by reception and into a meeting room called the Green Room where we found Pini (Zahavi, Chelsea’s agent) sat alone. We must have been in there about 20 minutes when Pini suddenly flicked his wrist to look at his watch — “Time! Time! My next meeting . . .” and he started to get up out of his chair. The door opened and José Mourinho and Peter Kenyon walked in.
I remember noticing Jonathan was gearing up to leave, reaching around his chair for his coat. The small talk, the pleasantries and the goodbyes lasted another 15 minutes as I genuinely saw no harm in being there for a few extra minutes as these two meetings overlapped.
Mr Mourinho pulled out a chair and sat at the head of the oval-shaped table and Jonathan was sat to my right. It was normal chit-chat from then on. I mentioned how well Chelsea were doing in the league. “Yes, and we are going to buy two more players — a midfielder and a left back,” he said.
And that’s when Pini made a flip remark, “Well, we are sat with the best left back in the world!” and Mr Mourinho smiled and said, “Yes, I agree.”
We talked about general football stuff before Mourinho asked how life was with me. Life’s good, I told him. “And are you happy at Arsenal?” he asked. This was not an unusual question in my book. Friends and family had been asking the same thing for weeks and Mr Mourinho had just walked in on a meeting with Pini Zahavi. It wouldn’t take the most perceptive of people to get nosey on that one.
“No, I’m unhappy but it’s a long story,” I told him. He asked if it was because of Arsène Wenger. I told him it wasn’t; the boss was brilliant, I had a very good relationship with him and my unhappiness was with other people. I could tell he was itching to ask more, but, at that point, Jonathan stood up and said: “We had better be going. Gentlemen, it’s been a pleasure.”
I can only speak about what was said and not said while I was in the room, and in those 15–20 minutes, the chit-chat never strayed anywhere near what could be considered an approach by Chelsea. Not once was there anything mentioned about figures, transfers, further meetings or even leaving Arsenal.
BY THE following weekend it became clear that, while war had not quite broken out, a major scandal had. Me and that famous Gunners No 3 shirt had been caught out of position as piggy-in-the-middle between both clubs, an Arsenal player chatting with the Chelsea manager, and this is what was exposed in the News of the World as an illegal approach by Chelsea. Tapping-up, in other words. Or, if you want to get technical, a breach of Premier League K3: the rule forbidding under-contract players from being approached by, or talking with, another interested club or manager.
If Chelsea were to be found guilty of breaching rule K3, the FAPL had the power to sanction them with a fine or even by docking points. It was as if someone had flicked on the floodlights at a darkened Highbury and enlightened the board. Perhaps they thought here was a way of possibly reining back the runaway leaders.
I genuinely believe Arsenal’s thinking was, “We can get one over on them here”, even though the club later denied this was a motive.
This was all because of the Chelsea factor. Was I deemed expendable if it meant getting back at the club whose supremacy was bringing Arsenal and Manchester United to heel in the 2004–05 season? I know what I think — that I was naive to believe my years of loyalty counted for anything.
There was a lot of speculation about charges against Chelsea and the sanctions open to the league, but not once did I think about being charged myself. It never entered my head.
But on March 23, 2005, the FA Premier League issued a statement announcing a formal inquiry. It was charging me for a breach of rule K5, forbidding a contracted player approaching another club, and José Mourinho and Chelsea Football Club for a breach of rule K3. It couldn’t make up its mind who had approached whom, so it covered both bases. Arsenal’s pursuit of Chelsea had backfired against their own player, and I couldn’t believe what was happening.
The hearing was held on Tuesday, May 17, five days before the FA Cup Final against Manchester United. As I drove there after training at London Colney, Mr Dein, the first witness called, was getting himself all mixed up. Apparently Mr Dein said that the hotel episode impacted so badly on the club that Arsenal’s 49-match unbeaten run was ended in the match following the News of the World’s story.
But the unbeaten run had ended the previous October, not in the January. From what I was told, the vice-chairman was all over the place with his facts.
I walked in as Mr Dein was walking back to the chair at the end of his evidence, with José Mourinho up next. From a tactical point of view, he was fascinating to listen to. He talked about me and Jonathan both being unhappy. He listed as reasons the contract I had, the way the negotiations had gone and said I was generally frustrated with how things were being handled.
I grew more and more agitated in my seat as he continued by saying that I also weren’t happy with the relationship Arsène Wenger had with some of the French players and that they were in control of the dressing-room.
The rest of his evidence weren’t good for me. Nor was the evidence of Peter Kenyon, who was next up. He said Pini Zahavi made the approach on our behalf.
I was nervous giving evidence. I told the inquiry that everything that had been said about the hotel meeting was rubbish. I ran them through the whole thing from start to finish: how a brief meeting with Pini Zahavi was interrupted by a knock on the door, in walked the Chelsea manager and chief executive, there was general chit-chat and then we left.
Then the inquiry hit me with the biggest blow. Arsène Wenger was not being called, because it was Cup Final week. Mr Dein’s evidence would stand alone as the Arsenal view. Coupled with the evidence of Mr Mourinho and Mr Kenyon, I think I knew I was dead at that point.
I WAS never going to be found innocent. I turned up at Marble Arch Towers on June 1 to hear the verdict in person, having flown into London from New York after England’s 3-2 friendly win over Colombia. We sat and listened as they pretty much hammered us all. Guilty as charged. As expected.
The 15-page judgment concluded: “We are satisfied that every individual was fully aware that a prearranged meeting was to take place and that its purpose was to discuss with Ashley Cole his future. We reject Peter Kenyon and José Mourinho’s explanation that they merely went to listen. They played an active role. We safely infer that there was an active discussion between all those present on the basis that Cole was going to be up for sale in the near future. Chelsea were exploring the prospect of acquiring him. We infer that Jonathan Barnett contacted Pini Zahavi and explained the position and, in all probability, the two agents discussed the possibility of a transfer deal for Cole . . . we had grave difficulty giving credence to Cole and Barnett’s account.”
So they didn’t believe a word I’d said. For me, the judgment was one mass assumption – it seemed they had filled in the gaps for themselves with a form of justice based on there being no smoke without fire.
If Arsenal had banked on the league backing up its bark with a bite, it was to be disappointed. Chelsea were not docked any points. Instead, they were handed a suspended three-point deduction and fined £300,000. José Mourinho was fined £200,000 and I was fined £100,000, despite the inquiry conceding that “the arrangements of the meeting were not of his direct making”.
All I could think was that Arsenal had been hell-bent on revenge against Chelsea and hadn’t given a toss about my welfare, and I’d not just been hammered with a hefty fine, but also with a bill for the FAPL expenses. I couldn’t hide my anger for Mr Dein and blamed him for wrecking my Highbury career. I still do.
History will always remember me for going behind the back of Arsenal to encourage interest from Chelsea. But one man’s version of history is another man’s different account. From my viewpoint, sat on the inside of that room with Peter Kenyon and José Mourinho, I know what weren’t said. From the fans’ and the league’s point of view, sat on the outside they seem to think they know what must have been said. And for ever and a day, all of us are going to have to agree to disagree.
Arsenal must be up to the same tricks as everyone else
I’VE lost some respect for Arsenal’s vice-chairman, who seems to have forgotten that the Arsenal boy became a man, that the boy he regards as a son of the club cannot be taken for granted just because there is an affectionate history.
Throughout the tapping-up affair the only person who was happy was David Dein, who couldn’t wait to heap praise on the News of the World when the FAPL inquiry was launched.
Nine months later and, curiously, Mr Dein was in no mood to rush to the Editor of the Daily Express to congratulate them for their investigative work. I don’t know what happened. I’ve just read the press reports like anyone else. So I’ll let you decide whether this smells of hypocrisy and double standards.
It all had to do with the £4.5 million transfer of Gilberto Silva from Atlético Mineiro to Arsenal, which attracted the close scrutiny of a High Court judge. Mr Justice Jack presided over a civil matter concerning agents’ commissions involved with the transfer. As a result of that case it emerged that Arsenal had used an international sports consultant to make inquiries and “sound out” the appropriate people in Brazil about Gilberto moving to a “ European club”, without ever mentioning Arsenal.
From reading the reports it seems Mr Dein protested that there was nothing “covert” about that approach. Now, I would say, nor was there anything “covert” about me meeting Pini Zahavi in a busy London hotel, but I still got hauled over the coals for it.
Look, tapping-up takes place in football. And if it’s not blatant tapping-up, it’s a diluted, more subtle form of the same thing. Whether it’s a Fifa-licensed agent, a third party or a friend of a friend, players or their agents are sounded out all the time. I’d be amazed if every club doesn’t do it. By definition, that means Arsenal must be up to the same tricks as everyone else.
What was blindingly obvious to me was that there was only one reason why Arsenal were making such a meal out of my case — because it was Chelsea. I wish the Gilberto case had come to light a few months earlier. It would have made for interesting ammunition for my legal team.
I was well down on the day when I drove into town to see Jonathan Barnett (my agent) at his offices. We jumped in Jonathan’s Bentley and he told his driver our destination: the Royal Park Hotel. It was Thursday, January 27, 2005.
We walked by reception and into a meeting room called the Green Room where we found Pini (Zahavi, Chelsea’s agent) sat alone. We must have been in there about 20 minutes when Pini suddenly flicked his wrist to look at his watch — “Time! Time! My next meeting . . .” and he started to get up out of his chair. The door opened and José Mourinho and Peter Kenyon walked in.
I remember noticing Jonathan was gearing up to leave, reaching around his chair for his coat. The small talk, the pleasantries and the goodbyes lasted another 15 minutes as I genuinely saw no harm in being there for a few extra minutes as these two meetings overlapped.
Mr Mourinho pulled out a chair and sat at the head of the oval-shaped table and Jonathan was sat to my right. It was normal chit-chat from then on. I mentioned how well Chelsea were doing in the league. “Yes, and we are going to buy two more players — a midfielder and a left back,” he said.
And that’s when Pini made a flip remark, “Well, we are sat with the best left back in the world!” and Mr Mourinho smiled and said, “Yes, I agree.”
We talked about general football stuff before Mourinho asked how life was with me. Life’s good, I told him. “And are you happy at Arsenal?” he asked. This was not an unusual question in my book. Friends and family had been asking the same thing for weeks and Mr Mourinho had just walked in on a meeting with Pini Zahavi. It wouldn’t take the most perceptive of people to get nosey on that one.
“No, I’m unhappy but it’s a long story,” I told him. He asked if it was because of Arsène Wenger. I told him it wasn’t; the boss was brilliant, I had a very good relationship with him and my unhappiness was with other people. I could tell he was itching to ask more, but, at that point, Jonathan stood up and said: “We had better be going. Gentlemen, it’s been a pleasure.”
I can only speak about what was said and not said while I was in the room, and in those 15–20 minutes, the chit-chat never strayed anywhere near what could be considered an approach by Chelsea. Not once was there anything mentioned about figures, transfers, further meetings or even leaving Arsenal.
BY THE following weekend it became clear that, while war had not quite broken out, a major scandal had. Me and that famous Gunners No 3 shirt had been caught out of position as piggy-in-the-middle between both clubs, an Arsenal player chatting with the Chelsea manager, and this is what was exposed in the News of the World as an illegal approach by Chelsea. Tapping-up, in other words. Or, if you want to get technical, a breach of Premier League K3: the rule forbidding under-contract players from being approached by, or talking with, another interested club or manager.
If Chelsea were to be found guilty of breaching rule K3, the FAPL had the power to sanction them with a fine or even by docking points. It was as if someone had flicked on the floodlights at a darkened Highbury and enlightened the board. Perhaps they thought here was a way of possibly reining back the runaway leaders.
I genuinely believe Arsenal’s thinking was, “We can get one over on them here”, even though the club later denied this was a motive.
This was all because of the Chelsea factor. Was I deemed expendable if it meant getting back at the club whose supremacy was bringing Arsenal and Manchester United to heel in the 2004–05 season? I know what I think — that I was naive to believe my years of loyalty counted for anything.
There was a lot of speculation about charges against Chelsea and the sanctions open to the league, but not once did I think about being charged myself. It never entered my head.
But on March 23, 2005, the FA Premier League issued a statement announcing a formal inquiry. It was charging me for a breach of rule K5, forbidding a contracted player approaching another club, and José Mourinho and Chelsea Football Club for a breach of rule K3. It couldn’t make up its mind who had approached whom, so it covered both bases. Arsenal’s pursuit of Chelsea had backfired against their own player, and I couldn’t believe what was happening.
The hearing was held on Tuesday, May 17, five days before the FA Cup Final against Manchester United. As I drove there after training at London Colney, Mr Dein, the first witness called, was getting himself all mixed up. Apparently Mr Dein said that the hotel episode impacted so badly on the club that Arsenal’s 49-match unbeaten run was ended in the match following the News of the World’s story.
But the unbeaten run had ended the previous October, not in the January. From what I was told, the vice-chairman was all over the place with his facts.
I walked in as Mr Dein was walking back to the chair at the end of his evidence, with José Mourinho up next. From a tactical point of view, he was fascinating to listen to. He talked about me and Jonathan both being unhappy. He listed as reasons the contract I had, the way the negotiations had gone and said I was generally frustrated with how things were being handled.
I grew more and more agitated in my seat as he continued by saying that I also weren’t happy with the relationship Arsène Wenger had with some of the French players and that they were in control of the dressing-room.
The rest of his evidence weren’t good for me. Nor was the evidence of Peter Kenyon, who was next up. He said Pini Zahavi made the approach on our behalf.
I was nervous giving evidence. I told the inquiry that everything that had been said about the hotel meeting was rubbish. I ran them through the whole thing from start to finish: how a brief meeting with Pini Zahavi was interrupted by a knock on the door, in walked the Chelsea manager and chief executive, there was general chit-chat and then we left.
Then the inquiry hit me with the biggest blow. Arsène Wenger was not being called, because it was Cup Final week. Mr Dein’s evidence would stand alone as the Arsenal view. Coupled with the evidence of Mr Mourinho and Mr Kenyon, I think I knew I was dead at that point.
I WAS never going to be found innocent. I turned up at Marble Arch Towers on June 1 to hear the verdict in person, having flown into London from New York after England’s 3-2 friendly win over Colombia. We sat and listened as they pretty much hammered us all. Guilty as charged. As expected.
The 15-page judgment concluded: “We are satisfied that every individual was fully aware that a prearranged meeting was to take place and that its purpose was to discuss with Ashley Cole his future. We reject Peter Kenyon and José Mourinho’s explanation that they merely went to listen. They played an active role. We safely infer that there was an active discussion between all those present on the basis that Cole was going to be up for sale in the near future. Chelsea were exploring the prospect of acquiring him. We infer that Jonathan Barnett contacted Pini Zahavi and explained the position and, in all probability, the two agents discussed the possibility of a transfer deal for Cole . . . we had grave difficulty giving credence to Cole and Barnett’s account.”
So they didn’t believe a word I’d said. For me, the judgment was one mass assumption – it seemed they had filled in the gaps for themselves with a form of justice based on there being no smoke without fire.
If Arsenal had banked on the league backing up its bark with a bite, it was to be disappointed. Chelsea were not docked any points. Instead, they were handed a suspended three-point deduction and fined £300,000. José Mourinho was fined £200,000 and I was fined £100,000, despite the inquiry conceding that “the arrangements of the meeting were not of his direct making”.
All I could think was that Arsenal had been hell-bent on revenge against Chelsea and hadn’t given a toss about my welfare, and I’d not just been hammered with a hefty fine, but also with a bill for the FAPL expenses. I couldn’t hide my anger for Mr Dein and blamed him for wrecking my Highbury career. I still do.
History will always remember me for going behind the back of Arsenal to encourage interest from Chelsea. But one man’s version of history is another man’s different account. From my viewpoint, sat on the inside of that room with Peter Kenyon and José Mourinho, I know what weren’t said. From the fans’ and the league’s point of view, sat on the outside they seem to think they know what must have been said. And for ever and a day, all of us are going to have to agree to disagree.
Arsenal must be up to the same tricks as everyone else
I’VE lost some respect for Arsenal’s vice-chairman, who seems to have forgotten that the Arsenal boy became a man, that the boy he regards as a son of the club cannot be taken for granted just because there is an affectionate history.
Throughout the tapping-up affair the only person who was happy was David Dein, who couldn’t wait to heap praise on the News of the World when the FAPL inquiry was launched.
Nine months later and, curiously, Mr Dein was in no mood to rush to the Editor of the Daily Express to congratulate them for their investigative work. I don’t know what happened. I’ve just read the press reports like anyone else. So I’ll let you decide whether this smells of hypocrisy and double standards.
It all had to do with the £4.5 million transfer of Gilberto Silva from Atlético Mineiro to Arsenal, which attracted the close scrutiny of a High Court judge. Mr Justice Jack presided over a civil matter concerning agents’ commissions involved with the transfer. As a result of that case it emerged that Arsenal had used an international sports consultant to make inquiries and “sound out” the appropriate people in Brazil about Gilberto moving to a “ European club”, without ever mentioning Arsenal.
From reading the reports it seems Mr Dein protested that there was nothing “covert” about that approach. Now, I would say, nor was there anything “covert” about me meeting Pini Zahavi in a busy London hotel, but I still got hauled over the coals for it.
Look, tapping-up takes place in football. And if it’s not blatant tapping-up, it’s a diluted, more subtle form of the same thing. Whether it’s a Fifa-licensed agent, a third party or a friend of a friend, players or their agents are sounded out all the time. I’d be amazed if every club doesn’t do it. By definition, that means Arsenal must be up to the same tricks as everyone else.
What was blindingly obvious to me was that there was only one reason why Arsenal were making such a meal out of my case — because it was Chelsea. I wish the Gilberto case had come to light a few months earlier. It would have made for interesting ammunition for my legal team.
