Arsenal covered their ears on Partey and failed to locate their moral compass

Telegraph

4 days ago

There was not just one moment for Arsenal to exercise some semblance of a moral compass over Thomas Partey, but several. They could have suspended him three years ago, when the Ghanaian midfielder was arrested on suspicion of rape. Or indeed last November, when he was interviewed under caution following numerous reports of alleged sexual offences. Or even in early January, when a comprehensive evidence file was passed to the Crown Prosecution Service. Instead, they not merely kept him on £200,000 a week, mindful all the while of the investigation's seriousness, but still actively sought only six weeks ago to tie him to a one-year extension. 'He's a really important player for us,' argued manager Mikel Arteta.
The more you study that remark by Arteta, extolling Partey's virtues on the pitch despite the club having known about the rape allegations against him since July 2022, the more awful it looks. It is one thing to opt against suspension for fear of the potential legal ramifications, but quite another to try to negotiate a fresh deal for the player in the weeks directly prior to him being charged with five counts of rape and one of sexual assault against three different women. It suggests a cynicism at the heart of the enterprise, with Partey's value as the fulcrum of Arsenal's midfield apparently trumping any deeper ethical considerations about retaining him, let alone about the efforts to renew his contract. It is important, of course, to also state that Partey denies all the charges against him.
Nevertheless, it is a bleak game that Arsenal have played, for which they deserve harsh scrutiny. On the one hand, they have been at pains for the past three years to remove Partey from any interview duties or promotional campaigns. But on the other, they have conspicuously burnished his reputation. 'The most duels won, the most tackles won and the most Arsenal touches,' read their message on X on October 29 last year, after his performance in a 2-2 draw with Liverpool. Nine days later, he was back at a police station for questioning.
Arteta could scarcely have been more effusive in explaining in May why he wanted Partey to stay. 'In regards to Thomas, consistency-wise, it's been his best season,' he said. 'I think the way he's played, performed, his availability has been exceptional.' Left unsaid was the intensely problematic question of why Partey was available in the first place. It is a stretch to believe that lower-profile employees ensnared by allegations of this gravity would have been given such latitude to continue plying their craft. Last December, Mark Bonnick, Arsenal's kit man for 20 years, was suspended and then swiftly sacked after the club were made aware of a series of pro-Palestinian tweets he had made. Irrespective of the fact that Bonnick has taken legal action, the speed of that process sits highly uncomfortably alongside the steadfastness with which they have stood behind a star player accused of – and now charged with – multiple rapes.
Worse still, they have been conscious throughout of the strength of feeling among their own fanbase. Last November, the Arsenal Supporters Against Sexual Violence wrote an open letter to the club, attracting 9,000 signatories, which said: 'While we recognise that individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty, we would find any scenario in which a club was continually to select and promote a player under investigation for sexual offences deeply concerning. This would give the suggestion that success on the pitch far outweighs respect for victims of sexual violence.'
Quite so. At every level of the game, there is an ingrained cowardice to the manner in which claims of violence against women are confronted. When Manchester United weighed up whether to keep the services of Mason Greenwood – the subject of an attempted rape charge in 2023, later dropped by the CPS – their attempts at crisis PR were so profoundly stupid that they ended up including domestic abuse charities on a 'hostile list'. Rachel Riley, the TV presenter, declared at the time that she was 'ashamed' of the club she grew up supporting. That sentiment finds echoes in the stance of Honor Barber, one female Arsenal fan who describes how she is finding it increasingly difficult to sustain her lifelong love of the club. She laments how Arsenal have long been aware of the noise around Partey, sometimes so loud that broadcasters have had to dial down the volume of the opposition chants, but how they have consistently covered their ears.
The institutional pathology is by no means confined to clubs. The Premier League and the Football Association should also find themselves under an unforgiving spotlight. Why is there not a crystal-clear FA directive determining how cases of alleged sexual violence are handled? How can there be such a failure of governance that the 20 top-flight clubs – seven of whom have now been in this position – seem to be stumbling in the dark, concocting whatever responses they deem suitable in the absence of any defined policy? It is a classically circular pattern of deflecting accountability: the clubs say it is a matter for the FA, the FA says it is a matter for the clubs, with the end result being the unholy mess of the Partey situation.
By no conventional system of morality or decency can Arsenal's handling of this affair be deemed satisfactory. This is not just your standard case of a defendant being permitted to go about his working life as normal, but of a prominent international footballer earning £31.2 million during the three years he has been under such an ugly shadow. If Arsenal – so keen even recently for Partey to sign on the dotted line once more – had had their way, the sum could have been even greater. For a club usually so earnest about asserting their values, it is a deeply dispiriting moment.