Mesut Ozil
World Cup-winning midfielder refuses to be bullied out of Arsenal
It’s difficult to fathom exactly what’s happened with Mesut Ozil at Arsenal. The 32-yearold was the Gunners’ record signing when he arrived from Real Madrid for £42.4 million in 2013, but now looks set to see out the final months of his contract without playing a game, having being omitted from Mikel Arteta’s Premier League and Europa League squads.
If you ask the World Cup winner, he’s convinced that he is being punished for his criticism of the persecution of Uighur Muslims in China last year.
“They burn their Qurans. They shut down their mosques. They ban their schools. They kill their holy men. The men are forced into camps and their families are forced to live with Chinese men. The women are forced to marry Chinese men,” he said on Instagram in December 2019.
“But Muslims are silent...don’t they know that giving consent for persecution is persecution itself?”
As a result, Ozil was removed from the Chinese edition of video game
Pro Evolution Soccer, and his name disappeared from internet searches.
Not only was his own standing in China affected, they also had an impact on Arsenal. The Premier League’s two broadcasting partners in China, CCTV and PP Sports, refused to show the Gunners, while the club had to remove the midfielder from merchandise celebrating Chinese New Year.
The club distanced itself from Ozil’s comments, stating that it is an “apolitical organisation,” but he did continue to play. He returned to the side under interim boss Freddie Ljungberg, having fallen out of favour under Unai Emery, and played 12 games under current manager Mikel Arteta before the league was suspended in March. His last appearance was Arsenal’s final game before lockdown, a 1-0 win against West Ham.
The coronavirus pandemic itself may have played a part in Ozil’s exclusion. Arsenal were the first Premier League club to implement pay reductions. Yet the club’s highest-paid player refused. Months later, 55 members of staff were made redundant.
Given his reported £350,000-a-week wages, Ozil’s stance was always going to garner attention. He insists the players were not given enough information.
Speaking to The Athletic in August, Ozil explained: “For anyone in this situation, you have a right to know everything, to understand why it is happening and where the money is going. But we didn’t get enough details, we just had to give a decision.”
Since then, Arteta has insisted that his decision to omit Ozil was purely “a football decision” and that he had “failed” the midfielder. Either way, it’s increasingly unlikely that we’ll see Ozil in action before his contract expires in June.
So, what’s next? Ozil’s huge contract – which he only signed in January 2018 – means that Arsenal will struggle to find a buyer, in spite of his undoubted talent. It’s a case of who’s willing to offer the midfielder an escape route.
Ozil has previously hinted at a move to Turkey, and has a place in his heart for Fenerbahce, who not so long ago paid Robin van Persie €4.9m-a-year. Istanbul Basaksehir may also offer a deal, with the current champions effectively sponsored by president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom Ozil has been a vocal supporter of.
In MLS, DC United have had a Designated Player vacancy since Wayne Rooney departed last January, but there is still a significant salary gap to bridge;
“I showed in the past that I can come back into the team and I will show it again”
the former England forward was paid a reported annual salary of around £2m; Ozil’s current package is closer to £18m.
The midfielder told The Athletic that he will not give up on Arsenal, saying: “I’m here through to the last day of our agreement and I’ll give everything for this club. I showed in the past that
I can come back into the team and
I will show it again.”
This time, it doesn’t seem so likely. Weeks after the interview, The Athletic claimed that loyalty bonuses in Ozil’s contract means he is due payments for every game he plays, and as a result Arsenal are actually saving money by leaving him out. In these tough financial times, it is hard to see them changing their stance.