It’s fair to say that Thomas Partey’s move to Arsenal on deadline day did not end up going down too well with the Spanish club.
In the days since deadline day, there’s been comments from Spain about how Atlético are victims, the player is a traitor, and the whole thing was done a little bit treacherously.
This has been disputed by Partey and co, who at this point are unlikely to care anyway given the player has got the move and the contract he has long wanted.
El Confidencial have now covered the situation and rallied against the comments and efforts to ‘dirty or discredit’ Partey’s image.
They explain that actually, Partey’s departure to Arsenal is a ‘major flaw’ in Diego Simeone’s plans and that the manager’s problem is that he does not have the same ‘persuasive power’ he once had.
In fact, they say the Argentine has been ‘touched’ by his ‘inability to retain players’ and has been ‘struggling’ to get his message across for some time. In other words, it’s not Partey’s fault a more convincing manager and offer tempted him away.
But even if he had convinced him to stay, Atlético did ‘little to stop his departure’ as far as El Confidencial are concerned.
They explain that while it’s undeniable Simeone has shown the player affection; the club never got anywhere near to the €8m a year Arsenal offered, despite Partey holding them off and making it clear for some time he wanted a new deal.
Indeed, the player even ‘reproached’ his father when he advised his son to leave the club publicly a few months ago. All the midfielder wanted was to feel ‘valued’ at Atleti, and that never happened.
The website also says it’s hard to believe the ‘indignation’ of the likes of Gil Marín, Enrique Cerezo and Simeone when it’s clear they were prepared for his departure with the arrival of Lucas Torreira.
They argue that rather than listen to one side of the argument, it’s best to let each one draw their conclusions and then ‘look for the culprits’.
However, they follow the phrase from Enrique Cerezo, who claimed that ‘footballers play where they want, and the leaders distribute love and money to those they want’, suggesting that in this case, it wasn’t all Partey’s fault.
