What the Robin Van Persie deal means

Analysis of the Robin van Persie deal and what it means for the buyers and the sellers.

Manchester United:

There are two scenarios facing Manchester United following the -capture of Robin van Persie - one positive, the other negative.

On the face of it, the prospect of Wayne Rooney playing in tandem with last season's Premier League top goalscorer and the double Footballer of the Year is mouth-watering.

Rooney and Van Persie could form as formidable a partnership as Dwight Yorke and Andy Cole, a combination crucial to United's treble success in 1999. Similarly, Rooney and Van Persie possess the potential to provide United with the two-man strike-force that enabled United to win the Champions League in 2008. But the potential flip side to Sir Alex Ferguson's plan would involve Van Persie failing to dovetail with Rooney, who has rarely looked at ease alongside his previous strike partners.

Alongside Cristiano Ronaldo, Rooney sacrificed his attacking instincts to help the Portuguese forward flourish. But, having claimed centre stage at United since Ronaldo left for Real Madrid in 2009, the 26 year-old is unlikely to be willing to play second fiddle again.

Rooney rarely looked happy alongside Ruud van Nistelrooy and, although Rooney has shown glimpses of an understanding with Dimitar Berbatov and Javier Hernandez, his best form has been as the focal point of the attack.

Who will occupy that role now? It is safe to assume that Rooney and Van Persie will be asked to play as split strikers, with one just behind the other, but their early games will provide an interesting insight into what the future holds.

And what will Van Persie's arrival mean for Danny Welbeck? He is likely to have to battle with Hernandez for the role of third-choice forward, but that pair could be as useful to Ferguson as Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Teddy Sheringham in 1999.

When Rooney questioned United's ambition in October 2010, he cannot have envisaged partnering Van Persie. The challenge for Rooney now is to make it work.

Arsenal:

It was in 2010, on one of the many occasions that Arsene Wenger had been asked to defend his grand strategy for Arsenal, that his patience briefly snapped. "Do you think we invest all this time in these players to sell them?" he said, apparently incredulous that other clubs should even consider trying to recruit his best players.

Wenger did then grudgingly accept that his vision for a young group to grow together, be nurtured together and eventually flourish together, would ultimately be dependent on them sharing his outlook for Arsenal. He was in no doubt, however, that the likes of Cesc Fabregas, Samir Nasri and Robin van Persie would all prove themselves to be equally committed. Two years on and we have a rather different answer.

The loyalty of the players was to themselves not Arsenal and, while that might be regrettable, there will also be those queuing up to tell Wenger that he was naive ever to think it could be different.

While Arsenal can argue with some conviction that a fee of 24 million pounds for an injury prone 29 year-old could prove to be an inspired piece of business, the loss of Van Persie is still more damning than past departures. With Thierry Henry, Patrick Vieira, Sol Campbell or even Nicolas Anelka, there was the sense that Arsenal had already had their best years. With Nasri, it was hard to avoid the suspicion it was largely about money. Even with Fabregas, there was his past affiliation with Barcelona.

With Van Persie none of the above necessarily applies. He is at the peak of his powers, Wenger wanted him to stay and he has not gone to a club who are being bankrolled by a billionaire benefactor.

In their adherence to the same self-sustainable principles that Arsenal hold dear, United are their most direct rival. Van Persie has gone primarily because he shares the fear of many supporters that this squad are no longer good enough to win major trophies.

Proving Van Persie wrong now represents the greatest and defining challenge of Wenger's career.