Oh yeah, they're not exactly the Arsenal of the Invincibles era right now, it's just the spin some fans and journos put on it that Arsenal's negotiators have somehow won a great victory by saying "That's more than we're willing to spend", or that United are greedy or whatever.
In a different context I heard this old story recently about an explorer who offered to trade the locals two bushels of tobacco for one sheep. And then the explorer says "I'll give you four bushels for two sheep" and the local refuses. He then goes away and comments on that the locals don't understand basic maths, of course missing that your last sheep might be worth a lot more than the one you're selling.
If we sell Ramsdale we're trading down. We need to go out and spend part of the fee on a new keeper, either one not as good or one a lot less experienced or both. And we still want that keeper to be capable of winning promotion this season. Perfectly reasonable for the board to say that the amount they'd need to see in the bank has to be pretty tasty before we sell. Perfectly reasonable for Arsenal's board to look at that figure and say they can get similar for less elsewhere.
If I do put a positive spin on it though, if this really has fallen through then I can't think of a time where we've so publicly put our foot down on selling players. Whether it turns out to be the right move or not, credit to them for not diagnosing him with sunstroke and giving us a speech on "cutting our cloth accordingly".