There seems to be something in the air recently regarding the future of European football, with big clubs making noises about their dissatisfaction with the Champions League, specifically the fact they (poor things) could theoretically be eliminated before the business end of the competition. Which would be just awful, wouldn't it?
There is talk of further seeding in the knock-out rounds, or even a closed-shop breakaway, invite-only Super League where "the big clubs" can play against each other to their hearts' content, without having to worry about any wee diddy clubs interrupting them.
I'm sure like me, the prospect of Real Madrid or Bayern Munich not making the quarter-finals of the Champions League would ruin the whole competition for you. In fact, you'd refuse to watch any of the remaining games on principle just because they were knocked out. Same goes for Barcelona, Manchester United, AC Milan, Juventus. You just couldn't live without them in the Champions League, right?
Same goes for probably 80% of the most important people in the Champions League - the TV viewers. Right?
What do you mean, you'd rather see YOUR team in the last 8 than Real Madrid? Are you crazy? Where's the excitement if YOUR team gets to the last 8, or even the semi-final? Who wants to watch that?
The threat of breakaway leagues and greater seeding has always been perceived as a massive threat by clubs in smaller countries, or even by supporters of smaller clubs in the big countries. But I would say to UEFA, "let them go."
How many of these "big clubs," are there really? I'd hazard a guess we're talking about a select group of clubs from the English, Spanish, French, German and Italian leagues. I'd go with:
Arsenal
Chelsea
Liverpool
Manchester United
Paris St Germain
Barcelona
Real Madrid
Bayern Munich
Borussia Dortmund
Juventus
AC Milan
Inter Milan
Apart from nouveau riche PSG, at least one of these clubs has appeared in every final (except 2004) since the inception of the Champions League format in 1992.
Think about that. In a quarter of a century, there have been two blips. In 1995 one of the teams in this list lost the final to a team not on the list, and in 2004 neither finalist came from that list.
Indeed, since 2004, only once (2014) has a team from outside that list even reached the final.
And these teams think the Champions League is not already slanted in their favour enough?
Let's compare that to the 25 years before the Champions League format. Winners included Celtic, Feyenoord, Ajax, Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Hamburg, Steaua Bucharest, Porto, PSV Eindhoven and Red Star Belgrade. That's winners from Scotland, Netherlands, Romania, Portugal and the old Yugoslavia (now Serbia).
Beaten finalists included Benfica, Panathinaikos, Atletico Madrid, Leeds United, Saint-Etienne, Borussia Monchengladbach, Brugge, Malmo, Roma, Marseille and Sampdoria. That's runners-up from Portugal, France, Belgium, Sweden and France.
You can see then, that the Champions League is doing exactly what it was set up to do - ensure it is dominated by the big teams from the big five (or even four) leagues.
So what if the Big 12 did break away? Would the Champions League be devalued without them? Initially, yes. Undoubtedly.
Would the breakaway league be the glamour tournament that attracts mega-money TV deals? Initially, yes. Undoubtedly.
But what about the longer term? Would those twelve clubs and only those 12 clubs be able to sustain the interest of the maybe 80% of football fans who don't support one of those clubs? That figure is probably not accurate, but I'd imagine the great majority of European football fans are not supporters of one of those clubs.
Without promotion or relegation from that select group, why would it be of interest to most football fans? I know it wouldn't appeal to me. I would not give two hours of my life to watching Manchester United v Barcelona in those circumstances, no matter who was playing for them. Even in the Champions League, the fixture holds no more than limited interest for me as it occurs so frequently. Even Celtic have played Barcelona on a seemingly annual basis in the last few seasons. We were even calling it the Nou Firm match.
Let them go and refuse to have anything more to do with them. Make it clear they can go, but don't on any account think they can have their cake and eat it.
Ban them from national leagues. Ban their players from international matches. Let them play with each other and only with each other for the rest of time and let's see how they end up.
The thing about winning the Champions League is that it is the Champions League. It is open to teams from every association in Europe, albeit on an uneven basis and slanted firmly in favour of teams from the big leagues.
Realistically, how much value would there be in winning an invite-only, closed shop league of 12, no matter how big the names are?
The likelihood is that in such a competition, even with 12 massive clubs, two or three of them would come to dominate in the longer term, with the rest becoming also-rans, like the BPL on steroids.
I would argue that in the longer term, a meritocratic Champions League minus those so-called "big clubs" would be a more attractive, more valued competition than a breakaway league of 12. Eventually, I could see them clamouring to get back in.
Whether they would like to admit it or not, the "big 12" need the rest of us. They need us to give the Champions League any value. Without the rest of us, they don't have even a semblance of competition. They need the supporters of the rest of us to generate the TV deals. They need the involvement of the rest of us to make their meetings the big deal that they used to be, but no longer are.
The big clubs are like a child who wants his favourite meal every day. After a week or two, it's not so good any more. It has become boring.
Barcelona v Chelsea needs to be a fixture that happens rarely, otherwise it becomes run of the mill. The "big clubs" don't need more games against each other, they need less.
What needs to happen in the Champions League is that it should only be open to Champions and it should be unseeded in every round.
Big clubs want more games against each other? Why not in the group stages then? The best team will still win.
The idea that a tournament is rigged to ensure bigger clubs always win is an affront to sport. It shouldn't be the bigger clubs threatening to break away if the rules aren't changed to suit them even more, it should be the rest of us threatening to pull out if a level playing field is not restored to the competition.
We're expected to provide the cannon fodder to enable the "big clubs" to automatically enter and safely negotiate the group stages while pocketing millions of pounds every single year. Our role is to be ritually slaughtered before the last 8, before the "big clubs" get down to the serious business of playing each other at the business end of the competition. If we ever do by some fluke beat one of those "big clubs" at any stage of the competition, it's guaranteed another one will stand in our way after that. And another after that too.
As long as we compete in this corrupt "competition" we validate it.
Every association outside the cash-laden "elite" should withdraw from UEFA competition until it is restored to a format that gives their teams a sporting chance to win it.
No comments:
Post a Comment