SoccerShout.com

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

I’m a firm believer of looking paying more attention to actions than words.  It’s a great way to determine what is important to people or organizations.

So it was telling this week when UEFA decided they could not consider New Wembley as a venue for the 2010 Champions League final.  The reason behind the decision was that the UK government could tax the players on the money they earned for playing in the final.  The event will take place in Real Madrid’s Bernabeu Stadium.

While I’m a big fan of not paying unnecessary taxes - and the Bernabeu is a fitting venue for any final - I have to ask the question:

What’s more important: Having the final you want, or saving a the players money that they’re too rich to spend anyway?

I would think that most players in the first-team of the finalists will be on contracts that guarantee them a million pounds a year for several years.  If they were to lose ten or twenty thousand pounds - in return for playing in the biggest game of the season - would they turn up their noses?  I doubt they’d even notice.

So if UEFA wants the final to be at Wembley, they should have it at Wembley.  The trade-off with additional taxes is not significant.

I have no problem with them picking the Bernabeu over Webmley per se, but not to consider Wembley is letting the tail wag the dog.