Published on May 1, 2008 by Phil McThomas
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Being a millionaire at a Billionaires Convention is probably a pretty lousy experience. So is being a very attractive lady at a party full of supermodels. Or a brighter-than-average student surrounded by Ph.D’s.
The semi-finals of the UEFA Cup should be pretty exciting. Both ties are nicely balanced. The teams are a good mix of traditionally strong teams and up-and-comers. Some good players in that lot.
And yet…do you care? Can you get excited about it? Have you made plans to watch the games?
It’s a shame, but the UEFA Cup has been devalued in so many ways - the never ending group stage, the parachute for Champions League teams, the lack of sponsorship or branding (quick - hum the UEFA Cup theme song!). But probably the most damaging thing that UEFA did was to stick it right after the Champions League each week.
No-one would stay to see the support band if they came on after the headliner. The only problem with Thursday is that is comes after Tuesday and Wednesday.
Published on April 20, 2008 by Phil McThomas
We’ve examined the have’s and have-not’s in the Premier League in previous posts. The disparity was between them was brought into focus by a comment from Sir Alex Ferguson this week.
Manchester United announced this week that they have signed three key players to long-term contracts (well…two key players and Wes Brown). But it doesn’t stop there for Fergie:
“We have a strong squad already and this just keeps it going,” said Ferguson. “And I would imagine there is a good possibility of stocking up again in the summer.”
Stocking up? Nice term. Sounds like a fat man at a buffet, doesn’t it?
Will the teams coming out of the Championship be stocking up this summer? How about the teams that managed to escape relegation? Or the ones stuck in the mid-table obscurity? Clearly no - so it’s just the rich getting better (and therefore richer) and everyone else falling further behind.
Or…business as usual for the Premier League.
Published on April 3, 2008 by Phil McThomas
We’ve seen how the teams that occupy the top spots in the Premier League have become increasingly easy to predict. Once a team spends five years in the top four, they never leave - a trend that has lasted for fifteen years and counting. In this post, I have a chart that shows how the gap between the teams in first and fifth place have increased dramatically over recent years.
[A note on the points totals in this (and similar) posts. Whenever I compare points totals in today’s Premier League to the Division One from 20 or 30 years ago, I adjust the older points total to make it comparable to today. Specifically, I re-calculate using three points for a win, and then reduce the number of points proportionally to allow for the number of games played in a season - 38, 40 or 42].
Between 1973 and 1997, the average number of points separating first and fifth place was 16 points. This shows how compact the league used to be - just five or six wins separating the top five places. A fan can usually look back on a season and five a handful of results that could have been wins instead of defeats, so they could live in hope and think of what might have been. This applies not just to the team that came second, but for the fans of the top-5.
Looking at the last five years, that gap has been stretched to 29 points. Early on in the season, fans quickly realise that this isn’t going to be their year. The focus becomes who will qualify for the UEFA Cup - which is something, but not as exciting as winning the league. The UEFA Cup has become a goal, rather than a consolation, for many teams.
The question becomes - how much worse will this situation become? The rate of increase surely can’t continue, but with the money being thrown at the teams at the top four, I’m betting it will get worse rather than better.
Published on April 1, 2008 by Phil McThomas
If there’s one thing that’s fundamentally flawed about organized football, it’s the following:
1) Teams that win competitions are rewarded with lots of money.
2) Teams are allowed to spend unlimited money on improving their playing squad.
3) The teams with the best squads win the competitions.
4) Repeat steps 1-3 until everyone is thoroughly bored.
So a few clubs get their noses out in front and never look back.
The reward structure of the Premier League is actually quite reasonable - the top club gets less than double that the bottom club earns. The problem comes with the Champions League - the top four effectively double their Premier League earnings with a decent run in Europe, and therefore end up with four times as much as the bottom club (table).
This has the predictable result of making the top three or four clubs untouchable in their domestic competition.
They say that money is the root of all evil. Well, it’s certainly at the root of much that is wrong with the Premier League. How can they hope to run any kind of even competition, when a handful of the clubs are getting a huge leg-up from a competition that the others are not even able to enter?
Published on March 29, 2008 by Phil McThomas
Can anyone help me figure out why the Everton v Chelsea match was switched from a weekend to a Thursday night?
Chelsea and Everton are both complaining, on the grounds of messing with the fans and impinging on sporting integrity. For once, I’m with Chelsea all the way on this one - Everton will have had five days rest to Chelsea’s three, again thanks to television.
What I can’t figure out is why either the early or the late television slot on the Saturday was not used - according to the BBC, they’re both open right now.
You would think that the Premier League would take the time to give a well thought out explanation to the fans if they’re going to throw them off-schedule and possibly derail their team’s title ambitions.
Premier League Spokeman: “The compilation of the fixture list is a complex procedure which faces enormous pressure from international match and European competition dates, as well as the need to balance the important requirements of the police and our broadcasters. We are also required by the European Commission to televise 138 matches per season, which brings its own inevitable pressures. Under these difficult circumstances, this date was seen as the fairest that could be achieved.”
To paraphrase: “Football fans aren’t smart enough to comprehend what we do here”. Then they throw in a few factors - that don’t apply here - by way of misdirection, then blame someone else.
As an experiment with how open the Premier League is with its customers, I’ll see if I can get a straight answer from the Premier League. Stand by (but don’t hold your breath).
Update: The Premier League website now has the early and late Saturday kick-offs allocated to Arsenal v Reading and Blackburn v Man Utd.
Published on March 29, 2008 by Phil McThomas
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.
Published on March 29, 2008 by Phil McThomas
So here we are, gathered to bid farewell to Derby’s short and inglorious stint in the Premier League. It’s common knowledge to football fans that the play-off winner barely stands a chance of Premier League survival. What might not be so well-known is that a bad situation is getting worse. And this is to the benefit of the established teams in the league.
If we take the current season as a foregone conclusion - a liberty I’m not afraid to take - there have been sixteen Premier League seasons. In ten of those season, the play-off winner has been relegated at the first attempt - a 37% chance of survival.
However, if you look at the last five seasons, that rate of survival has dropped to just 20% - West Ham in 2006 being the only exception to the relegation rule.
What does that mean to the rest of the league? It’s good news - great news, actually. Instead of three relegation places to fret about, there’s now effectively two. Who wouldn’t welcome that?
Football fans.
We’ve seen how three of the top four teams are effectively pre-ordained before the season begins. Now we see that one of the three relegation spots is taken care of. The aspirations of most teams now lie somewhere between “lower-mid-table” and “upper-mid-table” - not much to get excited about, is it?
So long Derby, and thanks for all the points. You might have had a miserable, dull season but you should take a crumb of comfort in the fact that most other teams are also having a miserable, dull season (just not quite as bad as yours).
