SoccerShout.com

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

Sky and Setanta announced their fixtures for the first 15 ‘match days’  in the 2008 Premier League calendar (here is a Premier League TV Guide for US television).  What often goes unnoticed by football fans is the power that the television companies have over which clubs their money goes to.

The Premier League clubs decide how to split the money received from television, and due to bullying by the big-4  in their wisom award 25% of the money according to how many times a club is shown on TV.  For the current TV deal, that works out to £460,000 per appearance (with a minimum payment of £4.6million per year).

The fixtures announced today break down as follows:

9 appearances: Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester United

7 appearances: Manchester City, Newcastle, Spurs

6 appearances: Everton

5 appearances: Aston Villa, West Ham

4 appearances: Sunderland, Bolton, West Brom, Blackburn

3 appearances: Fulham, Wigan, Portsmouth, Stoke, Middlesbrough

2 appearances: Hull

The usual suspects are at the top of course, but it’s also interesting to see the ‘big clubs’ like Newcastle and Spurs getting a lot of games despite disappointing campaigns last year.  The ’small clubs’ like Blackburn and Portsmouth are getting relatively few games despite finishing higher up the league table.

This translates into cold hard cash as follows: If the discrepancy remains over the course of the season, Newcastle will receive over £3.5million more than Portsmouth - at the discretion of Sky/Setana - even though Portsmouth finished 4 places higher last year.

Putting this in real terms, it’s enough to pay two players £35k per week, or it’s like having an extra 7,500 fans at every home game.

SoccerShout posted some more examples of unfair TV money distribution last season.  For example, Newcastle getting £5million more than Middlesbrough, despite finishing only once place higher.

Let me be clear on one thing:  I don’t blame the TV companies for wanting to show more of the big-4, and even teams like Spurs and Newcastle, if that will draw the most viewers.  It’s their prerogative to optimize their offering.

I do have a problem with the Premier League distributing that money according to appearances, which effectively lets the TV companies decide which clubs get the most money.

I had lunch a couple of months ago with a recruiter who I had become friendly with at work.  She was leaving her job with her firm and going to work for a rival.

At the end of the lunch I promised I’d call her if I had any openings in my team that she might help fill.

“Sorry”, she said, “I won’t be back around for a while.  I have a non-compete that says I can’t do business with any current clients of my old firm.  Maybe in two years…”.

Cristiano Ronaldo isn’t a football slave.  He can stop playing football for Manchester United whenever he wants to.  He just can’t go and play football for another team for a couple of years.  He can do anything else he wants to.

The restriction that he can’t play for any football team might seem overly restrictive.  If he went to play for a Championship team for a year, it’s unlikely he’d be competing against Manchester Untied.  And it’s not like my friend, the recruiter, is prevented from working for any other recruitment firm.

The football contract goes further than a non-compete, to the benefit of both the player and the club.  There’s a balance there -we’ll agree to pay you whatever happens, and you agree not to leave.

What Ronaldo is trying to do is take away the up-side that a club might enjoy.  Unless the players are happy if the clubs retore balance by limiting their down-side - we’ll sack you if you turn rubbish or get injured - I’d suggest the players just play ball.

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.