“When the club versus country dispute arose
Small children were trampled in the exodus…”
So sang Half Man Half Biscuit in 2005. Little has changed since then as the greed and intransigence of football’s powers-that-be threaten to ruin the Joga Bonito’s pre-eminent position in the world of sport.
After all these years discussing the issue, football fans are still plagued by half a dozen international breaks a season. We are expected to shut up and suffer as the thrilling, multi-vehicle chase of club football is made to dutifully stop at the level crossing to allow the slow train of the international game trundle through.
You almost feel embarrassed looking at the fixture list for an international week: a fishing village versus an Italian hillock; a rock in the North Atlantic versus an Iberian goat farm; an ex-Soviet wasteland versus a Balkan state who cannot so much as accept a compliment about their snazzy new ‘do from their neighbour without using it as a pretext for a long and bloody civil war. That we must endure this tripe instead of getting to savour proper football like Liverpool-Everton or Stoke-Bolton is nothing short of a travesty.
Time and again, the major nations are forced to undertake arduous journeys to godforsaken backwaters to stay in flea-ridden hotel rooms and play in meaningless matches. Why should the world’s top players be used merely to fuel the pathetic nationhood fantasies of countries where the men are simpletons who carry chickens around under their arm all day, and the women are toothless and haggard by the time they’re old enough to be married off by their fathers in exchange for five bags of couscous and a sheet of corrugated iron? The reason these places are in such a state to begin with is because they are, in the words of Moe Szyslak, “loser countries”. Why should clubs who pay so much money to these players risk having them injured just so these wretched nations can be mollycoddled so?
There is a simple answer: croneyism. Sepp Blatter is reliant on the votes of the smaller nations for his merciless grip on power. This is the main rationale behind his constant sniping at the footballing superpowers, the Champions League and especially the Premier League. It ensures that we must wade through Faroe Islands-Austria and Senegal-Gambia instead of the almost guaranteed top-notch club action we so crave. Why is it that practically every city the world over is so desperate to stage Premier League matches? What am I bid for the “crucial” World Cup qualifier between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan?
So, to the crux. How can we improve this mess and streamline the calendar so that we get more of the football we want to see? I propose a three-part solution.
Firstly, a no-brainer: abolish international friendlies. The only thing anyone has ever learned from international friendlies is that there is nothing to learn from international friendlies. Get rid of these wastes of time and make room for the Premier League’s 39th round – in fact, why not a 40th and a 41st, too?
Secondly, move the African Nations’ Cup to the summer. European clubs take the best young African talent and give it the chance to flourish in the world game’s heartland and what do they get in return? Their African players taken off them slap-bang in the middle of the season (while still having to pay the players’ wages, of course). There would be the usual whining about summer being the rainy season in much of Africa, so to spare the poor darlings’ socks from getting soggy, the tournament should be held in Europe. Most of the players are based there as it is. The Africans can watch it on TV like the rest of us.
The third part of my plan seems, superficially, to be draconian and unworkable. On the contrary – it is, in fact, so simple and so beautiful that it has just got engaged to a League One footballer. There should be a reform of the World Cup.
The Premier League is the model: a breakaway that’s not quite a breakaway. Here is how it would work: get rid of the qualifying tournaments and invite eight teams to the finals instead. The invitees would be:
Brazil
Argentina
France
Italy
Germany
England
These are all, of course, past World Cup winners. Uruguay would be left out because it’s been ages since they won the World Cup.
The other two would be:
Spain (European champions)
China (to tap into the emerging Asian market).
The advantages of this move are obvious and manifold:
- Eliminating qualifying will cut out 99% of the club vs. country antagonism at a stroke. It would also free up dates for more club games – perhaps even a re-introduction of the second group phase of the Champions League.
- It means we wouldn’t have to sit through the turgid early weeks of the World Cup in its present format. We would no longer be confronted with the appalling one-sided encounters which so characterise the first round. It would also wipe out the risk of any of the major nations being knocked out early on and depriving the world of the chance to see the planet’s greatest players at the business end of the competition.
- It would spare the major teams the tricky task of negotiating a qualifying group in the first place. Thus would we avoid the type of inequitable situation faced by England in trying to make Euro 2008. Why should a team which was a mere penalty lottery away from the last four in the World Cup have to suffer the cruel fate which befell them?
In addition:
- The World Cup should be played in Europe whenever possible. After all, this is where the vast majority of the TV money comes from, so it is only fair. The occasional tournament could be played elsewhere, such as one of the Gulf states or the United States, but only if the games are played in European prime time.
It is possible that this solution will be a mite too radical for the bloated monstrosities that sit on FIFA’s executive committee. It can, however, be easily modified in case the stragglers of the world whinge about not getting something for nothing (and mark my words, they would!). We could remove one of the automatic berths – let’s say Spain’s – and throw the remaining spot open to the winners of a qualifying tournament.
This would be organised in phases. Phase 1 would pit the very lowest-ranked teams in the world against each other. These are the kind of countries you can’t pick out on a map, not because your sense of geography is faulty, but because they are too small to be seen: Upper Lower Obscuria, the People’s Democratic Republic of Whatever-dever, Crapistan and the like. The winner of the group would progress to Phase 2 which would contain the next highest-ranked teams. The winners of this would go on to Phase 3, and so on.
The winners of Phase 17 would join those nations on the fringes of the world elite in the final, decisive Phase 18:
Spain
Portugal
Russia
Holland
Two random South American countries who aren’t Brazil or Argentina
The African team with the highest number of Premier League players
United Arab Emirates (this means that should Israel win Phase 17, they would have to forfeit their place in Phase 18. Can’t stand in the way of progress.)
A simple accommodation can be reached between clubs and countries should there be a dispute about player availability for the qualifiers: the relevant FA could pay a fee to the player’s club – say, £5,000 per player per minute played (including stoppage time).
These solutions are the most sensible yet devised for this seemingly interminable debate. Of course, it is this very quality which makes it unlikely for Blatter and his army of sycophants to adopt it. But the need for action is imperative. The international game is an overgrown vine strangling the tree of club football. The bleeding hearts who would have us beholden to some quaint notions of “tradition” are hell-bent on checking the extraordinary leaps made by European clubs in the last twenty years, with the Premier League in the vanguard. The latter competition has proved itself beyond doubt to be the most popular, richest and therefore best in soccer history. This has not been achieved by pandering to history or considering the feelings of those at the fetid bottom of the pile.
The plain truth is that the Champions League and Premier League have become the pinnacle of football. It’s about time the game’s structures reflected this.
The smaller countries are bleeding the game dry. For the good of the game, they should be put to sleep.
Written by Fredorrarci, who also maintains a blog called Sport is a TV show.
This article is a submission for the Soccerlens 2008 Writing Competition; to participate, please read the details here. The competition is sponsored by Subside Sports (premier online store for football shirts) and Icons (official signed football jerseys).
I don’t think I have a vote, but I vote for this one anyone. Jonathan Swift would be proud.
”The plain truth is that the Champions League and Premier League have become the pinnacle of football. It’s about time the game’s structures reflected this.”
Yeah, the first part is true, but for how much longer? It will not take long for other leagues to catch up n for the premier league to shatter. perhaps by continued billionaires investments?
But really , this is silly. Just ask any footballer what they want: thw world cup or a premier league crown…the answer is simple…world cup any time of the day.
this ‘article’ was surposed to give an insightful perceptive on how to make country commitments more bearable to clubs who pay fortunes for players…according to me, it is just subjective trash…a better way would be to fine the fa of the country.. its really like renting a car… countries rent expensive cars(players) n use them excessively, taking the risk to total them. Financial obstacles though would ensure that they use the car properly. In less imaginary terms, this may force the fa’s to raise their medical levels at the very least.
I don’t know why I even responded to such a stupi post. Shame on me.
Brian – so would Wenger…
Harasuke – you need to re-evaluate what this article is ‘supposed to do’. it would help understand it in any case…
This is a ridiculous proposal. Especially the 3rd part of it.
One thing I would propose is take England out of the elite
group of teams since they last won any major cup is 42
years ago in their own turf with a goal that never
crossed the line… After that they just kept crossing and
sending long balls.
Having more PL games or more stages in CL would just saturate
soccer fans. If Milan plays Manchester United 4-6 times
a season as opposed to maybe 1-2 people will lose interest.
It has happened to the US sports whenever teams play each
other more than a few times (see baseball or basketball).
EVERY team has to negotiate a qualifying group. England
did not qualify to last Euro because they did not play well.
Is this article suppose to be a spoof? If its suppose to be taken seriously then its utterly jibberish!!! Not just the 3rd part, Every single part of it is pure trash talk.
OK people I think you alllll need to understand that this is completely real and should be implemented NOW.
Really really.
excellent article! although i don’t think some people caught on to the humour of it…
Dumb article…..you are looking at if from just one side of the coin. International friendlies do help emerging countries get some good exposure. Thats the only way football can improve on a global scale.
And what do you mean by have the 39th round or more such rounds??? The national league of a country should be played within the borders of that country. They are welcome to organize pre-season tours to other countries….but not league matches. That would ruin the local game in those countries and not let those countries develop in football.
The result could be that interest will develop in other games where the country is good thereby causing football to lose it popularity.
There was a point of time in India that football was popular. India finished 4th in the Melbourne olympics of 1956 and won Asian championships. See football in India now – dead. Thats cause the indian cricket team is doin well now and football and is the number 1 sport here.
People praise superstars in countries. THe sport is probably secondary. If the player is good, then the sport becomes popular. Womens tennis in India, an unheard sport some years back, is now in the limelight, thanks to Sania Mirza. There are many such other examples.
IF you abolish international friendlies, or encourage a 39th round of matches, you will effectively kill local football. And if other sports come to the fore, a severe dearth of talent will be seen from these countries thereby pushing football to the back burner.
Now if football is pushed to the backburner, there is a high probability that football will lose its charm and sooner or later, it will be even difficult for European clubs to raise money in Asia.
Now is that what you want?
Every reaction has a chain reaction, and before you take a step, you must be totally aware of what you are doin.
As they say, little knowledge is dangerous, and by your article i judge that you have very little knowledge.
Freddo – you win the ‘most misunderstood author’ award, if that’s any consolation.
However, Lyndon, you’re wrong about football losing it’s charm. If you kill local football, they’ll turn on their TVs and watch the Premier League, much like those with little local movie culture turn to foreign cinema.
And it’s not like local football will be completely killed…I reckon they will allow it to thrash about in a meagre existence as a symbol of hope and use it to sell more ads for the 53rd round…
🙂
Ahmed: if this article was intended to be humourous, I offer my deepest apologies…at times, even I seem not able 2 discern it,…but then again i had just read some man city blog where a fan wanted skertel( bad spelling, you know who I mean) 2 die because of a challenge in the game against them…I’m sorry again but football fans r becoming stupider by the day(me included)…but still the article is kinda silly- i think my anger flared when i saw 39th game, i so hate that idea-money, im afraid is gonna kill the premiership….n ahmed, one last thing: quote properly. I never said ‘supposed to do’. i said ‘supposed to’…nah.
Thanks for all the comments. I don’t know what to say beyond that so I’ll leave it there…
Oh, and
“And it’s not like local football will be completely killed…I reckon they will allow it to thrash about in a meagre existence as a symbol of hope and use it to sell more ads for the 53rd round…”
I wish I’d thought of that line…
Haha, Fredo for FIFA boss! Sepp Blatter ain’t got shit on you!
well its like George Monbiot, interesting but lets pray it doesn’t become prescient
Ha! I love the plan and especially the “abolish” friendlies part. Aside from money making they make no sense and often hurt the players. I love internationals but I’m also an Arsenal supporter and having so many players get injured in shit friendlies is unbearable.
Yeah, the ANC needs to change, ideally to odd-numbered years. Then we would have all the continental cups (save Europe) being played at the same time.
FWIW, England won the World Cup 4-2, so everyone can shut up about *that* goal. West Germany still wouldn’t have won. Point moot.