In Goodison's case, this crisis has been looming for a long, long time. Why did those lining up to squeal their solidarity not flag up the situation before it became critical?
Thanks for your articles, they are always interesting. I wonder if you have any suggestions as to a possible solution to the issues you raise. I wouldn’t blame you if you didn’t - for the reasons below I don’t have a workable solution.
Even if the Premier League (aka the 20 owners of the clubs) had the incentive to deal with these challenges, it has never taken any steps to prevent the “death of competition.” The team that has spent the most money has tended over a long enough time period, to be the most successful. One only has to consider the list of winners since the formation of the league: Man Utd 13, Man City 7, Chelsea 5, Arsenal 3, Blackburn, Leicester, Liverpool 1 each. If you added runners up to that list, you would only need to add Aston Villa, Newcastle and Spurs. If you added 3rd places you would only need to add Norwich, Forest and Leeds. Sorry if these numbers aren’t quite right - I counted them by hand.
Even if every team kept within the Profitability and Sustainability Rules of the Premier League, the teams in the Champions League would likely be at the top due to the extra revenue and the promoted teams would be at the bottom due to the reduced revenue and their permitted losses are less. If there is to be a serious debate about sporting integrity by preventing clubs winning through spending thought needs to be given to a workable cap where expenditure for each club is the same. However, to peg spending to revenue does nothing for sporting integrity, it just maintains the status quo and the have-nots attempting financial gymnastics (to be polite) to try to keep up or accepting their entrenched position in football.
Proper redistribution of the money in football, to prevent the large cliff edges between the Champions League, Premier League, Championship etc... and caps as to spending could achieve this (and query whether it is a good thing - I prefer the money in football to be in the pockets of the players rather than the profits of the owners), but there is no chance of this happening as it would require the votes of 14 owners and it is not in their interests, and perhaps that is why there is no-one calling for this in the media.
There are outlets that consistently report on the matters of which you complain (eg Josimar), but just like the Premier League have no incentive or inclination to change the rules, what incentive does a newspaper have to report on these matters, especially with the high risks involved to which you refer?
As you correctly identify the fans also have no incentive to complain until it is too late, and even if the newspapers did report these matters, if the team is winning, the fans are more likely to hold this against the journalist/newspaper.
Overall, for me there is no obvious, realistic answer, but something much more radical is needed if the aim is sporting integrity by stopping a club spending its way to success, whether that is funded by an oil state or the club who happens to have the highest turnover. Without this, there will always be the incentive for a club to live beyond its means.
The inability of people to read coded messages is much worse now be it books, films, or news outlets. Add to this the corporate interests involved in those ventures and it's a dire situation. "Partnerships" between media outlets and the teams/leagues they cover says it all.
Thanks for your articles, they are always interesting. I wonder if you have any suggestions as to a possible solution to the issues you raise. I wouldn’t blame you if you didn’t - for the reasons below I don’t have a workable solution.
Even if the Premier League (aka the 20 owners of the clubs) had the incentive to deal with these challenges, it has never taken any steps to prevent the “death of competition.” The team that has spent the most money has tended over a long enough time period, to be the most successful. One only has to consider the list of winners since the formation of the league: Man Utd 13, Man City 7, Chelsea 5, Arsenal 3, Blackburn, Leicester, Liverpool 1 each. If you added runners up to that list, you would only need to add Aston Villa, Newcastle and Spurs. If you added 3rd places you would only need to add Norwich, Forest and Leeds. Sorry if these numbers aren’t quite right - I counted them by hand.
Even if every team kept within the Profitability and Sustainability Rules of the Premier League, the teams in the Champions League would likely be at the top due to the extra revenue and the promoted teams would be at the bottom due to the reduced revenue and their permitted losses are less. If there is to be a serious debate about sporting integrity by preventing clubs winning through spending thought needs to be given to a workable cap where expenditure for each club is the same. However, to peg spending to revenue does nothing for sporting integrity, it just maintains the status quo and the have-nots attempting financial gymnastics (to be polite) to try to keep up or accepting their entrenched position in football.
Proper redistribution of the money in football, to prevent the large cliff edges between the Champions League, Premier League, Championship etc... and caps as to spending could achieve this (and query whether it is a good thing - I prefer the money in football to be in the pockets of the players rather than the profits of the owners), but there is no chance of this happening as it would require the votes of 14 owners and it is not in their interests, and perhaps that is why there is no-one calling for this in the media.
There are outlets that consistently report on the matters of which you complain (eg Josimar), but just like the Premier League have no incentive or inclination to change the rules, what incentive does a newspaper have to report on these matters, especially with the high risks involved to which you refer?
As you correctly identify the fans also have no incentive to complain until it is too late, and even if the newspapers did report these matters, if the team is winning, the fans are more likely to hold this against the journalist/newspaper.
Overall, for me there is no obvious, realistic answer, but something much more radical is needed if the aim is sporting integrity by stopping a club spending its way to success, whether that is funded by an oil state or the club who happens to have the highest turnover. Without this, there will always be the incentive for a club to live beyond its means.
Been thinking about this JP. Let me dwell and give you a fuller answer shortly. Thanks
The inability of people to read coded messages is much worse now be it books, films, or news outlets. Add to this the corporate interests involved in those ventures and it's a dire situation. "Partnerships" between media outlets and the teams/leagues they cover says it all.