Tomorrow night, in case you didn't know, is the Champions League Final in Moscow between Manchester United and Chelsea. It's not the first time two teams from the same country have contested the biggest prize in European club football but it is the first time the two teams involved have come from England. It is also, as far as I am aware, the first time that the two competing teams have had combined debts of more than one billion pounds.
Consider that for a moment, not in footballing terms but economic terms. Despite the huge television contracts, record attendances, new stadiums springing up and down the country, the last match of the season will see two clubs who owe their existence to rich, foreign, benefactors. At Manchester you have the Glazer family who have a history of over reaching when it comes to under pinning their sporting ambitions whilst at Chelsea you have a Russian who clearly doesn't understand that football, unlike the Russian gas and oil industry or Russian politics, isn't about how much you spend or how much wealth you create but how much soul you invest in your club. Roman Abramovich may be a great guy, in the top ten richest men on the planet but it is obvious that his interest in Chelsea is purely egotistical - we are talking about somebody who owns shares in at least three other clubs and asked Arsenal before he asked Chelsea if he could invest his money there.
Peter Kenyon has today claimed that Chelsea will be self financing by 2010. How is that going to happen at a club which spends 70% of its income of team wages, when the economic model suggests that anything over 45% and you are running the risk of going under. I can only presume that the £530 million that Mr Abramovich has invested will be written off. A report on the five o'clock news claimed, and not being a Chelsea fan I cannot confirm this, that a Chiabatta at 'the Bridge' costs £8. £8 for a fancy sandwich in bread that ten years ago we would have thrown away because the outside is hard and looks stale! Of course society changes and the 'traditional' football fan is being slowly priced out of the game, corporate packages are becoming the norm, as are £1,000 season tickets which don't include the rights to attend FA Cup ties.
On the pitch I hope Manchester United win, I hope that they embarrass Chelsea - unfortunately I think that Chelsea are probably the hardest team United have to face in the English game. Chelsea's style is based around pragmatism, the idea that you win football matches if you don't concede goals - it's the same philosophy as Rafa Benitez which is why when Chelsea and Liverpool play each other you are usually better off watching the grass grow or the paint dry. Manchester United, led by Alex Ferguson, are cut from the same cloth as Arsene Wengers Arsenal - the belief, almost arrogance, that ultimately better players will win more matches and the best way to win matches is to score more goals. That said, Michael Essien, FrankLampard, Joe Cole, Michael Ballack and Ricardo Carvallho are as good as it gets in our league but watching Cristiano Ronaldo, Wayne Rooney, Carlos Tevez and Paul Scholes play at their best is what football is all about.
Of course, this being the Champions League final I'm sure you can get good odds for a 0-0 and United to win on pens.
5 comments:
Funny you should mention Man Utd in the same paragraph as the death of football: I've been thinking similarly about Man City recently. I concluded that all this foreign money coming into our game had a down side in that the people bringing it either didn't know or didn't care anything about football, English or otherwise. Being of a pessimistic nature, I wonder where it will end. People talk about "the bubble bursting" but no-one says how or when. As an accountant, Paul, what do you think are the long term prospects?
To be honest Shy I think Barcelona is the way forward, a club that is owned by the supporters. If you look at Man.Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool and Man.City they are all built on sand financially. Arsenal are an exception but as I pointed out whilst they were still at Highbury the repayments on Emirates would take some time to pay off before they can compete. Arsene Wenger is being prudent in financial terms by not spending what he hasn't got but you have to wonder whether or not they will fall behind on the field. You don't make money in football that's always been the case but I do worry for Chelsea, or any club for that matter, who pay out so much of their income in wages.
If you look at Rangers in Scotland they don't have any money are are having to rely on free transfers and loans and yet they reached the UEFA Cup Final, proof that if you haven't got the big bucks you don't have to fail entirely.
Interesting take on it all paul...very worrying. And no doubt will get worse before it gets better. English clubs are heading the opposite way from FCB. Re Arsenal, he has to buy at least two quality players to even have a hope of building on last season.
I haven't been around much but have caught up on a post or two - If you 'see' Gildy tell him I couldn't post on his as the verifiaction letter thingy hasn't been showing up (just a white square with a red cross in the corner: i.e. can't display image. That's my excuse and my next one is I'll be away for anothe rcouple of weeks yet before I am back here for more than a day at a time! (from Apr 1st to June 9th I will have had 8 nights in my own bed!...you knwow hat I mean!)
I'm sure you've posted some interesting stuff as usual (and Gildy) so I'll have a lot to catch up on later.
Cheers
P.S. that goes for Mags too...haven't been able to comment...HONEST!
Hi Span, hope when you finally get home you appreciate how much you miss it!
Post a Comment