Financial decay in football hidden out of view

As I write this, Portsmouth FC are conducting their own version of what I call a ‘Monopoly sale’, referring to the desperate state of affairs at the conclusion of the board game Monopoly where you sell anything of any remote value for about 20% of the price.  It is fair to say they are between a rock and a hard place right now.

Players are being sold off without the manager’s knowledge or the chief executive’s blessing.  Who is approving the transactions?  They are due in court on Feb 10 to face HMRC on a winding up order.  Bad news all round – HMRC don’t mess around with football clubs – no sympathy on their behalf when it comes to Football clubs in the red.

What is most eyebrow-raising about the two respective clubs’ situations is that they are still raising eyebrows.  

What is worrying is that as people are fed more and more of the ‘Big Four’ or Big Six/Seven Football that Sky deliver every minute of the day, Joe Average begins to neglect the rest of the footballing spectrum.  There are numerous examples of clubs with severe financial difficulties: Notts County, Cardiff & Watford all spring to mind. 

Even the biggest clubs suffer from tremendous financial difficulties – see Man Utd & Liverpool.  There is nothing sustainable about top-flight football and it is only a matter of time before something happens – be it radical or transitional. 

I think alot of the disdain for current professional football can stem from the impact of money and the dichotomy between footballers/football teams and the rest of the world.  A little more transparency and rational thinking is required from clubs in order to regain Joe Average’s trust and reaffirm a love for the sport which seems to have distanced itself from it’s audience.

Special sponsors…

West Brom feature Haiti appeal on their shirts

 

Only a quick one as I am mulling over how best to compose a proper entry – surely against the point of blogs where everything should be spontaneous and bitesized.  So for now…here is a short one.

Tonight, West Brom play Newcastle in a match up between arguably the two strongest teams in the Coca Cola Championship.  West Brom; the generous club that they are have donated the sponsorship space on their match shirts to the Disasters Emergency Committe for Haiti appeal. This is without doubt a generous gesture from the club and the DEC appeal will benefit from an increased footfall thanks to the awareness in this desperate time.

Without attempting to sully the attempt of West Brom to raise awareness and funds for the appeal, we should perhaps delve a little deeper:

• West Brom currently ‘negotiate their shirt sponsorship’ match-by-match.  So…they don’t have a long-term sponsorship deal as they over-valued themselves last year and this year. For the record they were the first and only team to go a full season without a shirt sponsor. 
• They are not actually donating any money out of their own pocket. They are auctioning off shirts and have ‘donated sponsorship space on their shirt.
• The match is being covered live on Sky TV which will generate extra coverage.  This helps their cause although it does mean they would have been able to command a greater one off figure for the shirt sponsor.
• It is very fashionable and without doubt good press to engage in such practice.  Some clubs have taken to doing this so not to spoil their shirts.  This is often done for two reasons: they do not require the revenue generated and so can forfeit the revenue by portraying the club to the world as noble. See Barcelona and Aston Villa.  The other type is the club who cannot attract a lucrative deal so forfeit the sponsorship to engage their fanbase, hoping to attract passers-by.

I can safely say which camp I think West Brom fall into.  They will not lose out from the deal in monetary terms and by doing so will generate lots of favourable coverage for the club.  They will also generate revenue for the DEC Haiti appeal which can only be good. Well done to them for the opportunistic idea and I hope it benefits the fundraising in the way that it will help them.

(Hard) Luck of the Irish

A picture says a thousand words…

So by now everybody has had their say and two cents worth.  This article will attempt to steer clear from the usual debates about who was in the wrong/referee being biased etc.

There are clearly lessons to be learnt from this debacle though:

1 – That there is precedent for replaying matches; technical error by the referee rather than human error.

2 – The seeding system is not a crime; announcing it halfway through the qualification process is.

3 – Video evidence for objective / in-play events should not be considered. However goal-line technology could.

 

1) The Uzbekistan – Bahrain match was abandoned after a penalty was disallowed for encroachment and a free kick was given rather than a re-take.  This incidentally occurred in a World Cup play-off match – the first leg so potentially easier to overrule.  It also occurred in 2005 and with little ramifications for the overall make up of the tournament – thanks to Trinidad & Tobago beating Bahrain.

2) FIFA in all their wisdom and insight decided to seed the playoff system.  A decision that would have disappeared into news nothingness.  Had it NOT been two weeks before the final qualifying positions.  With France, Germany & Portugal all potentially struggling to qualify.  As it was – all three made it through.  It is hard to say whether they would have been impacted more without the seedings as two of the four teams were unseeded.

3) I said it at the time and I still believe it to be true that video evidence for objective and in-play events cannot occur realistically.  I believe goal-line technology will come in, but the problem with decisions such as the handball or Reading ‘phantom goal’ is that these are the clearest possible scenario.  Both given as a goal when shouldn’t have – both in theory could be looked at quickly and referee’s decision overruled.

What happens for the example of Anelka’s dive/penalty claim – a rough estimate puts it as 15% thought it WAS a penalty, 50% thought he dived, 35% saying “I’ve seen them given”.  This 35% / significant population – how would they go about judging this decision in say 30 seconds.  Even this example is relatively clear cut as there was a stop in play straight afterwards.

What happens when a player leads with an elbow but the referee misses it and the play carries on and the opposition score/get a corner/anything.  Does the referee ask to see a replay then discount anything that happened after the incident?  The possibilities are infinite and get more and more confusing/difficult to justify.  We would soon see managers demanding replays after every injury.  The beauty in my eyes of football is that much of it is open to interpretation – this would not disappear with video replays.  However, what happens when Howard Webb refuses a penalty at Old Trafford that the rest of the world believes IS a penalty?

 

FIFA and UEFA are often the butt of many jokes or conspiracy theorists for various reasons and it is a very British mentality to stick up for the underdog.  However, with regard the seeding controversy, it seems FIFA have almost become a parody of themselves.  Whatever the truth, they have made themselves out to look like money-grabbing, heartless and totally corporate.  I say they have made themselves ‘look’ as I do not believe they totally are.  However, the perception is far more important.

In my humble opinion, they should have commented immediately rather than let the fiasco drag out.  I do not blame them for not re-staging the match as this could lead to all manner of scenarios calling for a reply.  One final thing I learnt from Wednesday night’s match was the horrible sight of players taking a minute to take a throw on or goal kick.  Feigning injury, rolling around; anything to run the clock down.  I KNOW this happens and know i wouldn’t complain if my team did such a thing.  However – is now the time to act? Timekeepers etc…

 

A depressing article this I know and one which has made me question my love for the sport. As a former academic once wisely spouted to me –

“Sport is not about the game itself – that is what you call a pastime or leisure activity.  Sport involves politics, economics and culture.”

Sport is big business and as such, affects livelihoods as any other big business. Can anyone REALLY blame Henry for his act? Did FIFA merely act smart looking to protect their number one asset with a comfier ride to the World Cup for France & Portugal?  Would we even talk about the seeding issue if it had happened before the draw – despite the same issue arising.

On a lighter note…here are some things that sport in the UK misses out on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs1l_V9kaYQ

UPDATE: Naming Rights Not Wrong..

So as I sit down and glance over the paper’s yesterday it is unveiled that Mike Ashley had announced he was prepared to sell the naming rights to St James’ Park.  Clearly he must have read my article on Tuesday.  The hoo-haa demonstrates my opinion that naming rights has a future in the sport but a tempered one.  Any offers on it actually occurring? Newcastle United, along with Leeds seem to have the most irrational fans – See appointing Kevin Keegan. 

I would personally love to see Newcastle rename their stadium the Ant & Dec Stadium but somehow I believe it is unlikely.  Seriously…they are sooo 2007.  My money is on Newcastle Brown – 33/1.

Sponsors’ football fling over?

So having watched a reasonable amount of football including my team held at home to Doncaster…a new pinnacle i think not, i surmised that despite our shabby sounding new range of sponsors…{Evolution HDTV & Joma], perhaps we are not losing out at all compared to some of our competitors…

WBA (West Bromwich Albion) had the ‘opportunity’ to have England 2018 blazed across their chests as their only ‘sponsor’ for this and even last season, while the likes of Cardiff and Leicester have chosen not to have a sponsor on their kit.  This is a worrying trend in English football – aside from the likes of Barcelona and Aston Villa who do not rely on this as their primary source of funding. Obviously neither Cardiff or WBA rely on this as a revenue source, however it traditionally has been…

This points to the undeniable growth of TV revenue as sole contributor to a TV club’s operations.  I am by no means a traditionalist or by any stretch of the imagination angry by this not-recent trend.  However it can surely only serve the purpose of allowing the TV company [ies?] greater influence of ‘our sport’…i will touch on this a bit later.  Obviously ‘in this current economic climate’, the incentive for companies to be drawn into long-term expensive contracts with seemingly immeasurable return has diminished.  The very nature of the companies involved with football sponsorship has also altered radically even within the past five years.  In the ’04-05′ season, out of the 44 clubs in the top two tiers, one was an online betting company [888.com – Middlesbrough].  The outlook is radically different now; seven in the Premiership, two in the Championship]. Indeed it was this reason that Randy Lerner decided to opt for the Acorns charity rather than online company Bet32.com.

So onto that influence that TV/media conglomerates will soon exert over the whole of sport.  It has been known as the ‘golden triangle’ of sport; the Sports Event, TV/Media and Sponsor all relying on each other equally.  Obviously if the sponsor is removed and/or the media hold all the shots, there is a dichotomous relationship in which the media hold the best cards.  I am not young or naive enough [just] to imagine this is all a new phenomena or that this will happen, however it is undeniable the influence of cash in the game, and also irrefutable where the smaller clubs receive the majority of their cash.

A very doom and gloom article it may seem; perhaps just a hint of life outside of the Premiership that goes unnoticed.  As long as Man Utd and Arsenal are financially ok, alls well!  Outside of this story, it is always sad to see any sport tarnished/disrupted by outside influences and obviously this covers the England Badminton team withdrawing from the World Championships for a specific terrorist-related threat to the players.  Sorry news which will certainly overshadow but perversely give the spectacle much more coverage than it perhaps merits.

To try and finish on a light-hearted note…if you have access… check this out: [5:20 in]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_3/default.stm

The Crewe equaliser was accompanied by a shout of ‘Shotttt’ from the crowd…a good call and a good goal.