The Champion's League Final 2008 - Good or Bad?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Chat' started by Will the Sec, May 6, 2008.

  1. Will the Sec

    Will the Sec Active Member

    OK, so it's a marvellous achievement that the last two teams in the Champions League are English, representing the Premiership.

    This points to the quality of players on show in the Premiership, but is it a good thing?

    For every Rooney or Terry playing at the top level, there are young players with their route to the top level (including eventually to an English/Welsh/Scottish/N. Ireland/Eire shirt) being baulked by overseas signings, and not always by players of the best quality.

    Thought

    The quality of the national sides from the British Isles suffers as a result of too many overseas players excelling in the Premiership.

    Discuss.*

    * or Ignore, as you see fit.
     
  2. Ipswich trom

    Ipswich trom Member

    Trevor Brooking alluded to this yesterday and my feeling is that in the interests of the National Teams it needs to be addressed.

    Manchester United and Chelsea are not the worst culprits in this, Arsenal take that honour by a mile with Liverpool close behind. My feeling is that there should be a minimum of 6 home nations players in the starting 11. The problem is that since we joined this Euro nation that now seems to exist it is seen as restricting opportunities and you aren't allowed to do it. The answer is simple but that's a totally different discussion. The Spanish and Italian lagues don't have anything like the same number of non home nationlas in their teams so it can be done.

    The problem is the money from Sky over recent years has led to the totally outrageous salaries that footballers are paid.
    The best thing that can happen is for this to be drastically reduced and brought back to realistic levels. I defy anyone to justify any footballer ever being worth over £100,000 a week. It is simply obscene.

    I for one can't wait for Roman to pull the plug on Chelsea just to see the fall out that follows!
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2008
  3. andyp

    andyp Active Member

    Thing is it's not sport any more, it's entertainment, which means huge sums of money to be made, celebrities, endorsements, merchandising, television money etc. Part of the rowing at Liverpool at the moment is cos one of the American owners feels they don't chase merchandising/sponsorship enough. Plus it's now a global game, the amount of money coming to the top clubs from the Far East is astonishing, and the TV viewers out there want to see top stars, they don't care what nationality they are (although part of the problem at Man City allegedly is that Thaksin promised to have a Thai playing in the team this year, but he can't get a work permit as he hasn't played enough rated internationals).

    You only have to look at the financial consequences of relegation from the EPL, the gap between the haves and have nots is getting bigger all the time.

    I don't see an easy solution, any restriction would get thrown out of the Euro courts as some sort of restraint on trade. Everyone wants a slice of the pie and those at the top get the biggest slices.
     
  4. Ipswich trom

    Ipswich trom Member

    There is a solution, not sure if it works. Expand champions league into a proper european league with possibly 3 teams from England, Italy, Spain, 2 from Germany, France, plus a few others. The lowest placed team from each country is relegated back to national league to be replaced by the national champions. In the case of the extras, straight swap.

    Another option would be to do the league with only the champions of all countries with a change of all teams the following year unless you won the European league in which case you get two entries for next season.
     
  5. DocFox

    DocFox Supporting Member

    This makes perfect sense. Many many sports have gone through similar problems. In American Football, I still remember the first $1M dollar a year player. Now they are everywhere. TV revenues were split amongst all teams so that they can all compete -- and a salary cap.

    Buying a team is nothing new. Having a young team beat established teams is not new, but rare (sounds like what happened this year -- for me to watch football from the UK I have to stay awake to 2 AM! -- or course the bonus is I get to see Dr. Who before hand)

    When sports where simply who filled the stadium it was different. TV brings in revenue which almost always changes the sport - and not always for the better.

    Jim
     
  6. StellaJohnson

    StellaJohnson Active Member

    There is nothing good about to english teams in the champions league cup final.

    All that English about the two teams is that the grounds happen to be situated in England. They happen to be two teams with the best group of players from all over the world happen to play for a football team in England.

    How can it be a good thing, especially as the England team can't qualify for the European cup finals?
     
  7. Bungle

    Bungle Member

    The one good thing I can see is that the british players that make it to the premier league first teams will be used to a high standard when it comes to the national team. But what is happening now is younger foreign players are being attracted to the premier league. Also what is not mentioned is that managers don't sign british players because they cost too much, why buy an in-experianced british player when you can sign a foreign internationally player? I also think that the FIFA proposal to limit the number of foreign players for european matches won't work, the top clubs will just buy national players for europen matches and they will then only get the occasional match in the league. What is good about these high spending clubs is when they have a clear out there are some great players available for other teams like Portsmouth.
     

Share This Page