Thursday 19 February 2015

@gt4abl Premier League Special: In the Second of his two part special; Miguel Davisse examines the impact of TV money on the Premier League and how this ultimately affects the development of English Players and the English National Team.



One of the biggest debating points in football grounds and pubs around the country is that the wealth of riches now available to Premier League Clubs, and the introduction of Johnny Foreigner into the English game have affected the English National Side and the development of young English talent.

The signing of the latest English Premier League domestic rights deal has once again reignited this debate. When analysing the impact that Premier League Money has had on the England Team and development of English Talent, it’s difficult to know where exactly to begin.

As original codifiers of the game in 19th Century, the English saw themselves as the leaders in world football and to a large extent they were. Rather ironically by today’s standards, the early English player prided himself on a dribbling game. He saw defending as unmanly, passing as futile and rejected the thought of taking his time to score goals. The art of attack and scoring goals was led by the forwards in a 2-3-5 formation.  This formation remarkably remained the norm until the 1940’s.

By the time the Hungarians visited Wembley in 1953, England had only ever lost one home international.  The Hungarians were the Olympic Champions and the world’s top ranked side.

England started with the tried and tested WM formation, with two backs, three in midfield and five forwards. The Hungarians played a 2-3-3-2.  This was never before seen by the English.  The Hungarians ran riot winning 6-3.

The tactically inflexible English side could simply not cope with the movement of the front two and the advanced midfielders, who expertly did what we would now refer to as ‘running between the lines.’ The famous image from that game is the goal of Puskas, who dragged the ball back under his foot, leaving the England Captain Billy Wright tackling thin air, before scoring Hungary’s third.

The impact of this defeat was huge.  The FA after years of complacency was jolted into gear. As originators of the game they believed that England would always be technically superior to their rivals from the continent.  Existing coaching techniques and practices were now obviously out of date. The humiliation at Wembley made the FA wake up to this fact and they soon realised they needed to start learning from their European opponents.

In an attempt to avenge the defeat, a rematch was scheduled in Budapest in May 1954. The Hungarians again provided a masterclass, winning 7-1. To this day it is England’s heaviest defeat.
England’s record in World Cup competitions since its inception in 1930 has been largely indifferent.  They did not take part in the 1930, 1934 or 1938 tournaments.  1950-1962 saw a best placed quarter final finish, until a home World Cup in 1966 saw glory for Sir Alf Ramsey’s team.

Since then there have been 12 World Cup tournaments.  England failed to qualify for three of those; made four quarter final appearances and the agonising shoot out defeat to Germany in 1990.

The European Championships have also not proven to be a successful hunting ground for England. Getting to the semi -finals in 1996 is the best result achieved (also a home tournament to pair with the single Word Cup win).  In 13 staging’s, England have failed to qualify five times, four of these prior to the Premier League forming in 1992.

This nod to history is important when looking at the English national team and the impact the Premier League has had upon it.  It is easy to blame the arrival of money and overseas players as being behind the failure of England at major tournaments. 

The dominant Liverpool side of the 80’s featured many players from the ‘home nations’ and Ireland.  Even pre-Premier League, Clubs were looking to supplement their first team playing staff from other countries.  Grobbelaar, Hanson, Lawrenson, McGregor, Dalglish, Souness, Nicol, Whelan and Rush were all non-English players dominating the domestic scene in England’s top division. This influx of talent from outside England –albeit the foreign players in this instance were from the other UK countries and Ireland - led to a thriving English presence in European competition. As Liverpool’s fans will rejoice in telling you, they’ve won it five times.

I see this as being no different to the way the Premier League is now.  If we look at lists of the best ever players to have played in the Premier League we will see names such as; Cantona, Zola, Henry, Bergkamp.  More recently its Drogba, Hazard, Suarez, Aguero.  The English players to make the list would be Shearer, Lampard, Gerrard and Scholes.

The impact of the overseas player on English football over the last 20 years is almost beyond measure.  Since the start of the Premier League in 1992 the amount of foreign players entering the league has risen dramatically year on year.  In the beginning the professionalism, dedication to training and personal fitness was almost never before seen by English players. 

Wenger’s arrival at Arsenal, bringing in continental coaching techniques and imparting his passing philosophy had a major impact on both the Club and its English contingent.  It transformed them from being steady performers but lacking panache under George Graham, to being a trophy winning beautiful Swan in the first decade of his reign.  That his team became only the second ever Invincibles in 2004 is truly one of the greatest achievements in modern English football.  This was built on a mix of a foreign coach, playing with a largely foreign playing staff, mixed with a blend of continental ideas on passing and possession and the traditional English fighting spirit.  There is no doubt that without the arrival of Wenger and the players he brought in from overseas that Arsenal would ever have gone on to achieve that feat. The team that started the most regularly that season featured just two Englishmen; Sol Campbell and Ashley Cole, at the time both England regulars.

They popular theory is the more Englishmen playing in the Premier League, the better the England team will be.  As we have discovered, throughout the history of English football, there has never been a period of great achievement by an England team. The 1966 World Cup win obviously stands out, but in 85 years since the first World Cup was played, one solitary win is hardly something to shout about. The recent greater influx of foreign talent hasn't somehow heralded a decline in the national team’s fortunes.  If anything, I believe that it has raised the bar for young English talent coming through.  The likes of Gerrard and Lampard have had to continue to progress and improve in the light of great foreign players joining their respective Clubs.  In recent years younger players at Chelsea have been able to look to the likes of John Terry, Frank Lampard and Ashley Cole and see first-hand the levels they need to achieve day in day out to play at the top level.  A quota system limiting foreign players in Premier League squads would reduce the competition to these young players and therefore not necessarily increase the quality of the English talent.

My strong opinion is that given time, the Elite Player Performance Plan should bear fruit.  The England Youth Teams are becoming more successful within their age groups and the football being taught in academies is progressive and built on a base of skilled possession football.  Not by chance is this approach also favoured on the continent. The great Ajax and Holland Teams were inspired by the coaching of Rinus Michels and his philosophy of Total Football. This in turn was mastered by Cruyff’s vision of youth coaching at La Masia whilst at FC Barcelona and most recently Pep Guardiola, as a student of Cruyff, developed and allowed the Tika-Taka style to flourish as his 2008-2012 Barcelona team became one of the most lauded Club sides of all time.

It is too simplistic to state that we should impart and impose the philosophy of La Masia onto every youth set up in England.  Firstly it is not practical, and secondly it does not fit the make-up of the traditional English game.  What we should do however is allow this melting pot of ideas from around the globe to continually influence our game.  Fans young and old love watching the stars of today dazzle and delight us with skill and flair.  Boys grow up wanting to be Hazard and Aguero. 

The Premier League TV money that comes from having a thriving successful competition is due to the influx of foreign stars to England.  The investment and progression made in training facilities even in the last ten to fifteen years cannot be ignored.  This is a direct consequence of TV money.

There is a direct link between the rise in wages paid to Premier League footballers and the increase in TV revenues, so I can understand when figures like Sir Alan Sugar, former Tottenham Chairman, says that he fears all the money will just line the pockets of Agents and Players. Some of it will.  Some of it will also go on developing youth players and some will undoubtedly go on buying the future cream of foreign talent.

However all this should be seen as a positive.  The English players of tomorrow will be better from training and learning from the top players of today.  These top players at present are foreign, but at the end of the day the England team is more likely to benefit from youth players being exposed to increased quality and competition at Clubs.

I would much rather have an England set up made of 25 top players who have earned and fought their way to be at the very top due to the level of competition at their Clubs, than a pool of 50 or 100 average players given opportunities by default due to the country of their birth.

The TV money has helped to support and grow our wonderful English Premier League. By default (and some design) it has financed the development of football in this country.  We should welcome it and be grateful for it and see how it can help progress the development of English players and the English Team. 


History shows us from that watershed game at Wembley in 1953 that burying our head in the sand, believing that English is best and not embracing the best practices around us is detrimental to England’s success. We need to welcome the benefit different cultures and influences can have on the England Team and see how the TV money can be a good thing. Ride the crest of the wave, enjoy the influx of the best players to our shores and do all we can to embrace the best League in the World. Even if it is from our living rooms.

Thursday 12 February 2015

In the first of a Two Part Special, @gt4abl 's Spanish Football Correspondent Miguel Davisse gives his thoughts on the new Premier League TV Rights Deal. In Part One, Miguel discusses the financial details of the deal and the pressing concerns of Pundits and the General Football Fan.

£5.14 Billion. 

Yes, £5.14 Billion

If you haven’t yet heard, the latest Premier League domestic television rights were auctioned and the total paid by BskyB and BT, across the seven available packages for 3 seasons from 2016/17-2018/19, was £5.14billion.

Now this is a lot of money.  It is undeniable; it is, a lot, of money.

Ex-Players, pundits and journalists - not to disclude your typical irate football fan (who also tends to get irate and have opinions on almost anything) - were quick to go onto Social Media and proclaim it ‘obscene, disgusting’ and accused the Clubs of 'money grabbing.'

Firstly, in order to address these concerns and opinions, we must lay out the specifics of the deal.  BT paid £320m per season for their packages. This equates to £7.6m per game. BskyB paid £1.39bn per season, equating to roughly £11.07m per game. 

Without going into too much debate, this can be seen as good negotiating by BT and Sky overpaying, but please remember Sky got the choice slots on Monday Nights and the 4pm Sunday games. As such these are worth more via advertising revenue therefore the amount per game is worth noting but not necessarily representative of over/under payment by either party. 

The 5.14bn was 71% more than the last rights auction, which by Sky’s own admission was £330m above their forecast. For context at the conception of the Premier League in 1992, the five year rights package cost only £191m, but there was vastly less games broadcast and Sky was the only rights holder.  Also given that in 1986 there was no live football on TV, not even a highlights show on television. It shows just how far English football has come in terms of quality and as a spectacle to be worth so much to the domestic market.

Secondly, now that the Business news is over, I shall proceed to address the nonsense that has been floating around this week.

The crux of the whole thing revolves around a few key facts.  

Spoiler alert:  FOOTBALL IS A BUSINESS! 

Whether we as fans and lovers of the most beautiful game like it, football is a business and big business at that. 

The basic concepts of economics are Supply and Demand.  If there is more Demand for a product (more companies bidding for TV rights) and the volume of Supply for that product (Premier League football) stays the same, the price will only ever go up.

A good example of the opposite is petrol prices.  Demand (people filling up their cars) remains fairly constant. Supply has been increased by more Arab oil on the market. Therefore because there is more of the commodity about and the amount people want remains the same, the price goes down. 

This is true of Football.  I do hear those who say that actually the amount paid is too much and is an obscene amount of money…which to an extent I do agree with them. However, I am yet to see an internet naysayer quoting how much money would represent a fair price and explain why.

Accusation One:

 '..but what about the Fat Cat Chairman greasing his palms at the fans expense?'

It is worth noting that again, this is a statement that can be proven to be undoubtedly true in some high profile cases.  No Chelsea fan can seriously argue that Roman Abramovic bought Chelsea Football Club in 2003 due to him being a long-term fan that stood in the Shed End in the dark days of the 80’s.  He bought the club as an investment vehicle and a way of basing himself in Britain. 

However, the argument about ‘real fans’ not being able to afford the price of football, due to the villainous foreign owner is a failed one.  The so called ‘real fans’ dominated the scene in the 70’s and 80’s. This was a period of major football hooligan disasters at Football Stadia leading to the expulsion of English clubs from European Competition.  Do we really want these ‘real fans’ at our grounds in 2015?  I certainly don’t.  The atmosphere really may not be what it was twenty or thirty years ago, but I prefer being able to attend a football match and seeing younger kids walking into the ground.  Seeing Women in football grounds not harassed and intimidated by these ‘real fans’ is a pleasure to see.  The atmosphere may not be the same, but I prefer the safety and inclusiveness of modern football to a few drunken louts chanting obscenities any day.

The last nail in the coffin to that argument is the attendances.  95% of seats available for sale are sold.  If football really was too expensive for the football fan, ground attendance would fall, not increase at it has this season.  Since the financial crash, a large number of established Premier League Clubs have frozen Season Ticket prices to protect their loyal fans from the pressure of inflation and constraint on their household budgets in other areas.  I salute those clubs for doing the right thing.

Accusation Two:

'They’re all over paid prima-donas'

I imagine you, reader, are the hard working type.  You try hard and work well to achieve the best you can for yourself and your family.  If you excel at your chosen profession, you get promotions, you may even be headhunted.  You move on to another company. You get further recognition, you’re doing a great job, your company is successful due to the business you are bringing in and they also grow and expand.  You are the star of your company.

Should you therefore be paid as the best person in that organisation? Should your hard work and effort to close those business deals and bring success to the company be rewarded? Absolutely!

Would you turn down that bonus or wage increase your hard work deserves to give it to the lady who cleans your office block in the evening, or to the lady who cooks your breakfast?  I’m not so sure.

Compared to the average fan, players’ wages are astronomical.  However your average fan isn't at the very pinnacle of their profession and one of the best at their job in the world.  And if they are, then I bet you they get paid the going rate for it!

To put this into context, Hedge Fund Managers can get paid hundreds of millions of Dollars a year.  To make further context, LeBron James earned $72.3 million last year.  Tiger Woods who is now 62nd in the Golf world rankings still earned $61.2 million in 2014.  This makes Wayne Rooney’s $23.4m and 43rd place in the Forbes Top 100 Paid Sportsmen look distinctly average.

My point in all of this is that although the wages are pretty incomprehensible to the fan that pays his 40 hard earned pounds on a Saturday afternoon, the top players he has paid to support are paid top wages as they are at the top of their profession. The Fan is entitled to his opinion as he pays his ticket money and as such has a certain right to critique their value of performance to wage.  However the Players' hard work, sacrifice and value as a commodity to his club, shouldn't just be based solely against his weekly wage.  Football Clubs are Businesses.  It’s not a nice thing to acknowledge but they are. Football at the top level is not the same as Sunday league.

Clubs all have Football in the Community Schemes, and one of the benefits of Clubs being big Companies are that they generally all have good CSR schemes to drive benefits back into the local communities.  They run after school clubs in schools, they support local good causes. They also support global charities such as the excellent Right To Play. 

A truly brilliant example of what a club can do for it's community is Manchester City’s recent complex and redevelopment of a desolate area of Manchester.  A shining example of the good a football club can do in a community through the increase in football TV  revenues.


To conclude, the modern fan enjoys a great spectacle.  They enjoy this spectacle, in a safe, well maintained Stadium, whilst watching a selection of some of the greatest footballers in the world.  The armchair fan can now also watch this spectacle in HD, and more of it than ever before. 


Who’s for going back to the 80’s, with no TV coverage, run down stadia and hooligans?  ….anyone?