Why Jose wants G14 to become G15
After last night’s draw Jose Mourinho was asked what needed to happen to improve Chelsea’s chances of winning the Champions League. His reply was blunt: turn G14 into G15. When asked to explain further Mourinho refused to elaborate and walked away. So who exactly are G14? And why does Mourinho want them to become G15? Well, the destiny of the Champions League and G14 are most definitely linked. Mourinho is right about that.
In the 1991/92 season the European Cup took the first steps toward becoming the Champions League. Group stages were introduced to what had always been a straight forward knockout competition. Bizarrely the knockout rounds were played first, followed by the now familiar mini leagues. This was subsequently changed, after complaints that the absence of quarter and semi finals diluted the excitement.
The difference between then and now is nicely illustrated by Nottingham Forest. In their 1978/79 European Cup winning campaign Forest played a total of nine games, including the final. They eliminated Liverpool, AEK Athens, Grasshoppers of Zurich, and FC Koln – all over two legs – before beating Malmo, 1-0 in the final. With respect (and I am not having any kind of dig at Forest here) how many viewers across Europe would sit their fat arse down to watch Forest v Grasshoppers, or even Forest v Malmo?
This was the primary reason the format was changed, there weren’t enough games and certainly not enough mouth watering fixtures for the pan-European TV audience. Television, the new hand feeding football, wanted the competition bigger and better. They wanted the big clubs to survive until they were the only ones standing. Then they would play off against each other in bumper fixtures, watched on TV by every football fan in Europe
What TV and these elite clubs wanted was more Milan v Barcelona, less Forest v Grasshoppers. That would maximise revenue, for everyone involved. The change was actively sought by Europe’s leading clubs, who aggressively lobbied UEFA. Predictably, in the face of a tempting cash offer, UEFA capitulated. Europe’s premier club competition, designed as a knockout challenge between title winners only, was to become a money spinning TV league.
That group of Europe’s top clubs, who had successfully bullied UEFA, would ultimately cement their relationship and become G14. The mission statement in their manifesto is clear enough: “To promote co-operation and good relations between G14 and FIFA, UEFA and any other sporting institutions and/or professional football clubs, paying special attention to negotiating the format, administration and operation of the club competitions in which the member clubs are involved [emphasis added].” In other words, to control the Champions League.
A second idea was then introduced, one which would expand the competition even further. The problem was that some countries had more than one ‘big’ club, while others had none; Grasshoppers, Malmo, Bruges, with respect, are not global audience pullers. So UEFA allowed teams who had finished as low as fourth in their respective leagues into the so called ‘Champions’ League. Barcelona and Real Madrid couldn’t both win the Spanish title every season, and similar situations existed in England, Italy and Germany – all valuable TV markets.
So the modern Champions League was born, specifically designed for television and artificially inflated to ensure every ‘big’ club participated, every season. With a not so hidden agenda of funnelling as much cash as possible into the coffers of the members of G14. The dominance this cash has helped G14 clubs to achieve is mind blowing. In fact it is little short of absolute.
Since the league format was introduced all fourteen Champions League finals have been won by clubs who are members of G14. In fact only two non G14 clubs have even reached the final since the changes were made; Monaco who were thrashed in the 2004 decider and Sampdoria who lost the first one back in 1992. Every other final has been exclusively between G14 clubs. Impressed? It gets better, the effect on domestic leagues is truly unbelievable.
Since the inception of the Premier League in 1992, the same year the European Cup format was adjusted, G14 clubs have failed to win the English title only twice; Chelsea and Blackburn Rovers, both fuelled by independent wealth, were the party poopers. Chelsea could be about to make that three times, but I am not in the poultry counting business.
Over the same fourteen year span in Spain only two non G14 clubs won La Liga: Atletico Madrid and Deportivo La Coruna. In Italy’s Serie A the picture is identical; in the last fourteen years only the Roman clubs, Lazio and Roma, have managed to steal the title away from G14, once each, both effectively bankrupting themselves in the process.
Put into perspective: since the Champions League changed format the titles in England, Italy and Spain have been won by G14 clubs thirty-six times out of a possible forty-two. In fact just six G14 clubs shared thirty-four of those thirty-six titles between them. Add this to the record of G14 clubs in the Champions League over the same period, a perfect fourteen out of fourteen. Now that’s what I call dominance.
This season a G14 club will win the title in Spain, same in Italy, same in France, same in Germany, same in the Champions League. In fact the only non G14 club who might win a major European title is, well, you guessed it. Yet some claim it is Chelsea who are making the game “uncompetitive”. Of course we are. Everything was just hunky dory before Roman Abramovich arrived. Returning to reality, why does Mourinho want G14 to become G15, and who exactly are G14?
G14, ironically, was originally formed with fourteen members but four more were added in 2002, including Arsenal. So really they are G18, but I guess G14 has a better ring to it. The prime movers and shakers are Milan, Juventus, Bayern Munich, Manchester United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Liverpool and Arsenal. There are nine other members but the aforementioned nine are the ones who wear the trousers. And let me assure you these are expensive trousers.
If you look at when football first became a real money pot, and television’s bitch, back in the early nineties, you’ll see a clear break from the past. Leagues which had been won by a multitude of teams suddenly became the preserve of a just a handful of elite clubs. Older fans will remember a time when second division teams won the FA Cup, when the league title was won by a different club every year. When the European Cup was won by teams like Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Steaua Bucharest, and Red Star Belgrade.
Those days are long gone. What killed them off and changed football forever was money, television and G14. We are now indisputably in an era where financial muscle is the single most important factor in determining if a club will be successful. About fourteen years ago a line was drawn in the sand; if you were in the elite at the time you were virtually guaranteed to stay there. If you were not already part of the elite then tough, you needed a miracle, an extraordinary amount of luck or possibly a Russian billionaire in order to compete.
Obviously I’d like to sell you the Rom-antic notion that Chelsea are now crusading on behalf of football against G14, sadly we are not. We applied to join G14 before the oil had dried on Abramovich’s first down payment. Shame on us, really. However the club did not secure the necessary votes; Manchester United, Arsenal and Barcelona were three who objected – I believe you need unanimous agreement to join. Though oddly enough Liverpool supported Chelsea’s application.
Why Mourinho feels we need to be part of G14 in order to improve our chances of winning the Champions League is another matter. There are rumours that G14 clubs have an informal agreement not to sell their star players to anyone but each other. On known evidence that doesn’t seem to be true, we bought Claude Makelele from Real Madrid for example. To counter that we haven’t bought a genuine mega star in his prime, no Ronaldinho, Thierry Henry or Andriy Shevchenko. But my view is that there are only a handful of players in that bracket, so it’s more likely to be lack of supply than conspiracy.
The other rumour, which I believe is mainly paranoia, is that G14 has an influence over which referees are appointed to Champions League games. I suspect Mourinho was unhappy with the apponitment of Marcus Merk, a referee known to be whistle happy. I’m guessing Mourinho was implying a referee designed to slow down the game was deliberately chosen, as this would favour the team defending a lead. Merk had previously controlled a Porto game when Mourinho was in charge there, and he complained at the time that Merk had destroyed the game by whistling incessantly. I don’t believe that at all, despite Merk giving a foul every ninety seconds, and I wish Mourinho would sometimes accept that we can be beaten without the aid of a global, anti-Chelsea, conspiracy.
What I do believe is that it is desperately unhealthy (to put it politely) for a handful of powerful clubs to exercise so much influence, in particular over the Champions League and how it is organised. The fact that this influence enables these clubs to utterly dominate the major European leagues is scandalous. Despite what opposition supporters think of us, and our new found wealth, I would prefer it if clubs didn’t need the arrival of a billionaire in order to compete. My allegiance to Chelsea aside, I would love to see a club like Bolton, or Wigan or even (God forgive me) West Ham win the league. The chances of it happening? Who to blame?
You can figure out both answers yourself.
Related links:
- Takeover bid could change face of football
- Chelsea deny application to G14
- Why greed of G14 is the greatest threat facing the game
- Posted at 03:15 PM · Permalink · Print · 7391 views · Last indexed by Google on the 15th May 2008
- Tags: Champions League, Chelsea, G14, Jose Mourinho
Yet again a magnificent article. Extremely interesting, well-written and cheeky in a good way. Super stuff, Bingo! I am ashamed to admit that I didn’t know any of that.
Spot on Blingo - 24 carat stuff as always.
G14 is a cartel, plain and simple. In any other industry the competition authorities would have had some serious words a long time ago. The influence they hold over UEFA is clearly unhealthy, but UEFA cannot live without them. Not a good situation for the game as a whole.
The group stages idea always made me laugh - plenty of second chances to avoid an early exit should one of the big boys take a surprise pasting from Grasshoppers or Malmo. It is the big prize, no question, and whilst the names that Forest beat may not be as glamorous, they (and the Liverpool sides of the 70’s and 80’s) beat what was in front of them and did it without the safety net (and guaranteed income) that exists now.
The situation brings to mind the Premier League breakaway - Dein, Edwards and co. all pushed relentlessly for years to obtain themselves a bigger chunk of the pie and greater control over the game for the ‘Big 5′, with scant regard for what would happen to the ‘have nots’. Part of me thinks that they all deserve to be utterly dominated for a decade or so by someone outside of their clique - might give them a bit of a reality check, although I doubt it somehow.
Brilliant Blingo! It’s been apparent for some time that not being a member of G14(18) is a distinct disadvantage in terms of influence over UEFA and FIFA. As you say, the world would be better if nobody needed rich benfactors to compete, but football is just like any other big business these days and wealth breeds wealth on the whole. I’d love to start a mobile phone company perhaps, but with Vodafone, O2, Orange etc holding court I’d have no chance of competing. Similary with football, who wouldn’t love to run a club on the brink and through sheer hard work and exploiting of local talent rise to the very top (a la Wimbledon, Wigan or prospectively Reading) but if you develop the best 15 players ever seen, the big boys will swoop and you’ll take the money. Everyone has a price, everyone, no exceptions. Just look at Lyon and Marseille and the price they got for Essien and Drogba respectively. Never doubt that both fees would have been halved for Airline or Manure.
I still have a conspiracy theory about refereeing but not G14 related, more on an anti-English theme relating to lack of any forgiveness over Heysel. Whilst the SB ref seemed hopelessly biased (IMHO) last night’s seemed ridiculously pedantic.
And of course, the collective nose out joint committee comprising Manure and Airline will never accept us willingly until we are in a position of utter supremacy or it becomes to their advantage. RA, BB and PK know this and will undoubtedly be oiling the right wheels to overcome this. A shame it’s necessary, but a necessary evil in these global branded, success crazed days.
Great great article!
Next stage of the one-sided punishment seems to have arisen, as Chelsea have been charged by the FA over the WBA game, but funnily enough West brom get away scott-free.
Don’t forget that it was a long time ago, and transfers were not as frequent thus all those Malmos and shit may have had awesome players.
Same in Russia. Now people say we are shit football-wise, but no one knows how much talent and world-class players we had back in the Soviet days. Real wanted many of our players, and were offering millions but obviously couldn’t succeed.
Same with other countries.
so when Arsenal won league in 1998 they weren’t part of G14!!
In one sentence Mourinho has summed himself up, and in my opinion the stance of Chelsea. His words basically say ‘G14 are corrupt, we should be part of G14′ thus saying that unless they are involved in the corruptness then it isn’t fair.
Had Chelsea won last night’s game it would have been all about ‘How we got through without being one of the G14′, yet today, in a frankly surprising statement he is bemaoning the fact that they are not.
I am not a Chelsea fan but do love football in general and in turn have the greatest respect for what Mourinho has done so far. And this is why I’m surprised he has said this. I understand his ‘everyone hates us’ attitude as it deflects attention from the team, but I thought this was what he thrived on - being an outsider of sorts, but to come out and suddenly decide that because things haven’t gone his way for once he wants to be ‘part of the pack’ has shown his morals are not truly what he preaches. And that’s a shame.
Come on Mourinho, you’ve got the best team in England and arguably Europe, an unlimited bank account and the potential to go on to become the biggest team football has ever seen. Do you really need to be the boss of G14 too? Now that would be a monopoly.
No one was a member of G14 in 1998, it wasn’t officially formed until 2000. It doesn’t invalidate the argument, the big clubs had already unofficially grouped together - including Arsenal - way before G14 was formally announced to the world.
Wake up, smell the coffee.
Benfica scored - come on!
This superb article should be saved + circulated by every true fan of football.
It outlines what is *really* killing the sport.
As I’ve maintained for years now, the big monopoly clubs are death to the “people’s game”. This is the real reason you see Chelsea being maligned + attacked.
Benfica scored - come on!
Liverpool’s demise has cheered me up a tad.
I want to see Barca play and thrash Arsenal now — be able to watch Ronaldinho without suffering a minor nervous breakdown each time he’s on the ball.
A rather long article that says very little. What precisely was your point I nodded off?
Not a poor article, necessarily, but it must be getting exhausting to come up with reasons why Chelsea FC aren’t everything you want them to be for the money that’s been spent. No class, no style, no bigger waste of money in the history of the sport.
And Maureen is running out of excuses.
Yes, all very conspiratorial that:
G14 clubs usually win their respective leagues;
G14 clubs usually win the Champ League;
G14 clubs are the ‘bigger’ clubs.
However, the relationship is really:
‘Bigger’ clubs usually win their respective leagues;
‘Bigger’ clubs usually win the Champ League;
‘Bigger’ clubs are in the G14.
The independent variable is being a wealthy, influential club, not membership of G14. Don’t fret, Chelski are rapidly buying there way into the ‘Big Club’ Club, so they’ll get the results you desire. Just lay off the conspiracy rubbish. Leave that to Moaninho.
Want to even out the domestic leagues? Introduce a club salary cap and a draft for players wishing to change clubs.
Why are these idiots here? Can you all please buy a yourself a brain or something, because your “money” crap ain’t even funny now.
People seem to think that if we *potentially* have the money, we not only actually have the money, we spend. In reality, all the big clubs have spent as much in terms of players relative to their quality. Chelsea never bought a super star, like MU, Real or Barca, and never did other shit you retards accuse it of.
So shut up and go to your beloved Liverpools and shit like that. Oh, wait, Benfica owned you big time :P
A very good article but I think we need to pay more attention to ‘what chelsea (we) need to do to win the Champions League’.
1. Fire Jose Mourinho and sell Drogba to
fund his compensation.* Most people were
questioning his tactics which to me are not
new but only because the numbers were
reversed this time. He doesn’t know who to buy,
he cannot tell who is better between two
players. He suppresses and kills talent, has no
tactics. There’s a million things not right
about JM and as long as we have him
we’ll be dissappointed.
2. Sell these players {Ferreira, Calvalho, Duff,
Eidur, Caltorn Cole, Del Horno}.**World class players
but options to us. Why would we rather have Duff
on the bench than get £10 million for him from ManU.
3. Having Ballack already, we need to go to Arsenal
and ask how much they need for Thiery.
So…how’s it feel to have splashed hundreds of millions of pounds, get shat all over by Barcelona, and watch a bunch of kids from across the road beat Real Madrid?
Bring back Zola.
Henry - I generally try to ignore you, or at least to be as courteous as possible when responding, but it is difficult not to be impolite when you post comments that even the most raving of idiots would be truly ashamed of.
Fire Jose because he hasn’t won the CL at two attempts with Chelsea? As long as we have JM we’ll be disappointed? Just what kind of fool are you? But then we get to the crux of the matter - “he cannot tell who is better between two players”. Translated - he doesn’t share your viewpoint on the Crespo / Drogba dilemma. Maybe we should put you in charge? It’d be one hell of a laugh if nothing else. Or maybe Jose might know a little bit more than you do? His record suggests so. Criticising the manager is one thing - baseless lunacy is entirely another.
Yeah, I’m absolutely gutted with the way things are down at the Bridge. Presumably you won’t be celebrating if we win a second league title - you’re clearly very disappointed with it all? I await your Cantona-esque philosophical ramblings about how I should beware my ego when the moon is flying sideways towards the vulture with baited breath.
And James - feels just fine thanks, even if ’shat on’ is hardly the right expression. And beating Real Madrid means very little if they don’t go on to win it. Long way to go yet.
Jonathan, Nothing surprises me at all, not from somebody who also thought Ranieri knew what he was doing. With your onesided anaylsis, ‘politeness’ is out of question. How come ‘what you see’ is always influenced by the results?
I don’t know why these two League titles are seducing you? You are far worse than I thought. Just why would you ignore me? You just want everybody to come out and agree with you all the times. You’re one of the many fans that are saying JM messed up with his tactics on Tuesday, just because we didn’t get a result. He’s been like that all season, only we’ve been lucky with results.Abrahamovich needs to save himself from a possible fatal heart attack(that could come with watching that kind of football) and pull the trigger. The devil hates us all evenly and I hope next season it’s somebody else’s turn to watch Bouring football. We’ve had our share of being managed by ‘Special Ones’(idiots), what we need now is a manager with brains. I don’t care where JM goes, as long as he stays there when he gets there.
Henry, You really are an idiot of the highest order.
I admire Jonathan’s persistence - he always gives a rational and objective riposte to your idiocy. But me, I won’t get into a ‘debate’ with somebody who clearly has issues. I would hope that regular commenters follow my lead and ignore you.
/rant
I’m afraid “Henry” is clearly a recent addition to the the blue band wagon. To those of us lucky to be present at Wembley in 1997 and who were too young to remember the 1970 cup final or watch the likes of Osgood and Harris play, the embarresment of riches we are currently enjoying makes the result on Tuesday seem like a drop in the ocean.
Barring the greatest collapse since the West Indies bowled out England for 43 runs in Port of Spain we will win back to back titles. We have a pretty good chance of completing a double. This is the kind of failure I can live with.
So “Henry” is either a gooner stooge, a former UTD supporter recently having made the switch (and trust me I met one of these recently and he wasn’t a 7 year old!!!!) or completely bonkers.
Henry old chap,
If you could kindly direct me to whereabouts on this blog I mentioned that Ranieri knew what he was doing, I’d be most grateful.
Thanks awfully.
To your credit you try to justify the G14 paranoia view (rather than just state it as self-evident), but the figures given don’t ring true. It’s no good blaming G14 for its influence over 14 years then say it’s only been in existence for 6 years! As a result, msg #14 from SBFC provides a more likely logic.
I’d happily accept the line that says money leads to money, but the first stage of that was home teams keeping all the gate receipts instead of the split that we only still see in the FA Cup, then the TV money introduced with Sky, then the creation of the PL which we only just snuck into and then G14. The money’s the point, not the organisation. Added to the extra professionalism within the game, the money dictates what can be afforded.
That said, given that the money is the key, you do make a good point that it’s only independent money that can realistically barge any club’s way into the top rank, and we’ve had that twice. First with Harding’s input paying for the Gulitt\Vialli\Zola years and now with Abramovich.
I think both you - Squiddy - and SBFC are missing the point. The announcement of G14 was only making public what had been a well organised clique of elite clubs for many years. The threat from the big clubs that persuaded UEFA to expand the European Cup into the Champions League was that they would break away and form their own European League. The elite clubs were organised and shared a collective purpose a long time before anyone had heard of G14.
The point I was making is that the ‘big’ clubs are now hermetically sealed into their position. There was a time when Everton, Man City, Derby, Forest, Leeds won the League. What chance of that now? There was a time, as I said, when smaller teams could also win the European Cup. These things are now impossible, in no small part because regular participation in the cash cow that is the CL has exaggerated the gap between the elite and the rest. The only ‘conspiracy’ I’m pointing to is that this was done deliberately. Do you doubt that?
This is not really an issue of club loyalty, though it seems to have been taken that way by some.
I think you are having some issues discerning causation. If one reads carefully, it is not hard to see the holes in your thinking. A little knowledge is a dangerous. Yours lacks enough knowledge to rise to that level.
“Ths has been done deliberately” - is that really it? The comment about causation has it exactly right. The problem is you’ve started with a conclusion and worked back and inevitably concluded “conspiracy”. An error of classic proportions.
I won’t point out the flaws because that usually results in a defensive reply. What I would ask is that you go back over it and find it for yourself. For example, when you say “six G14 clubs shared 34 of those 36 titles” try saying “12 G14 clubs shared 2 of 36 titles” and then ask what’s in it for those 12 G14 clubs.
OM; please feel free to point out the holes you see.
Same for Squddy; Please do point out any flaws you perceive. As for your comment - “12 G14 clubs shared 2 of 36 titles”, it’s inaccurate. Not all G14’s members are in the three leagues I was referring to.
Do either of you genuinely believe G14’s influence is good for football? Good for those clubs who are not members? If so why? I’m not being “defensive” at all, I’m genuinely interested to hear different points of view.
I’ve no reason to be defensive, I wrote a generalised view giving my perception. The figures and statistics I gave are accurate, European football is dominated by a handful of clubs and it certainly wasn’t always like that.
I accept some of the piece is simplistic - I cannot condense 14 years of political, financial and sporting history into a blog sized article - and my conclusions may well be slanted but saying ‘You’re wrong but I’m not going to tell you why’ is a bit disingenuous.
The article tries to extrapolate from an insuation. I don’t have to do anything. It’s you and JM who have to make your respective cases, ideally without using figures that leave out as much as they include. It was Mourinho who refused to explain and left the insuation hanging, as you said in your opening paragraph, so to turn that round and claim the onus is on others is rather slippery - first let’s have an accurate position to argue for or against.
You can’t claim accuracy for figures when for 8 of the 14 years the organisation didn’t exist at all, then say the clubs were working to influence Uefa anyway. Why create an organisation then?
I don’t even accept the validity of your question. The FA does its work for football, but some of it works for the grass-roots game and against a professional game. Ultimately this led to the Premier League, where they consider issues at their level and not levels below. Above that in the European game where Uefa have jurisdiction a group of bigger clubs form a group which represents them, but the competition they enter doesn’t exclude any club outside their group and any competition winner, inside or outside that group, are able to win the same trophy with the same prize fund. Really, so what? What else would you expect?
When the European Cup existed we had one team only from each country including every half-baked plot of land you could stick a flag on. Champions all, but it put the likes of Derry, Linfield, Innsbruck, Lucerne and Omonia Nicosia in place of Juventus or Barcelona etc. If the top clubs are anything to aspire to in any way whatsoever then the rating of countries (on performance, note) was essential. The smaller clubs from tiny countries still enter and if they justify their place then the likes of FC Thun get through to play Arsenal, in much the same way as Colchester got through to play us in the FA Cup.
Go to the Houses of Parliament and see what lobby groups exist for every industry under the sun. Is that any different to a G14? You could ask how they serve a wider market or how they benefit consumers? It’s exactly the same.
By all means complain, but complain about the whole world first, then come back to the G14 issue and if you can find argument that goes further than “Big clubs are big. Big is bad, m’kay” maybe we can take it further. But they’ll probably have let us in by then, so I imagine it won’t actually come to that.
I’m not sure I understand much of that. For example; “Above that in the European game where Uefa have jurisdiction a group of bigger clubs form a group which represents them, but the competition they enter doesn’t exclude any club outside their group and any competition winner, inside or outside that group, are able to win the same trophy with the same prize fund. Really, so what? What else would you expect?” Doesn’t make a great deal of sense to me, but I’m sure it’s an impressive argument.
And who, or what, is “m’kay”? Way over my head. You’re not a student by any chance?
I’ll try a bit of punctuation this time - always wondered what it was for…
“Above that [the level of the national association - the FA] in the European game where Uefa have jurisdiction, a group of bigger clubs form a group [G14] which represents them, but the competition they enter [CL] doesn’t exclude any club outside. Their group, and any competition winner inside or outside that group, are able to win the same trophy with the same prize fund. Really, so what? What else would you expect?”
The other phrase is from “South Park”. It’s meant to represent a rather po-faced, politically-correct indignation. eg “Drugs are bad, m’kay. Don’t do drugs”. And no, I’m not a student. I’m rather older than all that would indicate! :)
Now, with that distraction out of the way, a response to the original points might be nice.
Okay; in as short a summary as I can manage. I was arguing against ‘Abramovich and Chelsea have made football uncompetitive’.
My argument was as follows; Football is already extremely uncompetitive. It has been becoming more and more uncompetitive over the last decade or so. The reason for it being uncompetitive is that the gap between the big clubs and the rest is wider now than it has ever been.
I suggested the main reason for this ever widening gap was the distribution of the CL TV and prize money.
I then connected the clubs in G14 to the expansion of the CL into a TV league.
It’s a fairly straightforward line of thinking. I do believe it is supported by the facts. Prior to the expansion of the CL the major leagues in Europe could be won by a club that was not part of the elite.
Leeds, Man City, Derby, Forest, Aston Villa, Everton, in England for example. Since the CL expansion that trend has come to an abrupt halt. You can pick three teams in every single league and you can guarantee one of them will win that league. Absolutely guaranteed.
It wasn’t always the case that the big clubs would win everything, every year. It is now. You can say it’s a truism, the big clubs will always win everything. But the fact is they didn’t. Not before the early 1990’s. Everything changed around that time, can you imagine Red Star Belgrade winning the Champions League now? Or Aston Villa?
I’m putting forward G14, and their influence over UEFA, as a principal reason for why that change came about. Further to that I was suggesting the financial imbalance between the big clubs and the rest is now so great that an Abramovich type investment is about the only way to bridge the gap.
Conspiracy is not a word I used. I doubt it was as premeditated as it looks, but for me the CL riches have ruined domestic football, by making every major league in Europe completive between a dwindling number of clubs only.
Feel free to disagree.
By the nature of these debates we talk about what we disagree on. I don’t disagree with a lot of that, but then if you look at msg#23 you’d know that.
Thing is, what you’ve said just now is not the basis of the article. The basis is starting from the cherry on the cake [G14] and working back. That an organisation that was created in 2000 caused the increasingly narrow range of clubs at the very top from a decade before. Read your own article - that’s what it says.
I’m not sure what year it was (80s sometime), but in my opinion the start of this narrowing process was when the home sides were allowed to keep all their gate receipts. This pre-dated the influence of Sky and was fought tooth and nail at the time, but threats already existed of a breakaway league so it was given as a concession to prevent that happening. It was around the time of English clubs being banned from Europe and that concentrated the minds of big clubs to maximise what revenue they had left.
Where other clubs would get a share of the receipts from Man U etc they were cut off and forced to rely on what they could generate themselves once a fortnight - not something every week. I’m not sure if this made big clubs bigger, but it certainly ensured small clubs stayed small. This had a particularly big effect toward the absence of small clubs getting a share of the trophies in my opinion, not what you’re putting forward. Whether I’m right or wrong it does have the major advantage of happening before the event, so at least it stands a chance.
Then Sky came into the equation but their initial charges were £2.99\month for the whole deal and didn’t immediately change matters until they got their broadcast rights.
Then Sky and their broadcast rights eventually combined with the creation of the Premier League which cut off everyone below the top division and really did start to concentrate the TV money into the top division and the popular clubs within it. And prices increased and prize funds increased and wages increased and transfer fees increased etc.
When you eventually get to the creation of G14 everything had been in full swing for almost decades. It’s a natural conclusion of Darwinian survival of the fittest, globalisation and centralisation. As someone else said the only way to prevent it is through salary caps or draft picks like they have in the NFL and that’s the complete opposite of the trend of the last 20 years.
I agree Roman hasn’t created an uncompetitiveness. I agree a narrower range of big clubs win big trophies and get big money. I agree it’s come to the point where only a major external investor can break through (either at Roman’s level or, at a much smaller level, Dave Whelan). But the link from Jose’s insinuation and your link from G14 backward in time are things I strongly disagree with. As OM rightly said “you are having some issues discerning causation”. That one sentence could’ve replaced this entire debate, except you haven’t seen it and now I’ve written all this rubbish (more fool me).
Yes, “conspiracy” is a word you didn’t use, but it’s the subtext isn’t it? Paranoia is another word not used. Start from the beginning and work forward and neither are needed. I don’t have any answers, but at least my version doesn’t require a temporal distortion for it to be coherent and without taking into account the kind of things I’ve mentioned I don’t think your conclusion can be placed in proper context to your argument.
One of the most interesting articles I have ever read!
Superb stuff!
However, I disagree with the non-conspiracy comments and referees. UEFA must keep G14 “sweet” - they are extremely worried about the formation of a breakaway, new, European Super League and the subsequent loss of income.
Referees are on a UEFA list for CL games and can be put on or taken off this list by the UEFA referee´s commitee.
Given the huge or even perverted influence G14 have over UEFA I can no reason why there isn´t an unwritten understanding that referee´s who don´t favour a top G14 club may well be taken off the list.
Good article.
However, at the end of the day, 11 players go on the pitch and play another 11 players. G14 may be able to influence the format of Champion’s League, but the coaches and players determine the outcome, and the club owners determine the resources they’ll have available.
Give me Roman’s roubles over G14 membership any day.
For that matter, give me Wigan’s spirit…
First let me point out I am an Arsenal supporter, so now that is out there.
I believe the biggest factor is not the money they receive from the ECL, but from their respective leagues.
You took data from 14 years buy then admitted that the G14/G18 was not formed until 200.
The teams that you listed that once graced the top of the English league was pre-Premiership, in fact Leeds were the last team to win the league in that group and that was in the 1989-1990 season, so years and years before all of this G14 started.
In the EPL, once sky got involved it became a lot harder for a smaller team to rise up like they use to, unless they were backed by a wealthy backer, we first say that with Blackburn, and now with Chelsea to a much bigger degree.
This then meant that the same teams qualified for the ECL every year, and the purses just enlarged.
Arsenal still managed to get along ok pre their entry to the G14/18 and given we won the league in 2001/02 is not fair to argue we did that without the “influence” of the G14/18.?
But we were also helped by Sky’s money through the premiership and I personally believe this is where the gulf started between the haves and have nots, though it never really helped Liverpool to much did it.
The problem with this article is the said teams have always dominated their respective leagues and looking purely at the respective Champions in those leagues is not a very good argument.
Looking at the teams that finished 2nd-4th may have been a more useful/interesting exercise, where historically smaller teams would have stood a better chance to break though in any given season.
It does seem quite ironic when most people are currently blaming Chelsea, or rather Abramovich for ruining football and not the bigger clubs as a whole.
I would be interested to know that given your dislike for bigger teams running the game as a whole, would you be an advocate to salary caps, and maybe transfer spending linked to a percentage of a teams given revenue?
I know this would have to be implemented across Europe as a whole, and that it would be open to abuse, but it could, if it was implemented correctly, give a even playing field.
This is exactly the kind of exposition I was looking for. I became curious about G-14 and their influence after reading about the Charleroi case.
Well done.
[...] The G-14 see soccer as an industry (which it is). Their position is that FIFA need keep the business aspect of the game in mind when making decisions; G-14 therefore want a voice in the decision-making process. For more on this powerful alliance, look here. [...]
generally bullshit. Liverpool dominated the 80’s and mancs in the 90’s without G14. Everton, Newcastle are examples of that.
You also forget that had it not been for the success of liverpool, mancs etc, England would not have 4 places in the CL, you would not have got the 4th spot, and you would probably be bankrupt.
yes, they have issues, but most of the clubs in there are long established, well run clubs. (obviously some exceptions)
Spot on Blingo, im in the process of researching/writing an essay on this topic for uni.
What do you think of ‘Adidas Real FC’ vs ‘Nike United FC’ or ‘FC Umbro Blues’ vs ‘Reebok Reds’ in the corparate elite european football league 2020??? Surely the way of things to come.