Chris Hutchings yesterday became the latest in a rapidly growing list of Premiership managers to lose his job, as Wigan Athletic chairman Dave Whelan sacked him after 6 successive defeats in the league. After a tentative start the managerial merry-go-round is now up to breakneck speed. So far 4 have gone, Jose Mourinho, Martin Jol, Sammy Lee and now Hutchings. This figure could soon rise to 5 or 6 though if the disgruntled murmurings are to be believed at Newcastle Utd and Middlesbrough. Graeme Souness has been touted as the current front runner to succeed Hutchings at Wigan, followed by Stuart Pearce and surprisingly ex-Wigan boss Paul Jewell.
Wigan started the season well but the frailty of the squad was exposed when Emile Heskey got injured and Hutchings could not replace the firepower of the resurgent forward. Influential midfielder Antonio Valencia has also been unavailable for much of the season and the club’s failure to score goals probably sealed his fate. Wigan chairman Dave Whelan deemed 6 losses in a row unacceptable. Even at this stage of the season relegation worries were beginning to emerge and fresh impetus was needed. It is difficult not to feel sorry for Hutchings. Never the most glamorous choice of manager, he was a hard worker and installed this ethic into his team, although he never enjoyed the reassurance of the fans full affection. Most people in Wigan were disappointed about Paul Jewell’s departure and their appreciation for what he did at the club is still present and he is the fans choice for a return to the JJB. It would be a strange turn around though for Jewell to take up the reigns again after not long ago citing that he had become disillusioned with life and wanted a break.
The Suitors
The Guardian believes Graeme Souness leads the candidates for the Wigan job but, like Bolton last month, the fact he is a well known personality and has been out of the game for several months, seemingly defaults his presence in managerial shortlists. Some believe Souness is holding out for the Republic of Ireland job. Stuart Pearce is also a perennial contender in these lists. The media believe the England U21 job is not enough for him and that he is using it as a stepping stone as he waits for a good offer. This is despite there being no indication, verbally or otherwise from Pearce that he is not content with his current role.
More heads will roll
If Pearce is waiting for the right job to appear there may be a few options available to him in the near future. Following Newcastle Utd’s 4-1 thrashing at home by Portsmouth there are rumours Sam Allardyce’s position has become precarious. This is a job Pearce, a former Newcastle player, would surely relish although his managerial record would not make him favourite. Newcastle have rubbished the speculation, Magpie’s chairman Chris Mort said, ‘This kind of story does not merit a response; it is ludicrous’. For now this is the board’s standing but they and the fans will not tolerate too many defensive performances like Saturday’s from the hapless Cacapa and co.
Meanwhile Gareth Southgate is walking a proverbial tightrope at Middlesbrough. A creditable draw against Juande Ramos’ Spurs, thanks to a Luke Young wonder goal may have kept him his job for a little while longer. Before that game Boro had lost 5 on the spin and they are struggling this season just a point above the relegation zone. Boro look lightweight upfront following the summer sales of Yakubu and Mark Viduka. Sanli Tuncay has taken a while to settle and Jeremie Aliadiere and Mido have lacked the quality of their predecessors. Boro are enduring the dangerous situation of playing good, attractive football but not getting results. Southgate will not change his tactics though, ‘the beliefs I have mean that the manner on which we play has to stay.’ William Hill has Southgate at 7-2 to go.
Whoever gets the Wigan job will face a difficult task this season, both in keeping the club in the division and holding onto their job. But who will go next? Derby’s Billy Davies, the hide-away Steve Bruce at Birmingham? Now that the sack race has really got going, expect more casualties to fall as Premiership chairmen become increasingly nervous about maintaining league status and meeting fan expectations. For many it will be merely a case of when and who.
Tuesday 6 November 2007
Monday 5 November 2007
Platini Pesters the Pack
Michel Platini, FIFA’s golden boy is fast becoming a dislikeable chap since landing the role of top dog at UEFA. First his plans to give Champions League places to domestic cup winners instead of the next highest league-placed teams was strongly opposed by Europe’s leading clubs and then he angered his French counterpart Arsene Wenger when he criticised the Arsenal manager’s policy of buying young players. Not long in the job and Platini is already ruffling more than a few feathers of the football world.
Champions League re-jig
Platini plans to increase the number of league champions from mid-size countries in the group stage of the Champions League, which would mean that the number of clubs qualifying from the ‘big 6’ European leagues would have to be reduced. The new UEFA President feels this is the best and fairest way of improving the standard of football across Europe. In the short term the introduction of weaker nation teams would produce a competition of a lesser spectacle for the viewing public as quality is reduced, viewing figures would go down, along with revenue and prize money. Also many teams that rely on qualifying via 2nd, 3rd or 4th place would suddenly be faced with radically diminished budgets for transfers and wages. In the long term, Platini hopes that these weaker teams would soon become stronger from the benefit of the financial gains of the Champions League. Teams from nations like Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland etc. could then be fully competitive and also draw in more viewers from the respective countries.
In Platini’s vision for the Champions League there would be a play-off between 16 winners of the domestic cups, with 4 progressing the group stage. The re-design will mean more effort and respect will be afforded to domestic cups and give chanced for smaller clubs to catch up financially with the annual league winners and European campaigners. This is something that has often been called for in England, where tradition was that the FA Cup was the greatest prize, but has now lost some of its value because there is less financial incentive. Man Utd summed up its diminishing value when they decided not to take part in 2000 in order to participate in the World Club Championship. The plans will be discussed further on November 12th but G14 chief executive Thomas Kurth spoke for the leading European clubs, ‘We are not in favour of a boycott or breakaway, but the clubs are not happy with the changes put forward and we want to be listened to.’
Leave those kids alone
Having managed to turn many of Europe’s biggest sides against him, Platini warmed to his antagonising theme and decided to pick out another aspect of the modern game he felt should change. Despite having a reputation as being one of Europe’s greatest developer’s of young talent, Platini strongly criticised Arsene Wenger’s policy of buying young players. Throughout his career Wenger’s strongest managerial policy has been his ability to turn raw talent into world class performers. Platini though believes it is bad for the future of the game and will only swell the divide between the successful clubs and the rest. ‘I do not like the system of Arsene Wenger. I don’t like that. If the best clubs but the best 15 or 16 players, then it is finished for all the clubs in Europe. If my son is playing at Millwall and at 16 Manchester Utd come in for this player, then when will Millwall have a good team?’ What Platini does not account for is that many players desperately want to sign for the top clubs, big clubs have the best facilities to help fulfil potential, and also Wenger is not the first and won’t be the last to do such a thing.
Major clubs have always had people scouring the land for the best young talent and often sign them from the smaller clubs. It only comes to Platini’s attention now because Arsenal are playing very well in England and Europe with a young team plucked from around Europe at a young age. You can see Platini’s point but ultimately it is an individual player’s choice as to where he wants to develop his career. If, like he says, his son played for Millwall, then he may never progress into the quality of player which a bigger club’s facilities and coaching could provide for. Also players all develop at varying levels, especially when they are young and still growing. It is just as conceivable that an average player develops into a good player by the time he is in his early 20s as it is for a player with immense potential not to live up to his promise. Gabriel Agbonlahor at Aston Villa was not talked about as being a future England star until this season, and he is now 20. Similarly, when Jermaine Pennant was signed by Arsenal in 1999, carrying a price tag of £2million for a 15year old, people said he would be a massive star in the future. However his career has stalled, now aged 24, he has not become the player many expected him to.
Protection
It is obviously harsh and somewhat unfair on the clubs that occasionally lose the stars of their academy, but they can protect themselves against such swoops. It may be an idea for Platini to install some compulsive stipulations in the contracts of youth players around Europe, such as future sell-on fees, as well as appearance and trophy related payments and compensation. There could also be obligations to send that player, or others on loan between the transferring clubs involved. The fact Arsenal’s current squad comprises several players developed at the club and also have a burgeoning youth team is a credit to Wenger’s scouting team for finding players with both the mental and technical qualities required to become good players. Next time he feels like commenting on something topical he would be well advised to choose a subject that got a few friends on board first.
Play nice Platini!
Champions League re-jig
Platini plans to increase the number of league champions from mid-size countries in the group stage of the Champions League, which would mean that the number of clubs qualifying from the ‘big 6’ European leagues would have to be reduced. The new UEFA President feels this is the best and fairest way of improving the standard of football across Europe. In the short term the introduction of weaker nation teams would produce a competition of a lesser spectacle for the viewing public as quality is reduced, viewing figures would go down, along with revenue and prize money. Also many teams that rely on qualifying via 2nd, 3rd or 4th place would suddenly be faced with radically diminished budgets for transfers and wages. In the long term, Platini hopes that these weaker teams would soon become stronger from the benefit of the financial gains of the Champions League. Teams from nations like Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland etc. could then be fully competitive and also draw in more viewers from the respective countries.
In Platini’s vision for the Champions League there would be a play-off between 16 winners of the domestic cups, with 4 progressing the group stage. The re-design will mean more effort and respect will be afforded to domestic cups and give chanced for smaller clubs to catch up financially with the annual league winners and European campaigners. This is something that has often been called for in England, where tradition was that the FA Cup was the greatest prize, but has now lost some of its value because there is less financial incentive. Man Utd summed up its diminishing value when they decided not to take part in 2000 in order to participate in the World Club Championship. The plans will be discussed further on November 12th but G14 chief executive Thomas Kurth spoke for the leading European clubs, ‘We are not in favour of a boycott or breakaway, but the clubs are not happy with the changes put forward and we want to be listened to.’
Leave those kids alone
Having managed to turn many of Europe’s biggest sides against him, Platini warmed to his antagonising theme and decided to pick out another aspect of the modern game he felt should change. Despite having a reputation as being one of Europe’s greatest developer’s of young talent, Platini strongly criticised Arsene Wenger’s policy of buying young players. Throughout his career Wenger’s strongest managerial policy has been his ability to turn raw talent into world class performers. Platini though believes it is bad for the future of the game and will only swell the divide between the successful clubs and the rest. ‘I do not like the system of Arsene Wenger. I don’t like that. If the best clubs but the best 15 or 16 players, then it is finished for all the clubs in Europe. If my son is playing at Millwall and at 16 Manchester Utd come in for this player, then when will Millwall have a good team?’ What Platini does not account for is that many players desperately want to sign for the top clubs, big clubs have the best facilities to help fulfil potential, and also Wenger is not the first and won’t be the last to do such a thing.
Major clubs have always had people scouring the land for the best young talent and often sign them from the smaller clubs. It only comes to Platini’s attention now because Arsenal are playing very well in England and Europe with a young team plucked from around Europe at a young age. You can see Platini’s point but ultimately it is an individual player’s choice as to where he wants to develop his career. If, like he says, his son played for Millwall, then he may never progress into the quality of player which a bigger club’s facilities and coaching could provide for. Also players all develop at varying levels, especially when they are young and still growing. It is just as conceivable that an average player develops into a good player by the time he is in his early 20s as it is for a player with immense potential not to live up to his promise. Gabriel Agbonlahor at Aston Villa was not talked about as being a future England star until this season, and he is now 20. Similarly, when Jermaine Pennant was signed by Arsenal in 1999, carrying a price tag of £2million for a 15year old, people said he would be a massive star in the future. However his career has stalled, now aged 24, he has not become the player many expected him to.
Protection
It is obviously harsh and somewhat unfair on the clubs that occasionally lose the stars of their academy, but they can protect themselves against such swoops. It may be an idea for Platini to install some compulsive stipulations in the contracts of youth players around Europe, such as future sell-on fees, as well as appearance and trophy related payments and compensation. There could also be obligations to send that player, or others on loan between the transferring clubs involved. The fact Arsenal’s current squad comprises several players developed at the club and also have a burgeoning youth team is a credit to Wenger’s scouting team for finding players with both the mental and technical qualities required to become good players. Next time he feels like commenting on something topical he would be well advised to choose a subject that got a few friends on board first.
Play nice Platini!
The Wage Debate
The debate over footballer’s wages reared its ugly head again this week after Liverpool player John Arne Riise’s payslip ended up on the internet, revealing his substantial pay packet plus numerous bonuses. Confidentiality is such that we rarely find out exactly how much Premier league stars are paid, although experts and insiders give us a rough idea as to ballpark figures. Riise’s carelessness then, sparked great excitement, surprise and also anger from some following this one-off peak into the real world of footballer wages. By the end of the week, John Terry had been lambasted by Sports Minister Gerry Sutcliffe for taking home ‘obscene’ wages and even PM Gordon Brown had had a word to say on the matter. So, are modern footballer’s being paid too much? Not enough maybe? And should we introduce a salary cap?
A False Economy
This is not the first time wages have caused controversy within the British game, and one presumes the FA and many of those inside football will hope the interest in a tricky matter dies away, as quickly as it surfaced. Roman Abramovich’s arrival at Chelsea in 2003 spawned the dawn of a new era of lavish spending in the Premiership. At the time many were aghast, at the unrealistic fees for players and wages being paid and frustrated by the unfair advantage it gave the London club. Since then other clubs have deemed the only way to compete at this new level of finance is to sell to wealthy foreign investors, but the voices of disquiet about this new era have rumbled on. Fans and several club directors are irritated by the farcical operating costs which mean clubs like Chelsea are making substantial losses each year (last year £80 million) but are bailed out by the owners. In reality clubs like Chelsea, West Ham and Man City would go bankrupt quickly and there is no safety net to protect from the likes of Abramovich, Magnusson or Shinawatra becoming bored and the vital funds being suddenly withdrawn. Just look what happened to Leeds Utd. Flying high and enjoying European success, Leeds owners miscalculated, or rather, took a gamble on future earnings, which failed to materialise. The club’s fall from grace was sizeable and they are now penniless after spending more than they could afford. Today they are still paying the price as they play their football down in League One.
Riise Slips Up
Riise’s payslip showed that he was paid £139,634, including a £4,000 appearance bonus and Champions League-related salary increase. Riise himself was at a loss as to how the payslip had been discovered, a bewildered spokesman for his club said ‘I can assure you that John Arne Riise is not in the habit of throwing payslips out, it’s clearly been stolen and taken without his permission.’ Now, as far as I’m concerned the amount paid is not an astronomical wage for a player of Riise’s talents. According to the payslip he receives a £30,000 a week basic wage and probably £1,000 per appearance bonus. For a player who is first choice, a regular international and has won the Champions League I think this is fair enough. It is also relatively peanuts compared with what many of Chelsea’s players are paid though and this provided the key point in the Sports Minister’s recent attack on football in the UK. Sutcliffe riled both Chelsea and Man Utd when he accused them of pricing out supporters, running unsustainable businesses and he singled out John Terry among others as being paid ‘obscene’ amounts in wages. Terry is believed to take home £135,000 a week, while Andriy Shevchenko, Michael Ballack and Frank Lampard also take well over £100,000. Several Man Utd players earn around the same mark, including Wayne Rooney (£110,000) and Cristiano Ronaldo (£119,000). Is this justifiable for what they do?
Avram Grant thinks so and launched a vigorous defence of his captain upon reading the comments by Sutcliffe, ‘He did not choose the right person and he did not choose the right issue.’ Grant fumed. ‘I don’t know why these people talk about footballers, why not tennis or NBA players? They earn a lot of money too. And what about singers, nobody talks about them. They get more money for one hour than footballers get for one year.’ His comments were also supported by Sven Goran Eriksson, who felt footballers were artists and should be paid similarly, ‘You have to see a footballer today like an artist, someone who can move you with their performance…I think it is only fair that players earn god money as they are finished by the time they are 35.’ This sounds, as you’d expect, as though Grant and Eriksson are protecting football and themselves as much as they are John Terry. Particularly as Eriksson received such a generous wage when in charge of England and Grant may be planning fresh investments come January. Those within the game are enjoying the fruits of their labour at present, as football has become the most popular and therefore wealthy sport in the world. Compared with other wealthy sports, the wages would not seem so ‘obscene’.
Impressive though it was, Sutcliffe was forced to revise several of his claims made against Chelsea and Man Utd in his report. Coming, as they did, only hours after the government had leant its support to England’s 2018 World Cup bid, Sutcliffe’s findings irritated Gordon Brown. A spokesman for the PM said, ‘With hindsight, Gerry Sutcliffe might have put things differently.’ Contrary to Sutcliffe’s statement, Man Utd cannot be accused of running an unsustainable business, as their mass worldwide appeal guarantees them the required income. However, simply because Man Utd can afford the wages, does it make it right? On the one had if Alex Ferguson does not pay Rooney and Ronaldo what they want, then someone else will do and why should he risk losing them. However, Man Utd’s attempts to stay on top of a mounting wage bill may explain why season tickets at Man Utd are continuing to rise. Sutcliffe’s findings stated, ‘Manchester Utd increased their season ticket prices by 13% and said fans have automatically to buy European and Carling Cup games as well, and that costs an extra £200. That’s taking the game away from the ordinary grass-roots supporter’. For his efforts Sutcliffe appears not to have much support, accrued possibly to an error in the timing of his outburst. His comments though, if slightly muddled, are designed with the interests of the supporter and the future of the game at heart.
The Cap Crusade
Football is a huge industry these days, Sky Sports and Setanta has dramatically increased commercial opportunities, but has also driven a rise in the quality of player performance and pressure on individuals to succeed - this deserves financial recognition. If player wages did not increase in conjunction with the growth of the sport excess money would go elsewhere, probably to directors and businessmen behind the scenes. This is where the often-mentioned salary cap idea would have to be carefully constructed to protect against the potential for particular parties to either significantly gain, or lose out more than others under such a stipulation. For me a salary cap negotiated with the chairmen of the league clubs and the FA would provide a structure to guard against over-the-top payments, keep order and discipline and distribute players and finances more evenly across the game. Some will feel that it is a retrospective step, especially considering that Jimmy Hill and co fought to get rid of the wage ceiling nearly 40 years ago. If fairly managed though, and allowed room to fluctuate and deviate in accordance with inflation then it could be a viable option. Mandatory investments could be made from clubs’ available excess cash-flow, going into youth developments, training and stadium facilities and club-led community schemes. An excess of funds freed up from salary capping may also drive down the need for such high ticket and season ticket prices, highlighted in Sutcliffe’s report. The Sports Minister, after checking his facts, found that Man Utd had driven up season ticket prices by 10.87% from last year.
Could it be time for the Premiership to win its first cap?
A False Economy
This is not the first time wages have caused controversy within the British game, and one presumes the FA and many of those inside football will hope the interest in a tricky matter dies away, as quickly as it surfaced. Roman Abramovich’s arrival at Chelsea in 2003 spawned the dawn of a new era of lavish spending in the Premiership. At the time many were aghast, at the unrealistic fees for players and wages being paid and frustrated by the unfair advantage it gave the London club. Since then other clubs have deemed the only way to compete at this new level of finance is to sell to wealthy foreign investors, but the voices of disquiet about this new era have rumbled on. Fans and several club directors are irritated by the farcical operating costs which mean clubs like Chelsea are making substantial losses each year (last year £80 million) but are bailed out by the owners. In reality clubs like Chelsea, West Ham and Man City would go bankrupt quickly and there is no safety net to protect from the likes of Abramovich, Magnusson or Shinawatra becoming bored and the vital funds being suddenly withdrawn. Just look what happened to Leeds Utd. Flying high and enjoying European success, Leeds owners miscalculated, or rather, took a gamble on future earnings, which failed to materialise. The club’s fall from grace was sizeable and they are now penniless after spending more than they could afford. Today they are still paying the price as they play their football down in League One.
Riise Slips Up
Riise’s payslip showed that he was paid £139,634, including a £4,000 appearance bonus and Champions League-related salary increase. Riise himself was at a loss as to how the payslip had been discovered, a bewildered spokesman for his club said ‘I can assure you that John Arne Riise is not in the habit of throwing payslips out, it’s clearly been stolen and taken without his permission.’ Now, as far as I’m concerned the amount paid is not an astronomical wage for a player of Riise’s talents. According to the payslip he receives a £30,000 a week basic wage and probably £1,000 per appearance bonus. For a player who is first choice, a regular international and has won the Champions League I think this is fair enough. It is also relatively peanuts compared with what many of Chelsea’s players are paid though and this provided the key point in the Sports Minister’s recent attack on football in the UK. Sutcliffe riled both Chelsea and Man Utd when he accused them of pricing out supporters, running unsustainable businesses and he singled out John Terry among others as being paid ‘obscene’ amounts in wages. Terry is believed to take home £135,000 a week, while Andriy Shevchenko, Michael Ballack and Frank Lampard also take well over £100,000. Several Man Utd players earn around the same mark, including Wayne Rooney (£110,000) and Cristiano Ronaldo (£119,000). Is this justifiable for what they do?
Avram Grant thinks so and launched a vigorous defence of his captain upon reading the comments by Sutcliffe, ‘He did not choose the right person and he did not choose the right issue.’ Grant fumed. ‘I don’t know why these people talk about footballers, why not tennis or NBA players? They earn a lot of money too. And what about singers, nobody talks about them. They get more money for one hour than footballers get for one year.’ His comments were also supported by Sven Goran Eriksson, who felt footballers were artists and should be paid similarly, ‘You have to see a footballer today like an artist, someone who can move you with their performance…I think it is only fair that players earn god money as they are finished by the time they are 35.’ This sounds, as you’d expect, as though Grant and Eriksson are protecting football and themselves as much as they are John Terry. Particularly as Eriksson received such a generous wage when in charge of England and Grant may be planning fresh investments come January. Those within the game are enjoying the fruits of their labour at present, as football has become the most popular and therefore wealthy sport in the world. Compared with other wealthy sports, the wages would not seem so ‘obscene’.
Impressive though it was, Sutcliffe was forced to revise several of his claims made against Chelsea and Man Utd in his report. Coming, as they did, only hours after the government had leant its support to England’s 2018 World Cup bid, Sutcliffe’s findings irritated Gordon Brown. A spokesman for the PM said, ‘With hindsight, Gerry Sutcliffe might have put things differently.’ Contrary to Sutcliffe’s statement, Man Utd cannot be accused of running an unsustainable business, as their mass worldwide appeal guarantees them the required income. However, simply because Man Utd can afford the wages, does it make it right? On the one had if Alex Ferguson does not pay Rooney and Ronaldo what they want, then someone else will do and why should he risk losing them. However, Man Utd’s attempts to stay on top of a mounting wage bill may explain why season tickets at Man Utd are continuing to rise. Sutcliffe’s findings stated, ‘Manchester Utd increased their season ticket prices by 13% and said fans have automatically to buy European and Carling Cup games as well, and that costs an extra £200. That’s taking the game away from the ordinary grass-roots supporter’. For his efforts Sutcliffe appears not to have much support, accrued possibly to an error in the timing of his outburst. His comments though, if slightly muddled, are designed with the interests of the supporter and the future of the game at heart.
The Cap Crusade
Football is a huge industry these days, Sky Sports and Setanta has dramatically increased commercial opportunities, but has also driven a rise in the quality of player performance and pressure on individuals to succeed - this deserves financial recognition. If player wages did not increase in conjunction with the growth of the sport excess money would go elsewhere, probably to directors and businessmen behind the scenes. This is where the often-mentioned salary cap idea would have to be carefully constructed to protect against the potential for particular parties to either significantly gain, or lose out more than others under such a stipulation. For me a salary cap negotiated with the chairmen of the league clubs and the FA would provide a structure to guard against over-the-top payments, keep order and discipline and distribute players and finances more evenly across the game. Some will feel that it is a retrospective step, especially considering that Jimmy Hill and co fought to get rid of the wage ceiling nearly 40 years ago. If fairly managed though, and allowed room to fluctuate and deviate in accordance with inflation then it could be a viable option. Mandatory investments could be made from clubs’ available excess cash-flow, going into youth developments, training and stadium facilities and club-led community schemes. An excess of funds freed up from salary capping may also drive down the need for such high ticket and season ticket prices, highlighted in Sutcliffe’s report. The Sports Minister, after checking his facts, found that Man Utd had driven up season ticket prices by 10.87% from last year.
Could it be time for the Premiership to win its first cap?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)