The Football Thread

[TheLocalYokel]

A third European club football competition - UEFA Europa Conference League

I hadn't realised that UEFA had initiated a third European club competition this season called the UEFA Europa Conference League - the others are the Champions League (the main competition) and the Europa League,

Given that some clubs don't always treat the Europa League as a major tournament and will field under-strength sides, as they often do in the FA Cup which is similarly regarded as a secondary competition by many top teams these days, I wonder why it was thought necessary to bring in this third level European competition.

The idea apparently is to provide something for teams from lower-ranked member associations who frequently find themselves quickly eliminated in the other two European competitions. That said, I note that Tottenham Hotspur played in the Europa Conference League this evening, albeit with an under-strength side.

Many years ago there were three European club competitions: The European Cup (Champions League these days); the European Cup Winners Cup; the UEFA CUP - it began as the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup.

 

[JENNYJET]

I thought there was a rule wherby if a club fielded a deliberate weakened team, a fine shall be imposed. The rule was to protect the integrity of competitions. It followed that winners of competitions were granted entry to the higher level, via qualifying rounds.

 

[Poshgirl]

Tottenham in Europa Conference because they finished 7th in Premiership. Leicester in Europa League as FA Cup winners.

Perhaps it still works same as before. Promotion from Conference to League, with Champions League losers dropping into Europa League.

That's the end of my football interest....

 

[Silvercity]

Metro Mayor offers £45m towards Everton stadium​

By Ybnews on 16th September 2021
Everton’s new £500m stadium project will get a £45m boost under plans put forward by Metro Mayor Steve Rotheram and Liverpool city region’s six local authority leaders. Tony McDonough reports

Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock will hold 52,888 supporters

Metro Mayor Steve Rotheram says Liverpool City Region Combined Authority is ready to make a contribution worth up to £45m towards the cost of Everton FC’s £500m stadium.
On Thursday evening Mr Rotheram and the leaders of the six city region local authorities – Liverpool, Wirral, Sefton, Knowsley, Halton and St Helens – issued a joint statement saying they were ready to support the docklands stadium project with hard cash.
“This is not an investment in a football club,” said Mr Rotheram. “It’s an investment in the most significant regeneration project the city region has seen in over a decade. It will create thousands of jobs and help breathe new life into long-forgotten parts of our region.”
Everton FC and its main contractor Laing O’Rourke broke ground at Bramley-Moore Dock in Liverpool Waters in August. It is hoped Everton will leave its current home at Goodison Park in Walton and kick off the 2024/25 Premier League season at the 52,888-capacity arena.
The entire build is scheduled to take around 150 weeks in 12 separate phases. The initial enabling works are expected to take 32 weeks and are being funded by majority shareholder Farhad Moshiri.
However, Everton has yet to reveal the details of the main source of funding for the stadium construction. In 2018 the then Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson said the city was willing to lend the club half the £500m cost. However, the idea was abandoned with Everton insisting it would meet the whole of the cost.
Next week, Mr Rotheram and the six local leaders, including current Liverpool Mayor Joanne Anderson, will consider a grant of up to £15m to assist with infrastructure work to public space and heritage sites on the land around Bramley-Moore. This would include preserving historic features, restoring derelict land, and providing public access.
They will also consider a loan of up to £30m towards the overall project to build the club’s arena. The wider stadium project will be a vital catalyst for regeneration of Liverpool’s north docks and the area around Goodison Park.
Everton forecasts the project will offer a boost of more than £1bn to the city region’s economy, attract 1.4m visitors to the region each year and deliver an additional £237m of social value.

Liverpool City Region Metro Mayor Steve Rotheram. Picture by Tony McDonough

How the Goodison Park Legacy Project may look when complete

Derelict Victorian hydraulic tower at Bramley Moore Dock in Liverpool Waters – one of the heritage assets


The Combined Authority’s funding would come with conditions. They would include Everton committing to targets for employment and training opportunities for local residents and the achievement of social value.

As well as providing jobs and apprenticeships and stimulating the area’s regeneration, the loan would offer a return on investment, plus interest that could be used to fund other projects and services across the city region.

The stadium move will also kickstart the Goodison Legacy Project which will redevelop the club’s existing ground into a mix of housing, retail, office space and facilities for the community. It is estimated this will create more than £58m in social value.

As part of the deal, Everton will lead on campaigns focusing on chronic health issues in north Liverpool. Increased funding for the club’s charity, Everton in the Community, will see an expansion of its work in education, training, employment, youth projects, reducing crime and violence, supporting asylum seekers and veterans and health and wellbeing.

The joint statement said: “The Combined Authority exists to drive economic regeneration, create jobs and opportunities for local people, and breathe new life into an area that has continually been left behind by national governments.

“Devolution is all about local leaders taking control of our own destiny and working with local people to shape the future we want for our region. This project stands as one of the most significant regeneration projects our region has seen in more than a decade and will be a major catalyst for regeneration and revival.

“The financial returns generated from this investment will ensure that we are able to invest in further regeneration projects and services across the city region. Given austerity and the financial constraints that local councils continued to face, this is an innovative way of generating new money and investing to improve our region.”

A report going before the Combined Authority next Friday states: “The project provides the opportunity for transformational regeneration of North Liverpool and South Sefton/Bootle areas.

“The stadium is anticipated to attract further investment in the northern Liverpool docks area in a way no other commercial project is likely to achieve with wider impact spreading into adjacent areas such as south Sefton.”

from LBN

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Tottenham in Europa Conference because they finished 7th in Premiership. Leicester in Europa League as FA Cup winners.

Perhaps it still works same as before. Promotion from Conference to League, with Champions League losers dropping into Europa League.

That's the end of my football interest....

The winner of the Conference apparently receives an entry to the Europa League the following season unless they have qualified for the Champions League.

In order to encourage a greater number of clubs from the lower ranked UEFA membership entry has been divided as follows:

Nations ranked 1 to 5 will have one team;
Nations ranked 6 to 15 will have two teams;
Nations ranked 16 to 50 will have three teams;
Nations ranked 51 to 55 will have two teams;

I thought there was a rule wherby if a club fielded a deliberate weakened team, a fine shall be imposed. The rule was to protect the integrity of competitions. It followed that winners of competitions were granted entry to the higher level, via qualifying rounds.

That certainly used to be the case but with the amount of football played these days clubs routinely make wholesale team changes from one competition to another.

It's not only the major clubs either. Last month my local team, Bristol City, played a Championship match on the Saturday then on the following Tuesday evening they fielded a completely different eleven against Forest Green Rovers in the League Cup (I can't remember the name of the current sponsor - I still think of it as the Milk Cup).

 

[Seasider]

I have just read that Man Utd flew to their game at Leicester - a distance of 100 miles!
There is no wonder the environists slate the aviation sector.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I have just read that Man Utd flew to their game at Leicester - a distance of 100 miles!
There is no wonder the environists slate the aviation sector.

If that is the case it's ridiculous. Not the first time a Manchester team has flown the short distance to/from the East Midlands for a match. I wonder how much time they save as they have to get to the first airport and travel from the second by surface transport.

That said I've no doubt that business people and others sometimes use private jets for equally short, or even shorter, distances.

 

[rollo]

Yes it is true.

Ironically one of Manchester United sponsors/partners is the Responsible Environment Group Inc. who apparently are part of Uniteds commitment to carbon reduction and the environment in general.

You couldn't make it up, however justice prevailed today as little old Leicester City stuffed them 4-2

 

[JENNYJET]

Apparently the M6 was in a state this morning and risking a fine from Premier League for delayed kick off or postponement was a problem not to be faced. More efficient to fly down but directors have their own logic.

Well done to Leicester City ( as I go throw up outside.)

 

[Seasider]

If it was a last minute decision (M6 congestion) then they did very well to arrange for an aircraft (and crew) to take them there.
Call me a cynic, but I believe it was pre-planned.

 

[JENNYJET]

Maybe it was, but given past problems arriving by coach to certain clubs, and road congestion, flying may become the norm and owners can fund it.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

Apparently the M6 was in a state this morning

Only this morning?

risking a fine from Premier League for delayed kick off or postponement was a problem not to be faced.

Why should a Football Club be fined for circumstances beyond their control (e.g. traffic problems)?

Kevin

 

[JENNYJET]

My thoughts exactly but the Governing body insists on fixtures being completed on time. Fans and TV pay for it so I can understand the adherence to the rules.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

My thoughts exactly but the Governing body insists on fixtures being completed on time.

More likely, Sky Sports not wanting games involving big clubs to overlap! Would the governing body bow to the demands of a company providing vast amounts of money to the sport? Surely not!

Me, cynical?

Kevin

 

[JENNYJET]

Despite Sky Sports involvement, The FA has primacy when it comes to the conduct of competitions, e.g. Sky cannot abolish the Offside rule. It can and does negotiate it's choice of live game coverage and it's timing 'subject ' to the laws of the game and the rules of the Governing body. Funding is not a ticket to ride roughshod.

You are not cynical, curious perhaps?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Only this morning?

Why should a Football Club be fined for circumstances beyond their control (e.g. traffic problems)?

Kevin

It's not just 'big' clubs heading for tv fixtures. All clubs have to ensure that their team is at the ground prior to the appointed kick-off time. They have to make arrangements that take into account any possible delays. There are stories of team coaches breaking down with the players being rushed on to the ground in taxis, sometimes changing into their kit along the way.

Sometimes the referee will delay a kick-off time when, for example, crowds are still trying to get into the ground, a decision often taken on police advice.
There was a classic example of the ramifications of this on the final match day of the First Division (now the Premier League) 1976-1977 season.

The three candidates for the final relegation place were Sunderland, Coventry City and Bristol City. The last-mentioned clubs were playing each other at Coventry but such was the number of away fans attending the match that the kick-off was delayed. Five minutes from the end of the game it was tied at 2-2 when Jimmy Hill then the boss at Coventry announced over the public address that Sunderland had lost their match having kicked off on time. This meant that a draw in their match would see both Coventry City and Bristol City safe from relegation. Both teams stopped playing with the visitors retaining the ball and knocking it around in the middle of the pitch with no challenge from the host team's players. Understandably Sunderland protested following the match but got nowhere with it.

Clubs are also sometimes fined when fans get onto the pitch, even away fans, when the home club has taken all reasonable precautions to prevent such an occurrence.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

Despite Sky Sports involvement, The FA has primacy when it comes to the conduct of competitions, e.g. Sky cannot abolish the Offside rule. It can and does negotiate it's choice of live game coverage and it's timing 'subject ' to the laws of the game and the rules of the Governing body. Funding is not a ticket to ride roughshod.

You are not cynical, curious perhaps?

No, I'm definitely cynical!

Whilst Sky Sports cannot change rules etc, money talks and if it wasn't for Sky Sports wanting to get the highest audiences for the big games there wouldn't be the spread of matches over not just hours, but days (Sat, Sun, Mon - it's difficult to see where a team stands in the league, when teams around them don't play for a day or two).
That brings me onto another point. My late Dad and I are/were followers of Walsall FC. Like many fans of the smaller clubs, we feel that the league structure is heavily biased to the bigger clubs, making money/attracting investors at the expense of the smaller clubs.
When I used to visit my Dad, we loved nothing better than putting the football world right, over breakfast (sausage and fried egg sandwich - pure heaven - and a good coffee).
Our general consensus was -

All leagues would contain the same number of teams.
All matches would kick off at 3pm on a Saturday (or all at the same time for weekday matches and all on the same day).
A maximum squad size of 22 players.
Only 4 foreign players per squad.
No Substitutions - you finish the game with the same 11 players that you start with (possible exceptions for injury, judged by an independent doctor).
The Champions league, would be exactly that. Only the team that won their premium league would qualify, not the following 4 or 5.
Re-instate the Cup Winners Cup, at the expense of the lesser European competitions, giving lower league clubs at least a chance of playing against bigger clubs.
Stop the 'Golden Parachute' payments given to clubs relegated from the Premiership.
All of the above, aim to promote fairness across the leagues, not the profits of TV companies.
There were probably more, but the above would help to 'level the playing field' (pardon the pun) for the smaller clubs and hopefully end the heartache for fans of those clubs seeing their club go out of business.

I remember when I first started going to Walsall home games with my Dad (we also occasionally went to see Wolves or West Brom), on a couple of occasions the game was featured on 'Match of the Day', and my Dad and I were shown in the crowd. Now, 'Match of the Day' only shows premier league games - another kick in the teeth to smaller clubs, just because TV companies want to maximise their profits over the fortunes of the smaller clubs.

Kevin

 

[JENNYJET]

Whilst I will agree with much of what you say Kevin, I celebrate any club that has grown to become a 'big boy' in a league if it be a product of evolution and merit, but not through the generosity of Oligarchs or Sheikhs.

My fear is that the equilibrium of the Premier league is damaged by a sudden injection of wealth into one club, much like with the influence of a Russian in West London , bought honours take the shine away unlike earned honours.

If a club grows to become wealthy and successful, by merit alone, I then would not wish them handicapped like with Horse Racing or Golf.

If Walsall FC did a Wimbledon and entered the Premier league, they would be following teams like Swindon, Swansea, Barnsley and Bournemouth where success came organically.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

Whilst I will agree with much of what you say Kevin, I celebrate any club that has grown to become a 'big boy' in a league if it be a product of evolution and merit, but not through the generosity of Oligarchs or Sheikhs.

My fear is that the equilibrium of the Premier league is damaged by a sudden injection of wealth into one club, much like with the influence of a Russian in West London , bought honours take the shine away unlike earned honours.

If a club grows to become wealthy and successful, by merit alone, I then would not wish them handicapped like with Horse Racing or Golf.

If Walsall FC did a Wimbledon and entered the Premier league, they would be following teams like Swindon, Swansea, Barnsley and Bournemouth where success came organically.

I have absolutely no problem with clubs achieving success through hard work and good management, both at a sporting and financial level. But, the majority of clubs that fly high in the Premier league have received vast amounts of investment (usually form foreign investors), to propel them to those positions. Newcastle United seem to be the latest beneficiaries.
It sickens me when you see youngsters walking around towns/cities, wearing Man U, Man C, Chelsea, Arsenal etc shirts, when their own home club is desperate to get higher attendance for their games.
As for Walsall reaching the Premiership, it's never going to happen. And in truth, I don't want it to. I'd like them to sit in a higher league (the Championship), and have some good cup runs with a few 'giant killings', which they have achieved historically.
I'm not sure it's still true, but for many years Walsall FC kept on top of their finances and never used 'red ink' in their financial reports. It probably hurt their prospects of promotion, but it ensured their continued existence. Surely, that is success through good management, when average crowds were around 4000-5000 (pre-covid).

Kevin

 

[TheLocalYokel]

All leagues would contain the same number of teams.
All matches would kick off at 3pm on a Saturday (or all at the same time for weekday matches and all on the same day).
A maximum squad size of 22 players.
Only 4 foreign players per squad.
No Substitutions - you finish the game with the same 11 players that you start with (possible exceptions for injury, judged by an independent doctor).
The Champions league, would be exactly that. Only the team that won their premium league would qualify, not the following 4 or 5.
Re-instate the Cup Winners Cup, at the expense of the lesser European competitions, giving lower league clubs at least a chance of playing against bigger clubs.
Stop the 'Golden Parachute' payments given to clubs relegated from the Premiership.
All of the above, aim to promote fairness across the leagues, not the profits of TV companies.
There were probably more, but the above would help to 'level the playing field' (pardon the pun) for the smaller clubs and hopefully end the heartache for fans of those clubs seeing their club go out of business.

Football at the top is a different beast these days. Instant success is the watchword and the more investment the greater the chance of that success, or so the theory goes.

The top clubs are only interested in themselves; at least their owners are. That was no more clearly shown a few months ago when the so-called big European clubs including some of those in the Premier League tried to form a breakaway European league. Why? The chance of even more money for those involved.

The huge amount of money that is washing around at the top level of English football comes from one main source - the tv companies. What would happen if the tv companies walked away? Well, they wouldn't because they would know that a rival would be chomping at the bit to replace them. BT Sport's arrival at the top table of televised football a few years ago ensured that even more money would flow into the Premier League as there was more competition for the tv contracts.

The Premier League is a world tv product. It makes money directly and indirectly for the tv companies and for the Premier League and its clubs. None of the parties will give that up.

The tv companies can dictate to a considerable degree when between Saturday and Monday each week matches can be played and at what time. Unfortunately, that's part of the price that the Premier League has to pay for its lucrative tv deals.

Without tv money the Premier League clubs would struggle to compete with the giants of Europe who also have their own significant sources of tv income.

If only we could turn back the clock and reintroduce many of the suggestions you make, but we know that will never happen. As long as people want to watch the Premier League whether at the ground or on tv the status quo will remain, and probably become even more polarised. People from more recent generations have known little else and probably readily accept and value the way top-level football is packaged and presented. In fact, many younger football followers probably have no wish to turn back the clock.