Of course I paraphrase Camera Obscura, but the title comes from my compulsion to write about the whole tenor of the post-McLeish report debate. Since we started seriously talking about the inherent problems of Our Beloved National Game ™, it seems the overwhelming majority of contributors, both professional and amateur have somehow been blinded as to what the goal of any reorganisation should be; In the midst of all this profound naval gazing we've still not really got round to talking about some very important things, beyond vague ideas of improving the national team & getting more magical TV moolah.
Yes, we know it's broken, but in talking about fixing it, we’re currently fixating on basic facts and figures (2 x 10 or 14 + n [n being the great unknown of what to do with the SFL]) we avoid seeing the wood for the trees, and avoid asking ourselves what we want any league to actually be, or to measure how we would judge the success of any reorganisation/revolution.
Reading this excellent article about the Gambrinus Liga is a timely reminder that we cannot continue to think about ourselves in isolation. If, since 1992 and the Premiership era, football economics have changed immeasurably, we need to ask ourselves where we are, and what we should be. If there was one thing that leapt out of me from the McLeish report, it was there seemed to be now real idea of what he was looking for when he went for advice. Why was he looking at the FA or the German DFB when he could be looking for advice and examples of football governance and organisation in countries with similar statures to our own?
The big 5 European leagues are the big 5 for a reason. They are the wealthiest markets in which to sell TV rights, and so have pulled away from the rest. But where do we even fit into that food chain, and what can we do to optimise our position? If outside this big 5 we can discern another distinct group of Holland, Portugal, Russia and Ukraine, should we consign ourselves to being amongst a smaller group that contains our neighbours in Northern Europe? Denmark is now above Scotland in the coefficient after all, and surely if Sweden or Norway get their act together they could do the same.
But I'm an optimist. I'd like to say that Scotland (thanks to the Old Firm) could, and should fit into that second tier, especially if you add the likes of Turkey, Belgium or Greece - but what discerns that second group from the others? Well revenue is obviously the biggest factor, (and I would be grateful to anyone who could point me in the direction of a handy link to the comparative values of European Leagues’ TV deals) but in that case Russia would be in the top 5. What seems to set them above the other also-rans is a certain level of financial clout, but also an attractive, competitive competition, and an ability to produce players for the bigger leagues.
Portugal is the poorest country in Western Europe, with a population of 10 million people, but has been unusually blessed with good footballers, from Futre to Ronaldo to Moutinho. But the Liga Sagres also manages to import good players, develop them and ship them on to the big 5. As does Holland, along with many other leagues that we would consider as less prestigious than our own - something that even a cursory glance at the January transfer window gossip columns reveals. From what I can fathom, the last time a big name from the Scottish league went to a big 5 league for big money was Alan Hutton. Before then? Gio Van Bronkhorst or Craig Gordon, although hopefully Kenny Miller going to Florence might kick start an upsurge in premium SPL exports.
I’m writing this as Real Madrid plays Villarreal, with Ricardo Carvalho and Ángel di María in the home line-up. Both are products of the Portuguese league, and Real can also call on the likes of Pepe, born in Brazil, but developed and naturalised in Portugal, and Mahamadou Diarra who played in Greece and Holland before moving to Lyon. Why can’t the SPL do this more often? Of course we find it hard to source talent outside the EU (young Ki at Celtic being an exception) , but that still leaves a population of about half a billion people on our doorstep. This is something that some clubs are beginning to exploit, although it remains to be seen if the likes of Rogne, Mišun or Jelavic will go on to have the success of Gattuso or Van Bronkhorst.
This debate is quickly becoming tiresome as the media (probably correctly) paint a picture of the heartless, money-orientated club owners against the well-meaning but naïve supporters, who will be the ones who will ultimately underwrite our Scottish football future. I don’t mean to suggest that becoming a farm league for the top leagues is the prism through which to view reconstruction, only that we need to understand what it is we want, and how that will be achieved. The best way to do that would be to look beyond our own nose, and to what we can learn from other leagues. That debate seems to me to be entirely absent, although I accept that over here in Turkey, many media streams are beyond my radar.
So if we are optimistic about this, and don't see this as just another post on the road to ruin for Scottish football, let's remember this - A competitive, economically sound SPL will be able to produce a better calibre of Scottish player, and players from other countries will begin to see it as an attractive destination, as obvious as that may seem. I don’t think that is going to happen with a 10-team SPL, and the incumbent pressure that goes with such a set-up, nor will a 16 or 18 team league make sense in footballing terms, even before the economics is considered. That leaves the status quo or a 14 team set-up for me, and I can’t wait for this phony war to be over.
No comments:
Post a Comment