Premier League, coming to a country near you?
I’m home sick today, (the reason for all the posts) and was watching Sky Sports. I saw Premier League Chief Executive, Richard Scudamore announce this morning that the League has decided to continue to move forward with the plans to play one game, most likely in a January time period, in other venue’s outside of England. This would be only one game -called the International Round- would be added to the schedule so no one misses a home game.
He also said that perhaps they could incorporate this into a sort of winter break, with the teams most likely going to warmer climates to play their game.
Reading between the lines, I would guess that would primarily mean games played in Asia with a few in the southern and southwestern United States.
Scudamore also said that he would expect that a schedule would be drawn up by May of 2010 for the International Round fixtures for January of 2011, the first year to incorporate this game.
Why is this all happening? According to some reports, the Premier Leagues’ international TV contract is very undervalued. It’s possible that the international TV rights will soon outweigh the UK deal. Prem teams could clean up very big on this. But what is the price paid?
The Gaffer, from EPLTalk.com, has a decent piece concerning this subject which he wrote back in January.
Personally, I think players are already under so much stress and strain from extended schedules and increased pressure for fitness and performance. Players are nearly at the breaking point with not just an added game of league play, but cup play and international call ups.
As much as I would love for the game to come to the U.S. once a year, I think in the long run this can only hurt the league. Would the intensity level really be the same as playing in England on familiar pitches, with home and away supporters?
So what do think of this?
I made this comment on Soccerlens earlier, but I’ll post it here.
For those of us in the US, I think it’s a fantastic idea. The extra game doesn’t harm the integrity of the home-and-home round robin. I would love to see a real EPL game in the Fort Worth, TX area. I don’t know if it would help draw in the new fan from the US. After all, Formula One has had the best attended race on the calendar in Indianapolis for the past few years. I don’t think that’s translated into growth in the US market beyond its current niche status. One thing that is true, the United States has a history of attending soccer games against top teams from the EPL. In fact, I love the MLS all-star format where the MLS all-stars have played Chelski and Celtic the last two years. I wouldn’t want the league to be decided because Man U picked up three points playing a team in the drop zone for their 39th game, while Arsenal and Liverpool only pick up a point because they drew in Hong Kong.
A big detriment would be the travel involved. Watching Clint Dempsey in some interviews last night before and after the USA v. Mexico game, the full season plus travel was having an affect on him. You wouldn’t be able to play a game in Hong Kong midweek and then get a Saturday game back in England.
Simon Kuper wrote a litlle about this sort of thing this past weekend. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8296134c-cd45-11dc-9b2b-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
That’s why I think they spoke of a January break. To give them time to travel. But I don’t see how their going to do that without dropping games which is of course not what their suggesting.
I hate Richard Scudamore. I think is a money grabbing disaster who has no interest in the soul of football.
One of my earlier posts on this blog, way back in 2006:
http://cravencottagenewsround.wordpress.com/2006/09/14/from-our-european-correspondent/
mentions him, and relays a quote he made to a guardian journalist.
If you only get part of the article on Adam’s link because it says you’ve used your five free articles, just copy past the title of the article into the search field and you can then read the whole thing.
Thanks Adam
No way this works, if only because of the massive scheduling imbalance that it would create. What if two teams in a relegation battle have international fixtures against opponents on opposite ends of the table? It would be Tevez-gate all over again.
Yea, I just don’t see the fairness in how it could work. A relegation team gets stuck with a #2 team. And the #1 team gets that #3 team. Gee, do you think that might shift the balance of things for all parties involved?
Nice read there Rich. Welcome back! Hahaha.
Adam, Fantastic link. Thanks so much for that. It just went down in my bookmarks as a page for future reference. I also sent it to Bruce from duNord. Not sure if he’s seen or posted it yet on duNord. He loves Simon Kuper and I do believe corresponds with him from time to time.
Shocking idea. I’ve got nothing against the odd game abroad like the Americans do but something systematic like this will be a disaster.
The 39 game idea is utterly stupid. They’ve clealry already forgotten that they shrank the league not too long ago because our teams couldn’t compete internationally or in europe because of fixture congestion. And it gives rise to the possibility that a team could go down because they were unlucky enough to draw the likes of ManU.
The only way this works is if they keep it at 38 games and play one round of those abroad. But there’s no way that the clubs will reduce season ticket holder’s prices accordingly. And besides, while I’ve come to terms with the idea that foreigners can support British teams, even if they are inherently transient fans, but they aren’t and never will be the base and shouldn’t be pandered to in such a systematic way.
rjbiii,
Well, I don’t really think that Scudamore could give a S*#@ about his base of fans. That all he cares about is how much “more” money they can make. And they will, but the question is, whether there will come a point and time, like there has been in the States with baseball after the players strike, that fans say, enough is enough and stop coming to games. I’m afraid the game is so much a part of your culture that I don’t see that ever happening. I guess it’s no different then business everywhere. It sucks, that’s for sure.
Did you read the link that Simon Kuper link that Adam S. left us? Great stuff, of course I think he always writes fantastically.
I’m all for it. Bring Fulham to Chicago.
You guys are getting pretty bent out of shape over 1 extra match. Play reserves if you feel that 1 extra match will break your team for an entire season. It will be an added chess match for these managers. I mean, nobody bitches about the League Cup and that competition at this point is basically useless.
BQ. You’re so right. It’s like what they say out here about Cubs fans: that the owners never have to aim for a win because the fans just keep on coming. That’s exactly what the Premierleague thinks about the loyal fans. They only care about winning in the new ones and take the old ones for granted. But other than the clubs who’re always in the league the rest of them will rue the day they alienated their loyal local fans when they go down.
Jason, I couldn’t disagree more. This is supposed to be football, a game we watch every week, home and away, our team against yours. I’m happy for pre-season friendlies to be taken overseas, but league games? Do me a favour. This isn’t the circus.
As others have said, this is all about making money, expanding global fan bases (making money), and selling more shirts (making money) and satellite dishes (making money) or subscriptions (making money).
Yes! if Fulham played any where near me like Seattle or Portland I’d be there in a flash. I do understand that fans based in England would not like it and more money/interest would be made if it was in Asia somewhere. Every sport is ,in the end , about money. If Fulham could make a couple of million from a few games abroad every year, I’m sure we would do it
If you look at percentage of profit, Fulham would make out bigger than one of the big clubs. In other words, because we don’t make as much in the first place, an added 5 mil would be a greater percentage of profit that if Man U received 5 mil. And I take it this would be a pretty equal split in revenue? Or will they?
What if Fulham v Boro gets placed at a MLS stadium somewhere with 20,000 seats and Man U v whomever goes to the Rosebowl with 90,000. Does each team get a portion of tickets sales? Is it split up evenly?
But of course, in the big picture, the Man U, and recently Chelsea, (still so strange to see them as a big club) would be the big winners in merchandise and other ways the foreign fans love a winner and in general flock to the big clubs. So again, the disparity between large clubs and the smaller clubs could get even bigger from this move.
By the way Jason, no, Fulham will not be playing in Chicago in January. We’ll leave that to the Bears. Well, for the Bears, still playing football in January is about as much of a long shot as Fulham coming there. :o Yes, I did just rip on the Bears.
Ripping the Bears is fun. Especially when you are a Viking!
Got that right Adam.
This is a side effect of having owners who also own NFL franchises. The NFL cares absolutely nothing about the people who fill the seats. All their money comes from television, the corporate boxes, and branding. Games last longer and longer = more commercials. Plays being appealed to the “eye-in-the-sky” have nothing to do with anything but more air time and more commercials. Meanwhile, the guy in the stands sits and shivers in 15 degree [farenheit] temperatures for 2 minutes between each play.
Make no mistake, this EPL-abroad suggestion is all about branding. They want the EPL brand not only to supercede all the other European leagues, but also to go toe-to-toe with NFL, MLB, NBA in all the world markets. And, like the TV bonus, we’re fekked if we DON’T take part, but we really get nothing out of the increased revenue if we DO. If this works, it’ll be the big 6 who get all the merchandise sales and fame. Think kids in Kuala Lumpur are going to be rushing to the stores to buy Fulham or Bolton or Blackburn or Middlesboro kit?
Sorry; I’m more than a little locked about this.
This is a dumb idea. As much as I would enjoy Fulham coming to the US for a match that means something, part of the allure of watching a Prem match is the atmosphere in the ground. If you hold the match here in the US, you wouldn’t have that.
Plus, this undercuts the domestic leagues in the countries where they would stage these matches. Ultimately, it’s bad for football which probably means that it will end up happening.
George, I’m still gutted you saw us being trounced on your trip! The Villa game was a lot noisier, and we won. You must come back one day.
Rich,
Thanks, the alternative for our trip was the Villa match, but we couldn’t get that date to work. After watching it at home on my couch, I remembered this and felt a twinge of regret, but it didn’t last for more than a few seconds. It was too good of a result to feel down.
Don’t worry, we’ll be back. England is a perfect spot for us, Maria has beautiful gardens to tour while I have football to watch.
Glad you liked the Kuper column. I thouroughly enjoyed his book Soccer Against the Enemy (an updated version of Football Against the Enemy). I thought he was really stretching showing that football helped keep dictators in power. It’s a really good book for understanding how culture shapes different styles of football around the world. http://www.amazon.com/Soccer-Against-Enemy-Revolutions-Dictators/dp/1560258780/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202514365&sr=8-1
Hatterdon has a good point about how this will benefit the top six teams the most.
Personally, I just want to see England on a US summer tour since they won’t be in Euro 2008, but that’s off topic :)