I've been following a developing argument between the English Football Association, which oversees all aspects of the national game, and the Premier League, which administers the breakaway league of the top twenty clubs. Until about 20 years ago English football ('soccer' to the colonials) had four divisions with one governing body - the Football League. Then, the wealthiest clubs decided to form a league of their own, in which they would be able to negotiate television revenue separately from the lower leagues. There would still be relegation from the Premiership to the old second division (now called the 'Championship'), and successful lower teams could still win promotion to the higher eschelons.
In some respects the Premier League has been a run away success. It is now the most successful league in the world: its attendance figures have increased; its income has sky-rocketted; games are now shown around the world; players from every continent dream of playing for one of the top teams, earning more in a week than most people do in a year.
From my perspective, the Premier League has allowed the development of the team I have supported since I was a child. Growing up, I would go to watch Blackburn Rovers, along with five or six thousand other hardy souls.
The club had a storied past, having been founder members of the Football League in 1875. They had won many trophies, but not for years. The league title had not been theirs since before the First World War; the FA Cup had not been decked in Blackburn's blue and white since 1928. Then, Jack Walker, a retired businessman from Blackburn who had sold his metal company to British Steel for a bucketful of money, decided to invest in his hometown team. Almost overnight, quality players and coaches began to appear. The ground was updated. It was no longer possible, for example, to watch the rats playing underneath the stands (this had been a welcome diversion when the standard of football was dire). The team began to win. They won promotion to the inaugural season of the Premier League. Three years later they were champions. It was almost beyond belief. And if, since then, their fortunes have wavered a little, their accomplishments have still far out-stripped the wildest dreams of a North country boy, following his local team.
However, there is a downside to the Premier League. It has come to be dominated by four teams , leaving the other sixteen to battle for lesser honors. Money is now the driving force. Most teams are owned by foreign investors. Some of them are fabulously wealthy. Chelsea are owner by a Russian billionaire; two Americans own Liverpool; Manchester United is owned by the Glazer family, which also owns the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Manchester City was, until very recently, the property of the former Prime Minister of Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra, until, facing corruption charges, he skipped bail in his native country and his assets were frozen. The club was on the brink of insolvency until a group of arabs from Dubai came in and began throwing money around like there was no tomorrow. Blackburn is one of the few clubs still owned by a family trust. Their indebtedness is tiny compared to the likes of Manchester United, which owes over $1,300 million. As a whole, the Premier League clubs owe about $6 billion. Some have borrowed against future television income in order to pay their huge wage bills.
Just this week, FA chairman Lord Triesman expressed his concerns about the situation. The current global economic climate poses "a terrible danger." "Transparency lies in an unmarked grave," said Lord Triesman, somewhat poetically. Apparently, three clubs have been contacted by their banks about the level of their debt. One team, West Ham United, is preparing to sell players. It is owned by an Icelandic businessman who is linked to the banks in that country which have recently failed. No wonder there is concern for the future. The most popular league in the most popular sport in the world is being run by outsiders who seem to be concerned about profit and not much else. Some have poured millions into their adopted teams; others are holding the purse-strings tightly, causing friction in boardrooms and a lack of confidence on the pitch.
FIFA president Sepp Blatter said, recently, that buying a football club has become as easy as buying a replica shirt. Teams have become investments for the fabulously rich. But when they lose interest, or when their losses become unmanageable, they simply walk away. "More and more clubs are in trouble," said Lord Triesman, "with a number of owners leaving abruptly." Famous teams are in danger of folding because of the greed of players, agents, clubs, and owners.
Without mentioning any names, Lord Triesman said that the Premier League's fit and proper persons test needed an urgent review. What he meant was that some of those who are buying clubs would be more suited to racketeering out of a back-street billiard hall. "If there is a prima facie case of someone's human rights record being regarded internationally as being very serious, it's reasonable to question whether that person should be running a football club," he said. "Nobody has real confidence in what they cannot see."
Apart from mixing metaphors (how can one see what is supposed to be transparent?) Triesman has a point. Greed and corruption at the highest level are in danger of destroying "the beautiful game." If the financial crisis worsens, as well it might, it is difficult to see how some of the clubs can survive, at least in their current form." Talks of a salary cap are too little, too late.
Lessons from a Christian perspective? I suppose there are two. First, there is a reason why greed is regarded as one of the deadliest of sins. It destroys. Football players are not worth $200 million; neither should they be paid $200,000 per week (admittedly, these numbers apply only to the very best). When stadiums are populated by blue-collar workers who are lucky to to earning the equivalent of $60,000 per year, the amount of money being paid to prima-donnas kicking footballs is obscene. And those who have bought their way into the business are often no better. Seeking to capitalize on the worldwide marketability of a team like Manchester United, while running up mind-boggling debt is sheer lunacy. It will end in tears.
I have to say also, though, that Lord Triesman is profoundly wrong in one respect. It is not true that "nobody has real confidence in what they cannot see." Frankly, I have a lot more confidence in a God who keeps His promises, than in slippery characters who say one thing and mean another. After all, isn't faith "being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1)?
As the current financial crisis deepens we need to make sure that our confidence is in things that will last forever - like the promises of our covenant God.
No comments:
Post a Comment