What no difference a year makes... That's the saying isn't it? 12 months ago, David Moyes was bemoaning a fixture list that saw the club record its worst Premier League opening five games - the worst start since 1989/90. Berated, and quite rightly I might add, for the poor results he achieved in that time, but few would have expected that in just one year, that record would be not only in jeopardy, but broken. With hugely decorated and experienced manager Louis van Gaal, fresh off a remarkable third place finish for the Dutch national team at the World Cup, at the helm, it seemed Manchester United were in safe hands. The gamble with Moyes had not paid off, and now was time to resort to a more secure option.
But has van Gaal been the safe bet everyone assumed? After five fixtures of this season, Louis van Gaal's Manchester United were two points worse off than the team led by Moyes. More concerning for the new manager is the fact that when it comes to the fixture list, Moyes has a point. In the opening five fixtures of the ex-Everton manager's reign, United made difficult trips to Manchester City and Liverpool, while hosting Chelsea. If seven points seemed like scant reward from five Premier League matches, especially as defending champions, this season has been nothing short of a disaster. After defeats at home to Swansea and away at newly-promoted Leicester City, along with another disappointing 0-0 draw at Burnley, van Gaal's Manchester United ended up with just five points, and from a far easier set of games.
And that's not even starting to look at the transfer policies. While Moyes is hardly the Archangel Gabriel when it comes to transfer dealings, particularly on deadline day, panic buying Marouane Fellaini for £27m (£4m more than he could have got him for just a few months before), and failing to secure the signature of Ander Herrera after some shambolic goings on in Bilbao. However, it was clear that he never had the full backing of the United back room staff when it came to transfers, with chief executive Ed Woodward denying him the opportunity to splash the cash. However, that has not been a problem for van Gaal. Over £150m has gone out of the door this summer, with Angel di Maria and Luke Shaw accounting for the best part of £100m. While it is not fair to say they are failures just yet, only di Maria has made any kind of immediate impact, and defensively they look shocking.
But why is that? In fairness, part of that is beyond van Gaal's control. After their disappointing last season, three of United's regular back four left the club, with club captain Nemanja Vidic and ageing pair Patrice Evra and Rio Ferdinand opting to cut their losses. That kind of loss would shatter any club's confidence and performance, but I don't think that is entirely to blame for United's current predicament. Tactically, van Gaal and his players have looked inept at times so far this season. Unable to choose between 3, 4 or even 5 at the back, the lack of continuity has had devastating effects on communication in defence and understanding.
Having watched United a few times already this season, they look irresistible going forward at times, but when put under pressure defensively, they crumble. Without the presence of a strong leader at the back, no-one seems to want to take control. As a result, comical moments like numerous defenders going for the same ball, or marking the same man, have been prevalent this season. While some may be quick to blame the exuberance of youth, with the likes of Tyler Blackett and Paddy McNair making their first-team debuts, they have been some of the more consistent performers so far this year (Blackett's performance at Leicester excepted).
So how can United put this right? As much as pundits like Phil Neville suggest continued mega-spending, that will not do anything for the continuity and understanding of the team. Being a City fan, I have seen the impact of attempting to build a team of Galacticos overnight - it simply doesn't work quickly. City took three years to rebuild to form a side that can challenge for the top 4, so for United to expect that a continuing influx of quality players will inevitably lead to their re-coronation at the top of English football, they are very much mistaken. In my opinion, United's best route forward is to accept that this is not simply an isolated season of struggle, and to focus on honing the players they already have, with the addition of a couple of high-profile names a season. The players they have brought in this season are quality, but they need time to adjust.
So is it unfair that van Gaal looks like getting time where Moyes didn't? Absolutely. Had Moyes have made the same purchases that van Gaal has, and struggled in the same way, then the backlash would have been far more severe. The hashtag #MoyesOut was trending on Twitter from November onwards - will van Gaal have the same thing? I very much doubt it, though the joke #LouisvanMoyes has been made by Twitter users. However, it may well be that van Gaal can turn this round. In the meantime, van Gaal's track record and ability to pull big name signings may well prove enough to keep him in a job, regardless of the performances.
Louis van Moyes? The comparison will only please one man, and I think he made a trip to Turkey recently to see about the Galatasaray job.
Analysis of sporting events, talking points and controversies.
Sunday 28 September 2014
Sunday 14 September 2014
Sepp's U-Turn: Is More Video Technology A Good Idea?
When you think of famous and historic U-turn moments, you think of the 10p tax rate, the pasty tax and the poll tax. But video technology in football? Ask me just four years ago, days after the infamous Frank Lampard non-goal, and I'd have said not a chance. However, with Sepp Blatter's announcements at Soccerex last week that he is in support of video challenges, the pendulum seems to have swung full circle.
But why is this? As with many things, you can take the conspiracy or sensible route. The conspiracy? That goal line technology was only introduced once it had benefitted England. After Lampard's goal, not a whisper of discontent. But after Ukraine had a goal wrongly denied against England at the Euros, suddenly Blatter, and Platini (I have ranted often about his potential bias against English football before) are all for it. This theory is supported by Blatter's side-swipe and the FA once his scheme had been announced, namely that the English FA do not respect fair play (ironic when you consider the diving and biting that goes on from players not from these shores) and that they are sore losers following the failed bid for the 2018 World Cup. Funny that Blatter delivered this speech in the heart of England's current footballing capital - know your audience Sepp!
However, the real reason behind the change in heart is perhaps equally cynical, but considerably less likely to make you look like the sore loser Blatter claims we are. It's all about maintaining power. With his term set to come to an end in the upcoming months, and the seeming success of goal-line technology in both club and international football, a bit of bandwagon jumping is required to ensure that Sepp keeps his place at FIFAs top table. I don't believe for an instant that he would be making these statements if he had years of his term left to run.
So if we assume that this is a PR stunt to retain power, why did he pick technology a subject that had been so controversial over the past few years? Because it's been almost unanimously accepted the world over. The goal-line technology has been a revolution in both domestic and international competition (the Karim Benzema goal/no goal debacle at the World Cup ignored), and though technology to a lesser level, the cheers that have greeted the disappearing spray at every Premier League ground since its introduction clearly demonstrates that not all change is negative.
With technology very much in favour at present, it is hardly surprising to see Blatter sling his weight behind it. But I'm not so certain that the idea he came up with for Soccerex is that good. Let me say that I am a huge advocate of technology in sport - tennis and cricket have proven that Hawk-eye style systems work, while rugby league and union have shown that video referees are also successful. However, Blatter's idea that coaches should have a number of challenges to use during each half is, in my opinion, not the best way to handle this.
As we have seen on many occasions, football is a game of taking advantage of momentum. The very phrase that "2-0 is a dangerous scoreline" shows this, as teams frequently level having pulled one back. Often the most exciting moments in football are when one team has their tails up and have momentum on their side - look at the way Man City won their first Premier League title. Should Blatter's system be implemented, shrewd managers will be able to minimise this impact, affording their team the opportunity to recollect their thoughts and go again. If coaches are afforded the opportunity to break up that momentum and slow the game down by making frivolous challenges, it will have a hugely detrimental impact on the game for spectators.
However, as I said before, I am all in favour of technology in football, and I have a suitable solution. Ex-referee Graham Poll, when interviewed about the concept, said that referees can tell from the reaction of the players around them when they've made an incorrect decision. If this is true, there is absolutely no need for coaches to have the power to contest decisions and slow the game down. I would certainly have a video referee, but only so the officials could check that they have made the right call. It may not have saved Poll from handing out three yellow cards to Josep Simunic in the 2006 World Cup, but it will help in many other situations! This would minimise the risk of tactical use, while helping the referee to do their job to the best of their ability.
Should Blatter be re-elected (re-elected in the same way that dictators like Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi were "re-elected") it will be interesting to see whether this new policy goes any further. Maybe it's just my cynical mind, but I doubt it. As soon as he is safe in his job, this will conveniently go on the back burner, and I suspect we'll see the Swiss take a slowly more technology-sceptic mindset.
So if we assume that this is a PR stunt to retain power, why did he pick technology a subject that had been so controversial over the past few years? Because it's been almost unanimously accepted the world over. The goal-line technology has been a revolution in both domestic and international competition (the Karim Benzema goal/no goal debacle at the World Cup ignored), and though technology to a lesser level, the cheers that have greeted the disappearing spray at every Premier League ground since its introduction clearly demonstrates that not all change is negative.
With technology very much in favour at present, it is hardly surprising to see Blatter sling his weight behind it. But I'm not so certain that the idea he came up with for Soccerex is that good. Let me say that I am a huge advocate of technology in sport - tennis and cricket have proven that Hawk-eye style systems work, while rugby league and union have shown that video referees are also successful. However, Blatter's idea that coaches should have a number of challenges to use during each half is, in my opinion, not the best way to handle this.
As we have seen on many occasions, football is a game of taking advantage of momentum. The very phrase that "2-0 is a dangerous scoreline" shows this, as teams frequently level having pulled one back. Often the most exciting moments in football are when one team has their tails up and have momentum on their side - look at the way Man City won their first Premier League title. Should Blatter's system be implemented, shrewd managers will be able to minimise this impact, affording their team the opportunity to recollect their thoughts and go again. If coaches are afforded the opportunity to break up that momentum and slow the game down by making frivolous challenges, it will have a hugely detrimental impact on the game for spectators.
However, as I said before, I am all in favour of technology in football, and I have a suitable solution. Ex-referee Graham Poll, when interviewed about the concept, said that referees can tell from the reaction of the players around them when they've made an incorrect decision. If this is true, there is absolutely no need for coaches to have the power to contest decisions and slow the game down. I would certainly have a video referee, but only so the officials could check that they have made the right call. It may not have saved Poll from handing out three yellow cards to Josep Simunic in the 2006 World Cup, but it will help in many other situations! This would minimise the risk of tactical use, while helping the referee to do their job to the best of their ability.
Should Blatter be re-elected (re-elected in the same way that dictators like Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi were "re-elected") it will be interesting to see whether this new policy goes any further. Maybe it's just my cynical mind, but I doubt it. As soon as he is safe in his job, this will conveniently go on the back burner, and I suspect we'll see the Swiss take a slowly more technology-sceptic mindset.
Thursday 4 September 2014
Summer Transfer Window: Winners and Losers
And with the passing of the transfer deadline, the scrummage to secure the final additions to squads is over. For my review of this window, see the story here. But who has come out best? Which clubs are now set out for a tilt at the league, and who is destined for mid-table mediocrity? Or worse, a parachute payment jump into the uncertain waters of the Championship?
In order to determine the winners and losers in the transfer market, I will be marking each team's dealings out of 10 on five different topics: big name (relative to the club), value for money, team balance, player retention and absence of panic buying. From these rankings, I will be able to determine a league table of their transfer dealings. These will almost certainly not be indicative of how the league will go, but do give some indication of how well the clubs, and more importantly, their finances, are run.
Winners
Chelsea - Jose Mourinho knew his transfer targets at the start of the window, and he got his men. Though he may have had to pay a little over the odds for the likes of Fabregas and Diego Costa, the early £30m fees they had to stump up pale in comparison to the ridiculous figures seen out of Manchester United. Calm on deadline day, Chelsea's new recruits balance their team excellently, and they will be a force to be reckoned with come May.
Hull City - Perhaps surprising considering the deadline day chaos to come out of the club, Hull have also had a successful window. Their late signings of Hatem Ben Arfa, Gaston Ramirez and Abel Hernandez add significant strength in depth and could yet prove to be the key in their fight to reach the top half of the table.
Stoke City - Based mostly on the value for money aspect of the test, Stoke's signings up front of Mame Biram Diouf and Bojan will complement the creative talents of Marko Arnautovic behind. Mark Hughes went into the window knowing he needed goals, and if Diouf's stunner against Man City is anything to go by, they now have plenty of those in their front line.
In order to determine the winners and losers in the transfer market, I will be marking each team's dealings out of 10 on five different topics: big name (relative to the club), value for money, team balance, player retention and absence of panic buying. From these rankings, I will be able to determine a league table of their transfer dealings. These will almost certainly not be indicative of how the league will go, but do give some indication of how well the clubs, and more importantly, their finances, are run.
Team
|
Big Name
|
Value
|
Team Balance
|
Player Retention
|
No Panic-buys
|
Total
|
Chelsea
|
9
|
6
|
8
|
7
|
8
|
38
|
Hull City
|
8
|
6
|
7
|
7
|
6
|
34
|
Stoke City
|
7
|
8
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
33
|
Manchester City
|
6
|
5
|
7
|
7
|
8
|
33
|
Newcastle United
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
33
|
Arsenal
|
8
|
6
|
5
|
8
|
5
|
32
|
Everton
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
5
|
32
|
Swansea City
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
31
|
Liverpool
|
7
|
6
|
7
|
5
|
5
|
30
|
Sunderland
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
5
|
7
|
30
|
Tottenham Hotspur
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
30
|
Queens Park Rangers
|
7
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
5
|
30
|
West Ham United
|
7
|
5
|
5
|
7
|
6
|
30
|
Leicester City
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
29
|
Aston Villa
|
2
|
7
|
7
|
7
|
6
|
29
|
Manchester United
|
9
|
4
|
6
|
4
|
5
|
28
|
Crystal Palace
|
4
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
7
|
28
|
West Bromwich Albion
|
5
|
6
|
5
|
5
|
7
|
28
|
Burnley
|
1
|
6
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
26
|
Southampton
|
5
|
5
|
6
|
2
|
4
|
22
|
Winners
Chelsea - Jose Mourinho knew his transfer targets at the start of the window, and he got his men. Though he may have had to pay a little over the odds for the likes of Fabregas and Diego Costa, the early £30m fees they had to stump up pale in comparison to the ridiculous figures seen out of Manchester United. Calm on deadline day, Chelsea's new recruits balance their team excellently, and they will be a force to be reckoned with come May.
Hull City - Perhaps surprising considering the deadline day chaos to come out of the club, Hull have also had a successful window. Their late signings of Hatem Ben Arfa, Gaston Ramirez and Abel Hernandez add significant strength in depth and could yet prove to be the key in their fight to reach the top half of the table.
Stoke City - Based mostly on the value for money aspect of the test, Stoke's signings up front of Mame Biram Diouf and Bojan will complement the creative talents of Marko Arnautovic behind. Mark Hughes went into the window knowing he needed goals, and if Diouf's stunner against Man City is anything to go by, they now have plenty of those in their front line.
Manchester City - Unlike their city neighbours and rivals, City got their transfer dealings well and truly done with before the final days of the window. With a mixture of bargain deals for Bacary Sagna and Frank Lampard, and big ticket transactions like Fernando and Eliaquim Mangala, City's squad is probably the strongest in depth in the league. The prices may have been slightly steep, but there was not a moment of panic from Manuel Pellegrini. But would you ever expect it?!
Newcastle United - Rounding off the top five is the Toon. Despite constant complaints (and in many regards, completely justified) towards owner Mike Ashley, the fact remains that Newcastle have continued to bring in new (albeit consistently French) talent. Remy Cabella and Emanuele Rivière look like excellent acquisitions, and I feel they could be challenging the European places come May.
Losers
Southampton - I don't care what anyone says, you lose five of your biggest assets from the previous season, you're going to struggle. Though the Saints have seemed to dip into the market with some success, it will take time for those players to gel. The panic buying in the final hours only caps a remarkably busy, if a little traumatic, window for Southampton.
Burnley - It's a great shame, but Burnley simply don't have the funds to attract the calibre of players brought in by sides around them. If your biggest signing of the window is George Boyd, a benchwarmers at Hull the previous season, it's less of a marquee and more of a tiny gazebo. That they held onto Danny Ings is somewhat of a success, but I fear the Championship beckons for the ginger Mourinho.
West Bromwich Albion - This was fairly simple. Overpaying on your big name signing, whose name isn't very large anyway? Check. The exit of a number of your key defenders, leaving you threadbare at the back? Check. Bringing in a manager who, though well respected in the game, has little experience of Premier League management? Check. And the prognosis? A season of struggle awaits.
Crystal Palace - Though I can't be too critical of the final days of the transfer window at Selhurst Park, as the upheaval off the field will have affected transfers, the fact remains that the window was a shambles for the Eagles. Bringing Wilfried Zaha in may prove to be an excellent bit of business, but he is a risk. As for the rest, slim pickings. Though they held onto the majority of their key men from last campaign, I'm expecting them to slide slowly down the table.
Manchester United - Controversial? Perhaps, but hear me out. Though they have undoubtedly brought in the biggest names of the window, the expense to which they had to go to get them was absurd. Being a lifelong blue, I have had to put up with many a United fan argue that City have bought their league titles with their huge spending in recent windows, and I have always come back with the same argument. £5 is £5, whether you spend it in 10 minutes or 10 years. United have consistently spent medium amounts on players, and their historical total far exceeds the amount City have spent. The fact that City have spent it in five years is irrelevant - they have used what they have to the best of their ability.
It will be interesting to see if the same hypocrite United fans later their opinions now they are the ones spending. My earlier argument means I cannot be upset at United's spending without being a hypocrite myself, and I have no problem with them flexing their financial muscle. I simply find it amusing that they are spending that amount to buy 4th, rather than the titles that City are accused of buying.
Nevertheless, the fact remains that we have witnessed a multi-record breaking transfer window. Some clubs have made wise calls, others not so much, but it will be interesting to see whether my transfer table gives any indication of the trajectory of the clubs involved.
Tuesday 2 September 2014
Summer Transfer Window Closes: The Start of a Worrying Trend?
Transfer deadline day. The footballing equivalent to a crowded London marketplace mixed with a Glasgow pub brawl. With perhaps more bloodshed.
Some believe that the crescendo to the summer window merits a day off work. Though I am not quite of that mindset, I can't help but feel a strange sense of satisfaction watching the attempts of TV presenters to explain the chaos that will be occurring at 92 different locations across the Football League clubs, and countless more around the rest of the world. Millions are spent on the 1st September, some more wisely than others.
In recent years, as fees have escalated, the amount spent on this sacred day has risen exponentially. As a result, the panic-buying that is witnessed every years multiplies in cost to club owners across the country. On the other hand, some chief executives earn their pay packet on this day, as we have also witnessed some of the most successful transfers on this day. Wayne Rooney's £24m transfer to Manchester United in 2004 and Ashley Cole's 2006 move across London to Chelsea are good examples of this, and we will see plenty more in the coming years. And this is what makes deadline day so special.
So who has been guilty of panic-buying in recent years? A list of just some of the most high profile ones is below:
Andy van der Meyde - Inter Milan to Everton (£2m) - 20 apps/0 goals (2005 - 2009)
Xisco - Deportivo la Coruna to Newcastle United (£5.7m) - 9 apps/1 goal (2008 - 2013)
Roman Pavlyuchenko - Spartak Moscow to Tottenham Hotspur (£14m) - 78 apps/21 goals (2008 - 2012)
Dimitar Berbatov - Tottenham Hotspur to Manchester United (£30m) - 108 apps/48 goals (2009 - 2012)
Robinho - Real Madrid to Manchester City (£32.5m) - 41 apps/14 goals (2009 - 2011)
Paul Konchesky - Fulham to Liverpool (£4m) - 15 apps/0 goals (2010 - 2011)
Andre Santos - Fenerbahce to Arsenal (£5m) - 25 apps/3 goals (2011 - 2013)
Javi Garcia - Benfica to Manchester City (£16m) - 48 apps/2 goals (2012 - 2014)
Marouane Fellaini - Everton to Manchester United (£27m) - 17 apps/ 0 goals (2013 - current)
2014
This year's scramble for final additions has thrown up a few interesting transactions, and a worrying trend. With the Financial Fair Play regulations threatening to impact on a club's European involvement over the coming seasons, chief execs are looking for more ways to manipulate the system. We have seen clubs like Paris Saint Germain and Manchester City come acropper in their attempts to sign off enormous sponsorship deals to circumnavigate the regulations. While that could be deemed unfair, the current trend is going to be impossible to stop.
Deadline day has always been about the big names, the big transfers and the big money. However, this year we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of loan deals with an option to buy the following year. While this may appear on the surface to be foolhardy, as it always seems beneficial to tie the big names down to permanent deals, it may actually prove to be another shrewd move by chief execs to stay within the FFP regulations. With Manchester United having already spent in excess of £85m, the deal for Radamel Falcao would have taken the club far beyond the break-even necessary to avoid sanction from UEFA had it been permanent. However, with the option to defer payment for 12 months, the club can now rebuild its finances before having to fork out an additional sum. Similar deals for the likes of Alvaro Negredo and Javier Hernandez demonstrate that this trend seems set to continue.
The reason this trend is worrying? Call me old-fashioned, but I liked the thrill of the big signing. I remember staying up all night to watch the 2009 summer deadline day, which saw Manchester United sign Dimitar Berbatov for a British transfer record £30m, only for newly Arab-backed Manchester City to outdo them with the coup of Robinho minutes later for £32.5m. Though both eventually turned out to be flops, knowing that your club owns the player involved is exciting, while renting one is less so. If this is set to replace the traditional transfer deadline day, it will make the whole day a little less climactic, killing some of the fun that the broadcasters spend so long trying to instil.
Should this continue, the bloodshed and chaos we have become used to will become less of a pub brawl and more of an orderly queue of clubs, waiting their turn. A lot more safe, but a lot less exciting.
Some believe that the crescendo to the summer window merits a day off work. Though I am not quite of that mindset, I can't help but feel a strange sense of satisfaction watching the attempts of TV presenters to explain the chaos that will be occurring at 92 different locations across the Football League clubs, and countless more around the rest of the world. Millions are spent on the 1st September, some more wisely than others.
In recent years, as fees have escalated, the amount spent on this sacred day has risen exponentially. As a result, the panic-buying that is witnessed every years multiplies in cost to club owners across the country. On the other hand, some chief executives earn their pay packet on this day, as we have also witnessed some of the most successful transfers on this day. Wayne Rooney's £24m transfer to Manchester United in 2004 and Ashley Cole's 2006 move across London to Chelsea are good examples of this, and we will see plenty more in the coming years. And this is what makes deadline day so special.
So who has been guilty of panic-buying in recent years? A list of just some of the most high profile ones is below:
Andy van der Meyde - Inter Milan to Everton (£2m) - 20 apps/0 goals (2005 - 2009)
Xisco - Deportivo la Coruna to Newcastle United (£5.7m) - 9 apps/1 goal (2008 - 2013)
Roman Pavlyuchenko - Spartak Moscow to Tottenham Hotspur (£14m) - 78 apps/21 goals (2008 - 2012)
Dimitar Berbatov - Tottenham Hotspur to Manchester United (£30m) - 108 apps/48 goals (2009 - 2012)
Robinho - Real Madrid to Manchester City (£32.5m) - 41 apps/14 goals (2009 - 2011)
Paul Konchesky - Fulham to Liverpool (£4m) - 15 apps/0 goals (2010 - 2011)
Andre Santos - Fenerbahce to Arsenal (£5m) - 25 apps/3 goals (2011 - 2013)
Javi Garcia - Benfica to Manchester City (£16m) - 48 apps/2 goals (2012 - 2014)
Marouane Fellaini - Everton to Manchester United (£27m) - 17 apps/ 0 goals (2013 - current)
2014
This year's scramble for final additions has thrown up a few interesting transactions, and a worrying trend. With the Financial Fair Play regulations threatening to impact on a club's European involvement over the coming seasons, chief execs are looking for more ways to manipulate the system. We have seen clubs like Paris Saint Germain and Manchester City come acropper in their attempts to sign off enormous sponsorship deals to circumnavigate the regulations. While that could be deemed unfair, the current trend is going to be impossible to stop.
Deadline day has always been about the big names, the big transfers and the big money. However, this year we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of loan deals with an option to buy the following year. While this may appear on the surface to be foolhardy, as it always seems beneficial to tie the big names down to permanent deals, it may actually prove to be another shrewd move by chief execs to stay within the FFP regulations. With Manchester United having already spent in excess of £85m, the deal for Radamel Falcao would have taken the club far beyond the break-even necessary to avoid sanction from UEFA had it been permanent. However, with the option to defer payment for 12 months, the club can now rebuild its finances before having to fork out an additional sum. Similar deals for the likes of Alvaro Negredo and Javier Hernandez demonstrate that this trend seems set to continue.
The reason this trend is worrying? Call me old-fashioned, but I liked the thrill of the big signing. I remember staying up all night to watch the 2009 summer deadline day, which saw Manchester United sign Dimitar Berbatov for a British transfer record £30m, only for newly Arab-backed Manchester City to outdo them with the coup of Robinho minutes later for £32.5m. Though both eventually turned out to be flops, knowing that your club owns the player involved is exciting, while renting one is less so. If this is set to replace the traditional transfer deadline day, it will make the whole day a little less climactic, killing some of the fun that the broadcasters spend so long trying to instil.
Should this continue, the bloodshed and chaos we have become used to will become less of a pub brawl and more of an orderly queue of clubs, waiting their turn. A lot more safe, but a lot less exciting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)