Revolutionary idea indeed. BBC reports – On Thursday, the 20 Premier League clubs agreed to look into the possibility of playing an extra round of matches every season – abroad. The idea comes 16 years after the historic creation of the Premier League, and shows just how much the top flight of English football has changed since that key move in 1992. My thoughts below.

It’s quite easy to get a revolutionary idea. The difficulty is only in making people believe that it’s their time’s worth. And then comes getting support or strong lobbying for that idea. Football has seen many such revolutionary ideas and has seen most of them dismissed. From bigger goal posts to video technology to four 25-minute quarters to 10 minutes bins, we have always seen new ideas in football. If you analyse and compare various sports to see how much they have changed over a period of 100 years, you’ll realise that football has changed the least. The governing body of football has always maintained their stance keeping the game simple. I’m completely with them. The most special thing about the game of football is ironically its simplicity.

Now the FA has come up with one of the most unbelievable ideas in football. My immediate response was ‘ah! good idea but why don’t we do it differently!’. If I’ve break down this proposal in parts: (i) premier league teams playing matches outside England (ii) playing premier league matches outside England (iii) Not every team will play outside England in this arrangement (iv) premier league to have 39 matches each instead of 38.

(i) Premier league teams playing matches outside England: Fantastic proposition. I’m jumping for joy! Even if India may not be on the list currently, the mere prospect is mouth watering. How I’d like to see Terry and Lampard an Indian stadium of 100,000 fans (yes, it can be a sell-out)! It’s a great idea to spread the game of football in areas like Asia and North America. Whereas in Africa, I don’t think they need premier league to promote football in Africa. It’s already quite big there. One negative is that the local leagues will have to face tough competition against the one of the best leagues in the world. I don’t follow the Indian football league. Suppose I do. Though I must be able to watch a dozen Indian league matches for the cost of one premier league match in India (hypothetical), what if I decide to save my money by avoiding a dozen Indian league matches to watch a premier league match? This is not a socialistic world (if yes, the socialism would be shot down before it commits a suicide). FA wants to make money, the clubs want to make money, we want to see world class football, that’s it.

(ii) Playing premier league matches outside England: This seems like a no-brainer to me. How in the world can we see a league match being played outside that nation? Every ground-breaking idea would have to face these ‘how in the world . .’ questions. There are certain things that simply won’t make sense until they work but we want that in the first place to see if it works. This idea of playing a Chelsea vs West Ham league game in say California, seems completely out of place. League games should stay within the country. Let’s leave it at that. I’m not talking about the long flight journeys and the resultant fatigue. I’m talking about the sentiments here. How intense would the Ashes series be, if it were to be played in the USA? I can understand if the quarter finals, semi finals and finals of a cup competition is going to be played in a neutral venue. That can be digested. But this idea of playing premier league games outside of England is YUCK.

(iii) Not every team will play outside England in this arrangement: A proposal cannot be more unscientific than this. Only 10 teams out of 20 would get to play outside England. How funny! How would that be arrived at? Toss of a coin? Drawing lots? There are very significant differences in playing at home and playin away within England and playing in a neutral venue thousands of miles away. After playing the 38 matches of regular home and away fixtures against other 19 teams, who would be our opponent for the 39th match and how will that be decided? Too early to ask? Still I cannot think of a decent method of arriving at this. I don’t think if they’ve announced the timing of these matches. It’s not known yet whether they will be in any month of the season or all will be played towards the end of the season.

(iv) Premier league to have 39 matches each instead of 38: That’s so unnatural. When you have 19 teams to play against it can’t be more than 38 matches. The opponent of the 39th match could very well be decided by a lucky draw. Such kind of randomness and luck in the premier league is unwarranted. Also the 39th game played outside England will not be called either as a ‘home’ match or an ‘away’ match. This means the statistics and record keepers will have to exclude this for home and away records and such stuff.

When you put all the above four ideas into one single proposal that inter-connects all these situations, the end product is not a very pleasant one. We should realise that this proposal is at a very preliminary stage. Some of the components of the proposal could change as we go along. I hope FIFA rejects this idea of tinkering with the premier league. If the objective is to make more money or to promote football, they can choose other competitions but never a league.

Gary Cahill to Chelsea?






  • View Results

Loading ... Loading ...