@kaybaba99
After Matchday 2 round of games, the four Premier League teams won just three and lost five of their eight games in the UEFA Champions League to prompt talks of a crisis in the English game which, despite an unusual influx of cash, has persistently and consistently fallen short not only against Europe’s best but also average teams from other leagues on the continent.
The question, given what we have seen of Man United, Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal, is: What is wrong with English football and why can’t its best compete in Europe?
Since 2011-12 there have been 11 Champions League quarter-finalists from La Liga, six from the Bundesliga, five from Ligue 1 and three each from Serie A and the Premier League. This is in the same league which produced a team in seven of the eight Champions League final matches from 2005 to 2012.
If the English Premier League is as exciting and strong as it is touted to be, then why are they becoming the poor cousins of Europe’s bigger teams despite previously-undreamt of revenues in domestic league history?
I’m not convinced that there’s one single reason to explain this big problem which represents a clear and present danger to the league we all follow with passion so I will try to enumerate a couple of ideas that could probably be responsible for why England’s representatives are not only losing to Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Real Madrid but also to PSV, Porto and Dinamo Zagreb.
ENGLISH FOOTBALL’S ARROGANCE
The same mindset of superiority which made England to miss the opening editions of the FIFA World Cup, despite being a founding member of the world football governing body, simply because the English felt there football was much more developed than the rest of the world and therefore couldn’t be bothered with the indignity of playing against teams that they’d recently been at war with and the undue foreign influence in what they considered to be a British game.
This mindset, call it arrogance if you like, till pervades English football such that, despite the increasingly huge gap between English teams and their counterparts from mainland Europe in terms of European titles won, our friends from England will not agree that there are better teams outside their land.
Besides, what if the Premier League is not as tough as previously thought? What if years of self-isolation and conceit have left the English game far behind the top leagues in Europe such that it is difficult to catch up?
English football and its administrators have refused to admit the possibility that there’s another league out there superior to what they have in their domain. This failure, call it arrogance if you like, also affects their attitude to continental competitions. For clubs and fans around Europe, they view European competition as a privilege. In England, it’s viewed as a nuisance or a mountain too difficult to climb. Remember how Real Madrid pursued La Decima – a 10th UCL title – with a single purpose determination as if nothing else mattered. And, truly, nothing else did. Now they have won Decima, the battle-cry is to win ‘Once” – yea, you got it, title number 11. Compare this with the frenetic pace English teams pursue the Premier League and fans insist on rating teams based on the number of PL titles won ahead of CL gongs.
TACTICAL NAIVETY
One cannot help notice that most Premier League teams find it hard to transform from a rigid 4-4-2 formation employed in the domestic league to any other variant suitable for the rigours of playing in Europe three days after scuttle-work at home. It speaks to the arrogance earlier mentioned when Premier League managers show an air of indifference to the opposition, erroneously thinking what matters is their own game-plan to win a match.
There have been fundamental tactical problems with the way English teams set out to play in Europe, naively thinking that if a tactical formation was good enough to win games in the league, then it should be good enough to win in Europe too.
Even the much-medalled Sir Alex Ferguson never underestimated the difference in the dynamics of the domestic league and European competitions so it was rare for him to line up a team that did not reflect his understanding of the particular competition he was playing.
European teams flood the midfield with as many as five players – sometimes sacrificing one defender for a 3-man defence – but Premier League teams most times obstinately stick to their four-man midfield, leaving the middle a player short and often found wanting once they lose possession. This lack of width, and sometimes depth, is one huge factor why English teams fail to do well in Europe.
If you examine how English teams set out to play in Europe, you see that element of naivety in their approach because playing in England and in Europe are two different kettles of fish. To his credit, Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho admitted it’s more difficult playing in Europe than at home. “It’s more difficult for English clubs. This league is very difficult and the Champions League is a completely different situation.”
While at Chelsea, Ancelotti once remarked that he was surprised at the lack of tactical variation in England – so you understand what I mean by inadequacies in the tactical set-ups of PL teams.
STYLE OF PLAY/PHILOSOPHY
By twist of irony, the Premier League style of play – founded on all-out attacking play with boundless running and less on defensive play – is probably an hindrance against some of Europe’s best.
Former Man United defender Gary Neville shares this opinion when he said: “My biggest concern is that when you watch some of the better teams in Europe they actually look tougher mentally, better physically and have more intensity. Sometimes we’re watching a game on a Saturday or Sunday and we’re thinking it’s exciting and it’s fast paced. That’s correct but when you get into the Champions League it’s a different level so what we think is fast paced doesn’t work when you’re up there. The better teams can apply high pressure all game and I’m not sure we’ve got enough teams who can do that. We’ve got to increase the intensity of our big games in this country which will then reflect on the Wednesday nights when we go into Europe.”
Broken down into a layman’s language, what works well in England could be less effective in Europe. Take, for instance, Arsenal’s win against Man United on Sunday. The Gunners raced into a 3-0 lead after 20 minutes and kept attacking to get more goals up on till the final minutes of the game. In Europe, it could have disastrous consequences like it happened to the same Arsenal last season when they led 3-0 against Anderlecth but contrived to surrender their lead to end the game 3-3. An European team, leading by three goals to nil will sit on that advantage to see the game out instead of the gung-ho approach of the English teams which often tend to back-fire.
Another game that comes to mind readily was the Champions League game between Man United and Bayern Munich in the 2009/10 season. Trailing from a 2-1 first leg loss, United got off to a flying start with three first half goals which was more than enough to see them through. But trust the adventurous English spirits, they poured forward in large numbers to ‘kill’ off the game and got punished by two late goals by the Germans to end the game 4-4 on aggregate and send Bayern through to the next round.
More often than not, this inability to see games out from a winning position which is a direct product of the style and philosophy of the English game is partly responsible for their perennial heart-ache in Europe.
LACK OF A WINTER BREAK
Of Europe’s top five domestic leagues, the Premier League is the ONLY one without a break in the middle of the season. Rather, while others in France, Germany, Spain and Italy observe a minimum of two weeks (Bundesliga teams get six weeks) break for players to cool off and recharge their batteries, the Barclays Premier League organizes its most hectic fixtures around the festive period with games as many as three games in the seven-day period between Christmas and New Year’s day.
The CL group phase ends mid-December and continental teams use the winter break to prepare for the more crucial knock-out stages. This period, immediately after the New Year also coincide with the knock out stages of domestic cup competitions which means a two-week break could be priceless but, inexplicably, those who run the Premier League don’t see the wisdom in this. The managers and players have shouted themselves hoarse to no avail.
Most managers, if not all, have given up calling for the winter break and the funny insistence on English clubs playing through Christmas and New Year only to falter at the business end of the season when trophies are handed to deserving winners. While Premier League clubs are fading and fainting around February/March, that’s precisely when European teams are reaping the benefits of their winter break. Two weeks may seem insignificant but the benefits are uncountable.
Of course some will ask why the winter break was not a factor between 2005 to 2012 when English clubs played seven of the eight UCL finals? My response is who does a winter break hurt? The fans, the players or even the sponsors? Exactly, nobody. So, I ask in return, why not?
Of course, not everyone buys the idea of a break in winter. Gary Lineker, ex-Spurs striker said in a tweet: “Crisis point for Premier League football. If no winter break, at least play less games over Xmas and no FA Cup replays beyond 4th round.”
Former England winger Chris Waddle disagrees although for a different reason entirely. “If we had a winter break everybody would go and play in America, China, Dubai. They would not get a day off or get a rest.”
For me, I say let there be a break. If clubs like they can go to Mars on tour but we would have absolved the administrators of blame.
FOOTBALL IS CYCLICAL
This may sound pedestrian and lacking in empirical fact but it is worth looking at holistically. Throughout football history, teams have risen and fallen with another one always standing by to take their place. For illustration, there’s none better than Real Madrid to use as example. Los Blancos won the first five editions of the competition from 1956-60 but failed to make any appreciable impact again until 40 years later when they won three titles in the five years between 1998 and 2002.
Or you could take the case of Manchester United that failed to win a league title in 26 years but then went ahead to win 13 in 20 seasons. Undoubtedly the Premier League’s dominant club for two decades, United experienced a first season out of the Champions League since 1995-96 last season. For a club which failed to reach the Champions League quarter-finals only five times in 17 years until the departure of manager Sir Alex Ferguson in 2013, making the semi-finals seven times and four finals with two podium finishes, they were an undoubted European force. Until recently, that is.
Escalated to national teams, time was when the mere mention of Brazil was enough to make teams quake in their boots. Now, Brazilian teams are routinely disgraced by ‘minnows’ that they would have crushed in their hey-days. At the ongoing U-17 World Cup, South Korea defeated Brazil 1-0 in their opening group game last Saturday. South Korea o! Closer home, the 1990s was considered the glorious era of Nigerian football when we won several laurels. Now we struggle to qualify for competitions. What has changed? Nothing. Just that there are new super-powers in town. No king rules forever.
IMPLICATIONS
Manchester City may have won two of the last four Premier League titles and finished second in two of the last three seasons but they have struggled to replicate their domestic form in Europe, going out in the first knock-out round for the second successive year, after exits at the group stage the two previous years.
City have undoubtedly had some tough groups – three times pitched with Bayern, the other with Real Madrid and Borussia Dortmund – but their situation is a sign of things to come for English clubs as group placements continue to be determined by a Uefa seeding system that is based on performance in European competitions over the last five years.
Thus the continued poor performance of English teams would eventually have two main effects. One, there will be a significant drop in the amount of revenues accruing to Premier League teams which in turn affects spending on players’ acquisitions. Secondly, it will impact on their ability to continue to increase exponentially their commercial and broadcasting revenues from overseas, particularly the lucrative Asian and American markets. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, it may have longtime implications for the Uefa coefficient that determines the number of Premier League qualifiers for Europe’s elite club competition. The coefficient determines the number of qualification places national associations are allocated in the Champions League and Europa League and England are third in Uefa’s coefficient rankings behind Spain and Germany but ahead of Italy.
Bad news is that England are just ahead of fourth-placed Italy by just 3.47 points which means they could be pushed into fourth place by the end of this season which invariably means there would only be two automatic and one play-off qualifiers from England. Essentially, instead of a top four, there would now be a battle for top three and you know what that means for your club.
Good news is that England trail second-placed Germany by just 2.48 points which means it is also possible to overtake the Germans and get into a stronger position where the automatic three qualifiers will be guaranteed.
Both extreme situations are possible. For Premier League fans who can’t bear the ordeal of seeing their teams missing out of the gravy train, maybe now is the time to start praying. And for those who still think calculating the coefficient is a mystery, I’ve demystified it by giving you an idea of how it is done.
How the coefficient ranking is determined.
The associations’ club coefficients rankings are based on the results of each association’s clubs in the five previous UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League seasons. The rankings determine the number of places allocated to an association (country) in forthcoming UEFA club competition.
Points system
1. Each team gets two points for a win and one point for a draw (points are halved for matches in the qualifying and play-off rounds).
2. Clubs that reach the round of 16, quarter-finals, semi-finals or final of the UEFA Champions League, or the quarter-finals, semi-finals or final of the UEFA Europa League, are awarded an extra point for each round.
3. In addition, four points are awarded for participation in the group stage of the UEFA Champions League and four points for qualifying for the round of 16.
Coefficient calculation
The coefficient is calculated by working out an average score: dividing the number of points obtained, by the total number of clubs representing an association in that season’s two club competitions. The resulting figure is then tallied with the results of the previous four seasons to calculate the coefficient. Where two associations have the same coefficient, the association with the higher coefficient in the most recent season is placed first.
COMMENTS