- How to reform refereeing and bring back free speech in football
- Do Arsenal really get twice as many red cards as other clubs?
By Tony Attwood
There is an article today in the Telepgrah which has also appeared in MSN (in case you don’t have a subscription to the former), which follow up on a piece we published back in June: “The War with Man C has gone legal”. There we noted that Manchester City was now suing the Premier League for damages and that could have enormous implications. If the Premier League says it can’t pay, the League itself could be wound up. If it does pay, which means the other clubs end up paying money to a club that has more money than the rest of them put together. That could lead to the rest of the League resigning and forming a new competition. Either way the League ends as we know it.
I have a personal interest in the story because when the news that ManC was suing the League first broke, I wrote a letter to the Daily Telegraph letters page pointing out the danger to the rest of the League of this situation. That letter appeared in the normal way in the digital edition of the paper, but then about an hour later was removed I asked why and received no reply. My guess was that someone associated with ManC demenaded its removal and the paper kowtowed. Of course that is total speculation by me, and might be wrong, but I have asked the Telegraph why that happened, and they have declined to reply.
Of course that’s a trivial point, but I bring this up again because today the new article which appears in the Telegraph, focussing on the cost of the Premier League’s cases against Manchester City, (which was the essence of my letter to the paper).
The article today says, it “could cost clubs tens of millions of pounds that will not be recoverable” to fight the 115 cases against ManC. This view is based on the fact that the Leage “failed in an appeal to make Everton pay £4.9 million for its case.”
In that case the Premier League was awarded just £1.7 million in costs. Now it is suggested that the League, even if it wins its case against MancC would again not recover its costs. Those costs would then be paid by the League, and would wipe out its reserves which are generated by the sale of broadcasting and commercial rights.
What makes things particularly worrying for the League was that the League claimed in the Everton case that it was Everton’s “unreasonable conduct in the proceedings unnecessarily and significantly increased” and so having lost they should be liable..
Everton seem to have argued that they paid their legal team half the amount the Premier League did, and their legal team were more efficient and so they shouldn’t pay costs. You can also find details of the case in the Daily Mail.
This is all a big problem for the League. Everton were guilty, but it has cost the League a huge sum to prove it and remove what turned out to be six points.
The implication of this is that whatever the outcome each of the 115 cases against Manchester City brought by the League as a breach of the rules, and of defending the cast that Manchester City has brought against the League, the League could be financially ruined.
Now the Mail is arguing today that “Should City emerge triumphant, it is difficult to imagine a situation where they would seek full costs from the competition, given the history between the two.”
Well, perhaps I have a better imagination than the Mail, but I can imagine wanting their costs paid, and will only relent if the League changes its approach and henceforth does things as ManC want.
Meanwhile the League has just lost £3m in bringing Everton into order, not too long after it lost the Leicester City case where it was seeking a points deduction in relation to PSR breaches. This was on the technicality that Leicester had already been relegated by the time they were charged and thus outside of Premier League control! The court (to my surprise and that of a few others) agreed.
That win on a technicality followed Manchester City’s win in its earlier fight with Uefa which was also on a technicality (Uefa taking too long to bring the case to the Court of Arbitration in Sport).
None of this is good news for the well-being of the game, but as I originally argued in my piece to the Telegraph which they published and then withdrew, the clubs always have the option of doing what they did with League Division One – which is resigning on mass, but in this case leaving clubs like ManC, Leicester and Everton behind when forming a new League.
Of course at present no one is saying a word, and we still have to see the outcome of the League against ManC, and ManC against the League. Either way I rather fear the League is going to lose, but in doing so, could then be wound up, and re-emerge without ManC, or other clubs effectively owned by countries.
So it could still all turn out ok in the end.
Not looking good for the league, seeing how the sale of the hotel from Chelsea to a sister company was approved by them.
On top of PGMOL not having money.
“Now the Mail is arguing today that “Should City emerge triumphant, it is difficult to imagine a situation where they would seek full costs from the competition, given the history between the two.””
Sadly I feel just The Mails use of the adjective ‘Triumphant’ says a lot about their, and I fear most of the Right Wing medias take on this.
From the Cambridge dictionary:
TRIUMPHANT adjective
“having achieved a great victory (= winning a war or competition) or success, or feeling very happy and proud because of such an achievement:”
‘Great Victory’ ‘Success’ ‘Proud’ ‘Achievement’
They know as much as we do the possible implications of all this, whatever way it goes, yet that is their take on Man City’s stance.
As Tony speculates:
“The implication of this is that whatever the outcome each of the 115 cases against Manchester City brought by the League as a breach of the rules, and of defending the case that Manchester City has brought against the League, the League could be financially ruined.”
“There we noted that Manchester City was now suing the Premier League for damages and that could have enormous implications. If the Premier League says it can’t pay, the League itself could be wound up. If it does pay, which means the other clubs end up paying money to a club that has more money than the rest of them put together. That could lead to the rest of the League resigning and forming a new competition. Either way the League ends as we know it”.
Just speculation on Tony’s part I know, but everything I see and read on this suggests this is not going to end well, whatever the outcome.
And all because a Nation State simply wants to walk over everybody else. Because they don’t want to abide by the rules of a competition in the same way everybody else has to.
And to get their way they are bullying everybody else, and by doing so they are risking the entire existence of the Premier league, yet The Mail sees a potential victory for Man City as a ‘Triumph’!!!
A Triumph for for what? Capitalist bullying?
A Right Wing rag in the corner of the richest kid on the block. Well I never.
Another well informed and written article. Unfortunately, obscenely rich people (or countries) with no previous attachment to the sport or undying passion for football have taken over. Rules, clauses and articles are there to be exploited and broken in search of that next league title, rendering any competition futile! The right result in the case of these type of clubs will never be achieved. Money will always prevail! The only outcome therefore is for all the other clubs, dedicated and committed to obeying the rules, to leave this very damaged and poorly managed league and create a new transparent league (with a backbone) and one which is fully answerable to the UK Government, without those clubs effectively owned by countries.
Robin
“The only outcome therefore is for all the other clubs, dedicated and committed to obeying the rules, to leave this very damaged and poorly managed league and create a new transparent league”
That is one possibility, one I think Tony echoes.
Apart from a ‘transparent’ league, we could all perhaps hope for a transparent PGMOL, or better, a totally new body, in charge of the officials.
My hope on that front has always been that the entire pool of European referees, or those on the books of UEFA, referee across all European Countries. This is not as far fetched as it may seem, as it already happens on a smaller scale for all European competitions and Internationals.
Surely it wouldn’t be an enormous stretch to expand the same principles across the leagues? Even if they just did this with referees from what we may call the ‘elite’ leagues that would at least be a start.
Under such a system:
-No referee would ever have to referee the same team twice.
-The geographical location of a referee becomes irrelevant.
-Who they supported growing up becomes irrelevant.
-They will be removed from the subliminal pressure applied to them via the media and their local environment.
-The referees would all be held accountable for their decisions in a live (Maybe just recorded?) debrief on TV after a game. Not by SKY TNT etc, but by the official assessor. He will reference decisions against the Laws of the game. He will judge him for consistency within a match and even across matches expecting clear explanations for all decisions and inconsistences.
(This is not draconian. In my job I could of been ‘downloaded’ at any time. Covertly watched at anytime. Overtly assessed regularly throughout my career. Stood down if I was found to of transgressed. Retrained and reassessed if I did it more than once. Sacked if I did it too often. I could be breathalysed or blood tested any time. I was expected to live my life in a certain way. I was classed as a professional and was expected to behave as such, inside and outside of work. I was held to the highest standards. I did not have a single issue with any of this. It was my job. Nor should referees. It is their job)
-Referees are therefore overtly rated on their performance and are suspended, sacked, promoted/demoted on the basis of their performance level.
This is how it should be now. The fact it is not is shameful.
Sadly it is exactly how the media want it. And they run our game.
As we saw the weekend. As we see week in week out. It is the media and their cohort ‘experts’ that are their judge Jury and executioner.
If they say the referee was correct then he was correct. Case closed.
It’s a disgrace, and a new league may indeed give us an opportunity to at least address some of these issues.
My hopes aren’t high.
I’m hoping that talks between clubs who wish to leave the Prem are going forward. So that by next season regardless of outcomes a new league arrangement is in place. I particularly like Nitram’s idea to ditch the Profligate GerryManderers Organisation and employing match officials from across European leagues.