UF Quick Throw: UEFA Not As Corrupt As We Supposed

Darren Fletcher's appeal was denied.

From UEFA's statement: "In reaching its decision, the Control and Disciplinary Body concluded (i) that the protests had not been submitted within the required 24-hour deadline of a match for filing protests – as specified in the disciplinary regulations – and (ii) that even if they had been admitted they would have been rejected as unfounded as there were no grounds for contesting the referees' original decisions."

Translation: Day late, dollar short get bent.

Read more on "UF Quick Throw: UEFA Not As Corrupt As We Supposed"...

In Defense (?) of Platini

Platini: Evil genius? Idiot? Both?

This past Wednesday, UEFA president Michel Platini gave a speech to a meeting of the European Parliament in Brussels. While we here at UF have been known to get in a jab or two (or 17) at Michel (and his idiotic counterpart, Sepp Blatter), I decided it was only fair to take a hard look at his speech to determine if there were any points of merit. Lord knows no one else on here will defend my countryman.

Platini addressed the MEPs (Members of European Parliament) for 90 minutes, discussing his ideas regarding several intertwined issues which he believes threaten the very values that football represents: club expenditures on player transfers and player salaries, and the exploitation of younger and younger players. Let's take these issues one at a time to examine more closely what Michel is talking about.

1. Club Expenditures on Player Transfers
Much of the hand-wringing regarding exorbitant transfer fees has lately been generated by the takeover of Manchester City by Abu Dhabi, who spent a record £50 million ($72 million) on Wayne Bridge, Nigel de Jong, and Craig Bellamy. This reached epidemic status when Man City made a record £100 million (close to $125 million at the time) offer to AC Milan for Kaka. Although the star declined the move, there was great worry that a club with that sort of financial backing could effectively outprice any competing clubs for a specific player.

Platini's argument is that "the 1%" clubs (and how did he calculate that?) dominate the television schedule, are repetitive champions in their domestic leagues (thus ensuring repeats in the Champions League), and benefit greatly from massive financial backing. Thus, the obvious solution is to implement a spending cap and the obvious (at first glance) comparison is to American sports. However, the NFL has a salary (i.e. not spending) cap, while MLB only has a luxury tax (which is routinely ignored by those teams that can afford to pay it), rather than a hard cap. The closest correlation to the need for a spending tax as proposed by Platini would be something similar to the negotiations between MLB teams and foreign players, such as the deal between the Boston Red Sox and Daisuke Matsuzaka, where the Red Sox paid $51.11 million to the Seibu Lions and $52 million to Matsuzaka.

The argument against Platini in this particular context is that imposing a spending cap is an unfair restriction of market forces. If someone can afford to pay an athlete and that athlete's former club an absurd amount of money, why should they be barred from doing so? Of course, everyone expresses mock outrage at the money spent on athletic achievement - "Why don't we pay teachers, or firemen, that much money?" Answer: Because they are not involved in privatized events, but are paid for by municipal and state governments. If we pay them more, that money will likely come in the form of higher taxes for you. Obviously, teachers and firefighters (and many others) perform functions that are immeasurably more important than athletes, but the reality is that Roman Abramovich isn't willing to outlay massive amounts of cash for sewer workers, but only for shite like Shevchenko.

So, for point #1, Platini gets an C-. It's a principle that people would agree with, in general, but one that is economically indefensible.
---
2. Club Expenditures on Player Salaries
Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Kaka make €9,000,000 ($11.5 million) per year - this is above the average salary for all 30 MLB teams (direct comparison with NFL teams is next to impossible due to how salaries are constructed). So maybe Platini has a point here?

In the context of how American sports and the concept of salary restrictions relate to footy, the NFL and its salary cap are held up as examples of parity, while MLB containing clubs who are able to ignore the financial ramifications of the luxury tax is decried as a league where "the rich get richer" (by continually winning championships and getting increased exposure).

Parity in the NFL? Since 1981, the Super Bowl winners have been: (1) the San Francisco 49ers (5 times); (2) the Washington Redskins (3 times); (3) the NY Giants (3 times); (4) the Dallas Cowboys (3 times); (5) the New England Patriots (3 times); (6) the Pittsburgh Steelers (2 times); (7) the Denver Broncos (2 times); and (8) 1 win apiece for the Raiders, Bears, Packers, Rams, Ravens, Bucs, and Colts. I wouldn't exactly call it parity when 7 teams have 21 out of 28 (75%) Super Bowls.

Dominance of the rich in MLB? Since 1981, there have been 18 different winners in 27 World Series, with only 8 teams as multiple winners and only the New York Yankees having won more than 2 (4 overall victories, including 3 straight from 1998-2000; I despise the Yankees).

In essence, then, the views of the NFL and MLB are not consistent with the reality of their history over the past 25-30 years. In addition, the argument against Platini here is once again that such a salary cap would be a restriction on free trade agreements across the European Union. The EU specifically allows for the free movement of workers between countries in an express attempt to allow those individuals to search for higher-paying jobs. Is Platini then saying that footballers are not entitled to those same protections?

So, for point #2, Platini gets a D. He was fantastic on the pitch, but his grasp of economics leaves a bit to be desired.
---
3. The Exploitation of Young Footballers
At last we get to a point with which I agree. Platini actually received quite a bit of applause from the MEPs when he discussed the dangers of questionable recruiting practices and less-than-savory agents preying upon youngsters in less-developed countries.

"Paying a child to kick a ball is not that different from paying a child to work on a production line in a factory that makes footballs...Both amount to child labor. And when you pay the parents, when you uproot them from their home environment, when you make them emotionally disorientated, I call that child trafficking."

While this may initially seem a little dramatic, there are undoubtedly many young players who are brought to Europe from Africa every year and wind up poor and alone on the streets rather than in an academy as they were promised by "agents." Imposing stricter travel restrictions for minors into the EU, as well as providing closer regulation of football agents, will certainly help to deal with this aspect of searching for "the next Zidane."

So, for point #3, Platini gets a B-. It's an issue that everyone agrees is serious, and he appears to be passionate about, but he hasn't provided us with any ideas of substance for how to deal with it.
---
This is, admittedly, a simplistic analysis of everything that Platini has proposed but I have already written a novella by Internet standards (cue the "tl;dr" comments). In essence, is Platini trying to save the game he loves, or is he simply mad with power. We'll most likely find out this summer exactly how much influence UEFA has over the EU, and how powerful Platini truly is.

Read more on "In Defense (?) of Platini"...

Shrek Is Let Off the Hook for Stamping on an Aaaaaalborg Player

Okay, maybe we just needed an excuse to publish more Shrek pictures, but UEFA has let one Wayne Rooney off the hook for aggressively stamping accidentally stepping on an Aaaaaaalborg player last week.

Your requisite rhetorical question: Would it have been the same result if it had been a Man U player who was stepped on?






(photo credit: NY Times)

Read more on "Shrek Is Let Off the Hook for Stamping on an Aaaaaalborg Player"...

The Subservient League

Morning all.

Today saw the groups and fixtures released for the UEFA cup and I will pardon you for not leaping up and down with excitement. This competition now looks like the poor bastard love child of the Champions League.

If you can't see it yet, just wait until next year.

Join me after the jump to look at the impending changes and all of this year's important fixtures involving the English sides... Tottenham, Manchester City, Portsmouth and Aston Villa.



Why oh why oh why oh why does the UEFA Cup have to be in a league format? Well that's a rhetorical question but its retarded. Money aside, the UEFA Cup worked as as a separate knock out competition and it was this "difference" from the Champions League that actually made it unique and gave 5th, 6th and 7th place domestic league finishers some European credibility.

Now? Its a poor man's Champions League! [Ed. Note: it's why it's widely known as Little Cup to the CL's Big Cup] One in which you don't even get to play each team at home! Nope, now you are drawn to play two games at home and two games away.

This is retarded. It has to be all or nothing. Do it properly or do not bother. This format is typical of UEFA's willingness to make changes on a whim under the leadership of their principle buffoon Mr Platini, a man who opens his mouth more often than Divine Brown. At least she served a purpose.

Let's pretend you are Hull and you make it Europe, (hey it's possible...) only to be told that you will play AC Milan away (not this year though) but they won't be expected to visit you in a second leg. It's absolute nonsense!

The rules and regulations surrounding this competition have changed so often it is hard to keep up. The loss of two legs and the addition of Champions League "losers" at a later stage has made this competition a fixtures draw lottery. Maybe Harry Redknapp, Juande Ramos and Mark Hughes would do better to buy a scratch-and-win card at the nearest paper shop. Talking of gambling, how long before the home advantage finds it's way into a fixing probe?

This competition should be renamed The European Subservient League... But wait. It gets better.

From 2009 on, this competition will feature FORTY EIGHT teams inhabiting TWELVE groups and be renamed The Europa League! People watched the UEFA Cup because it was an exciting knock-out tournament that featured regular giant-killing, special European nights and once-in-a-lifetime chances for fans to see European monsters in their back yard. Now it's just a poor man's Champions League that favors the big boys.

Anyway... let's take a look at this year's Subservient League groups (released today) and pretend we give a shit shall we?

Group A: Schalke 04, Paris St Germain, MANCHESTER CITY, Racing Santander, FC Twente

Group B: Benfica, Olympiakos, Galatasaray, Hertha Berlin, Metalist Kharkiv

Group C: Sevilla, Stuttgart, Sampdoria, Partizan Belgrade, Standard Liege

Group D: TOTTENHAM, Spartak Moscow, Udinese, Dinamo Zagreb, NEC Nijmegen

Group E: AC Milan, Heerenveen, SC Braga, PORTSMOUTH, Vfl Wolfsburg

Group F: Hamburg, Ajax, Slavia Prague, ASTON VILLA, MSK Zilina

Group G: Valencia, Club Brugge, Rosenborg, FC Copenhagen, Saint-Etienne

Group H: CSKA Moscow, Deportiva La Coruna, Feyenoord, Nancy, Lech Poznan

Manchester City's group looks tough. Sparky Hughes' men will face PSG (3 Dec) and an easy-ish Steve McClown FC Twente team (6 Nov) at home before hitting the road to play Schalke (27 Nov) and Santander (18 Dec).

Portsmouth lucked out with AC Milan (if such a thing is possible) as the Italian giants will visit Fratton Park on the 27th November. Pompey will travel to Braga (23rd Oct) and Wolfsburg (4th Dec) before their last group game at home to Heerenveen on the 17th of December. Braga are certainly beatable on the road and the home advantage in the Milan tie is HUGE. I can see Pompey progressing.

Villa have a tough task ahead of them as they open their European campaign at home to Ajax before heading to Prague on the 6th of November. They finish group play with an extremely tough trip to Hamburg on the 17th of December. Hamburg are no push over either, as they currently sit at the top of the Bundesliga table after 7 games

As for Tottenham, who knows? The way they are currently playing and the selecting their players writes off any kind of prediction. At least they don't have to travel to colder climates during the league stage. Both Spartak Moscow and Zagreb will travel to White Hart Lane. Trips to Udinese and NEC Nijmegen don't exactly look daunting but then again, neither did Hull at home!

-Bigus.

Read more on "The Subservient League"...