The English FA is proposing to add one game per season for each team in the Premier League to be played abroad. The "top 5" teams will be seeded in the draw for fixture so they can avoid playing against one another.
What do you think of this scheme? I personally think it is bollocks because it will skew the result; the top teams will gain easy points and will stay top year after year. The situation is bad enough nowadays with the "Big Four" perpetually dominating the table; this scheme will make it worse. Additionally, the added travel will pile on top of the heavy schedule that teams already have with multiple competitions, making player fatigue and burn-out even more of a problem.
I am sure there is a large income potential for teams so that management will be salivating at the thought but the negatives outweigh the positives in this case. I say let's scrap some international friendlies in the middle of the season and replace them with club friendlies abroad.
1 hour ago
Posts
6 deflections:
That would mean a 39-game season for all of the 20 premier league teams. A rigged draw that would pit top teams against bottom teams would be a puzzling aspect of the plan.
The prospect of a league game in the States is tempting for American-based supporters. I would drive to New York City (7 hours) for an official league game, but not for a friendly.
The downside of this plan could be imposing, with players losing their form for weeks on end due to jet lag, and conspiracy theories about what might have been if it weren't for those dastardly foreign fixtures, but I'd really enjoy a trip to Giants Stadium to see my beloved Arsenal beat on whoever they draw from the hat.
My initial thought is that I'm for the plan, but I can already hear UK and Ireland-based supporters decrying it as an outrage.
I find it ironic that photos used in the articles concerning the foreign soil matches is invariably one of East-Asian fans wearing Man u kits. They'd seem to benefit the most with their marketing approach. I too wish to see my team locally, I don't want it at the expense of a player's fitness.
We've got to get more East-Asians wearing Arsenal kits.
I slept a little uneasily having gone out on a limb with my prediction that UK and Ireland-based supporters would decry the plan as an outrage, but my prediction came good this morning as Arseblog suggested the clubs redirect their attention from exploring the plan, to a probe of his anus.
Goodplaya, though, wrote an erudite piece in favor of the proposal, comparing a bad draw for the extra game to losing out to a deflected goal.
I would also love to see "my" Arsenal play live. I continue to be surprised at how many Arsenal shirts I see in the street so I'm sure a lot of fans share this desire. But adding more games to already congested fixtures is a big problem.
Logistically, I think they will have to extend the season by one to two weeks to allow for jet lag; cup games and internationals may also have to move.
After sleeping on it, I think the globalization of EPL is inevitable and is irreversible. Growth is saturated in UK and the growth potential around the world is so much more. All the clubs will want in on this opportunity because everyone involved (except the fans) will be able to make so much money from it.
Now The issues become
1)how it can be done so that the Englishness, the cultural heritage and uniqueness of the EPL game is preserved and propagated and
2) how to protect the players' health
Other comments, including those of Arsene Wenger and Alex Ferguson.
The comments I've read from supporters have mostly been strongly opposed to the proposition. Voicing support for the idea looks like it could be a quick way to make enemies.
However, a poll on Soccernet, with over 42,000 responses, has it as 45% for and 45% against, with 10% abstentions.
Post a Comment