Big Four Stranglehold Has Suffocated Life Out Of The Game

[Jonny2J]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle1696102.ece

The large white type caught the eye on the newsstand in precisely the manner intended. Positioned directly underneath the stately Times masthead, it read “The dream final”, advertising TheGame’s comprehensive coverage of the FA Cup semi-finals that ended with the progress of Manchester United and Chelsea to Wembley.

A dream final for who exactly? For fans of the two clubs? Definitely. For the FA? Of course. For ticket touts? Certainly. And for media executives with their famously hazy grasp of how real supporters think? Yes, probably them, too. But for the rest of us, forget it. The “dream final” is a nightmare.

You will read a lot of guff this week — some of it doubtless on these pages — about how this is a momentous week for English football. Three teams in the Champions League semi-finals, wall-to-wall coverage, Clive Tyldesley oozing gravitas — what’s not to love? But for the majority, the truth is different. Chelsea, Liverpool and Manchester United in the last four of the premier club competition in Europe, Chelsea v United in the FA Cup Final and the same three plus Arsenal occupying the top places in the Barclays Premiership — the “big four” have a stranglehold on English football and they are choking the last breath of life out of it.

Admittedly, they are fine teams and three of them — the ones wearing red — have been the dominant forces in the English game since Herbert Chapman first began to mould Arsenal into a sporting institution in the decade before the Second World War.

But this is not an argument about style or the excellence of Cristiano Ronaldo, Steven Gerrard, Cesc Fàbregas or Frank Lampard. It is about real competition, the element of surprise that used to be considered part of the essence of the national game being devoured by huge corporate monsters. My colleague, Simon Barnes, wrote a typically eloquent piece about two years ago about the monoculture of football taking over the sporting landscape. The four leading clubs have colonised the game in the same way — a monoculture within the monoculture.

And nothing perpetuates the cycle more than the Champions League. Clubs playing in it are rewarded lavishly each time they step on the field. With every passing year, United, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal gain more income, enabling them to draw farther away from the pack. United’s 8-3 aggregate thrashing of AS Roma that earned their place in the last four was a black night for English football. Why? Because a spectacular performance live on terrestrial television during a school holiday week will have garnered tens of thousands more impressionable young converts to the Old Trafford myth machine.

Can anyone smash the cartel? Well, anything is possible and success in football is famously cyclical, but consider the example of Tottenham Hotspur, the most recent club to make a serious attempt. They have a fine head coach, have traded players like Merlin stickers in the playground and invested large sums in the transfer market. Yet this season they have failed to challenge seriously for the Champions League place that eluded them so cruelly last year and have had to endure a hugely symbolic and deflating defeat by Arsenal’s second string in the semi-finals of the Carling Cup.

Here is a question. What would you consider the most significant goal in a domestic match since the formation of the Premier League in 1992?

For me, it is Paul Rideout’s header that gave Everton victory over United in the FA Cup Final of 1995. An odd choice, perhaps, until you consider that the triumph of Joe Royle’s “dogs of war” represents the only time in 15 seasons that the outcome of one of the two leading domestic trophies has been anything approaching a shock. And do not try to say that Blackburn Rovers’s title win in the same season was against the odds when it was achieved with the most expensively assembled squad in the game at the time.

When the Premiership came into being, the fear was that the clubs at the bottom end of the established Football League structure would flounder, but this has not been the case. The game thrives in the lower divisions because it retains the capacity for shock.

Contrast that with the sheer Groundhog Day numbness induced by being a supporter of Tottenham or Everton or Manchester City. My club, Aston Villa, have acquired a brilliant new manager and a visionary new owner boasting an amply filled bank account, but the best we can hope for is to challenge for fifth or sixth place. Excuse me for not getting overcome with giddy anticipation.

So please do not expect the majority of football supporters to grow feverish at the prospect of an all-English Champions League final, or lose sleep in expectation of the “dream” FA Cup Final or fret over whether Liverpool or Arsenal will claim that oh so coveted third or fourth place in the Premiership. We lost interest long, long ago.

GIANTS’ RULE

The present

–– Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal should occupy the top four places for the second consecutive season

–– In the 15 seasons since the formation of the Premier League, big-four clubs have won the championship 14 times

–– In the same period, the same clubs have won 14 FA Cups

–– Increasingly, they monopolise the League Cup, too, winning it in five of the past seven seasons

–– Manchester United and Arsenal occupied the top two positions in four consecutive seasons between 1997-98 and 2000-01

The past

–– Tottenham Hotspur (1950-51), Ipswich Town (1961-62) and Nottingham Forest (1977-78) all won the title in their first season after promotion to the top flight

–– Between 1972-73 and 1979-80, the FA Cup was three times won by teams from the second tier of English football

–– Eight different clubs won the title in the 1960s

–– Nottingham Forest were European champions two seasons after being promoted from the old second division

–– The last four of the League Cup in 1974-75 had no sides from the top division

[Hansel]

ANOTHER thread?

[Sully]

Its all been caused by the increase of money into the game over the past two decades. Football was a working class mans game but hikes in prices for the top teams are starting to take the average man away from football. Teams in high positions like Chelsea, Arsenal and Man United can get away with charging ridiculous sums of money but some of the lower teams cant as there football is not as "attractive" if you know what I mean. Also that fact that the big teams who get the large amounts of money from gate recipts can use it to their advantage and sign the bigger name players does nowt to help the situation.

Its not going to get better unless the F.A do something its only going to get worse. The influx of big money foreign investors is going to take its toll. Their financial clout can help them get te big players and some teams dont mind paying over the odds for them. Transfer caps is a possible solution to the monopoly that the top teams have but if I'm being honest i doubt the FA will do anything

[nath_scfc]

EDIT: Image removed upon hotlink being changed.

[Definitely Maybe]

Originally Posted by nath_scfc

Exactly. I wish we could win the league but decline promotion, I love the Championship

[nath_scfc]

Top three fighting for automatic, then 4th-10th for the 3 remaining play-off spots? Then the play-offs semis and final AND Plymouth to laugh at!

CASHBACK!

[g33k]

The Championship is certainly the best.

[Cobinho]

Are the top four dominating? Yes. Is it down to SKY Sports? Not really. The teams have great managers. Money can't be used as an excuse because Newcastle, Leeds and Tottenham spend more than Arsenal.

Before Abramovic there was not a "top four" more like a top two. Only Arsenal and Man Utd could win the league because they were good and the rest were not up to standard. They were not great purley because of money but because they had good managers.

Liverpool, Chelsea, Leeds and Newcastle all had thier time in the Champions league. All on thier day were good sides and if they were in Premier Leaugue now would seriously challenge for a top four spot. They were all much better that Spurs, Bolton and Everton are.

I think there is a "top four" because they are very good teams and would be at the top of any league in Europe.

[-The Trooper-]

Do you know what will make the situation better? - Complaining about it. That allways seems to work

[Jonno394]

Originally Posted by Definitely Maybe

Exactly. I wish we could win the league but decline promotion, I love the Championship

You're jumping the gun a bit there aren't you.

[calculus]

Originally Posted by Sully

Its all been caused by the increase of money into the game over the past two decades. Football was a working class mans game but hikes in prices for the top teams are starting to take the average man away from football. Teams in high positions like Chelsea, Arsenal and Man United can get away with charging ridiculous sums of money but some of the lower teams cant as there football is not as "attractive" if you know what I mean. Also that fact that the big teams who get the large amounts of money from gate recipts can use it to their advantage and sign the bigger name players does nowt to help the situation.

Its not going to get better unless the F.A do something its only going to get worse. The influx of big money foreign investors is going to take its toll. Their financial clout can help them get te big players and some teams dont mind paying over the odds for them. Transfer caps is a possible solution to the monopoly that the top teams have but if I'm being honest i doubt the FA will do anything

Man U do not charge high ticket prices to your average fan at all especially compared with Arsenal and Chelsea but this is down to the London factor! Man U charge £35 for the equivalent seats at Arsenal it's £60 and at Chelsea it's £70!

Originally Posted by Cobinho

Are the top four dominating? Yes. Is it down to SKY Sports? Not really. The teams have great managers. Money can't be used as an excuse because Newcastle, Leeds and Tottenham spend more than Arsenal.

Before Abramovic there was not a "top four" more like a top two. Only Arsenal and Man Utd could win the league because they were good and the rest were not up to standard. They were not great purley because of money but because they had good managers.

Liverpool, Chelsea, Leeds and Newcastle all had thier time in the Champions league. All on thier day were good sides and if they were in Premier Leaugue now would seriously challenge for a top four spot. They were all much better that Spurs, Bolton and Everton are.

I think there is a "top four" because they are very good teams and would be at the top of any league in Europe.

Cobinho you know your football and I was going to say something along the same lines because if Arsenal didn't sack Bruce Rioch and bring in Arsene Wenger then we would be in a worse position than Tottenham and Newcastle because we finished 12th the season before AW came and with his introduction we finished 4th and then in his first full season we won the title with more or less the same team plus Vieira, Anelka and Remi Garde( )!

If the quality of the managers was better then yes there would be more competition!

I think Allardyce and Redknapp have done good jobs with limited funds difference being that they recruit older players who cannot do it for as long as the younger players that Ferguson and Wenger recruit!

People like to knock Jose Mourinho but Ranieri spent £200m and couldn't win the title!

Now I'm ranting but the point of my story is not that we should somehow try to weaken the top 4 as it is now but that in itself should push the other teams to do more than be happy with a 0-0 against these sides and say that they should have probably nicked it! I've said in a previous post that I would like teams like Spurs to make it a top 5 but they have to put in the shifts to do that...hard work and strategy. A greater knowledge of player that are coming through not just in England but WW!

Man U improved OT off the back of Ferguson and likewise the Emirates was built off the back of AW you can't begrudge these 2 managers at least their success!

Obviously Liverpool and Chelsea have had injections in cash but then so have AV and West Ham!

[Jonny2J]

Spurs' strategy now is remarkable and the changeover in the whole culture of the club is remarkable, plus in my eyes they have after Arnesen the best Director Of Football around.

[Stella Artois]

Yes, I too admire Spurs philosophy of buying average English players and building a team.

Spurs have gone backwards from last season. They can't beat their points tally from last year and at the same time they still have the same frailties as before.

Commoli is a brilliant sporting director who is wasted at that shithole.

[Viperized]

Why on earth did Comolli leave us in the first place, and out of all places, why Spurs? I'd like him back here to be honest. He had a role in bringing the likes of Anelka, Henry and Toure to Arsenal.

[Tigermen]

What Cobinho said basically. I don't know why the big four are somehow supposed to feel guilty for their successes. Are they supposed to not win just so that we can have new teams on top? It's up to other teams to challenge and to up their level, instead of bleating about the 'stranglehold' of the big four like they're such monsters, maybe it'd be better for the complainants to focus their anger on the challengers to the big four. Arsenal's place in the top 4 was there for the taking this year, but Bolton go and lose 5-1 and 4-1 to Middlesborough and Spurs. Spurs spend millions on expanding their empire of midfielders and yet they've gone backwards since last season. Why? Because they're not good enough, simple as. They have 3 away wins in the league this year, is that the big four's fault? No. Case in point, the bloke in the times laments that his team, even with their 'brilliant' manager can only look forward to 5th or 6th place at best. Would this be the same brilliant manager that led them to ELEVEN games without a win? Yep, fucking brilliant mate whatever. Villa have the billionaire owner, and they have this so-called brilliant manager and they still went eleven games without a win. Why? Cos they're not good enough, that's why. Everton finished fourth in 2005 and what did they do? They spent 6 million on Per Koldrup, that's what they did. So please let's not use money as an excuse, because as others have pointed out the likes of Newcastle and Villa have pissed away money over the years that Wenger could only dream about. To be honest, the know it all 'anti-sky it's all about the money look at me I'm so controversial and I'm a REAL fan' brigade are becoming just as tiresome as those they take the piss out of. Yes Sky's money has changed the game beyond recognition, but don't pretend that that leaves everyone outside the top 4 without a pot to piss in cos it's simply not true.

Oh and if people want to complain about unfair competition, maybe cast your eye lower down the league. West Ham spent what, £15 million in January? And why? Because they got bought out by some bald Icelandic cunt, not because they earnt it. And that's why I pissed myself when Upson (7.5 million my arse) crippled himself in his first game. Watford couldnt even spend 7.5 million in 3 seasons, let alone in one transfer window. And West Ham are still shit and I for one will laugh my head off if/when they go down, because Charlton and Sheffield United have shown that if you actually pull your finger out and play as a team you might get somewhere. If you throw money to cunts like lucas neill and hope it'll get you out of trouble then you'll rot, and it's exactly what you'll deserve.