The Premier League has announced that they are looking to expand the season by one extra match that will be played in cities like Hong Kong, New York, Los Angeles, Singapore, Sydney, Johannesburg, Dubai and Beijing. Not surprisingly the blow-back has been enormous. Supporters, managers and club officials have been in an uproar since Thursday’s announcement. One of the comments that I read on a discussion thread said that they shouldn’t have to pay for twenty home games if one of them is going to be played in another country. Actually the report I read (and they may have reported it wrong) was that it would be an extra game, so all of the home and away fixtures would be available.
Sir Alex Ferguson has come out and said that if you are going to add an extra fixture to an already filled schedule, the managers should be consulted before making it a public issue. A crowded fixture schedule didn’t seem to curtail a trip to Saudi Arabia. The managers should have been consulted, but to say that the crowded schedule is a problem is asinine. Premiership teams travel quite a bit in the pre-season to global destinations (not every team does, but more do it every year) and trot out their B team while charging the international fans quite a bit.
This isn’t about making the English game available to the world. If the Premier League really cared about reaching around the globe it would be easier to watch the League matches we want to see. And how are they going to make the travel worth it for all of the teams? I would walk to Los Angeles to see Manchester United play Arsenal if all of the stars are going to play. But, why would I pay to see West Brom play Reading? Nothing against either team, they just don’t have enough of a fan base in the US to make it worth their coming over. The Premiership should put together a promotional tour of globally followed clubs versus smaller clubs. People will turn up for Middlesbrough if they are playing Chelsea, not if they’re playing Wigan.
Another con would be Sepp Blatter getting involved as the plan progresses. THAT’S the kiss of death to any plan. If you want to watch an idea swirl it’s way down the bog get FIFA involved.
3 responses so far ↓
jixme89 // February 10, 2008 at 4:19 am |
the premiership is not a travel show. the pre-season friendlies are just fine as only the popular teams with a large fan base does that.its the ‘English’ premier league… not the global football league..
Mark // February 10, 2008 at 4:37 am |
Agreed. Forcing the smaller clubs to travel the world to put on a road show would only serve to use up valuable resources that could go towards strengthening the squad, improving facilities etc. All for a one-off match that probably would only draw a half filled stadium.
While I would love to see Manchester United’s stars putting on a show, part of the excitement of the match is seeing it in a stadium with history.
steviethek // February 10, 2008 at 9:19 pm |
As an American EPL fan, I dream of going TO England to watch EPL games in their proper grounds, with the two teams’ fans – part of what makes the EPL unique. These new games wouldn’t be ‘genuine’ from that perspective.
Would the fans in New York come out to see Fulham? Would they sing “James Bullard, Bullard… he’s better than Steve Gerrard… he’s thinner than Frank Lampard… James Bullard, Bullard” to the tune of “Que, Sera Sera”? I think not!
Show of hands: how many people want to see Boro vs. Wigan on an artificial pitch in Salt Lake City? Didn’t think so.
Some of the EPL teams came over here for friendlies and I think that’s fine – perhaps even have EPL vs. EPL teams in off-season friendlies, but not League matches. There’s such a thing as squeezing the Golden Goose too hard.