March 5, 2017 by stuartnoel - 3 Comments

More (I)FABulous law changes on their way

If yesterday’s Premier League games tells us anything about the state of the game today its that referees get big decisions wrong from time to time. Spectacularly wrong in the instances at Swansea City v Burnley and Manchester United v Bournemouth where the decisions had a material impact on the game, if not the result. With great power comes great responsibility and whilst many of us will question their ability to handle the pressure of a billion pairs of eyes scrutinising any and every decision, it is something that they will have to live with.

The use of video replays would have made a massive difference yesterday. In the game at Swansea, Anthony Taylor blew his whistle to give a penalty to Burnley for handball. Play was halted by his whistle so if video technology was in use, he would have easily been told that it was the Burnley play who handled, not a Swansea City player and play could have restarted with a free-kick to the defending team. Likewise at Old Trafford with the Ibrahimovic and Mings incident, play had been stopped by the referee. He knew something had gone on which should be enough for an opportunity to review the decision.

Referees have so much pressure on them to perform that it is time some of the responsibility was taken off them. The use of goal-line technology in the top flight has eradicated any doubt and opportunity for error as to whether the ball has crossed the line. Somehow, we need to get that technology working further down the pyramid. Perhaps if we also took timekeeping away from them, then there would be less pressure at the end of games when the mysterious “added time” amount is often questioned. Rugby Union and League uses a time-keeper who is able to fairly stop the clock in circumstances where unnecessary time is being taken – hardly a revolutionary change or one that would require significant implementation (and would give the Premier League/Football League further opportunities for sponsorship no doubt).

The decisions at The Liberty Stadium and Old Trafford come at a very apt time for football as this week we’ve seen the latest round of proposed changes to the game being made public. It’s that time of the year when the footballing world is treated to the bewildering proposals in the laws of the game as the 131st meeting of the International Football Association Board (IFAB) met at Wembley Stadium. Contrary to popular opinion, it’s not FIFA who make up laws just for the sake of it, but IFAB which, in a nod still to the importance the British played in the development of the game, is made up of representative from the home nation Football Associations plus FIFA. Yep, this group has more power than UEFA, South America and Asian football combined. If any country wants to suggest a rule change, then they have to get the ear of a board member and it is discussed at this annual gathering.

The decisions made at this year’s meeting will be formally ratified in the summer and then come into play at the start of next season, although some will on.y be seen in junior football, such as the implementation of sin bins. Such a change will be run as a trial in junior football with the aim to see how feasible it is to bring into the game at a higher level.

Another interesting change that will be trialled next season relates to how penalty shoot-outs are managed. The proposal is that they will follow the tennis tiebreaker approach meaning in theory no one team will gain an advantage of taking first (6/10 shoot outs are won by the team that takes first). So team A will take first then Team B will take two, then Team A will take two, and so on until Team B take the 10th penalty, if necessary.

The meeting, which was chaired by Football Association chief executive Martin Glenn, also approved further testing of video assistant referees (VARs) and agreed a strategy to improve player behaviour. From next season, assuming the home stadium has the ability to support the technology, video replays will be used in the FA Cup from the Third Round as an extended trial.

The board also discussed the issue of player behaviour and dissent towards the officials. A key part of that strategy will be considering how better to use captains. This may eventually mean only captains can speak to match officials, as is the case in rugby union, but such a rule-change does not appear to be imminent.

For now it appears the law changes won’t impact us too much. Last season’s amendments are still proving difficult for many officials to interpret, none more so than the rule about players not having to leave the field after being treated for an injury if the perpetrator is cautioned or dismissed which has been a thorny issue for our management team on a number of instances. And let’s not go into the whole “offside in your own half” business.

There’s a balance to be struck between making changes for the good of the game and making changes because it justifies the purpose of IFAB. The jury is still out where public opinion sits but perhaps they should listen more to the average fan and some of the ideas they may have. Watching 100 plus games a year gives me plenty of opportunity to think about what could be done to improve the game, so here are my five ideas for submission to next season’s meeting:-

The use of an independent time-keeper who is able to stop the clock for any excessive time wasting and thus eliminate the concept of “injury time”. No longer would there be dispute about adding 30 seconds for a substitution (we timed an opposition substitution two weeks ago when they were winning at 1 minutes 17 seconds from stop to start of play). Likewise, there will be no silly antics of players getting involved when a goal is scored and they try to recover the ball from the net and are blocked by the defending team.
If the ball is kicked directly out of play for a throw-in (i.e without bouncing) then it should be taken level from where the kick was made – in other words the same rule as they have in rugby. The purpose of this is to try to reduce time-wasting tactics where defenders, protecting their lead, hoof the ball out of play and thus encourage more attacking and positive play.
Foul throws should be treated as fouls and penalised with a free-kick to the opposing team rather than giving a throw to the opposition. I’m amazed at how often at the highest levels of the game, foul throws are not penalised.
Get rid of indirect free-kicks. All fouls and transgressions should be treated the same – fouls are given because the laws of the game have been broken and should be penalised the same way.
“Shepherding” the ball out of play for a goal kick needs to be redefined. It’s the biggest joke in football when a defender creates a barrier yards away from the ball to stop the forward getting to it, even when they change direction of attack. Allow an exclusion zone of no more than 2 feet from the ball – anything else should be deemed as obstruction and penalised either with a free-kick or in the area, a penalty.

Of course I doubt any of these will see the light of day. If I was to predict what we will see in the future I would say it will be 20 minute half-time breaks (more opportunity to sell advertising) and that there is no limit to the number of players that can be named as substitutes – after all during major international tournaments this rule is already in existence.

I’m sure IFAB and FIFA will argue changes are for the good of the game, but if that was the case, why haven’t they implemented some of the more sensible ideas already?

Speaking out of turn

More through necessity than anything else, I still have the pleasure of holding the microphone at The Dripping Pan for every home game I attend. Whilst the job isn’t that hard, you are forced to pay a little more attention than most fans to what is going on on the field, and such luxuries as having a pee, eating anything that requires two hands or even tweeting add an extra layer of complexity to the job. It is a thankless, mostly dull job really but one that is essential. In the three years that I’ve been doing the job I have had to deal with two lost children, five lost wallets, numerous cars blocking access in the car park and one request to “ring home”. Alas, I am still waiting for my first marriage proposal or the nadir of a PA announcers career, “Mr x just to let you know you are the father of a new baby boy/girl”.

Thanks to Boysie for getting my best side

When I agreed to take it on I wanted to do it my way. No sitting up in the stand, no cheesy announcements, no muffled voices. It had to be big and bold, whilst still standing on the terraces with a pint of Harveys. Of course this leads to problems, especially when I can’t get to the bar until we have kicked off and am scared to turn my back just for a second in case I miss a bit of action. I should do my research on pronunciation of player names but rarely do (apparently I’m still pronouncing Gus Sow’s name wrong), breaking it down phonetically and hoping I’ve got it right. You can get too cocky though and announce something without referring to the team sheet such as the announcement of Tooting’s fourth goal scorer yesterday, Adam Cunningham….for Adam read Alexander.

Standing on the terraces does have issues though – it’s not that easy to see what’s going on at the other end. I’ve lost count the number of times an opponent has scored and we have no idea who got the final touch. In games when the reliable Rookmeister isn’t Tweeting in the stands I have to make a brave decision, knowing that the name I pick will be added to Football Web Pages and go down in history. Of course we can try to find out from the opposing keeper, but they rarely know or even bother to respond.

And then there are times when you simply forget that you are doing the job as was the case yesterday when we conceded the comical second goal. We were all so confused as to what happened that it was a good five minutes later before I remembered that I hadn’t announced it, although the handling of an own-goal is always a difficult one to decide what to do. Should I say “own goal by Lewes number 4 Lloyd Harrington”, adding fuel to the fire of an already fuming midfielder, or should I give it to the “supplier” of the final ball? In this case the Tooting player could hardly claim any credit for it. Perhaps simply not announcing it was the best option, although if it was the first goal, what should I have done then as the Golden Goal competition is resting on my announcement of the time. During the second half I bumped into an old friend, Gary Hancock, down from Tooting and started chatting to him, only realising a few minutes later than both sides had brought on substitutes unannounced.

Now that’s one aspect where I have the power of life or death. Well, sort of. Yesterday we sold out of Golden Goal tickets meaning that two lucky punters would win £25. I’m a bit conflicted here as I always have two tickets although I never open them until the first goal has been scored and I’ve announced the winner – I’m sure there would be a stewards enquiry if I did ever win, despite spending a King’s ransom on it over the years.

Announcing the teams is a challenge in itself. They don’t put pronunciation guides on team sheets these days – was Tooting’s left-back “Ade-bow-ale”, “Ad-ebo-wale” or “Ade-bowal-e”? The temptation to adopt Alan Partridge-style exclamations has so far been suppressed but it is only a matter of time before one or two slip out.

The rules keep on coming – Don’t announce the man of the match or official attendance too early – my rule is during a stop in play once we get into the 89th minute. Three years ago versus Brighton & Hove Albion in the Sussex Senior Cup, Sam Crabb was chosen and I announced the award when we were 1-0 down but then two Tom Davis specials saw us win and would’ve had won him the award. Yesterday there was an audible groan when I announced Charlie Coppola as Man of the Match, with comments like “you sure?” and “what game are you watching?” but I don’t choose the winner, I just announce it.

And finally you need to thank the away fans for attending, even if they’ve smashed up half the ground and invaded the pitch, and wish them luck for rest of season and a safe journey home. Yesterday I made the “mistake” of suggesting we would see the Tooting & Mitcham United fans next season despite them sitting proudly on top of the table. Or was it a mistake?

So let’s get to the game itself…

Lewes 1 Tooting & Mitcham United 5 – The Dripping Pan – Saturday 18th February 2017
Let’s start with the positives. Our matchday poster got national media attention. We scored the best goal of the game and the crowd of 769 was the second biggest in the Ryman League South this season and the third biggest at step 3 and 4. Reasons to be cheerful 1, 2 and 3? Alas the 5-1 scoreline where we actively contributed to four of the goals didn’t make for a happy post-match analysis.

It could have been so different as we should have taken the lead inside the first two minutes, as Charlie Coppola found Jonté Smith in space in the penalty area, only for the striker to see his initial strike and then his effort on the rebound saved by Kyle Merson in the Tooting goal. Then the roles were reversed and we almost saw a Coppola headed goal as he got his head to Smith’s excellent cross.

Alas, we couldn’t take our chances and fell behind in the 26 minutes when Chace O’Neill cut inside from the right and saw his long-range effort appear to take a deflection and loop over Winterton into the top corner. Tooting’s lead was doubled in bizarre circumstances nine minutes later, as Winterton called for the ball as he looked to claim a cross from the right, with Lloyd Harrington ducking to get out of the goalkeeper’s way, only for the ball to hit him on the back and end up in the back of the net.

We needed to score the next goal and started the second half positively but when chances presented themselves we couldn’t quite find the final touch. On the hour mark Stacey Freeman fouled Mike Dixon in the area and former Lewes player Jordan Wilson sent Winterton the wrong way from the spot to make it 3-0 and effectively end any hope of a come-back.

Tooting increased their lead further with ten minutes remaining, as substitute Adam/Alexander Cunningham capitalised on hesitant defending to run through and finish past Winterton. The afternoon went from bad to worse four minutes later, as Lloyd Cotton was shown a straight red card for hauling down Dixon in the penalty area as the striker looked to get his shot away with only Winterton to beat. Wilson was pushed aside with Dunn desperate to score his first goal since returning from Greenwich Borough and he chipped the ball down the middle to make it 5-0.

Despite a small exodus of fans when that goal went in, the biggest cheer of the day came when Stephen Okoh danced through the visitors defence and rolled the ball through Merson’s legs to give us some consolation. It was certainly a kick in the teeth but other results mean that a win on Wednesday against Dorking Wanderers (only!) could still see us rise to fourth place, our highest league position this season.

February 17, 2017 by stuartnoel - 0 comments

The Unreal situation of counterfeiting in football

Last year saw the launch of the BBC’s annual Cost of Football survey which once again leads to lots of back-slapping, table thumping and general head scratching at the costs fans have to pay to watch and engage with their teams.

Whilst some of this year’s headlines will focus on the first drop in ticket pricing in some areas for the first time in a long time, primarily due to an agreed cap in prices for away ticket sales, you cannot ignore the numbers relating to the cost of football shirts. Newport County Football Club have probably never been top of many league tables, but according to the survey, they sell the cheapest current replica shirt at £37.50 out of the 92 clubs playing in the professional game today. At the other end of the scale, the two Manchester clubs sell the most expensive replica adult shirt at £60.

Whilst the cost of football shirts is not a new tub-thumping topic, you can understand some of the outrage today at these figures. Whilst the actual of producing the shirts is a closely guarded secret by the manufacturers, it is highly unlikely to be more than 20% of the sale price. It is no mystery in many instances, however, about the amounts that clubs are receiving from shirt sponsorship and the deals with the shirt manufacturers.

The news that Chelsea have signed a new kit deal with Nike for a reported £60 million A SEASON once again puts into perspective how money is dominating the highest level of our national game. The Blues terminated their existing deal with adidas six years early in what can have only been a purely money-motivated move (that deal was rumoured to be “just” £30 million a year) to sign the deal with Nike for the next fifteen years, which will see them earn £900 million (assuming there are no other bonus elements for winning cups) – read more about the Chelsea deal here.

Football shirts are not like Gucci handbags or Hermes scarves. They are not luxury items. They are lifestyle items. Yet they are priced as such. Some brands will say that the reason why the shirts are priced so high is as a direct result of the problem of counterfeiting. Is that fair? This is a Catch 22 situation – the more a manufacturer invests in the production process to try and defeat the counterfeiters, the higher the retail price is set which will drive more people to but an inferior but lower cost counterfeit.

One in six products sold today is counterfeit. In the UK alone it is an industry worth over $20billion. This number continues to rise every year despite attempts by companies such as NetNames to scour the Internet, find the infringing items and removing the offending websites or online sellers from the web. However, with money still tight in many households, high-ticket desirable items such as the football shirts fuel the growth in counterfeiting.

Manufacturers state that the prices are being driven up by counterfeiters, not realising that by increasing their prices they make the issue worse. They claim that the effect of buying fake ‘knock off’ goods has a ‘knock on’ effect on the price of legitimate products. Every pound, euro or dollar spent on counterfeits is a pound, euro or dollar not spent with the brand owner, reducing the savings from economies of scale that can be passed on to the consumer. Production costs, support costs, marketing costs and legal costs are all higher, which the brand owner must pass on to the consumer – a double whammy. However, in the football shirt world it seems that the price tag is high because they know irrespective of the purchase price, the demand for the product is already there. A Liverpool football fan is hardly likely to decide to support arch rival Everton and buy a Blues football top simply because of a price tag. They will simply seek a cheaper “fix”. A football fan with £20 to spend on a shirt will spend £20 on a shirt whether it is a fake or not in most cases.

It’s not hard to find counterfeit football shirts. Many of us will have seen them for same in tourist destinations or street markets – even at first glance you can see they are inferior quality either by spelling mistakes on the sponsor name or even the club badge itself whilst a simple search on a number of market place websites such as Taobao reveals shirts for most major clubs in frightening volumes.

So what is the answer? We’ve seen that fan power does has an impact on the costs associated with football from the agreement that away tickets in the Premier League are capped at the moment at £30. Perhaps a similar campaign could force the club’s and the manufacturers to reduce the price of replica shirts? They need to be as a part of the solution as they are in the problem. Educating fans about the social costs of counterfeiting is also a step in the right direction, especially targeting the fans of tomorrow with purchasing power.

This is one aspect that the International Trademark Association (INTA) have been focusing on through its Unreal campaign which aims to educate 16-18 year old on the dangers, both real and hidden of buying counterfeits. Sporting goods and equipment such as replica football shirts are very much in these consumer’s eyes and so trying to spell out the ethical and criminal nature of counterfeits and the effects it has on society as a whole can only be a good thing. However, it still needs the manufacturers to do their part too – they need to also educate consumers on the costs and dangers as well as ways by which counterfeits can be reported.

Nothing really changes in football, nor in any other sport. Despite what many commentators will tell you, it’s no longer a beautiful game. Clubs are commercial entities with shareholders and owners to deliver a return to. Fans are brand ambassadors whose loyalty is often measured on how much they spend on branded merchandise rather than if they can remember who scored the FA Cup 3rd round winner back in 1972.

February 3, 2017 by stuartnoel - 0 comments

Economic Theory explained by Football 22 – The Public Choice Theory

It’s quite probable that when James M Buchanan Jnr created is Public Choice Theory he didn’t expect to win a Nobel Prize. But that’s what he did. He probably also didn’t think it would be used to explain why certain players strike up natural partnerships with each other that delivers significant benefits for their club.

Buchanan was almost certainly a fan of the great Rapid Vienna side of the early Eighties who won back to back Austrian Bundesliga titles whilst he was teaching at the Austrian School of Economics. They won the1982-83 title on goal difference from city rivals Austria Vienna thanks in no part to the goal-scoring partnership of Hans Krankl and Antonín Panenka. Krankl was a goal-scoring legend for the club, scoring 267 goals in 350 games but he rarely found a striking partner who he worked well with. Enter Czechoslovakian Panenka in 1981 and the rest is history and he averaged a goal every other game in his four years at the club.

So what’s a Nobel-winning Economic theory got to do with the scoring exploits of Krankl and Panenka? Good question to ask and one that Buchanan could have taken to his grave if it wasn’t for his study, Buchanan lays out his award-winning theory in a book he co-authored with Gordon Tullock called, “The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy.”

Buchanan brought together insights from political science and economics to explain how public-sector individuals, such as politicians and civil servants make decisions. He showed that, contrary to the conventional wisdom that the public-sector acts in the public’s best interest, unless there is a clear win-win situation. In footballing terms, players, especially strikers, are inherently selfish, wanting all the glory for themselves.

However, once in a while a club will stumble of a partnership where both players work in unison, understanding that the sum of the two talents is greater than their individual efforts and thus debunking Buchanan’s work. Shearer and Sutton, Sheringham and Cole, Cottee and McAvennie and now Smith and Okoh for the mighty Rooks have proved that mutual interest is stronger than self-interest.

Since our dynamic duo were paired together against Sittingbourne, they’ve scored six between them, of which five have been laid on by each other. Last weekend’s opening goal against Godalming Town was a classic example with Jonté Smith holding the ball up and drawing defenders to him before playing Stephen into space behind the defence to slot home. For us Rooks fans the partnership is getting better game by game although would have had Buchanan tutting into his Apple Strudl. He would have enjoyed Okoh’s solo effort in Guernsey though where he appeared to take on the whole Guernsey side without a care in the world for the Rooks players (including Jonté himself) in support before curling it home.

So next time you see a player decide he’s going go it alone and ignore his team mates in better positions rest assured it’s not through self-interest but rather conforming to a Nobel-prize winning theory.

January 29, 2017 by stuartnoel - 0 comments

Dorking hell

There’s defeats and then there are last-minute, defence lapse after you’ve been on top for 89 minutes 55 seconds sort of defeats. Yesterday’s game at Dorking fell firmly into the latter category. There’s only so much preparation you can do prior to games both in terms of analysing the way your opponents play, and adapting your line up and formation accordingly. With almost every member of the first team squad available to train, Darren Freeman’s major problem on the morning of the game was who leave out. We’d seen enough of Dorking, who have topped the Ryman League South longer than any other side this season, to know how they would play and where our opportunities would come from.

The difference between teams at the top of the league and those firmly stuck in mid-table at this time of the season is bravery. Do we go to places like Dorking and set up to grab a point? Or do we go with the full intention of winning the game, concentrating on our strengths and their weaknesses rather than the other way around. Lewes of old would have certainly taken a Craig Levin approach to away trips (Scotland famously played a 4-6-0 formation under his leadership in the Czech Republic once) but today we have a squad of talented individuals whose sum parts are much greater than their individual contribution.

If the players believe in themselves then the fans will follow, just as they did yesterday when over 80 Lewes fans added some noise and verbal encouragement to the afternoon. How much of a difference does that make to the team? An unbelievable difference. Players want to play for teams where the fans care. Opposing team goal keepers certainly cannot ignore the noise and the comments coming from the likes of Cynical Dave standing just a few feet behind them. At our level they simply do not experience that from many sides, especially away support. If every time as a keeper you know that 80 voices are encouraging you to make a mistake, only the strongest characters will be untroubled.

Picture by James Boyes

Yesterday we all did our bit. Darren, Ross, Codge and Paul prepared the team. The fourteen players who were involved in the game gave everything. The fans never gave up hope. But sometimes you fall just short, irrespective of the effort of everyone involved. A 2-1 last second defeat in those circumstances is harder to stomach than getting smashed 5-0 to a team below you in the table.

Dorking Wanderers 2 Lewes 1 – Westhumble Sports Ground – Saturday 28th January 2017
We started positively, full of running and stretching the play. Dorking play a similar game to us, which would have led to this being a fantastic match for the neutral, less so for an away fan as the game went into the 90th minute. Our formation saw us use our full-backs as overlapping wingers, trying to get behind their full-backs and pull the ball back for our midfielders running.

Twenty five on the clock. Full-back Matty George cuts inside his man, takes a touch past a second, gets a lucky rebound from a third and is through one-on-one. The ball just runs away from him and he goes down under the challenge from the Dorking keeper. From the referee’s angle behind play it looks a certain penalty, from ours behind the goal it is 50/50. But the referee can only give what he sees and he points to the spot. Protests are pointless, but the Dorking players feel the need to do so anyway. Huk in the Dorking goal is booked. Dixon waits patiently then slots the ball in the corner. 1-0 Lewes.

Our lead lasts four minutes. Dorking at their best, swapping passes at pace, catching the Lewes back four out of position and the prolific McShane smashes home. The heads don’t go down. Brinkhurst to Okoh, to Brinkhust, to Okoh. The ball is fizzled across the six yard line and Jonté Smith taps home. Bermuda’s scoring sensation jumps into the arms of Cynical Dave. Alas the flag is up. We protest, as the unwritten rule book says we should, but the goal is ruled out.

Man of the match Huk in the Dorking goal seems spurred on by the taunting from the Lewes fans, pulling off outstanding saves from Dixon and Okoh. Half-time and players, management and fans alike go to re-hydrate, knowing that we won that half.

The start of the second half is more of the same. Hammond shaves a post, Smith heads just wide whilst at the other end Sole hits the bar. The game could go either way, as both sides are now committed to attack. Full-back Matty George comes off. Lewes try to bring on Dan Perry but he’s having a fight with his shirt. “Go on, go on” shouts Darren as the ball is played to Stephen Okoh. Dan, who still hasn’t got the shirt on, assumes his gaffer is talking to him, so he runs on, still with his shirt only partially on, keen to join the attack. Alas, Darren’s comments were directed to the Lewes winger, Okoh, and not Dan who is promptly booked for illegally entering the field of play.

Five minutes are put up on the fourth officials board. Dorking hit the ball from left to right. Brinky has switched from right to left back to cover for the departed Matty George. He controls the ball on his left, tries to push it onto his favoured right to clear but the impressive Briggs takes it off his toe and smashes it home within half a second. Dorking celebrate wildly, the Lewes side sinks to their knees.

Five additional minutes don’t bring and further chances to a Rooks side who have been sucker-punched. The full-time whistle blows and the response from the Lewes fans is as warm and heart-felt as any victory this season. Every player gave everything and whilst we didn’t take any points home, no fan can bemoan the way we played, the effort, the passion.

As a fan all you can ask is seeing your team give a damn, playing to the best of their ability. Sometimes it will be your day, other times you will suffer that 90th minute defeat, wandering off into that night feeling mortally wounded but knowing that you, like the players and management, will be back, full of optimism in a week’s time.

January 20, 2017 by stuartnoel - 3 Comments

Is the Chinese cash a bad thing for English football?

So it is official. World football has gone mad. Oscar’s transfer to Chinese side Shanghai SIPG ratified on the 1^st January meaning he left these shores to become the richest player in the world, with an estimated salary of £400k. And for Chelsea? Well they will get £60 million as “compensation”, £35 million more than they paid for the 25 year old Brazilian or in terms of games played, a profit of £172,414 for every game he played for the Blues.

Oscar kept the “richest player” in the world for almost an hour as Carlos Tevez agreed to join cross-city rivals Shanghai Shenhua on a weekly wage of £615,000, or in layman’s terms, £1 per SECOND.

This is a very similar conversation to what we were having a year ago when the likes of Ramires and Alex Teixeira joined the league for tens of millions of dollars yet that hasn’t destabilised world football has it? So the scaremongering about this being the beginning of the end is pure hyperbole.

In the history of football in England there have been five clear compelling events that have shaped our game today. Whilst some people may consider other events in a similar vein, football is today a global business rather than a game of the people. How have we got to this point?

Back in 1888, William McGregor, a director at Aston Villa wrote to a small number of other football clubs and suggested the creation of a league competition, based on the structure of “football” in the United States college system. The league kicked off in September of that year, the first organised football league-based competition in the world.

At the turn of the century, the Football Association passed a rule at its AGM that set the maximum wage of professional footballers playing in the Football League at £4 a week, and banning any payment of match bonuses. The concept of the maximum wage stayed in place for sixty years until it was abolishing it in January 1961, the second compelling event in British football.

Money has been the root of all evil in our game and the third tipping point came in 1990 after the publication of the Football Association’s “Blueprint for the Future of Football” which essentially laid out the concept of the Premier League. There’s little debate that the Premier League was created to ensure that the clubs at the top of English football were able to maximise revenues potentially on offer of the next TV deal. The heads of terms agreement was signed in July 1991, with the First Division clubs giving notice to resign from the Football League a few weeks later.

Hot on the heels of the formation of the Premier League came the next compelling event – the first BSkyB Television deal, signed in May 1992, for £191 million paid over five years. Five years later that amount more than trebled to £670 million. Now, twenty five years later that amount is over £5 billion.

The huge amounts being offered by the TV companies also had a knock-on effect, one that today is still the most emotive subject for the fans and the media alike. Overseas ownership of clubs. Whilst some may point the finger for the huge sums paid for players today at the door of Blackburn Rovers, and what owner and life-long fan Jack Walker did in the early years of the Premier League by buying the best of British and delivering an unlikely Premier League title to the Lancashire club. Walker invested nearly £100 million of his own fortune to bring a redeveloped, modern stadium to Rovers along with the league title for the first time in 80 years.

However, it was the arrival of Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich in West London that really changed football as we knew it. It’s not public knowledge how much exactly Abramovich has invested into the club but it will have run into hundreds of millions. What his investment has proved is that money does buy success and it is will some irony that Blues current manager Antonio Conte has issued a stark warning about the impact of the cash being spent on players in China could have on the rest of football.

To me, they are the five moments in the history of English football that have shaped our game more than any other events. Like it or not, the TV deals now dictate how our football clubs think and act, with managerial careers now at the mercy of the riches on offer for simply keeping a team one place above the Premier League relegation zone.

But let’s assume for one minute that the transfer market in China does accelerate and they start making serious offers for the most talented players in the Premier League. What are the potential ramifications for our game should we start leaving these shores?

Scenario 1 – Investment into Premier League clubs from foreign ownership comes to an end

In this case, the growth in Supporter-owned clubs would increase. Is that a bad thing? We only have to look at the Bundesliga, often used as the ‘model’ for successful leagues. In Germany all clubs in the Bundesliga are issued with a licence which is based on financial criteria as well as the fact that no one individual can own more than 49% of the shares in a club. Football clubs are incredibly resilient. Out of the 88 clubs that played in the Football League ninety years ago in the 1926/27 season, only two of the clubs completely cease to exist today (Aberdare Athletic and New Brighton). In that same period, huge numbers of companies have gone to the wall. Football does have a Teflon coating and any withdrawal of funds from one source will be replaced from elsewhere.

Scenario 2 – Clubs are forced to play home-grown talent

With Chinese clubs happy to raid the Premier League on a regular basis perhaps the clubs will invest more in the pathway for the development of their players. Instead of simply stockpiling young players who are loaned out until their value drops to a point where they are simply released, clubs will give the youngsters a chance. The more young English players that are given the opportunity to play in the Premier League, the better it will be for our National side. In addition, clubs will be more willing to work with grassroots clubs in the development of players through that channel. With potentially less cash available for wages, hopefully the players that come through will be more “balanced” and more in touch with the fans. Again, look at the situation in Germany where the majority of the team that won the 2009 UEFA Under21 Championship were also part of the 2014 World Cup winning squad – all of whom bar one (Mesut Özil) plied their trade in the Bundesliga.

Scenario 3 – Premier League TV rights are devalued

With an exodus of the “best” players, the Premier League is no longer seen as the best league in the world and when the parties sit round the table in 2018 to renegotiate the three year deal due to expire in 2019 the offer will be significantly less than we saw in 2016. Bear in mind that initial viewing figures for this Premier League season have seen a decline by nearly 19% in the first two months, hardly the result the winning bidders expected for the record TV deal. If the product is devalued by the exodus of players then what bargaining chips will the Premier League clubs have? Less TV revenues coming in will reduce the level of commercial agreements and thus clubs will once again have to look at alternative revenues or cost-cutting measures. Fans may then start to see the value of the grassroots game, and attendances may will rise in the Non-League game.

Scenario 4 – Absolutely nothing changes

In all honesty, it would take a massive investment within the Chinese league to make an impact on English, Spanish, German or Italian football. The whole reason for the increase in investment by the Chinese clubs is to increase their talent pool. The concept is that you bring in overseas coaches to help develop Chinese coaches, you bring in world-class players that will also hopefully increase the skill levels of home-grown players which in turn strengthen the Chinese national team. That’s the ultimate aim. Having played in just one World Cup (back in 2002 where they lost every game and failed to score a goal), they are significantly behind the countries who they would consider rivals. Japan have qualified for the last five World Cup Finals, reaching the knock-out stages twice, whilst South Korea have qualified for the last eight and finished fourth in 2002. If they cannot improve their performance on the world stage then this whole phase will go down in history alongside the ultimately failed North American Soccer League in the 1970/80s where some of the best players were tempted for one last hurrah.

Of course there may be other consequences but I think scenario 4 is the most likely to play out. Whilst the headline numbers are all round how much some of these players will be paid, the pressure and media scrutiny they will be under to perform will be intense. Footballers such as Tevez are already millionaires multiple times over. They could retire tomorrow and never have to worry about money every again. So what is their motivation to move? Only they can answer that but I do not feel a small handful of players heading east is the next compelling event in our beautiful game.

January 15, 2017 by stuartnoel - 0 comments

Notes from the Main Stand

We’ve got a relatively settled routine as to how we prepare for home games. At around 2.15pm (for a 3pm kick off) we will get the first sight of the opposition’s starting XI and from that moment we will start to compare their line up to their previous game, or one that we have got a scouting report on. In the next ten minutes alterations will be made to our formation, tactics and set-pieces, to try to exploit any weaknesses. Of course, our approach isn’t unique and our opponents will be more than likely doing exactly the same downstairs in their changing room. Whilst no one will ever confess to games being won off the pitch, the importance of preparation cannot be under estimated even at our level.

Yesterday the preparations and execution were slightly different. Having played our visitors just four days previously meant we knew a fair bit about them. It’s fair to say that we spent some of the time on Tuesday watching how they played rather than our own performance in preparation for today. Few teams set themselves up the same when they travel away. Alas, with a threadbare squad at the moment, we don’t have much choice. Injuries to Matthew George and Ronnie Conlon further depleted our squad yesterday but we have a talented group of youngsters such as Dean Stewart-Hunter who came into the side. The notable change in our visitors line up was the return of keeper Jack Delo, who had been injured in the warm up. Even knowing what the injury was enabled us to have a plan to try to exploit that weakness.

Our visitors “secret weapon” on Tuesday was their huge long-throws which when they first started taking them, surprised us. So the key to this game was don’t concede throw-ins in the final third. If in doubt, concede a corner or simply clear it in-field. If we did concede one, then bear in mind they would be likely to throw the first couple short to surprise us.

The second complicating issue for this game was that Darren would be serving a one-game touchline ban relating to his dismissal back in October against Cray Wanderers. He’d entered the field of play after a Cray player had assaulted Lloyd Cotton and subsequently been red-carded.

We could of course appeal against the charge but would need to submit evidence to the contrary of the match officials. Lose the appeal and the fine (£100), and the ban (1 game) could be significantly worse. So Darren took his punishment and headed to the stands. But how could we ensure he would be manager seen and not heard? Simple – I would sit next to him and make sure he served his ban.

According to the official FA guidelines on an official serving a touchline ban, the ruling is:-

“A participant serving a touchline ban should take up a position in the directors box if one is in existence. Where there is no directors box (or a position is not available) they are required to take a position in a stand or position which is detached from and some distance away from the dugouts”

With only a few rows of seating in our Main Stand, Darren would be within shouting distance of Ross and Codge. However:-

“The participant can make communication with members of the coaching team within the dugout but only via the use of a telephone or a ‘runner’.”

So the “runner” would be me, passing notes down to the dugout. Not quite the normal afternoon of watching the game for me then.

Lewes 3 Herne Bay 1 – The Dripping Pan – Saturday 14th January 2017
The first instruction is written down and is given to me. As I head down the steps to tell Ross that James Hammond should take the free-kick, I can hear Darren shout “Get ‘Ammo to take it..” Hammond does indeed take the free-kick and he curls it perfectly into the top corner to give us a 1-0 lead. It’s going to be a long afternoon.

Thirty seconds later Stephen Okoh races clear of the Herne Bay defence and lobs the ball over the keeper…as the ball is in the air I feel a grab on my arm. Could it be two? No, the ball shaved the post and goes wide. Notes are furiously written by Darren as he sees things I can’t see.

“Win the ball faster” he shouts at nobody, but Codge hears him, translating his message into a quiet word in the ear of Lloyd Harrington as he comes over to take a throw-in. On the twenty minute mark, the Vice-Chairman of the Isthmian League sits directly behind Darren. I write on a note that he is sitting behind him, but Daz is too engrossed in the game, concerned that Jack Dixon is sitting on the ball too long.

He races off at the half-time whistle, trying to get into the dressing room before the players, ready to give his full and frank opinion on why we aren’t more than one goal ahead.

Less than two minutes into the second half Dixon fouls his marker, picks up a yellow card which will see him banned for two more games (having just come back from a two game suspension) and the referee points to the spot. On Tuesday night Adria pulled off a superb save from Pulman’s spot kick. Today it is Walder who steps up and slots it into the corner. Somehow we are level.

“We’re flat and that’s making the crowd flat” I text Deaksy and tell him to start singing.

The written messages soon dry up, replaced by my phone being used as a walkie-talkie with Ross on the touchline. James Hammond restores our lead with a tap-in after the impressive Kaja roasts his man down the right and tees him up. Then the crowd start making some noise and we start dominating play.

Lloyd Harrington picks up a yellow, meaning he will also miss the two vital games against Dorking Wanderers. “Looks like I’m going to have to play in those games”. I assume he’s joking although when Charlie Coppola neatly flicks the ball round his marker, Darren tells me the England Schoolboys international learnt that trick from him in training and I can see the seriousness in his eyes.

We huff and puff and finally blow the Herne Bay resistence down with a third in injury time, Egli Kaja (the first ever Albanian to play for Lewes for those who love a random fact) beats his man and is then hauled down. A mele breaks out as four or five Rooks players want to take the spot-kick. Jack Dixon wins the discussion and slots home. Job well done all round. I could now have a beer and relax, around two hours later than I normally could.

Three wins on the bounce, scoring nine times and conceding just twice means that we rise to 5th in the table, the highest we have been since the opening day win at Chipstead.

The final restriction that we had to ensure Darren complied with was a little bit stranger:-

“The participant who is subject to a touchline ban may not make contact with match officials, match delegates or assessors prior, during or after the match.”

Which technically meant when the officials came into the bar for their pasta post-match, Darren couldn’t even go and shake their hand and say “well done” although he resisted passing me any further notes. Normal service will be resumed in two weeks time thankfully.