11/21/24
September 25, 2003
UEFA blast big spending Abramovich.: UEFA chief executive Gerhard Aigner has ... criticised the Russian oil tycoon for his attempts to accumulate a superstar side that could stifle the development of homegrown youngsters and has demanded action be taken to prevent it from happening elsewhere. Erm, isn't this too little too late? Haven't the likes of Inter Milan, AC Milan, Juventus, Barcelona and Real Madrid been doing this for several years now? Did Aigner tire of getting complaints from them about the new boy on the block? Is any real good to come of this? Besides, what can UEFA do? Spending caps? Ha!
posted by worldcup2002 to soccer at 10:02 AM - 29 comments
Must be his 'oil' connections that have them worried.
posted by garfield at 10:39 AM on September 25, 2003
This is what I'm saying. Why publicly make a fuss about one guy who is doing the same thing all the top clubs have been doing for a while now? Why make a big fuss about something that you can do nothing about? Was it just convenient to pick on an outsider like Abramovich? Is the UEFA or FIFA election coming up soon? What? What?
posted by worldcup2002 at 10:40 AM on September 25, 2003
Other clubs have spent freely on players but I think none with quite the scale of this Summer's spree by Chelski.
posted by billsaysthis at 11:30 AM on September 25, 2003
Whats this? Some story about the pot & the kettle on Soccernet? How peculiar.
posted by lilnemo at 11:33 AM on September 25, 2003
As usual, i have no idea what lilnemo is talking about...
posted by StarFucker at 11:40 AM on September 25, 2003
I think wc2k has hit the nail on the head regarding Abramovich's "outsider" status. I think UEFA have an issue with someone who is not a member of the club coming in and doing what the other big European clubs owned by media magnates and other "legitimate businessmen" have done for years. It seems apparent to me that part of the issue here is that Abramovich seems to take a personal interest in making sure his team wins. Unlike other teams that are owned by wealthy individuals or corporations that run their clubs like businesses, Abramovich seems to have taken a Steinbrenneresque personal interest in -- gasp! -- having his team win, rather than just turn a profit.
posted by holden at 11:41 AM on September 25, 2003
You know Fooker! The pot calling the kettle black. UEFA exec Gerhard Aigner saying 'Somebody can buy a team and suddenly they can be a candidate to win the Champions League. I don't think football should be about that.' When this has been done many times by many teams before Abramovich came on the scene (as wc2k2 pointed out).
posted by lilnemo at 11:47 AM on September 25, 2003
In other football news, clubs that go into administration will now have 10 points deducted. What does everyone think of this?
posted by BigCalm at 11:54 AM on September 25, 2003
"go into administration"....what does that mean?
posted by garfield at 02:01 PM on September 25, 2003
Heh heh...
posted by StarFucker at 02:31 PM on September 25, 2003
garfield: That's the Brit way of saying "go into Chapter 11 bankruptcy so they can hide from creditors."
posted by worldcup2002 at 03:01 PM on September 25, 2003
The old Dow Chemical trick, eh? (in that case, litigants) Thanks wc2k2. Sounds like the financial landscape of the EPL is quite intriguing.
posted by garfield at 03:11 PM on September 25, 2003
Apparently, Abramovich wants to buy the Vancouver Canucks too.... it's Hockey.... ICE Hockey - geez, fucking Brits ;)
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 03:42 PM on September 25, 2003
Perhaps if he buys the Canucks, Abromvitch can persuade British Airways to revive the Concorde for a Lond-Vancouver run. Or just buy the thing for private use.
posted by billsaysthis at 06:15 PM on September 25, 2003
The 10 point deduction ruling is largely a result of Leicester - who, by going into administration, still managed to pay their players, make new signings, and get promoted to the premiership. The problem is that clubs which really are in serious financial trouble (York, Notts County, Derby County + loads more), will be penalised even more, resulting in certain relegation, less money, etc. The parachute payments introduced at the same time might help, but the 10 point deduction could mean that we see several historic clubs disappear forever. Just as long as Charles Koppel's Wimbledon is the first to go, I won't complain too much.
posted by BigCalm at 04:43 AM on September 26, 2003
Anybody want to explain to me the whole Wimbledon thing?
posted by StarFucker at 08:25 AM on September 26, 2003
Try this SF Franchise FC In other news 
Come And Have A Go This banner advert for Sunday League.com comes from the Official Arsenal site, atop a page about the Directors issuing a statement expressing concern over players' unruliness. Not the best timing, is it? (Via Carlsberg Mediawatch)
posted by squealy at 11:49 AM on September 26, 2003
Can you sum it up for me Squealy? I have read a long article in 442 about it but i still don't understand... Who is Wimbledon now? What is Milton Keynes? Who moved where? What is the original team? Its very confusing...i feel like i would be outraged if only i knew what was going on.
posted by StarFucker at 01:42 PM on September 26, 2003
There's been growing talk of salary caps in the FA. While it's been directed towards the Nationwide leagues, it's quite possible that some of the other EPL clubs that aren't swimming in money (and there's not too many of them) would gang up and use this as a blunt instrument against Chelsea's profligate spending.
posted by GoDizzGo at 03:20 PM on September 26, 2003
GoDizzGo: Where's the G14 and that Euro League when we need them? Put that on the field and no one will talk about salary caps, ever.
posted by billsaysthis at 06:17 PM on September 26, 2003
It's fairly straightforward SF. Wimbledon FC, a south London amateur club were promoted to the football league in 1977. A decade later they'd risen to the First Division (now Premiership) and in 1988 they won the FA Cup beating L***rpool in the Final. They were inaugural members of the Premiership in 1992 and stayed in the top flight until they were relegated in 2000. Always a team with low attendances this suffered even further when their owner sold their Plough Lane ground in Wimbledon, south London and they began to ground-share with other London clubs. About two years ago, after a takeover, a move to Milton Keynes (a small new town 50 miles north of London) was mooted by their new owners amid much protest from supporters. Today they play their first game in Milton Keynes, though they are still called Wimbledon FC. In May 2002 Wimbledon Independent Supporters Association and The Dons Trust supported the formation of AFC Wimbledon, a new amateur team. The vast majority of Wimbledon supporters regard this new club as the continuation of the original club. With thanks to Wikipedia.
posted by squealy at 06:56 AM on September 27, 2003
Thanks squealy... I KNEW i should have been outraged!
posted by StarFucker at 08:36 AM on September 29, 2003
SF - an excellent introductory article on the situation was published in the Guardian back in January. Through the magic of the internet you can read it and I would recommend reading it if you are at all interested in the topic.
posted by gspm at 10:08 AM on September 29, 2003
Well like i said, i read a lengthy article in 442 about but i couldn't understand it.
posted by StarFucker at 11:05 AM on September 29, 2003
442? i didn't get that. sorry if I dug up the article you were referring to. i dunno what 442 is.
posted by gspm at 12:08 PM on September 29, 2003
442 is a football magazine? You never heard of it? Check it out...
posted by StarFucker at 12:29 PM on September 29, 2003
hmmm, looks good, promises interviews with noel gallagher and peter schmeichel that I would read but it doesn't seem to bring up any articles for me no matter what I do (click on the story links on the page you provided, click on . yellow card to the web designers of 442. then again, i wondered why they would seem to be giving away the content of their magazine which seems to be a lousy business plan so maybe it is not there for me to read anyway. I get it now. 4-4-2.
posted by gspm at 01:36 PM on September 29, 2003
Case of trying to shut the stable door after the horse has bolted. Won't be long before we can predict the league results just by following stocks and shares and gauging the market share of the "global brand". At that point they might as well just open an auction for each competition and let the highest bidder have it. Players will play wherever they get most money. It's no longer about the football. But too late to blame it on Abramovitch. He's just a businessman who's seen a good niche. Everyone thinks he's blowing spending money on Chelsea, but they won't be laughing in a few years when they're making a bigger profit than Man Utd ...
posted by walrus at 09:17 AM on September 30, 2003
I don't understand really...whats the problem? I hate Chelsea because of Abromobitch...but not because he has bought players...