The Secret Footballer: The FA has helped devalue its own Cup
Whether by hosting semi-finals at Wembley or pressuring Manchester United out in 2000 the game's so-called governing body has failed to protect its showcase event
The FA Cup final used to be a major event on the calendar. Photograph: Mike Hewitt/Getty Images
One of the books I particularly enjoyed last year, along with four million others, was Freakonomics, a light-hearted way of using economics to get to the bottom of certain cultural phenomena. The more memorable chapters tackled the reasons why drug dealers live with their mums, how does a relaxing of the abortion laws relate to a drop in crime throughout the 1990s and, perhaps the most difficult to answer, why has the FA Cup become so worthless?
OK, so that last one wasn't in the book but there are one or two interesting observations to be made if we apply some rudimentary economics to the level of interest that some clubs, and the Football Association for that matter, attribute to the world's most famous knockout competition.
An obvious starting point would be the huge financial rewards many clubs have benefited from since the Premier League's inception in 1992, but there have also been a couple of spectacular public-relations disasters that have blighted the FA Cup thereafter, all of which have gone a considerable way to devaluing the competition.
A couple of examples are the pressure the FA exerted on Manchester United to withdraw from the competition in 2000, in the mistaken belief that participating in the Fifa World Club Championship would help England to stage the 2006 World Cup and the latest masterstroke, which appears to have been to overlook the significance of the small print in the contract with Uefa that states no game can be played at Wembley two weeks before the Champions League final. As a result, we now have the world's oldest knockout competition being played on the same day as four Premier League fixtures, one of which, as fate would have it, looks as if it will determine the outcome of the title. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of travelling football supporters – not that they seem to figure much in any of the authorities' thinking these days – will miss some, if not all, of the Cup final. All of this detracts from what promises be a fascinating match between two passionately supported clubs that have gone a long time without winning any silverware.
What I find difficult to understand is how a governing body the size of the FA can spot, and fine, West Ham's Danny Gabbidon for telling fans who have abused him to F-off on his Twitter account but can't see that hosting the Champions League final is in direct conflict with the final of its own showpiece competition. If the FA is throwing money at ideas to try to revitalise the FA Cup, why did it strike a deal that completely belittled the competition? I guess the easy answer to that question would be the need to service the debts that come with a national stadium that cost more than £750m to build.
How times have changed. When I was a kid the FA Cup final was a major event on the calendar. The whole day was set aside to enjoy the occasion and everything surrounding it. From the pre-match build-up to the main event, you were immersed in it. I'm not a big one for nostalgia but if a wedding commands two weeks of solid coverage these days, then surely the FA Cup final can find an audience that merits the best part of a day?
There was also a time when I could reel off the FA Cup winners and losers, the goalscorers and the heroes and the villains – I knew everything there was to know about the competition. Yet I would struggle to do likewise for the FA Cup finals in the past decade and I'd imagine that's the case with many people. The over exposure of the Premier League and the easy access to Europe's finest players means that, for now at least, the game to watch is the Champions League final.
The FA cannot compete with Uefa's prize money and nor should they be expected to, but I believe our governing body could do more to protect the status of its showpiece event. You will, for example, do well to find a player who believes that hosting a semi-final at Wembley is a sound idea. What made the FA Cup such a fantastic piece of silverware to win in the past was surely the uniqueness of playing the final at Wembley. Sadly, many of us believe that today it is too easy to play at the world's most famous stadium.
But the blame for all of this – if you want to apportion blame – is certainly not exclusive to the FA. I can't remember a time in professional football where clubs, managers and players have been more aware of which side their bread is buttered. Fourth spot or the FA Cup? Fourth spot. Premier League survival or the FA Cup? Survival. Stoke City or Manchester City will pick up £1.8m for winning the FA Cup, which is the difference between finishing 15th and 17th in the Premier League.
The prize money is not the motivation at this stage of the competition – it's all about trying to win the famous trophy – but as long as £30m is on offer to reach the Champions League and the same sum dangled in front of those clubs fighting to stay up, the FA Cup will never be taken seriously by top-flight clubs in the early rounds. Chairmen certainly make it clear where they feel the priorities lie at the start of the season by offering huge survival bonuses to players and managers.
For all that, the FA Cup clearly isn't worthless. For those lower down the leagues the romance of the competition lives on, as we have seen once again this season. And whatever the Stoke and Manchester City players stand to collect in bonuses this afternoon, a winner's medal will be priceless to them. It's just a shame that the FA has forgotten the value of its own competition.
twitter.com/TSFguardian
---------- Post added at 03:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 AM ----------
appropriate time to bump
Whether by hosting semi-finals at Wembley or pressuring Manchester United out in 2000 the game's so-called governing body has failed to protect its showcase event
The FA Cup final used to be a major event on the calendar. Photograph: Mike Hewitt/Getty Images
One of the books I particularly enjoyed last year, along with four million others, was Freakonomics, a light-hearted way of using economics to get to the bottom of certain cultural phenomena. The more memorable chapters tackled the reasons why drug dealers live with their mums, how does a relaxing of the abortion laws relate to a drop in crime throughout the 1990s and, perhaps the most difficult to answer, why has the FA Cup become so worthless?
OK, so that last one wasn't in the book but there are one or two interesting observations to be made if we apply some rudimentary economics to the level of interest that some clubs, and the Football Association for that matter, attribute to the world's most famous knockout competition.
An obvious starting point would be the huge financial rewards many clubs have benefited from since the Premier League's inception in 1992, but there have also been a couple of spectacular public-relations disasters that have blighted the FA Cup thereafter, all of which have gone a considerable way to devaluing the competition.
A couple of examples are the pressure the FA exerted on Manchester United to withdraw from the competition in 2000, in the mistaken belief that participating in the Fifa World Club Championship would help England to stage the 2006 World Cup and the latest masterstroke, which appears to have been to overlook the significance of the small print in the contract with Uefa that states no game can be played at Wembley two weeks before the Champions League final. As a result, we now have the world's oldest knockout competition being played on the same day as four Premier League fixtures, one of which, as fate would have it, looks as if it will determine the outcome of the title. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of travelling football supporters – not that they seem to figure much in any of the authorities' thinking these days – will miss some, if not all, of the Cup final. All of this detracts from what promises be a fascinating match between two passionately supported clubs that have gone a long time without winning any silverware.
What I find difficult to understand is how a governing body the size of the FA can spot, and fine, West Ham's Danny Gabbidon for telling fans who have abused him to F-off on his Twitter account but can't see that hosting the Champions League final is in direct conflict with the final of its own showpiece competition. If the FA is throwing money at ideas to try to revitalise the FA Cup, why did it strike a deal that completely belittled the competition? I guess the easy answer to that question would be the need to service the debts that come with a national stadium that cost more than £750m to build.
How times have changed. When I was a kid the FA Cup final was a major event on the calendar. The whole day was set aside to enjoy the occasion and everything surrounding it. From the pre-match build-up to the main event, you were immersed in it. I'm not a big one for nostalgia but if a wedding commands two weeks of solid coverage these days, then surely the FA Cup final can find an audience that merits the best part of a day?
There was also a time when I could reel off the FA Cup winners and losers, the goalscorers and the heroes and the villains – I knew everything there was to know about the competition. Yet I would struggle to do likewise for the FA Cup finals in the past decade and I'd imagine that's the case with many people. The over exposure of the Premier League and the easy access to Europe's finest players means that, for now at least, the game to watch is the Champions League final.
The FA cannot compete with Uefa's prize money and nor should they be expected to, but I believe our governing body could do more to protect the status of its showpiece event. You will, for example, do well to find a player who believes that hosting a semi-final at Wembley is a sound idea. What made the FA Cup such a fantastic piece of silverware to win in the past was surely the uniqueness of playing the final at Wembley. Sadly, many of us believe that today it is too easy to play at the world's most famous stadium.
But the blame for all of this – if you want to apportion blame – is certainly not exclusive to the FA. I can't remember a time in professional football where clubs, managers and players have been more aware of which side their bread is buttered. Fourth spot or the FA Cup? Fourth spot. Premier League survival or the FA Cup? Survival. Stoke City or Manchester City will pick up £1.8m for winning the FA Cup, which is the difference between finishing 15th and 17th in the Premier League.
The prize money is not the motivation at this stage of the competition – it's all about trying to win the famous trophy – but as long as £30m is on offer to reach the Champions League and the same sum dangled in front of those clubs fighting to stay up, the FA Cup will never be taken seriously by top-flight clubs in the early rounds. Chairmen certainly make it clear where they feel the priorities lie at the start of the season by offering huge survival bonuses to players and managers.
For all that, the FA Cup clearly isn't worthless. For those lower down the leagues the romance of the competition lives on, as we have seen once again this season. And whatever the Stoke and Manchester City players stand to collect in bonuses this afternoon, a winner's medal will be priceless to them. It's just a shame that the FA has forgotten the value of its own competition.
twitter.com/TSFguardian
---------- Post added at 03:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 AM ----------
appropriate time to bump
