COLUMNIST JIM HOURIGAN
How to break the Skyopoly
By Jim Hourigan : 27/05/2008 : 
Comments (41) :
I won?t lay claim to this idea as solely my own, but what I would like to do is explore it further and see if we can get it moving so that we break the sky 4?s hold on the Premier League. I know we are threatening 4th but this seems a more attractive proposition.
Comments (41) : In simple terms, this is my proposal:
- Positions 1 and 2 in the Premiership qualify for the knockout stages of the Champions League automatically (as they do now);
- Positions 3 and 4 plus 5 and 6 in the Premiership go into a playoff for the next 2 places in the CL:
- 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 with the higher placed team playing the second leg at home;
- Winners of each tie play off at Wembley with the winners taking the third automatic spot into the group stages with the losers entering the qualifying round;
- If no automatic 3rd slot then winner gets a higher seeding to ensure ease of passage to the group stages;
- Losers of the play offs automatically enter the Uefa Cup;
- Winners of the FA Cuptake the third Uefa Cup place;
- If there are 4 Uefa Cup places then the winners of the League Cup take the 4th spot;
- If either of the Cup winners have already qualified then the place goes to the losers in the finals ? FA Cup first then League Cup;
- If all places taken by teams already in Europe then the 7th in the league qualify, followed by 8th if necessary.
-
Why should the Sky 4 teams agree?
Well obviously those with most to lose are the 3rd and 4th in the Premier League. However, they will have to balance the chances of losing a 2-leg affair against teams they arguably dismiss, against the increased revenue for the play-off plus a share of the Wembley gate and the massive TV coverage. Would they gamble? Well I bet they would!!! Managers may complain about extra matches but who holds the purse strings?
Why would other teams support the idea?
Well for me it's fairly obvious ? 5th and 6th have a stab at the CL as well as the money from the extra game and TV revenue. I?m pretty sure Spurs, Villa, Newcastle and even the likes of Blackburn, Pompey and West Ham would jump at the prospect. However much stick Keegan got, he was right, and whatever spin Scudamore attempts to put on it, unless the Sky 4 somehow become a little more vulnerable then football will eventually lose out. The top of the Premier League is boring to all but their own supporters. We nearly caught Liverpool but as soon as they became worried out came the big guns and in reality they left us trailing because our squad was not good/big enough.
What have Sky got to lose?
Well potentially one (or even 2) of their Sky 4 might not qualify in a year, but I?m sure the increased revenue and hype of a play-off would encourage them. Look at the way they sell the present play-offs and this is for the Champions League!!! Sky would allow one to fail for the massive hype it would receive. They may even be encouraged to see that breaking the Skyopoly is in their best interest anyway.
Of course there are other issues ? availability of Wembley, World Cups and Euro?s, but in reality money talks ? why else are they after a 39th game? Bolton v Hull will never attract either a sizeable crowd or a TV audience ? Everton v Liverpool or Arsenal v Spurs would be massive!!
Where to from here? Well I wonder what reaction I will get from fellow blues? If positive then perhaps the concept needs to be sent to all the Premier League websites and the clubs themselves to see if a seed of change can be encouraged to grow.
Reader Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
Jim, really like it.
Obviously the sky 4 would detest it certainly the RS as they only ever finish 3rd or 4th.
As you have already accounted for, world cups etc would be a stumbling block, but one thing you haven’t considered is if the 3rd or 4th team wins the champions league then what happens to the playoffs? 3 way? We know all too well that even the 5th placed team in England can win it.
Or what if the 3rd and 4th placed teams both reach the final resulting in delayed extra matches.
I love the concept as it would have been excellent for us over the last 2 seasons and this season may not have petered out in the fashion it did.Jim,
Great set of feasible solutions set out in a clear, well thought out manner. The only problem is this - even in seasons where they dont finish high enough to qualify for the CL, all the RS have to do is stamp their feet and they get in through the back door anyway. So even if all your ideas were put into practice I fear that very little would change.Sorry that will never happen.
Why? The Prem get all their money from Asia. 95% of Asian fans who support Prem teams will support the Big 4teams.
If that Prem 4 is broken up why should they continue to support eg Liverpool if they lose their footing and become an also ran without the guarentee of top 4 prestige? They can go and support Real Madrid instead, taking their money with them.
The Prem is unique in that all CL teams are guarenteed, and that guarentee is the glue on which the Asian fans’ support is stuck.
Also I’m sure the head honchos of the top 4 sway a lot of influence in what happens... i.e David Dein blocking the FA’s attempt to lure Wenger etc.
I like the theory though, but would prefer having a max of one team in the Champions League, only then it would be called the European Cup!Very well put, Jim. As a plan it has some great advantages to open up the league a little more and give other teams the chance of something to play for. It would mean an evening out of the playing field a little too, that's got to be good.
On the down side, I would imagine Arsenal and Liverpool would use every penny they could on lobbying against it. They have most to lose as what we have at the moment is a Sky monopoly of the four teams with the greatest resources.
On the other hand, Sky, as you say, have nothing to lose but much to gain. As they pay the teams, it's conceivable that they could dictate (ok, pressure) the Premier League into change.
Now that would make for an interesting end to the season!If we can’t get into the top 4 over the current 38 games then what is the point of having more games over a play off type competition. I personnally don’t agree with these play offs. A league table should finish after the set number of games and not have extra games tagged onto the end. Currently the play off system gives more exposure to the team that wins from 3rd through to 6th than the two teams that actually get automatic promotion. Just another money spinning exercise that needs to be stopped now.It was rumoured to be a possible basis for the fabled 39th game, the idea being that no matter where you were in the table you would be ?playing off? for something at a neutral venue. it raises the question, what do positions 1 & 2 play for? Or why should Derby be given a second bite?Also the biggest game of the season would effectively be shipped to the foreign supporters. Would/ could/ should the average supporter reserve their family holiday for a game in Asia?
I like the idea so long as it is not shipped to the 4 corners. Perhaps the higher placed team should have home advantage?
I say we just win the league next season. That’ll show ’em.Jim,
Might be slightly more palletable to the sky 4 if the playoff was from 4th to 7th, playing off for 1 spot onlyMaybe these are games which the PL can take abroad to kill that bird as well.Nice ideas, but I would have one qualifier from the FA Cup, and one from the playoffs you describe. I dont see the point in a Wembley game where both teams would make it through anyway......Good idea, Jim. One way to solve the problem of the extra games would be to reduce the number of teams in the Prem to 18, which is something Fifa have been requesting for years anyway (may also help Scudamore fit in his game abroad).
The problem is the Premier League in its current format sells... and sells very well! I can?t see the money men changing a winning formula, but if you do decide to forward this to other clubs or the Prem, I?m behind you.Would this be such a great idea if the season we shook them up and finished third we then lost the play-off to sixth placed Blackburn who finished 15pts behind us??.It could and should be much simpler than that. I will leave aside my argument that only the champions should be in a so-called "Champions League", and accept that England will have four representatives for the foreseeable future.
The four places should be allocated as follows:1) League Champions (group stages)
2) FA Cup winners (group stages)
3) League runners up (qualifiers)
4) League Cup winners (qualifiers).This set-up, would mean that, apart from the team in second place, any team playing in the "Champions League", would need to win a competition to enter it.
(if a team were to win both the Premier League, and the FA Cup, the team finishing second in the league would take the second automatic spot, and the team in third place, would be allocated a qualifiers spot).
I Feel that this could work, because, as I see it, it is up to the English Authorities to allocate their four places as they see fit.
Who knows, perhaps we could get back to calling it , "The European Cup"...
I go along with the play-off between 4th to 7th with one team joining the Sky 3.
This would incentivise clubs like Everton, Newcastle, Spurs, City, Villa, Portsmouth, Blackburn and West Ham to try to break into the Top 7 right 'til the death.
Also the Sky 4 might not risk outspending these teams too rreatly without their automatic CL place guaranteed almost every year !
Great idea overall!Ken, Unfortnately that is exactly the kind of misfortune that’d likely befall us Evertonians!Its an idea that would appeal to those outside the top 4 and would be dismissed by those who finish in it.
Based on this years final standings you couldnt see Arsenal being happy that their Champions League ambitions were under threat from a team who finished 23 points below them in Aston Villa.
Personal view is it should go back to the old format but that would never happen so its current format is probably about right. The year we finished fourth you will remember the uproar that almost materialised when it looked as though we would lose our CL spot to the other lot.
Well put together Jim but non feasible for meYes it’s a nice idea, but don’t we usually rip the "Champions" League competition to pieces anyway for including teams who come 4th (or 5th if you include that shower from across the park)? Why should we now accept a potential 6th placed team to participate?
Who decides the qualification rules anyway - the Premier League or UEFA? If it’s the former then, sorry, but there’s no way that cabal of interested parties will let this go through. The RS and Arse stand to gain a small amount from extra match revenue but stand to lose a helluva lot more by being denied qualification in a playoff. Too risky by far. It would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.
There’s no way they’ll be coerced into any situation that threatens their carefully constructed status quo!
The best way to break the cartel is for Everton(ski?) to play our way into the top 4 on merit, which some might claim we did last season anyway, referees notwithstanding!TX - LL damn right it?s not your idea. I emailed this to you pricks a week ago. Why not just publish my article instead of re-writing it?Why not have the team who finish 4th go to the UFEA cup and the 5th to the CL?
The prem league and sky don’t want anyone else in the CL, its hurts revenue and that in turn would kill the PL and Sky.
You can’t spend your way in as look what happened to Leeds and to a lesser extend Blackburn.
We should just celebrate the UFEA cup more and fuck the CL or hope that they reduce the number of CL places to 3 - that would really put the cat amongst the pigeons.I don?t know what you guys are fretting about - I?d be very surprised if you manage a top 8 place next season let alone anywhere near the CL places. You?ll be suffering Yakubu second year blues and Moyes will be snapped up by a Chumpionship team...What happen’s Jim, if you finish 3rd, 20pts ahead of the 6th place team, and lose your place because you get beaten by that 6th placed team, how would that be fair? Wouldn’t the 3rd place team deserve their place on merit? Me think’s that if we were a perenial top 4 placed team, we would be slamming idea’s like this. As someone has mentioned, if we are not good enough over 38 games to claim a place, then we don’t deserve one.To break the manopily of the top 4, would be for all the other prem leage teams to play their second team against them, soon the players in the top flight would soon become very disilutioned and especially should they loose, as must happen. Yes, the top four would get the points, but it would soon change things with only 6 leage matches with any type of chalenge for them. ( aginst each other) The rest of us would produce real style football to watch.There is another problem with allocating more potential CL places & having them vie for the spot via playoffs - it reduces the importance of the league games. Example - the Shite get off to another poor start next season, & see their chances of unseating the Big 3 evaporate. Instead of the realization that they must rally & finish 4th to milk the CL cash cow, they know that they can cruise in around 6th-7th & still be in with an equally valid shot. Even Goodison Park would have been a more sterile environment for the Newcastle game if our place in these playoffs were sealed going into the ultimate match of the season. Too many of these playoffs & you end up with American Sports, which feature interminable regular seasons featuring half-interested participants who regularly sit out (supposedly) meaningful regular season games to ’rest’ (read: reduce risk of injury going into playoffs). In sum, let’s take our CL spot on the pitch, not through some rule change which will not necessarily benefit us in future scenarios.In response to a number of points raised let me clarify a couple of my thoughts. Firstly I don’t think the clock will ever turn back to a single representative from each country in the CL, there is too much money at stake for this too happen. So what I’m suggesting is an adaptation of the present system bearing in mind that the Sky 4 will be reluctant to give up everything but might be persuaded to develop the present system.
I choose 3rd and 4th because the team in 4th has the chance to gain an automatic qualification place and this might be enough of a gamble for the idea to go forward. If only the 4th placed team is involved then its 3 against 1 and I suspect none of the Sky 4 would be too positive about this. The play off final generates money and the winner gets the automatic qualification place.
The whole concept of play offs is inherently flawed with the team at the top of the group more deserving than the side thats last. But that is the reality of the playoffs in all the other divisions and both Rugby codes. However principled we might be about the perceived injustice of the play offs, they are a reality in modern day sport so why shouldn’t they be used in the premiership?
Finally should we end up 4th and a system like this was in operation then we would take our chances just like the rest, (besides I wouldn’t mind a trip to Wembley), what good for the goose etc. etc.I think it’s a brilliant idea. I cant believe there are people saying it’s not fair on the big four if they get loads more points in the season. I’m sorry but why have they got so much more points? Because of the monopoly caused by the champions league.
By having a playoff, the money will be shared by more clubs. Clubs like Everton and Villa, assuming they win the playoffs every so often, could use the money to become more competitive in the league, challenging for the top 4 places and even challenge for the league.Anyone care about England anymore...?
Guess not.Jim, I dont think its just the qualification thats the issue. As long as the sky 4 can pay ridiculous wages, they will always be able to sign the best players and therefore finish the highest. We need a pay scale structure introduced, where the PL pay the wages on a PRP basis funded by the clubs that the players are contracted to. No longer would we have to double a players salary just to extend his contract by a few years as it would all be on a pay scale dictated by a thrid party - the PL. OK, it needs work, and I have a detailed plan that I will maybe post on this site, but just thought it worth mentioning on this thread. Players wages are rising faster than unleaded!I’d rather the manner in which points are handed out is changed. I find it absurd that Arsenal, who play some of the most scintillating football seen on this planet, are ultimately overtaken by a team of mercenaries such as Chelsea. On a more selfish note, the football we played during the winter period was the best by an Everton team in a generation...yet, ultimately we could just as easily played out dour 1-0 victories.
It’s often been said that football is a game of two halves, well why not deal out the points in a similar fashion? Scrap the old 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw!
I propose that if you win a half you gain 2 points, a draw gets you 1 point. The second half is rewarded in a similar fashion. The team that ultimately wins the game gains an extra "bonus" point. So the 7-1 win against Sunderland would have given us 5 points rather than the measly 3 that it did. The Goodison Derby would have given us 2 points (and Liverpool 3) rather than the big fat 0 we did get. The 1-0 against Sunderland would have given us 4 points and them 1.
The onus would be on each team to keep going till the end rather than just turning on autopilot when they think that they’ve done enough. Hopefully it would also mean an end to dour matches involving, primarily, Chelsea and Liverpool where they rely on stout defending and a moment of inspiration from Drogba or Torres.
There’s more chance of the monopoly being broken like this than asking the Sky 4 to to give up their reserved spots through a play-off.
Harvey, thats a grand plan. Can you permutate it over last season and see what happens? Its a new and interesting idea on me. Only snag is, how many 7-1?s do we get a year? Seriousl y though, an innovative idea and one I'd like to see how this season would have ended.Does anyone remember 10 years ago, the talk was of a top 2 - Man Utd and Arsenal, 20 Years ago it was Liverpool and Everton, 30 years ago Liverpool and Notts Forest. What 2 things did all these eras have in common?
1. Everyone thought they were impenetrable.
2. None of them were
Rather than changing the rules to let other teams catch up, I would prefer to let nature takes it’s course. They won’t be the top 4 for ever, no matter how it seems at the moment. And which would feel better, qualifying for the champions league via the league or via a rule changeNice try - but like others have said - if we were actually one of the top 4 - there wouldn’t be any of these discussions and we’d happily go on enjoying our money so we have a shot at the title. We are close to breaking the top 4 now and if we were to change the rules then all it would take would be a bit of bad luck to lose to Arsenal or Liverpool in a playoff game - teams we didn’t even beat this season in 4 attempts.
We were obviously not good enough this year for a champions league place so we shouldn’t be trying to steal one on the basis of a playoff game.
I understand where you’re coming from with the championship playoffs but there’s no sky 4 teams there every year so all the championship playoff teams have a genuine shot of winning through.
Secondly it would be terrible if we had a great year and Arsenal had a poor year and then we had injuries like we did right now and lost the playoff game. Basically what i’m saying is if you finish top 4 you deserve it.Unfortunately, Alisdair, the gulf in resources between the top four and the rest has never been so great, to the point where, at the moment, one of the four is going to win the Title every season. The final Premier League table this season just gone clearly shows that difference — clear daylight between the Sky 4 and fifth place.13 years ago, Blackburn were able to put together a team to win the league (the only side outside the "top three" to have done so since); 16 years ago, a team like Leeds could win the title and going back to the 80s, a team like Watford could finish second a season after gaining promotion. That scenario is laughable these days.
It used to be that things corrected themselves naturally as the core of a great side aged and moved on. Nowadays, it’s going to take something like Chelsea imploding if Abramovioch leaves and holds them to ransom or Liverpool tanking if the Yank civil war at Anfield comes to a head after too much debt has been rung up, thereby leaving the door open for one of the next tier of clubs.
Without that, I genuinely believe things have shifted too far in one direction and it’ll probably take either a very long time or a series of billionaire takeovers among the chasing pack to compete, albeit perhaps only temporarily, to change things.
I think that is an excellent idea. However, if I could just make a suggestion - we could have the 4th and 5th teams in the EPL in a 2 legged play-off for the final CL and the loser getting the UEFA cup spot. Then there are still 2 places in the UEFA for the 2 cup winners and if we are worried about too many games this should be less of a burden. Also, I think may people would find it hard to accept that a team that came 6th in the EPL may play in the CL. A decent team can finish 6th but a only a good team can finish 5th in the EPL. We dont want the CL awash with average teams but your proposals are great and has something to work towards...What about just distributing the money raised from the CL to the representative associations. I.e. rather than the current 4 earning from CL prize money & Tv deals this year, why doesn’t UEFA give that money to the FA to distribute amongst the English leagues. That would negate the financial gulf, which would then enable the old style break up of the supposed top teams.When did we last look capable of beating any of the sly4 over 2 legs?I suspect drastic changes to qualification requirements would be difficult to implement both domestically and across Europe (as I’m sure there would need to be consistency across the leagues).
Perhaps a more simple solution would be to distribute the wealth more proportinately across both UEFA competitions?
Forgive me for not knowing the exact figures (as I can’t be arsed to reseach it properly) but i’m fairly confident that the winners of the UEFA generate minimal revenue in comparison to those simply qualifying for the group stages of the Champions League.
Perhaps if those qualifying 5th and both of the cup winners had a shot at earning a bit more cash along with the SKY4 recieving a bit less, we could make the league more competitive without having to muck about with the format.Jim Hourigan, think it’s a really good idea, very well thought out.
Sorry Harvey, I just don’t buy the beuatiful game points, or Norwich would be up there and we would have been sunk along time ago with Joe Royle’s dogs of war.Chad, my point (pun intended here!) had nothing to do with the beautiful game, as such. It was more about rewarding teams that look to attack for longer periods of the game. Why should a team that wins 1-0 receive the same number of points as an competitor that wins 3-0?
With regards to the play-off question, I just can’t see the gang of 4 signing up for more competition. Why would they? Would KW and BK be championing a play-off series for the CL if EFC permanently occupied 3rd or 4th place? I think not. Would 3 extra Wembley matches sway them (effectively wagering your entire season on 3 games)? I think not.
On the other hand, by rewarding teams who come out ready to play winning football, you’re presenting them with the incentive of putting yet more distance between themselves and the chasing pack. I can see the Sky 4 rubbing their hands with glee counting their chickens...
However, do you think that playing second XI’s prior or after a CL match would be so commonplace if you knew that your competitors could suddenly pick up 5 points at your expense?
Chad Schofield, you refer to a bit of history that should stay where it is....in the past. We’ve seen a transition from 2 points/win to 3 points/win. The reasoning there was to provide a bigger incentive to win matches. If we were to constantly hark back to how things would have been, and applying rules retrospectively, you’d end up nowhere.
Football is a sport and should evolve, especially to combat threats to its existence...because that is what the Sky 4 are.In addition to Harvey’s point, the system of rewarding points dependent on the type of victory is already used in Rugby Union - sides getting an extra point if they score more than 4 tries - losing sides getting points if they finish within a margin of their victors etc... its not so an unusual plan. Lest not forget it was the English league that introduced the 3 points for a win system to encourage sides to play for the win in the first place.Not read all the responses, but these ideas are not new. They are just not supported by the Sky 4, CL 4 whatever name you want to add.
And despite a money-spinning end to the season, it would no way make up for their potential loss of income from missing out on the CL, nor on possible loss of attraction to new players. It would need pressure from money - the rest of the Leage’s clubs or TV getting involved to out-vote and out-muscle them.
A system similar to the one you describe has been operation in the Dutch League for a few years. Moyes went to watch M Bradley recently in a CL qualifier after Heerenveen finished 5th. Eight clubs (2nd to 9th positions) play for one CL place and 3 Uefa Cup places.
Something is required, I am sick of the sycophantic rubbish that comes out of even the BBC on this. All pretensions to there being a competitive element to the Premier League should surely be dead. Check out the League tables in the 60s and 70s - now that was competitive.
Even Liverpool’s dominance in the mid-70s to mid-80s was different. They rarely got as many wins as today’s champions and there was a different 2nd place team every year. Check it out: they included Forest, Qpr, Watford, Ipswich and Southampton FFS.The only way to really level this playing field is to distribute all the CL prize and TV money euqaly between all the teams in the premiership.
All the playoff system would provide is a second bite at the cherry for one of the current top four if they have a bad season and come 5th - imagine how we would feel comming 4th next year and having them from across the park taking our CL spot in a playoff.
The answer is to get a better manager back him consistantly and finish 4th for 2-3 years on the trot so that we gain the financial power that they currently have. Only problem is that would just make life better for evertonians the prem as a whole would be just as uncompetative only with a diferent top four...Lousy Idea Jim.
This will perpetuate the Sky 4, not break it.
Much as it pains me to say it - the team we all hate and love to see crash are one of the best at one off games (remember their Champions League performances in the last 4 years).
So they can play their normal crap for 38 games, finish in the top 7 and then still get in the Champions League.
i think its a great idea but cant we have a system whereby the team that finishes 4th must play everton (even if they finish in mid table) over two legs both played at goodison
© ToffeeWeb
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
1 Posted 27/05/2008 at 11:51:36
Report abuse
Why?
Because I believe ANY alternative to the present, dull-as-shite (fuck Richard Keys - it is!) situation HAS to be better.