It must be said that the Premiership has become referred to as the greatest soccer league in the world. With three English sides in the final stages of the Champions League, one could say that the “proof is in the pudding”. I for one will never say that. In fact, I would go as far as to say the winning team of the Champions League does not say a great deal about the league in which it came from. With that rationale, every time a German, Italian, or Spanish club wins the Champions League we would be saying that the respective league is the top league in the world. And that is nowhere near the truth.
Foreign investment has injected an enormous amount of funds into the English Premier League (EPL). It is a reality that greater investment does lead to a greater product in the soccer world. More money results in better stadiums, better coaching and training staff, and of course it draws in the high class players from all over the world.
In Simon Cuper’s article, “English Football takes over the World”, he gives reasons behind the progressive success of the EPL. From cost-effective stadium building that inadvertently created an ideal atmosphere for football, to imperfect football players whose “frequent mistakes produce exciting moments in front of goal”. I agree with the stadiums being a large factor of the excitement of watching an EPL game but are we really going as far as to appreciate errors? Would that not be backwards thinking? Maybe not.
If you view football as art and not as a product, it makes more sense. Throughout history we can identify with music groups that may not be perfect but still draw massive appeal. Artworks that may be confusing and disgusting to look at, yet you can’t look away. So football is art; very few people would disagree. So now comes the question of whether we want art to be owned by multi-billion dollar corporations. Foreign owners with less appreciation to the roots and history of a club who will squeeze as much profit out as possible until it is all used up.
I’m reminded of when FOX tried to increase the fan base for ice hockey in America by adding a lot of fancy extras to the broadcasting. One of the extras was highlighting the puck with a big black blurry dot. It was done to make the puck easier to follow. Is that really a good thing? Attracting new fans is one thing, but will they go as far as FOX did for ice hockey? (Just for the record, the FOX techno-puck was an absolute disaster) Will the EPL become guilty of employing cheap tricks to increase viewership? I'd like to take this time out and point out C. Ronaldo's ridiculous over use of step overs.
Will teams in the EPL begin to favor the flashy offensive players and error-ridden defensemen to produce a league with high scoring affairs? If so, I will not be alone in questioning the quality of the EPL. I will not be fooled as easily.
David Beckham has become the greatest export in English soccer. Yet I can think of a handful of other English players with more talent. Was his fan base created by his soccer ability, or by his lifestyle? Is the image of David Beckham worth more than the player itself? What is more important to a David Beckham fan, his free kick ability, or the fact that he married a Spice Girl? Is the EPL becoming a fad, like boy bands in popular music? Like the iPods of the digital media world? If it is, there will be a hefty mess to be cleaned once this bubble pops.
No comments:
Post a Comment