

Stop the Robbery!
By: Inara | October 30th, 2007I know, I rant about this at least once a day, but after I saw a link posted by Bob this morning, I just can’t help myself.
Reuters published an article about the nationalities of the players in the Champions League. It’s not that unexpected that Brazil has the most nationals in the CL, with 98 of the 770 registered players in the tournament. But guess what country is second, with 64?
If you guessed France, you’re absolutely right. But don’t you wish you could be wrong?
At first, it would almost seem like a good thing, but then you realize that France has only two teams in the Champions League this year. And then you have England, with only 26 nationals (and yet they have four teams)…
The full list:
* Brazil 98
* France 64
* Italy 55
* Spain 53
* Portugal 41
* Germany 38
* Turkey 37
* Argentina 32
* England 26
* Scotland 25
* Romania, Ukraine and Netherlands 23
* Serbia 22
* Czech Republic 20
* Norway 16
* Russia 15
* Ivory Coast 14
* Greece and Poland 10
* Denmark 8
* Sweden, Uruguay and Nigeria 7
* Croatia, Slovakia and Mexico 6
* Switzerland and Cameroon 5
* Belgium, Colombia, Ghana, Finland, Australia and Senegal 4
* Bosnia, Chile and Mali 3
* Albania, Paraguay, Israel, Belarus, Ireland, Peru, Northern Ireland, Austria and Georgia 2
* Wales, Macedonia, Montenegro, Lithuania, New Zealand, China, Honduras, Japan, Iceland, Togo, Congo, Uzbekistan, Morocco, Cyprus, Guinea, Ecuador and USA 1
So what does this mean? Basically, France is the second highest exporter of footballing talent to Europe’s major leagues, which is ironic because France is ranked fourth by UEFA and is generally considered to be one of the “Big Five” leagues. Now, I’m not much of a supporter of Michel Platini, but I’m starting to understand why he’s been pushing to limit the amount of foreign nationals each team can possess.
Neither the Bundesliga, La Liga, the EPL, nor Serie A are drained of their best youth talents on a regularly basis like France. Something needs to be done about France’s hemorrhage of its talent. I don’t know what, but the more I think about it, the more concerned I am about Ligue 1’s future. It’s like the chicken and the egg dilemma: France loses its best players because it’s an unattractive league, and yet how can it be an attractive league if the best players leave?
If players like Thierry Henry, Franck Ribery, William Gallas, David Trezeguet, Phillipe Mexes, etc still played in France, public interest in L1 would be huge, which would mean more money from broadcasters and healthier finances, which in turn would allow L1 to keep these players.
Part of the reason French clubs are so handicapped is because of the DNCG, which closely monitors club expenses and penalizes them if they run into the red, something unique to France. Additionally, France wouldn’t be France without the high taxes, which burden clubs and turn away players who don’t have to lose half their paycheck to the state.
It’s an awful situation, but I can’t think of a solution. All I know is that a solution needs to be found. Even right now, L1 is in danger of losing their very best talents – Samir Nasri, Karim Benzema, Hatem Ben Arfa, and Jeremy Menez.
The question is, what can be done to make France more competitive? If it’s only a matter of lowering taxes, is that too high a price to pay, when you take into account the good that money does?
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
![]() |
Comments
-



England has so much money now because of television rights for the matches. Look back at when French league football was attractive, what was different? Very simply, European success. To be a competitive league, France needs Champs league success. The only reason why Lyon is half-way enticing to some players is that they got to the quarter finals last few years. Europe is where you show off, it’s what got me as a Lyon fan and if they got further in the comp alot more people would take Ligue 1 seriously.
Posted from
Ireland

-



French players do not leave the french league because it’s unattractive, they leave because they get more money abroad. For a player to get 100000€ in his pocket, it costs a french club around 220000€, it costs less than 150000€ to a club in any other league in europe. That’s why talents do not stay in France…
Posted from
Luxembourg

-



Is this accurate? I know the US has both Frankie Adu (Benfica) and DaMarcus Beasley (Rangers) in Champions League.
Posted from
United States

-



Ush: But TV right are a big part of getting money in France, especially since we lose much of it in taxes. And for European success, you need money. Also, in the early nineties, when French football was attractive, they did fairly well in Europe – a CL win, plus PSG was in two finals. Given time, I think there would have been more.
Pean8ts: Well, league attractiveness includes how much money is paid to players. The EPL is a cash cow and so more attractive.
joejoejoe: Well, it’s reuters. It could be that they are accounting Adu as from being born in Ghana?Posted from
United States

-



joejoejoe : Good point, and Ireland have John O Shea (Manchester United), Ste Finnan (Liverpool) and Aiden McGeady (Celtic) in the CL.
Posted from
Ireland

-



Lars Hirschfeld, Rosenborg keeper is Canadian.
Posted from
United States

-



Inara : I’m pretty sure the English TV deals are giving more money to the clubs than any other leagues. For instance, the bundesliga has no tv rights agreement. It’s not hard to see why they go to England with the money the likes of Chelsea offer. Lyon and Marseille are getting opportunites to excel in Europe, they have to take them.
Posted from
Ireland

-



English clubs do get more money – the bottom clubs get the same amount as Lyon! In Spain and Italy, clubs negotiate their own TV deals, so the top clubs in the top 3 leagues each pull in around 100m+ per year, double of what Lyon get (and keep in mind Marseille get less than Lyon). Germany get barely any money from TV deals (though their taxes aren’t as stifling), but if you look at their results in Europe in the past seven years, you’ll see why. Germany have been doing even worse in Europe than France. And other than Bayern, what other team has a chance at winning the CL? None. YET Germany have an easier time retaining their youth players. Why?
It’s a vicious circle. A team needs money to get good results because that allows them to keep their best players and have a deeper bench. Yet without good results, French clubs won’t get much money.
Posted from
United States

-



Lars Hirschfeld is officially my new porn star name.
Posted from
United States

-



Well Bayern did win the CL in 2001. But if I’m not mistaken, doesn’t Bayern have some sort of government backing similar to Real Madrid?
I guess it’s a case of capitalising on youth and not big names. Boca Juniors beat AC Milan, Porto won the CL. Arsene Wenger was never one to spend that much money.
Another thing I believe is that in England, alot of fans enjoy watching crap football. Viewers would pay money there to watch garbage, sky sports seem to be showing more championship this season than premiereship.(No offense to any English fans who do like the beautiful game!)
Posted from
Ireland

-



Portugal has the same problem as France.
Posted from
United States

-



What, Ara? Hairy women? Wah wahh wahhhhhh. Before you go nuts, I’m Portuguese and so is my wife. But seriously, I thought the same thing when I saw Inara’s commentary on this. I also said basically the same thing on some other blog around here but I can’t find the post to link it. Therefore I can not prove that I am as intelligent or insightful as you. Just take my word for it.
Posted from
United States

-



I thought Shazback posted some insightful links in the comments to an earlier post:
http://lyon.theoffside.com/people/jean-michel-aulas/the-battle-for-tv-rights.html#comments
So I wonder whether this whole ‘blame it on the taxes’ argument is valid, based on those changes to the law.The Bundesliga gets around €440m a year from the TV rights deal, which is by far the lowest of the big five leagues. Pay-TV isn’t very popular in Germany. But Germany has the second largest TV market in the world (second to the US obviously) and the Bundesliga has the highest free-TV presence of all leagues. This equals massive exposure of sponsors and thus the Bundesliga generates more revenue from sponsorship deals than the rest of the big five. So the Bundesliga has alternative income sources. Otherwise Bayern Munich couldn’t live in a country with a laughable TV deal and still be one of the richest clubs in the world. So the league has some financial muscle to keep talent.
Another important aspect though: the Bundesliga and German FA had some homework to do considering their youth work. So for a long time there wasn’t any particularly interesting talent on the German market, that could be taken away. Only recently the youth academies started to churn out promising players. And whether the Bundesliga can keep the majority of those players isn’t clear yet. So maybe the same thing that happens to Ligue 1 will also happen to the Bundesliga in the future.
Posted from
Germany

-



Oops. It’s Freddy Adu. I never get that guy’s name right.
Posted from
United States

Comments are closed












