English football has lost its soul

[Guest Knightrider]

ARSENE WENGER last night claimed English football has lost its soul.

 

The Arsenal boss blames the speculators buying the Premier League’s top clubs and believes it is a recipe for disaster.

 

The outspoken Frenchman said: “The biggest threat to English football is that people buy clubs by loaning money from banks.

 

“This is what the Glazer family did with Manchester United.

 

“They are unique in that they produce so much money that they can handle it.

 

“However that example, played out at a smaller scale, can mean death to clubs and football as a whole.”

 

It is a stark vision of the future from the man who has turned his Gunners into a world force with predominantly foreign players.

 

His side are top of the Premier League and are being praised for producing brilliant young talent — plus record profits.

 

But Wenger fears the English game is in deadly peril.

 

He insisted: “English football is losing his soul.

 

“Fans are the keeper of our football. But the first signs of danger are there to see. Stadiums are starting to empty, TV channels and radio stations are overcrowded with football. There is a kind of overdose looming.

 

“I’m sure that there is a limit to the amount of football people can take, on TV and also financially.

 

“Suddenly the English model has gone from owner-supporters to owner-businessman.

 

“The danger wasn’t there yesterday, but it’s there today. Of course you can have business integrated into the sport while still respecting the values of football.

 

“However, perhaps it is time for people to worry.

 

“Before you had a young kid who could watch his Liverpool team from the stand and who, after succeeding in life, would dream of buying his club. Things have changed beyond recognition all of a sudden.”

*

 

The man known at the Emirates as the Professor knows it is not hard cash which is the root of all evil but what people do with it.

 

He said: “Money is not the culprit for the ills I’m pointing out. It’s the way in which people are using it which is bad. If the target is to make sure that everyone improves and the players earn more and more money then that’s absolutely fine.

 

“But if the consequences are that clubs are going out of business with massive debts then I’m against it all.

 

“What really disturbs me is that a club living way, way above its means is tantamount to cheating.

 

“There should be a European organisation controlling the club money like we have in France.

 

“But obviously a far better way would be for those in charge to be sensible in the way they run clubs.

 

“At Arsenal, everybody has got values which they hand down in perpetuity to new generations.

 

“This is why, two years ago, when we had this problem with Ashley Cole, I asked Chelsea what their values were?

 

“The idea that they wanted to nick a player because he is one of the best, I can perfectly understand.

 

“But what were their values?

 

“My key question, with regard to the use of so much money in today’s game would be: ‘why should we and why can’t we have young English footballers who are as good as anyone else in the world?’

 

“I believe that we must do something about this now.

 

“It is far from unusual for a player to come to us from South Africa or Brazil and be far better than an English player. This should not be.”

 

Wenger will again be without skipper William Gallas for tomorrow’s clash with West Ham.

 

Gallas is still struggling with a groin injury picked up in August.

 

He said: “I know I have to look forward but it’s difficult.

 

"I don’t want to cry about it, but when you work hard, and you feel pain, it’s difficult to accept.”

 

Sly dig at Man Utd and Chelsea or does he have a point?

[JJ7]

I don't think Wenger should be the one talking about this. Packing his team with 100% foreigners and Arsenal charging people £60 a game is hardly helping.

[Guest Knightrider]

I think those things are kind of out of his direct control though, especially ticket prices, where as market forces are dictating he buys foreign.

[Baggio]

Might as well put this in here.

 

Liverpool's proposed debts may spark alarm

 

By David Bond

 

 

When Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr bought Liverpool in a £174 million deal in February, contrasts were immediately drawn with the Glazer family's takeover almost two years earlier at Manchester United.

 

Here was another of English football's most revered institutions falling into the hands of American raiders. But unlike the Glazers, there was no campaign to try to stop Hicks and Gillett from acquiring Anfield. Instead, they were welcomed with open arms, as saviours of an underperforming club, who despite winning the Champions League in 2005, were desperate for new investment to help them win the Premiership.

 

However, the differences with the Glazers may be more difficult to spot in the future. Hicks and Gillett are now seeking to borrow at least £500 million to refinance the original loan used to buy the club, and to pay for the move to a new 76,000-seat stadium at Stanley Park.

 

When the Glazers borrowed a similar amount to purchase United - much of it from punitive hedge funds - the level of debt was used against them by their critics.

 

But the initial £298 million borrowing by Hicks and Gillett, split imto £185 million to buy Liverpool and £113 million as working capital, passed without too much comment.

 

"

 

The original loan from the Royal Bank of Scotland, which was personally guaranteed by the Americans, has to be repaid in Feb 2009 and currently attracts a hefty £21.5 million in annual interest.

 

Liverpool's owners now want to refinance those borrowings over a much longer term - secured, crucially, against the club's assets - and to roll that debt into the loans being used to pay for the stadium.

 

Given their ambitious business plans for the new ground and English football's booming television rights values, raising the money should have posed few difficulties. But that was before the global credit crunch started to bite, forcing banks to pull in their horns.

 

Liverpool, guided by their financial adviser Robert Tilliss from New York-based Inner Circle Sports, were close to approving a proposal from Goldman Sachs.

 

However, it is understood that in the last month Goldmans reviewed their offer, asking Hicks and Gillett to put in much more of their own money, thought to be around £100 million.

 

. In an attempt to calm any fears over the club's long-term business plans, Hicks told Inside Sport yesterday that the refinancing remained on track. But it is understood that Liverpool must provide assurances on the funding for their new stadium before plans go before Liverpool City Council on Oct 18.

 

Failure to do so could mean the project, which is due to start in the New Year and is supposed to be finished in 2010, is delayed.

 

Hicks said: "The lead on this is being handled by Inner Circle Sports. Through them we have been talking with a number of financial institutions including Goldman Sachs on the stadium financing.

 

"We have not reached any definitive conclusions yet but we are looking at a number of alternatives.

 

"The time-line for obtaining the final stadium finance package and our ability to commence construction, following approval by Liverpool City Council, calls for us to get started by early next year.Everything will be finalised long before then."

 

Tilliss said the club were considering long-term loans secured against future ticket revenue as well as shorter deals designed simply to pay for the construction of the new stadium. "The primary objective is the stadium planning," Tilliss said. "But we are also looking to put the acquisition debt on a more permanent footing. We are looking for the most innovative and flexible proposal."

 

With the clock ticking, Hicks, who owns Dallas Stars ice hockey team and is the financial muscle in the partnership with Gillett, must make a decision in the next 30 days.

 

A lot will depend on just how much he is prepared to put into the Liverpool project. But even if he does eventually agree to put in a large chunk of his own considerable fortune, Liverpool supporters are likely to react with alarm at the levels of debt now being piled onto their club.

 

A £500 million loan is 16 times Liverpool's operating profits for 2007, which are expected to reach the £30 million mark, thanks to their run to last season's Champions League final. In comparison, Manchester United's borrowings are eight times their operating profits, while Arsenal's are four times. "Even by football's debt levels that is a heady figure," said one City analyst. Tilliss dismissed those calculations, saying the borrowings must be placed in the context of the revenues and operating profits that will be generated by the new stadium.

 

But, inevitably, Liverpool fans will begin to wonder whether Hicks and Gillett may have to bow to financial pressure and reverse their pledge not to copy the most hated Glazer innovation of them all - massive hikes in ticket prices.

[Guest Knightrider]

Aye, seems we have been quite lucky with Ashley. I remember Liverpool fans lauding it over Man Utd when Glazer took over, yet their owners seem to have bought their club by the very same methods.

[Mr Logic]

“It is far from unusual for a player to come to us from South Africa or Brazil and be far better than an English player. This should not be.”

 

That's the question that really needs answering and addressing, though the money (credit/loans) in the game today does seem to be an accident waiting to happen.

[Rob W]

"Suddenly the English model has gone from owner-supporters to owner-businessman."

 

 

so lets forget about

 

Deadly Doug

Ken Bates

Wm McKeag

Bob Lord

and that swine who used to own Citeh

 

 

[McCormick]

Have you noticed how very few English players are playing abroad.. that must say something aswell

[Guest Synthespian]

Have you noticed how very few English players are playing abroad.. that must say something aswell

That's almost always been the case.

It's because so few Englishmen have the skills to play the European game.

[Guest BooBoo]

Have you noticed how very few English players are playing abroad.. that must say something aswell

That's almost always been the case.

It's because so few Englishmen have the skills to play the European game.

 

The language barrier is also a big problem. Most Europeans are vaguely competent at English. Very few English footballers will speak a word of French, Italian, Portugeuse etc.

[McCormick]

Have you noticed how very few English players are playing abroad.. that must say something aswell

That's almost always been the case.

It's because so few Englishmen have the skills to play the European game.

 

The language barrier is also a big problem. Most Europeans are vaguely competent at English. Very few English footballers will speak a word of French, Italian, Portugeuse etc.

 

surely its about the ability, numerous foreign players don't know a word of english yet the PL is full of them

[Guest BooBoo]

Agreed but its the English mentality (not just restricted to footballers)that they cant be arsed to learn a foreign language whereas Europeans seem to accept that they need to learn some English.

[brummie]

"Suddenly the English model has gone from owner-supporters to owner-businessman."

 

 

so lets forget about

 

Deadly Doug

Ken Bates

Wm McKeag

Bob Lord

and that swine who used to own Citeh

 

 

 

Spot on, mate.

 

Randy Lerner may be American but has shown more care and done more for Villa and our history in just over a year than Ellis did in 30.

 

Wenger is having a laugh - as someone said in this thread, stuffing your side with foreigners and charging 60 quid a pop is somehow OK, but having foreign owners is losing the soul of the game.

 

As things stand now, I can't think of a single dodgy foreign owner in the English game. I can think of plenty of dodgy English owners from the past, though

 

[Thespence]

The Americans at Man Utd, Villa & Liverpool are sports people, they all own franchise in major sports in the states.

[Cajun]

Have you noticed how very few English players are playing abroad.. that must say something aswell

That's almost always been the case.

It's because so few Englishmen have the skills to play the European game.

 

and the fact they are probably going to earn double here than what they would be paid if they moved to another country.

[Cronky]

On Liverpool's financial situation - I'vesaiditbeforeandI'llsayitagain. Liverpool and Everton each building separate grounds at the same time is insanity. Initially, fans wouldn't like sharing a ground, but they get used to it quickly enough. It's not as though it's harmed AC Milan and Inter.

 

With the Premiership now attracting players from all over the world, yes it's tougher for young English players to force their way in. I don't think that raising the bar is all bad though. The quality of the English players that do make it is going up.

[Guest youcantseeme]

Except Everton wouldn't have paid for any of the stadium. We couldn't afford a new one before the yanks came in either.

[Gash]

I don't think Wenger should be the one talking about this. Packing his team with 100% foreigners and Arsenal charging people £60 a game is hardly helping.

 

60 quid a ticket is not true, that is one of the higher prices, tickets are available for OVER 18's at every game for just 18 quid! So i think the media and other people need to stop being selective with their "evidence"

 

And im not going to go into the foreigner thing its another thread but Why spend more on somebody as good or worse?

Why have a player who couldnt play your way in the team?

[Guest BigSamsBarmyArmy]

I don't think Wenger should be the one talking about this. Packing his team with 100% foreigners and Arsenal charging people £60 a game is hardly helping.

 

Exactly right. Good football but ruining the English players chances. That said the money that some teams have spent is ridiculous and could have cleared many clubs debts in the Lower leagues.

[Delima]

... and could have cleared many clubs debts in the Lower leagues.

 

So? With the ways those clubs are being run they deserve to be in red and in the lower leagues.

[Guest duffyg]

a bit rich coming from someone who fields no english players week after week.

[Fugazi]

Why should he buy English players? If he feels he can get a better deal buying from abroad (Which he obviously can) then that's his decision.

[Guest alex]

Why should he buy English players? If he feels he can get a better deal buying from abroad (Which he obviously can) then that's his decision.

He doesn't have to, it just makes his comments 'a bit rich' to pinch duffy's phrase.

[Teasy]

Why should he buy English players? If he feels he can get a better deal buying from abroad (Which he obviously can) then that's his decision.

 

Why should these foreign business people not come in and buy English Football clubs if they want to?, its there decision.  The point is he's mouthing off about people hurting the English game, but he's hurting it as much as anyone.