Football is a strange game. Fans support their teams through thick and thin yet have very little input on how their clubs are ran.
The only influence would be voting for their club’s authorities, but that only happens in countries where clubs are still social institutions, rather than privately owned businesses.
More often than not presidential campaigns are ran under the promise of bringing certain players or manager in, and more often than not, those promises are broken the moment someone wins the elections.
So if the fans and members have no influence on the running of their clubs, certainly the presidents and boards of directors, will hand full power to the Managers they appoint to handle all football matters.
Not the case. The managers live in constant uncertainty about their future, which means they can only plan short term, which in term ends up damaging the academies and youth development departments.
This problem is nowhere more present than in the UK.
So who then holds the power in most football teams?
It seems that the answer is the players.
Crazy to think this way, but let’s analyse this conclusion:
1) Example number 1 is the Carlos Tevez saga. He sign a long term contract to play for Manchester City. Having played for rivals United beforehand, he can’t claim that he is not adapting to the area or City.
For one reason or another, Tevez decides he wants to leave. The club, does not want to lose him, as they have invested lots of money bringing him into the club.
Despite putting him on the transfer list, no club seems to be able to afford his wage demands, never mind the fee requested by Manchester City.
The next thing is he decides he is not going to play when his Manager tells him to get on as a substitute.
The club has now suspended him for 2 weeks, fully paid until they investigate further.
Is this a punishment? Of course it isn’t. Tevez spent his suspension time having a great time in Argentina, getting paid for it.
Will Manchester City fire him if they find him guilty of gross misconduct?
My opinion is they won’t, as they need to recover some of the money they have spent on him.
So the only possible outcome is that the club will end up selling the player, which is exactly what he wanted.
Players 1- Clubs 0
2) As in example number 1 this one relates to players who sign contracts with clubs. The names on this story could be as long as you wish.
A player or players play a full season with for a team, and that club ends up relegated.
Why does that player or players who contributed to the downfall and bad results thinks or think that they should not stay?
The contracts nowadays seem to have relegation clauses stating that so and so can leave the club if they are relegated.
To me the clubs should be the ones having clauses to benefit them and not the players.
Contracts should state that if Joe Bloggs is not good enough to keep Anytown United on the Premier league, then his salary will automatically be reduced by xx% for the time that that club is in the lower division.
Instead, players take teams down, and get sold at cut prices as their team is not a “Premier League team” anymore, and again footballers become not accountable for their shortcomings
Players 2- Clubs 0
3) How many times have we heard the phrase “ the problem is that the players are not playing for the Manager”
I am sorry, their contract is with the club, the club chooses the Manager, therefore they should do as they are told or pay the consequences.
Instead, when we hear this phrase, normally the Manager loses his job.
Players 3- Clubs 0
It is time to stop player power, and bring accountability to the people who get the most money out of the game and the least responsibility for their own failures.
The only influence would be voting for their club’s authorities, but that only happens in countries where clubs are still social institutions, rather than privately owned businesses.
More often than not presidential campaigns are ran under the promise of bringing certain players or manager in, and more often than not, those promises are broken the moment someone wins the elections.
So if the fans and members have no influence on the running of their clubs, certainly the presidents and boards of directors, will hand full power to the Managers they appoint to handle all football matters.
Not the case. The managers live in constant uncertainty about their future, which means they can only plan short term, which in term ends up damaging the academies and youth development departments.
This problem is nowhere more present than in the UK.
So who then holds the power in most football teams?
It seems that the answer is the players.
Crazy to think this way, but let’s analyse this conclusion:
1) Example number 1 is the Carlos Tevez saga. He sign a long term contract to play for Manchester City. Having played for rivals United beforehand, he can’t claim that he is not adapting to the area or City.
For one reason or another, Tevez decides he wants to leave. The club, does not want to lose him, as they have invested lots of money bringing him into the club.
Despite putting him on the transfer list, no club seems to be able to afford his wage demands, never mind the fee requested by Manchester City.
The next thing is he decides he is not going to play when his Manager tells him to get on as a substitute.
The club has now suspended him for 2 weeks, fully paid until they investigate further.
Is this a punishment? Of course it isn’t. Tevez spent his suspension time having a great time in Argentina, getting paid for it.
Will Manchester City fire him if they find him guilty of gross misconduct?
My opinion is they won’t, as they need to recover some of the money they have spent on him.
So the only possible outcome is that the club will end up selling the player, which is exactly what he wanted.
Players 1- Clubs 0
2) As in example number 1 this one relates to players who sign contracts with clubs. The names on this story could be as long as you wish.
A player or players play a full season with for a team, and that club ends up relegated.
Why does that player or players who contributed to the downfall and bad results thinks or think that they should not stay?
The contracts nowadays seem to have relegation clauses stating that so and so can leave the club if they are relegated.
To me the clubs should be the ones having clauses to benefit them and not the players.
Contracts should state that if Joe Bloggs is not good enough to keep Anytown United on the Premier league, then his salary will automatically be reduced by xx% for the time that that club is in the lower division.
Instead, players take teams down, and get sold at cut prices as their team is not a “Premier League team” anymore, and again footballers become not accountable for their shortcomings
Players 2- Clubs 0
3) How many times have we heard the phrase “ the problem is that the players are not playing for the Manager”
I am sorry, their contract is with the club, the club chooses the Manager, therefore they should do as they are told or pay the consequences.
Instead, when we hear this phrase, normally the Manager loses his job.
Players 3- Clubs 0
It is time to stop player power, and bring accountability to the people who get the most money out of the game and the least responsibility for their own failures.