EPL arms race beyond a sporting contest
By Adrian Musolino, 21 Aug 2012 Adrian Musolino is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Arsenal, Chelsea, English Premier League, EPL, football, Manchester City, Manchester United, Robin van Persie
Manchester City's Pablo Zabaleta, centre, celebrates scoring against Queens Park Rangers with teammates Gareth Barry, right, and Sergio Aguero. (AP Photo/Jon Super)
Related coverage
The richest and biggest football league in the world, the English Premier League, returned for another season over the weekend.
The 2012/13 season faces the difficult task of following on from the drama of last season’s final day, where Manchester City snatched its first title in 44 years with a thrilling come from behind win in the dying minutes of the season, and the London Olympics, which thrilled Britain over its summer.
While Robin van Persie’s move from Arsenal to Manchester United on the brink of the season put the EPL back on the agenda, it set the tone for the new season and what the league has become.
EPL chief executive Richard Scudamore has described the league as an arms race. It’s a fitting analogy when you consider the money bankrolling the current “big three” in the league – Manchester City, Manchester United and Chelsea – comes from the richest reserves of Abu Dhabi, the United States of America and Russia respectively.
Van Persie’s move highlights how financial clout has funneled into the new “big three” of the Manchesters and Chelsea; when even a club such as Arsenal, one of the “big four” that did until recently dominate the league, can’t compete financially with the likes of the Manchester clubs.
This environment where clubs like Manchester City can transform from serial underachievers to the richest club in the world, thanks to the likes of the Abu Dhabi United Group for Development and Investment, backed by members of the Abu Dhabi royal family, alienates some who claim it’s anything but a fair sporting contest.
But what makes the EPL the most popular league in the world is this off-field soap opera, where the arms race adds an extra dimension to the drama of what happens on the field. That sub-plot is what added that extra level of intrigue to last season’s title battle between Manchester City and United – the new versus the old powerhouse.
Sustaining fans is the nature of the game where newly-promoted Southampton can push the defending champions Manchester City away from home on its day, even though over the space of 38 matches the gulf in financial clout becomes very evident.
But how long can it last, particularly when the divide between the haves and have-nots across some leagues in Europe is becoming so pronounced?
Heading into the season opening weekend, Scudamore was asked questions on how long before the EPL bubble bursts, amid concerns the financial arms race is unsustainable and the English game is setting itself up to bankrupt clubs. (See Glasgow Rangers and Portsmouth as examples of how financial realities can bite, with the concern in England that relegation from the riches of the EPL could condemn a club.)
But according to Scudamore, there’s no reason why people aren’t going to want to watch or listen to the league, ensuring the turnover the EPL generates can sustain the competition.
But how long will fans of middle tier clubs such as, say, Aston Villa, remain interested as their club continues to be shutout because of finances?
Those fans can only realistically hope for EPL survival, a possible run for a European spot and maybe trophies in the cup competitions, while hoping theirs is the next club to entice an incredibly wealthy owner with the spending power to match the elites or that FIFA’s Financial Fair Play system can close the gap.
Is this sustainable? If we keep watching the drama around the Manchesters, Chelseas and the next club to be turned into a powerhouse thanks to a ridiculously wealthy owner, then the rest of the league will just have to make do with being a small part of the show.
Adrian Musolino is editor of V8X Magazine, and has written as an expert on The Roar since 2008, cementing himself as a key writer who can see the big picture in sport. He freelances on other forms of motorsport, football, cycling and more.

August 21st 2012 @ 4:00am
Roger Rational said | August 21st 2012 @ 4:00am | Report comment
Manchester United aren’t bankrolled by the Glazers. The Glazers are bankrolled by Manchester United. The club has spent in the region of £500m on interest payments and servicing fees since the Glazers took over. They were debt-free before then. It’s a completely different scenario to Manchester City and Chelsea.
It’s highly probable that if every club was forced to operate within its natural revenue streams then United would win the League by 15 points every year (as they did for most of the 1990s and early 2000s) because they are so much bigger and richer than everyone else. Perhaps Arsenal, with a canny operator like Wenger and a big stadium, would be in with a shout every 3 or 4 years. But generally, it would be a one-horse race.
Therefore, in my opinion, it’s only the sugar daddies that keep things interesting.
August 21st 2012 @ 5:14am
Stephen Smith said | August 21st 2012 @ 5:14am | Report comment
The EPL may be an arms race, but its no different to the other main leagues of Europe. Spain is even more skewed towrads the big clubs because of the individual tv deals for Barcelona and Real Madrid. The rest feed off scraps, and the gulf between the big two and the rest in La Liga is massive, even bigger than in England. PSG are going to do the same thing in France with their Qatari owners. Unfortunately, in modern day football, money talks loudest everywhere.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:18am
Kasey said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:18am | Report comment
This is one of the reasons why I very much prefer our local league to the EPL.
Sure they’ve got van Persie and we’ve got Archie, but I know at the mid-point of every off-season that with a canny buy and some deft coaching, my team is starting the season with a chance to win silverware and not a tin-pot cup like the League Cup, but potentially the championship.
Its got me flummoxed how a club like Bolton can sell season tickets.
I enjoy the EPL storylines and pay attention to them. I particularly enjoy the “big club gets off to rotten start and could be relegated” scenarios. I don’t know why but they just really appeal to me
August 21st 2012 @ 10:46am
HardcorePrawn said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
Bolton is a big town, and the club attracts a lot of local support. That’s how they’re able to sell season tickets.
That’s a bit like asking why people still support Richmond in the AFL. They’re not going to win the Grand Final, not this year, nor next, but the fans still sign up for membership and attend games. It’s the nature of being a supporter. You stick by your team.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:46am
Michael said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
The EPL is a truly international league with an international following. The rich clubs are strong and lead the field every year……so what ? Thats what keeps it interesting and English players can only benefit from playing with and against the best players in the world every week. Everyone wants to see the battlers take an opportunity to knock off the rich clubs and build tension in the mid season with manager sackings (prediction…….Mark Hughes). People like the drama; the twists and turns of a season, otherwise it would be a bit mundane. Swansea may once again be a ‘jack out of the box’. Its good to see Newcastle back where they belong. This justs adds grist to the mill. People love it and I think the other European leagues are beginning to realise that if they can copy the EPL formula they may become more successful.
August 21st 2012 @ 6:16am
Victer said | August 21st 2012 @ 6:16am | Report comment
Nothing new under the sun in the EPL and Europe. If you do not have a salary cap wealth concentration will inevitably occur somehow, simple as that. Even look at major league baseball. People will still watch the EPL as sort of a formula one of football, however I personally find it laughable to support a city in Europe in which I have no affiliation with.
This is why the a-league can’t go down this path. Wealth concentration in our league will simply dilute fan bases of smaller clubs. We need a stricter salary cap, not a looser one, so every city in the comp big or small can have a shot at winning every year.
August 21st 2012 @ 7:22am
MV Dave said | August 21st 2012 @ 7:22am | Report comment
The parochial nature of the support for most teams means the EPL is as strong as ever…remember most teams are 100 plus years old. Stoke City, who most would agree cannot win the league, sell out every home game, likewise Norwich, Fulham, Swansea and West Ham will go close to all sell outs. Last season stadiums averaged over 92% capacity.
The new TV deal is a massive increase in the current deal (over a million pounds per season) and add to that the overseas TV deal being being over 600 million pounds per season. The bubble hasn’t burst yet…Man U just signed a sponsorship deal with American brand Cheverolet for over half a billion dollars.
Also don’t forget the league below EPL (Championship) is attended by almost 10 million fans each season as teams strive to get into the top division.
Newcastle, Liverpool, Everton, QPR, Fulham, Tottenham, West Ham and Man City are all looking to increase capacity of their stadiums or move to larger grounds.
Don’t forget that in the mid 1980s teams in the old Division 1 averaged around 20,000 per game played in old crumbling stadia…
The fear of relegation, FA and League Cup runs plus the chance of European competition keep all clubs interested throughout the season.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:14am
Futbanous said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Have to agree with MV Dave. This article overlooks the strength of traditional support for football clubs in the UK.
Famous clubs drop down the divisions,but support is maintained . Wednesday,Leeds Notts Forest etc maintain their fan support regardless of who they play. Obviously more turn up if they get back in the EPL when ManU are the opposition ,but the core support remains.
Look no further than North of the border for proof of solid traditional support where 49,000 just attended a Rangers match in the 4th tier of Scottish Football.
You have to be born into it to understand it,its not about the EPL,the FA whoever ,its about your club vs the rest,something this country needs to understand, if it wants the A-League to be more than what the FFA had for breakfast yesterday.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:27am
oly09 said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Exactly.
To say Villa fans will lost interest once they can’t make Europe is a bit ridiculous.
Also there are so many clubs with strong support in the Championship that the English game can still support clubs going bust (unlike Australia).
August 21st 2012 @ 10:32am
HardcorePrawn said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:32am | Report comment
I have to agree too; the comment “… how long will fans of middle tier clubs such as, say, Aston Villa, remain interested as their club continues to be shutout because of finances?” tells of a massive lack of understanding of how and why teams are supported by the faithful.
Does this article really imply that fans of Aston Villa, or any other “middle-tier” club (incidentally, despite their lack of success in recent years I’m pretty sure you be hard-pressed to find any fans of the largest team from Britain’s second city referring to their club as “middle-tier”), might start supporting either of the Manchester clubs, or Chelsea, or Arsenal, just because they’re currently more successful?
Seeing as the current title holders were, only a few years ago, plying their trade in England’s third tier, and Chelsea went through some remarkably lean years pre-Abramovich, it would be pretty short-sighted, not to mention probably unthinkable, for fans to start switching allegiances on the basis of current league positions and their team’s potential to win the league.
So, in answer to the question “how long will fans … remain interested…?” For as long as the club exists, whether they be chasing for the title, in a relegation dogfight, or even down in the lower leagues.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:37am
Kasey said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
I personally think the cost of going to games is more likely to be a disincentive to the next generation of fans than a lack of silverware.
The current generation of fans are rusted on and are being fleeced by GBP 50 ticket prices, but they have had their habit formed when it cost a tenner, how are the kids of today supposed to become ‘addicted’ to football?
This is one area I actually admire the AFL. They have put some of their megabucks towards ensuring the AFL is still attractively priced so families can attend. As long as they eat at home first or bring sangas into the ground.
August 21st 2012 @ 11:08am
HardcorePrawn said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Kasey,
The GBP50 prices you mention usually only apply to the more successful clubs, perversely it seems that the richer the club the more they fleece their fans, Chelsea are apparently particularly bad.
My own beloved Sunderland charge GBP29 for adults and GBP10 for kids for most games, with a slight increase (GBP35 & GBP13) for the visits by the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, the Manchesters of Utd & City etc, and our much-loved, bar-coded friends from up the road, Newcastle.
Incidentally, unlike Australian stadia, the areas around most British stadia are populated with burger vans, cafes, shops, & pubs so there are better-priced alternatives to the dreck that passes for stadium food and drink too. I can only speak from my experience of Melbourne, but there’s very little to buy in and around Aami Park and Etihad that isn’t over-priced and downright nasty. I certainly resent paying $6 for a re-re-re-heated Four&Twenty pie.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:39am
nordster said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:39am | Report comment
Agree HardcorePrawn… Lack of understanding of football too…in australia we are used to needing ‘level playing fields’ to keep us interested in otherwise mediocre sports.
In football, folks will turn up and watch their long time supported club whatever they are contesting…
August 21st 2012 @ 11:02am
whiskeymac said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:02am | Report comment
well said.
August 21st 2012 @ 8:41am
chris said | August 21st 2012 @ 8:41am | Report comment
YAWN.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:44am
Kasey said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:44am | Report comment
…is usualy my reply to almost anything about the spannish league;)
August 21st 2012 @ 9:09am
Bondy. said | August 21st 2012 @ 9:09am | Report comment
If you add Real Madrid ,Barcelona and possibly Bayern Munchen their five clubs that dominate world football and where players will and wont go, Arsenal is a tidy little feeder club for the likes of Barcelona and have been for quite some time dating back to van Bronckhorst.
I dont think football will truly be understood fortunately or unfortunaely a club like West Ham will fight for relegation immediately thats their role thats their duty and if you have money like Man Cty you go from an ordinary team that runs eleventh every year too in less than three and a half years spending close to 900 million pounds but Premierships and F.A. cups have rolled through the door,.When is professional sport truly fair would it be fair to compare Collingwood and Pt Adl with Man Cty and Stoke ?.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:59am
whiskeymac said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:59am | Report comment
bondy – there are more than 5 clubs unless you are discounting the milans and juve, chelski.
how long until PSG are mentioned also.
i disagree with your arsenal comments even though having lost hleb through to song to them its hard to argue we aren’t a target from our success and policy not to spend big (despite the resources apparently to do so). i cant see the real-chelski-city plan of buying big as sustainable… but i have been thinking that for 10years now.
oh and not lets forget shanghai shenua =)
August 21st 2012 @ 11:12am
Bondy. said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Whiskey.
Nobody buys more Arsenal players than Barcelona are they perving on us ?.
August 21st 2012 @ 9:58am
nordster said | August 21st 2012 @ 9:58am | Report comment
We are missing out in oz on one of the more interesting aspects of international club football. The interplay and tensions between the rich plaything clubs, the ambitious midtable teams, the battlers and the like. All for the purpose of a ‘level playing field’ as its called. The cookie cutter club license regs hold us back in this respect. Though it need not go to the two team league, barca/real caricature. But a bit of an arms race here would not be so bad. It would actually connect terrace and boardroom support somewhat more closely to on field reward. Not altogether bad for creating a vibrant and exciting league.
Part of the issue with bankrupted clubs comes when it goes too far and they are able to binge on debt. But this is fed by wider economic forces and trends beyond football. So if its capital not debt driven it is not such a risk.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:51am
whiskeymac said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
disagree nordster – comparing leagues with clubs with so called rusted on support being able to endure (and thrive) with distorted playing fields to one with fluctuating fortunes so far and a small fanbase and media exposure is an unwise folly. Our HAL has many positives and the fact anyone can win the comp, or feel they can, at the start of the season is one for a comp still attracting support and finding its feet.
August 21st 2012 @ 11:08am
nordster said | August 21st 2012 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Sounds ok for the opening decade of the league, ive supported the restrictions early on in our league too. Going forward into the second decade though its likely to turn us into a rather dull league ….and im not sure which league u are referring to as distorted? Ours or their’s? Distorted by money as a reflection of terrace and boardroom support (them) or distorted by regulation and contrived equalisation (us)?
August 21st 2012 @ 10:35am
whiskeymac said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
as some posters observe clubs are supported by fans – crowds at leeds, rangers etc attest to the interest in the club. this interest endures and is set to. look at the crowds below the Premier league – people watch their teams regardless if its playing a glamour tie against euro opposition or the team down the road.
August 21st 2012 @ 10:49am
Bondy. said | August 21st 2012 @ 10:49am | Report comment
I use to listen to Allen Greens phone in on 5 live and it was quite common for the lower tier team supporters to phone in and some of them have no major connection to the prem teams.
August 21st 2012 @ 12:23pm
oly09 said | August 21st 2012 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Exactly, football fans from lower league clubs don’t just change clubs when they get relegated. Look at AFC Wimbledon, they have been getting crowds of 5000 since forming despite starting in the lower lower non-leagues.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:33am
Colin N said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:33am | Report comment
A couple of years ago, there was a table which showed the English Championship was the fourth best supported league in Europe.
Not sure what it’s like in Spain, Italy, France etc, but the lower leagues are all well supported in England and people care about it as well. Right about AFC Wimbledon, but even the much-maligned MK Dons get 7-8,000.
You would never get Premiership reserve teams playing in the lower leagues.