Liverpool’s Jay Spearing during their Champions League second round, second leg, soccer match at Anfield Stadium, Liverpool, England, Tuesday, March 10, 2009. AP Photo/Paul Thomas
It’s not often that the Carling Cup semi-finals take on major significance in England, but then it’s not often that the world’s richest club takes on the world’s most indebted with a place in a knock-out final at stake.
That the two teams hail from one of world football’s traditional hotbeds makes tonight’s Carling Cup showdown between Sheikh Mansour’s Manchester City and the Glazer family’s Manchester United all the more intriguing, as the nouveau riche of Eastlands face off against their city rivals.
The match – postponed due to last week’s inclement weather – takes on added significance thanks to the growing alarm at plans by the Glazer family to sell and lease back Old Trafford and United’s Carrington training ground in a bid to refinance their mounting debts.
So incensed are some supporters that they’ve asked Sir Alex Ferguson to resign in protest, and whilst the vocal few might represent just a fraction of United’s global fanbase, there’s no doubt that a growing sense of unease is creeping across the English game.
It comes in part because UEFA has vowed to crack down on heavily indebted clubs – a decision that has reputedly earned the seal of approval from Chelsea’s billionaire benefactor Roman Abramovich.
Chelsea are just one of number of top flight English clubs that could see their spending reined in, but the move could come too late for Portsmouth – winners of the 2008 FA Cup final.
Faced with a winding up order and crippled by seemingly insurmountable debts, the troubled southern club have thrice failed to pay player’s wages this season and have now seen a transfer embargo slapped upon them.
They may have once paid top dollar for the likes of Glen Johnson, Sol Campbell, Sylvain Distin, Lassana Diarra, Niko Krancjar and strikers Peter Crouch and Jermain Defoe to call Pompey home, but they did so in the Premier League’s smallest stadium, with matchday revenues failing to cover the massive wage bill.
Former Portsmouth coach Harry Redknapp – who moved on to Tottenham and gutted the Pompey squad in the process – now oversees a Spurs side looking to move away from their own 36,000-capacity White Hart Lane home, as they too look to keep up with the big spenders of the English game.
It’s a similar story across the division as Liverpool supporters grapple with their bickering American owners, West Ham United search for new investment and Arsenal continue to pay off their Ashburton Grove home at the cost of the big-name signings fans crave.
English football may be awash with talent, but it’s also burdened by a mountain of debt, and things will only get worse if the next TV rights deal comes complete with a bargain-basement price tag.
Of course, it’s not just English clubs that are feeling the credit crunch, with plenty of sides in La Liga and Serie A poring nervously over their accounts.
But it’s the lure of the Premier League that continues to attract both sponsors and sheikhs alike, keen to cash in and generate funds or fame by association.
How much longer that continues is a question many fans in recession-hit England are now asking, with the bubble seemingly set to burst on the halcyon days of Premier League spending.
It’s often seen as a hindrance, but while the A-League’s salary cap might prevent clubs from signing global superstars, it also ensures that teams won’t disappear overnight.
I doubt there’ll be too many thinking about that when Roberto Mancini’s side run out at the City of Manchester Stadium, but perhaps it’s a point worth considering when the world’s latest “richest club” takes on one now heavily in debt.
David V.
Guest
Arsenal do not and have never lived beyond their means. That was the case for generations and is the case now. Therefore, they have maintained a top-flight place continuously for 84 seasons (91 years) as of this year. Everton have been there since 1954, Liverpool since 1962. Tottenham and Liverpool have over the past two decades spent exorbitant amounts with little return in comparison to Man Utd, Chelsea or Arsenal, who have all won the title. Anyway, the game needs to get back to basics and start refocusing on developing young local talent. Not just in England, but everywhere. England produced a few generations of talented, some technically very gifted, footballers between the 50s and 80s. They can do so again. But was that halcyon period down to clubs doing their job, or was it more down to luck?
MV Dave
Guest
Anyone who saw the semi final 1st leg this morning between Man City and Man Utd would have no doubt as to why English football is the best in the world...atmosphere, skill, drama, pace, athleticism, goals, saves...just a brilliant game. City won 2-1 with United old boy Tevez scoring twice. United laid seige to the City goal in the 2nd half but just couldn't get the ball in the net...Sets up the 2nd leg at OT next week magnificently. BTW This result was exactly that of the semi final 1st leg in 1970 (last time these 2 played at this stage of the League Cup) between these 2 at Maine Road (ManCity). In that year the teams drew 2-2 at OT for City to go to WEmbley...wont happen this time :)
Colin N
Guest
But that's their own fault though. The Manchester United fans didn't want Glazer and I'm not sure whether the board did either. The breakthrough for Glazer came when McManus and Magnier sold their shares to him, leaving the door open for a takeover. I would do exactly the same thing though if I was in McManus's and Magniers position as they got a £70m profit from it.
Colin N
Guest
Chelsea aren't actually in debt anymore, as Abramovich has converted those loans into shares. Liverpool are (I believe) in £300m debt, but similarly to Chelsea, those are loans owed to Gillette and Hicks, but it remains to be seen if they convert them into shares.
Colin N
Guest
It's interesting to note that the profit also includes the interest that has to be payed back, which still makes impressive reading. If the Glazers hadn't have come in (which is of course hypothetical) and all the revenue streams were as they are now (so ticket sales etc) then Manchester United would have made a profit of £91m, even without the sale of Ronaldo. Two years ago, Man Utd made an operating profit of £80m, but because of the interest, the debt increased by £16m.
McLovin'
Guest
But Man U have a more global reach, especially in Asia.. football is also the biggest game in the world. Man U also play more games a year (the carling cup should be a cracke), with FA, Champions, EPL, World ClubChallenge
MV Dave
Guest
So there should be more US teams in the top 10 as they have 6 times the population... and the people who put the debt on ManU are Americans...conspiracy!
McLovin'
Guest
These things change year to year.. and who hasnt heard of the patriots? Tom Brady and Gisele Bundchen ring a bell? There generally more NFL teams over $1b and in the top 10 than football teams.. and from what i know, they dont have the debt problems that football clubs do/
MV Dave
Guest
Sorry Jay Man Utd are the most valuable sports club in the world... Not bad for a club in a country of 50m vs the US over 300m. http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/13/nfl-cowboys-yankees-biz-media-cx_tvr_0113values.html 1 ManU US$1.8b 2. Dallas Cowboys $1.6b 3. Washington Redskins $1.5b
GC_Clint
Guest
Hah, I havent even heard of the New England Patriots. Out of the American sports I would have guessed the Yankees or the Lakers
Art Sapphire
Guest
Liverpool might be mid-table now but they have only just moved in. It still smellsnew and they haven't settled in yet. If Torres and Stevie G move out it leaves more room for everyone to relax and get used to the new dwelling :)
Art Sapphire
Guest
Jury's out in regards to the new owners until we see what they intend to do with signing players and management choices Although SAF does not have a high opinion of them - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jan/08/sir-alex-ferguson-david-sullivan But as we all know "fortune's always hiding" for us Hammers so we are used it. Man U were used to it to for 25 long years too, MV Dave :)
Jay
Guest
I remember reading that the New England Patriots were the most valuable sporting franchise... there a fair chunk of american sporting teams in the top 10
Simmo
Guest
whaddya mean "if they sell Torres and Stevie G to pay off the debt then its mid-table obscurity here we come."? they're already there :-)
MV Dave
Guest
Liverpool!!! wash your mouth out with soap :) Hey wouldn't laugh too soon Art looks like the Hammers are to be taken over by that dodgy duo Sullivan and Gold (ex Brummies) who make 'Arthur Daly' out of that great tv cop show from UK Minder look like Mother Teresa ;) Reckon a better duo for the Hammers would be Hale and Pace :) BTW One of my best mates who is a fellow MV member is Hammers through and through...even has Forever Blowing Bubbles for his ring tone! http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jan/19/david-sullivan-david-gold-west-ham
Art Sapphire
Guest
Don't worry MV Dave - it could be worse. You could be a Liverpool supporter. They got no money, no promised new stadium, and if they sell Torres and Stevie G to pay off the debt then its mid-table obscurity here we come. As a West Ham fan I look upon all this some bemusement. Our squad is paper thin already and our asking price is about 100 million pounds. As long as we stay up, thats what you call affordable :)
MV Dave
Guest
As l said Art the Board/Glaziers have a lot of work to do...in the meantime if things go sour and the Glaziers are forced out :) then the club will be sold again... The point l was trying to make earlier is that the club itself as a brand, as a money making franchise and as a team on the park is virtually unequalled in world sport...the fact that they have been allowed to be placed in such a precarious position is the scandal. Good luck to MUST in their efforts but in truth the only way out seems to be if the club is sold again this time without the debt being forced onto the club.
Art Sapphire
Guest
MVDave - As the Guardian reports today - 340 million pounds that should have been invested in the club has gone to pay off loans and bankers. Man Utd success is going up in a pile of smoke. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jan/19/manchester-united-finance-the-glazers If the bond issue is fully taken up by lenders, it will mean that since the Glazer family bought United in May 2005 for £810m – £540m of it borrowed from banks and hedge funds – their takeover will have already cost United £340m in cash. That comprises £220m in bank interest plus "early-repayment premiums" made when the borrowings were first refinanced in August 2006. A further £120m will have been incurred in fees paid to bankers, lawyers and other professionals – the fees for this bond issue are noted as £15m – plus £35m incurred by the club's interest rate hedging arrangements. On top of that, the "payments" have incurred interest payable of around £124m since the Glazers first borrowed the money to buy United. A Glazer family spokesman, who also speaks for United on financial matters, declined to comment. Nick Towle, chair of the Manchester United Supporters' Trust, said: "It is a shocking picture. These are immense amounts of money being leaked out of United to pay banks, lawyers, the Glazers themselves and interest, to pay for a takeover none of the supporters, or the United board itself, wanted. "United's success and profits could have been used to keep ticket prices affordable or invest in the team but instead we see this heartbreaking waste, just because one family ultimately hopes to make a profit from the club."
Simmo
Guest
^^ this means that ManUre's most important asset is SAF, not OT.
Simmo
Guest
Roon-ay Roon-ay Roon-ay