Originally published on 411mania on 26th
November 2008
You would think that when it comes to football fans all over the world that they would crave a competition where club sides from the farthest reaches of the globe compete to see who the best is. But they don't. Well some do and FIFA certainly do, given that this is a tournament, that through various forms and identities they have been trying to get off the ground for decades now. Despite all the effort and fanfare however, the concept refuses to catch on.
Trying to decide who the best in the world are, formally and informally speaking has been going on for years now. Indeed way back in 1887, it is claimed that Hibernian (Scottish Cup winners) and Preston North End (FA Cup winners) met to decide who the better team was in a ‘World Championship' match. The establishment and then subsequent growth in scale and in popularity of the European Cup after the Second World War showed the desire that fans and organisers alike had for competitions which brought the best from different countries together, and so a logical expansion appeared some sort of replication on a global scene.
The overwhelming evidence from the World Cup, with players representing their national teams, was that the games two powerhouse regions were Europe and South America. With that in mind the decision was made to create a competition whereby the Champions of Europe would meet their South American counterparts, the winners of the Copa Libertadores in a tie to be played over two legs, home and away to find out who the ‘best team in the world' was. Hence the birth of the Intercontinental Cup in 1960 and Real Madrid’s triumph against Penarol of Uruguay.
The first encounters saw a general evenness on the pitch and in its first decade of existence the title was won five times by European sides, with six going home to South America. However what also began to characterise the encounters was the extreme violence on show. The games became extraordinarily vicious, full of some of the most ‘x-rated challenges' you will ever see. While it definitely takes two to tango, it was the South Americans, particularly the Argentineans who were the clear aggressors. They saw the matches as a way of showing that there was no inferiority with their European rivals. Infamously when Celtic travelled to Montevideo to play Racing Club of Argentina (back when a third playoff game was needed if the two previous games had finished equal) the game saw six red cards and almost indiscriminate violence.
The teams from Europe when they travelled to South America were subjected to atmospheres that redefined the term ‘hostile'. It is not a coincidence after all that the South American equivalent of the Champions League took its name through the desire to celebrate the ‘heroes of South American Independence'. The hostile environment, often violent nature of the clashes and the travelling involved meant that a number of the European champions elected not to travel and to forfeit the competition. In the 1970's, Ajax (on two occasions), Bayern Munich and Nottingham Forest all opted not to take part. The result was that from 1980, the decision was made to make the game a one off tie, to be held in a ‘neutral venue'. From that point on the champions of the two continents would clash in Tokyo, Japan. This did nothing to boost the continued lack of enthusiasm for the game from the European stand point, and to those competing from South America there was always far more of an incentive and will to win.
To this day, Europeans have never, through its various guises, ever firmly got behind the competition. There is clearly a view of inherent superiority. The attitude has always seemed very much clear; ‘the competition is largely pointless, as we all know that the best team in the world will come from Europe. Never mind if we lose a one off game, the power of the Champions League is all conquering'. That may be true, it may not, but it's not hard to see how this conclusion was reached. After all it's the European sides that have the money and resources and from the 1960's onwards an ever increasing supply of South America's finest players. None of the best players that represent Brazil Argentina, Paraguay and Chile et al ply their trade in their home continent – they are all in Europe. How can a team from South America claim to be the best in the world, given that all the best players from South America play for European clubs?
However, even if you afford them the excuse that they were often unenthusiastic in their approaches to the game, European sides were frequently well beaten by those teams from South America and the encounters did show the strength of the world game despite its often Eurocentric dominance. Indeed up until the turn of the century, from 25 encounters, the balance was only just tipped Europe's way with 13 victories to 12. The divide in the international game would appear to continue to reflect a rather balanced situation whereby Europe and South America are equal with nine World Cup wins apiece. And despite there, as yet, being no other national side outside of those from the two dominant continents triumphing at the World Cup, nations from other parts of the world continue to grow and have a bigger impact on the world game. With that in mind FIFA continues to strive to develop the Club World Club idea, expanding this notion of finding out who the best team in the world are by aiming to bring together the champions from all of the six continents.
Football's great strength, over every other sport in the world is its truly global appeal. The biggest sporting occasion in a single sport is the World Cup, and whilst many other sports can boast fine levels of international competition, none can match the strength and vitality of football's club game around the globe. That is why there has always been such continued desire on many people's part for this competition, for a ‘World Cup of clubs' to be developed. If you talked to fans of nearly any other sport, then putting forward a competition where the champions from each of the continents competed to see who the very best in the world was would probably be greeted with great excitement and enthusiasm. The problem with football is that the resources, when it comes to the exceptional talents at the top of the game, are not spread all that wide. Simply put; the best players in the world play in Europe, and with all due respect, the champions of Oceania would probably find it hard to compete with the likes of a Sheffield United or a Numancia let alone a Manchester United or a Real Madrid.
For a competition striving to decide a ‘champion of champions' there just simply isn't enough to excite those who have regular access to the Champions League. Potentially, through the expansion of the competition to include the champions of Asia and Africa and the like you are aiming to expand its reach and appeal but without the world's top players the tournament is unlikely to capture people's imaginations even in those other parts of the world.
Manchester United, as champions of Europe and as a club with one of the strongest squads in world football are unsurprisingly considered favourites and it's more than likely that their opponents in the final will be LDU Quito of Ecuador, the champions of South America. The three editions of the tournament in this format and held in Japan have all seen the final contested between the sides representing these two confederations, meaning not much change from the older incarnations of the tournament. Attempting to try and change things this year will be the likes of Al Ahly (Champions of Africa), Pachuca (Champions of North America)and Gamba Osaka (Champions of Asia), but barring, and I don't want to seem disrespectful, some vast quantities of luck or Manchester United and Quito putting out reserve sides then they don't really stand a chance. This is reflected in the fact that Europe and South America's representatives are virtually given byes to the finals. It's hard for people to get excited about, or take seriously, a competition where half the sides one suspects are so obviously there to make up the numbers. Then again, isn't that the case with the Champions League?
Despite some of its failings however (enough to fill a number of columns), the Champions League is one of the reasons why it is unlikely that the Club World Cup will ever stand a chance of truly taking off. The Champions League provides everything that the world craves; this is where the leading names in football come to strut their stuff and where famous sides battle for supremacy. It is in many ways disappointing that a sport which more than any other represents the whole world is so ‘European' at the top; however that is a fact of life. This is where the money and prestige is and as such that is where the world's focus is. The best players of countless different nationality perform in the Champions League, flocking to European clubs from all over the world – this is effectively your Club World Cup. For years there may have been short sightedness or indeed a certain snobbery on the part of the leading European lights when it came to taking on the champions from elsewhere, but now more than ever that is where the top talent is, all in one place.
What may look like a good idea on paper then, and is, given the truly global nature of the game, something that does hold certain attractions, will never get off the ground whilst the Champions League remains firmly in the media glare and the clubs of Europe house all the top talent. The way the tournament is organised also fails to inspire, with the announced locations for future editions; Abu Dhabi in 2009 and 2010 and then back to Japan for the two editions after that seemingly decided with little or no rhyme or reason, save the obvious commercial and monetary value. That's the problem with the concept as a whole really; to many fans the whole thing just seems high on the ‘gimmickry' and short when it comes to quality and competitiveness, hardly an ideal combination for a new tournament trying to get established.
It appears unlikely it will be going away anytime soon, so maybe we will, as fans around the world come to love the tournament, but rightly or wrongly, the eyes of the footballing world when it comes to the club game continue to be trained firmly on Europe – success in the Champions League to many, being a far more useful barometer in helping to decide who truly are the best in the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment