• Manchester United Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • dsteer_lfc_68 dsteer_lfc_68 Feb 8, 2008 02:09 Flag

    Premier league matches being played abroad.

    Tim, not sure this is a good idea either, but how is this really any different than your recent trip to the Middle East for a benefit game, and a reported million pound pay day?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I didn't agree with that either to be honest (not a fan of Saudi Arabia's human rights policies), but it was slightly different in that it was a no-pressure friendly testimonial, where United were asked to take part.

      The main thing I don't like about the proposal is the fact that it will get rid of the level playing field that all clubs have in that they play each team twice - there's no luck involved in that.

      If United were drawn against Fulham for the extra game and lost, while their relegation rivals Birmingham were drawn against Derby and won, and Birmingham avoided relegation by 3 points at the end of the season, where's the fairness in that - it changes the whole character of a league system that's been the staple of football in this country for over a century.

      • 3 Replies to Tim
      • this is a non sense! imagine, you played 38 games you win the league by 3 points but a goal difference less good... you come to this game out of the world, loose it the other wins it, and you are defeated....

        This stupid.

      • Fair point. I can see two main things to dissaprove of here. One is this being an extra game allows some teams to gain extra points, and others to potentially loose valuable points. Who ends up in which category is a luck of the draw. In today's table if Man U were to play Derby, but Arsenal had to play Chelsea (I know an extreme example, but just an example) it really would not be fair. Think this is what your getting at, but using the relegation example, which is also valid. On this I agree with you

        Other point is taking time out to fly all over the world, to really just make more money. This is what I was comparing to what Utd did, but credit to you for not agreeing with what Utd did, just because it was Utd. On the face of it, all teams will have to travel, so no major advantage or disadvantage, although some will complain if they have to go to Australia while others only go acros the Atlantic. But with International breaks, players are already jetting all over the place between games, so not sure this makes much difference.

        But there is a certain crassness to it, as its all a marketing ploy. While I understand the globalization of sport, this looks a little like just another money grab. If they insist on doing something like this, I'd rather they do it outside of league games. Not sure its workable, but how about playing a round or two of the league cup overseas, and call it the "International League Cup". Its already a knock out compitition with a little luck of the draw involved, all teams playing abroad would be on neutral grounds, and it would both give extra revenue to the teams involved (some of whom maybe Championship teams) and raise the profile of a compition most of the top clubs no longer really compete in.

      • Fair point. I can see two main things to dissaprove of here. One is this being an extra game allows some teams to gain extra points, and others to potentially loose valuable points. Who ends up in which category is a luck of the draw. In today's table if Man U were to play Derby, but Arsenal had to play Chelsea (I know an extreme example, but just an example) it really would not be fair. Think this is what your getting at, but using the relegation example, which is also valid. On this I agree with you

        Other point is taking time out to fly all over the world, to really just make more money. This is what I was comparing to what Utd did, but credit to you for not agreeing with what Utd did, just because it was Utd. On the face of it, all teams will have to travel, so no major advantage or disadvantage, although some will complain if they have to go to Australia while others only go acros the Atlantic. But with International breaks, players are already jetting all over the place between games, so not sure this makes much difference.

        But there is a certain crassness to it, as its all a marketing ploy. While I understand the globalization of sport, this looks a little like just another money grab. If they insist on doing something like this, I'd rather they do it outside of league games. Not sure its workable, but how about playing a round or two of the league cup overseas, and call it the "International League Cup". Its already a knock out compitition with a little luck of the draw involved, all teams playing abroad would be on neutral grounds, and it would both give extra revenue to the teams involved (some of whom maybe Championship teams) and raise the profile of a compition most of the top clubs no longer really compete in.