The English Football Thread

Vesper · May 2, 2020

47 minutes ago, Special Juan said:

I'm sorry but they have to simply end the season and do it now. All fo this restart stuff is absolutely fucking idiotic. Peoples lives in their thousands are being lost and the PL's desperation to get started is quite simply worrying.

If a player contracts this disease after the restart it sets down again, completely. There is no vaccine as of now and won't be for months possibly a year. Doctors will not give a guarantee that nobody will contract it so where does this stack up with insurances and players rights?

The fact there is a push for a date smacks of greed, desperation and is quite frankly embarrassing in all honesty.

well said SJ

fuck do I MISS footie though!

Laylabelle · May 2, 2020

2 hours ago, Special Juan said:

I'm sorry but they have to simply end the season and do it now. All fo this restart stuff is absolutely fucking idiotic. Peoples lives in their thousands are being lost and the PL's desperation to get started is quite simply worrying.

If a player contracts this disease after the restart it sets down again, completely. There is no vaccine as of now and won't be for months possibly a year. Doctors will not give a guarantee that nobody will contract it so where does this stack up with insurances and players rights?

The fact there is a push for a date smacks of greed, desperation and is quite frankly embarrassing in all honesty.

It's a really dumb idea. Even behind closed doors you'll still have television staff and whatever else on site. Medics,ball boys,people around the stadium or just have a lot more balls so if it goes into the seats you wouldn't have to faff around trying to find it.

Still be a fair crowd of people to make this work.

Like said one player tests postive it would have to stop again. Or you would hope so anyway!

Vesper · May 2, 2020

Neutral venues, testing & tension between clubs: Premier League return explained

https://theathletic.com/1789458/2020/05/02/premier-league-qa-neutral-venues-testing-arrangements-and-what-happens-next/

It’s been another long and complicated week of Premier League politics, with various parties briefing their preferred outcomes and the 20 clubs getting together yesterday to thrash out a return after coronavirus.

Here is our understanding of the key issues as they stand…

What was discussed in Friday’s meeting and who was there?

All 20 clubs were present and views were aired at the three-and-a-half-hour meeting: finishing the season at neutral venues was the key theme. Different clubs are in different circumstances, with different challenges, so they’re naturally not singing from the same hymn sheet all of the time. But all 20 are committed to wanting to finish the season… for now. The call was done over Skype but without video, although the participants were shown some slides.

Do clubs want to come back and play?

It has been clear from the moment the pandemic broke out that certain clubs were searching for a way out of the current campaign. West Ham’s Karren Brady, for example, floated the idea of null-and-voiding the season in a national newspaper. Other clubs who would avoid relegation in the event of the season ending now — either by voiding the campaign or establishing a points-per-game model — have privately argued for these resolutions. Initially, such views were dismissed by rivals as blatant examples of self-interest but the mood is shifting. Just as the rest of us have grown wise to the perils of the pandemic, club executives, coaches and players have become very sensitive to the public health arguments. The idea of calling time on the season now is no longer confined to those clubs who stand to gain by not finishing the fixture list.

The Athletic is aware, for example, of a senior member of a leading Championship club’s coaching staff who believes the decision to start playing again is “reckless, dangerous and prioritising economic health before public health”. This is not as simple, therefore, as football tribalism and there are divisions even within dressing rooms. The most clear argument across the Premier League, however, has always been that if the season can be played to a conclusion, it should be. Otherwise, the clubs may have to repay £762 million to broadcasters deprived of their usual coverage. This, arguably, is the crux of the issue.

One well-placed source said on Friday night: “The Premier League now wants to restart and there is a clear majority for this. They will have a proper crack at getting this over the line. The discussions were less a debate and more information, led by Premier League officials and the government, detailing how they can restart. Clubs will continue to brief and leak stories to suit their own agendas. But within the meeting, it felt like football was working its way back.”

An executive from a club thought to be in the neutral camp, in regards to calling it off or carrying on, said there was confidence play will resume, barring any major medical complications or new developments. But they added an important proviso: if the coronavirus curve goes in the wrong direction again, the appetite to resume would disappear and players and staff would rebel.

One continuing concern for clubs is what will happens if, midway through the resumption, a significant number of their staff and/or players are struck down by the virus and have to be quarantined for 14 days. Would the club need to bring their reserves or youth team players back to training just in case? Would games be postponed if a certain number of players became unavailable? These are questions that are yet to be answered.

Any tensions?

Aren’t there always? An executive at one Premier League club has told The Athletic that his club are against the prospect of games being played at neutral venues, and that “half the league are against it”. He also questioned the logic of matches being played at neutral venues to prevent fans from congregating outside the stadiums when the biggest clubs have fans all across the country, not just their home towns.

“It’s being driven by the clubs with a lot to gain and not a lot to lose,” he said. “The bigger clubs are pushing for it because they know the only way for them is up in terms of glory or money, no risk.”

The chairman of another Premier League club, unhappy at the prospect of games being played at neutral venues, told The Athletic: “I think the integrity (of the competition) was lost a long time ago, this just seals it.”

It has also been claimed that the PFA are yet to be consulted on the plans, which will likely re-open the battle scars caused last month as clubs tried to agree wage deferral deals with their players.

I’ve heard a lot about ‘Project Restart’ this week. What is it?

OK, the title could do with a bit more thought, particularly when you consider how good the Premier League usually is at marketing, but there is no disputing the amount of effort that has gone into the English top flight’s grand plan. And if it comes off, nobody will complain about the name.

Work on how to keep playing during the coronavirus crisis started at the league’s west London headquarters at the start of March, a week before the season was suspended. It was initially hoped the Premier League might be able to copy Serie A’s example and play on behind closed doors for a while but the speed of contagion in both countries soon made that plan unworkable. Leicester’s 4-0 thumping of Aston Villa and Sassuolo’s 3-0 win over Brescia on Monday, March 9, were the last action either league has witnessed. Two days later, Manchester City versus Arsenal was called off when Mikel Arteta became the English game’s first patient, and two days after that the whole season was confined to bed.

Once the initial shock had passed, Premier League HQ started on a resumption strategy. According to sources, almost every member of staff has contributed, with clubs, broadcast partners, medical experts, police and friends overseas all pitching in. One part common sense, one part best practice, two parts blue-sky thinking, with a twist of good luck, it is a cocktail for these strange times. The clubs were given a first taste at the previous league shareholders’ meeting a fortnight ago, and were emailed a more detailed recipe earlier this week, but Friday’s Skype call was the first time league bosses and medical adviser Dr Mark Gillett talked them through it in detail. They were shown the return to training protocol, a medical strategy, the testing regime and the idea of using eight to 10 carefully chosen, neutral venues around the country.

These were the main items of discussion on Friday but delve deeper into the dossier and the clubs will find details on how many people will be allowed to attend the games, how they will get there, where they will get ready, how they will leave, where they will stay, how they are expected to behave and how long it will take to complete the 92 unplayed games.

There is, of course, one word missing from all of these best-made plans: provisional. None of this happens until the government says so and the key date here is Boris Johnson’s announcement on May 7, when the Prime Minister will announce if the UK can follow the likes of China, Germany and Italy in relaxing the current lockdown conditions and returning — even if only for a few months — to something closer to normality.

Why neutral venues?

The reality is the Premier League is not going to get necessary police approvals and Sports Ground Safety Authority licences to be able to play games at 20 stadiums. There are significant concerns about the possibility of large numbers of fans gathering outside the grounds, as was seen when Paris Saint-Germain played Borussia Dortmund and Valencia hosted Atalanta in the Champions League in March.

So, instead, the league is looking at eight to 10 “approved” venues. Nearly all of them will be Premier League stadiums but nobody will play a game at home. Stadiums that are close to large residential areas are likely to be discounted and local infection rates will also be taken into consideration. The plan does not include non-football grounds such as Twickenham at this stage, and The Athletic understands Wembley is also currently not under consideration.

The list of potential venues was not discussed in the meeting, although some clubs may have ruled themselves out of the running already, as Bournemouth, Southampton and Watford have all started extensive work on their pitches. One other that was about to start work has stopped after hearing they could be used as a neutral venue.

The neutral-ground concept would see teams not even playing in their home city, so Liverpool would not play at Everton or Tottenham at West Ham. Plans still need to be formulated as to how you stop supporters congregating at their home ground even if there is no match. If Liverpool were to win the league in Birmingham, authorities need to know fans will not flock to Anfield. This fear was raised by Liverpool mayor Joe Anderson on Thursday, provoking an angry response from the club and its support.

It is still unclear if clubs could play all their games in one stadium. The presentation at the meeting did not go into that level of detail. If a non-Premier League ground is used, VAR will have to be installed. A director at a Premier League club told The Athletic that the selection of neutral grounds was “a sticking point, expressed vocally by a number of clubs.”

It is said that the bottom six were among the most strongly opposed the concept of neutral venues because they have crucial games coming up and see losing any home advantage as potentially damaging. Teams with less to play for — including Everton, Burnley and Crystal Palace — were generally more relaxed.

The representatives of the “big six” clubs were said to have been particularly quiet on the call. It has been suggested to The Athletic that they may have been briefed of the details discussed ahead of time, and there is even a suggestion that the Premier League’s elite clubs have formed a separate group to discuss the issues at hand.

Would this need a vote to go ahead?

It is unclear whether clubs are entitled to have a say in the proposal but one person involved in the call told The Athletic they thought the use of neutral venues would be a rule change, which requires a vote and the usual two-thirds majority — 14 of the 20 clubs. They added that they thought the vote might not pass. However, the clubs were told that playing in neutral venues is the only option. And without football matches, there are big question marks over that all-important broadcast and commercial revenue.

Would teams train in these neutral venues too?

No, they would prepare for matches at their own training grounds and travel to games. The World Cup-style training camps that some clubs suggested are not on the agenda. The Premier League will try to make travel time and distance as equal as possible across the league. Details of overnight stays and travel to games wasn’t discussed.

Aren’t a lot of players worried about this?

Yes, some players are scared and angry, and a big point that came across during the meeting was the need for the league to consult more fully with players and managers, so they buy into the plan and understand what they are being asked to do.

Speaking to The Athletic on Friday night, Professional Footballers’ Association boss Gordon Taylor said he would not be issuing any advice until “a clear path” had been agreed by the government, their medical advisers, the Premier League and its medical advisers and all the club doctors. This plan would then need to be presented to the union, the League Managers Association and their respective members and delegates, so that a “full risk assessment, with full questioning” can take place.

We are at the end of week six of lockdown and everyone is thinking about the here and now. But the proposed return to training, on May 18, is still more than a fortnight away, with the first game not pencilled in until June 8 — the country will be in a different place in terms of testing, the pandemic curve, people returning to work, using public transport and lots more by then. But, as we heard from the Manchester City forward Sergio Aguero and others this week, some players are worried.

One prominent Premier League player told The Athletic “there’s no chance” he will train in a mask because he fears he would not be able to breath properly. And it is understood at least one club have already asked players to vote on whether they are happy to return to playing.

Another player told The Athletic that although he would personally be willing to play were it deemed safe to do so, he was curious as to what would happen if the majority of a club’s players agreed to return to action, but a smaller group were reluctant. He also questioned exactly how much the decision-makers cared about the safety of players, staff and anyone else who would be attending the games if and when they take place.

Yet a director at one Premier League club said: “I think it’s perfectly understandable that if a player fears for his or his family’s welfare then that should be respected. Let’s say for example a player’s relative has had treatment for cancer and they live with them, why should they be expected to risk that? However, let them stay away, take unpaid leave and give their salary to the greater good and worthy causes in much need — not just NHS but local workers and small businesses. Let each club play with the players that want to play and not force anyone to put themselves at risk.”

What about testing?

The Premier League is clear it does not want to do anything that could be construed as football jumping the queue for testing or diverting resources from key workers and frontline medical staff. Not only would this be an enormous PR own goal but it would be highly unethical.

But for the “sterile environment” plan to work, the players will need regular testing: at least twice a week and perhaps as much as every other day. The players and staff involved are likely to want that for their peace of mind, too.

It is estimated that Project Restart will require 40,000 testing kits, which will be privately sourced from a Dutch supplier, costing the Premier League £4 million. One club has arranged its own informal test that involve a few pricks of blood taken from a finger and a result is almost instant. The league will also set up the required testing stations.

Is what has happened in other countries this week significant?

To an extent, yes. Premier League clubs have carefully followed developments in France, where the government effectively ended the current campaign when it said there could be no sport until August. Yet this has created a financial black hole. Several Ligue 1 clubs are already pleading for huge loans to cover losses. Furthermore, the decision to award titles and European places, as well as promote and relegate teams, has attracted legal threats from clubs such as Amiens, Lyon and Toulouse. The Premier League is unsurprisingly fearful of similar headaches.

The top flights in Belgium and Holland have also brought the curtain down on 2019-20, although the Dutch are not awarding any titles or promoting or relegating anyone. They are, however, proposing to send their top two teams to next season’s Champions League and next three to the Europa League. This has provoked a furious response from AZ Alkmaar, who were only trailing Ajax at the top of the table on goal difference but had the wind in their sails. The top team in Holland enter at a later stage of qualifying and would automatically join the group stage if this season’s Champions League was won by a team that had also qualified via their domestic competitions. Other unhappy parties include sixth-placed Utrecht, who were only three points behind fifth-placed Willem II with a game in hand (and also in the Dutch Cup final), and the two teams clear at the top of the Dutch second division.

What unites all three of these leagues, and Scotland — another one currently debating how to conclude their stalled season — is the fact they are all moving to new broadcast partners next season, so have an added motive for wrapping up this season and not compromising the prompt start of next season.

Looking elsewhere, the fact the UK is slightly behind the Covid-19 curve of Germany, Italy and Spain is a blessing in terms of the league’s ability to plan. The English game can, essentially, take the successful parts trialled elsewhere and learn lessons from any mistakes.

On Friday, it emerged that three players at German club Cologne have recently tested positive for the virus. They will now spend 14 days in quarantine but group training continues. Premier League clubs are expected to follow the same model, treating coronavirus as an injury, rather than letting a few positive tests bring the season to a halt again, as happened when Arteta tested positive.

Is it possible to tell what the individual clubs are thinking?

Yes and no. Contrary to what we have seen and heard from a few clubs in the EFL, no Premier League club has publicly laid out its position on whether to resume this season or not. Brighton have probably been the most transparent club in the top flight with their chief executive Paul Barber giving weekly on-the-record briefings but even they have been reluctant to show every card they are holding.

This means we are relying on tells to work out what each club is thinking. Arsenal, for example, are understood to be eager to play on. They have been in isolation longer than most, as they played Olympiakos at the end of February and the Greek club’s owner Angelos Marinakis, who also owns Nottingham Forest, was an early Covid positive, so they are desperate to get out on the pitch again. As they are also losing four games’ worth of their substantial match-day revenue, Arsenal are very vulnerable to a potential clawback of broadcast money. And they, like others, have made their pay-cut and deferral plans on the basis of completing the season.

Arsenal also, however, believe they had a strong hand going into the run-in, and had not given up on Champions League football. Do not forget, if Manchester City fail to overturn their UEFA ban, fifth place is good enough for a return to the big show and seventh place would be good enough for the Europa League, as Manchester City would not qualify via their Carabao Cup win. Arsenal are ninth, five points behind Manchester United in fifth, with a game in hand.

Another team with a game in hand are Aston Villa, with six of their remaining 10 matches scheduled to be at home, an advantage they would have been counting on to get themselves out of the bottom three. But The Athletic understands they, too, want to play on and are convinced they have enough talent to get out of trouble on the pitch. Their midfielder John McGinn, so influential for them at the start of the season, is now fit and ready to go.

Bournemouth are another example of an injury-ravaged squad now looking a lot healthier thanks to the enforced break. And then there are the clubs we cannot read. Liverpool have simply stopped talking in these meetings and maintain a Sphinx-like cool. Tottenham chief executive Daniel Levy is another who the other clubs are finding difficult to interpret.

In terms of the table, Tottenham are in a similar position to Arsenal and they also will be losing huge amounts of revenue from not being able to stage games and events at their new home, so you would imagine they would be desperate to avoid giving back any broadcast money and determined to continue their run of European football. Some, however, think Levy is leaning to calling it quits on this season. Why? Nobody is certain, although Tottenham’s wage bill is one of the most incentivised in the league, with lots of bonus payments.

Everyone has their own headaches.

What happens next?

As mentioned above, nothing really changes until Johnson’s speech next Thursday. Until then, the league is stuck in the same Groundhog Day pattern as the rest of us: get up, print off the kids’ homework, hold virtual meetings, make actual phone calls, get some fresh air, stay safe, repeat.

But there was a second significant meeting on Friday that involved Oliver Dowden, the secretary of state for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam and the top doctors from the Football Association, Premier League, Rugby Football Union, England and Wales Cricket Board and UK Sport, the government agency that funds Olympic and Paralympic athletes.

This digital gathering focused on how professional team sports will resume training after what has already been in football’s case, the game’s longest break since World War II. The Athletic understands this meeting was positive and professional, with all united around a desire to get moving again, providing the government says go.

So sport waits, makes plans and stays as loose and as limber as possible. What else can it do? To throw in the towel now would not look clever if anyone came asking for their money back. To not be ready to finish this season, as quickly and as fairly as possible, could look negligent if the country enters another phase of lockdown later this year.

If Johnson says no, well, Project Restart might have to become Project Avoid Litigation, with the key details not being the number of tests you do or how long players must go without seeing loved ones, but which battles they choose to fight.

Vesper · May 2, 2020

Why does Saudi Arabia want to buy Newcastle United?

https://theathletic.com/1788335/2020/05/02/why-does-saudi-arabia-want-to-buy-newcastle-united/

On October 2, 2018, Hatice Cengiz stood outside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and waited for her fiancé to return with the documents that would allow the pair to be wed. She had been due to marry Jamal Khashoggi, a veteran Saudi Arabian journalist who once had the ear of the country’s all-powerful Al-Saud royal family but had, in recent years, fallen out of favour.

Khashoggi’s journalism had been critical of Mohammed bin Salman, the country’s young, recently elevated crown prince. MBS, as he is widely known, embarked on a charm offensive with presidents, prime ministers and international captains of industry promising social and economic reform in the kingdom. One day he was to become Saudi king and was, ultimately, to become the prospective new owner of Newcastle United.

Khashoggi’s writing countered the reformist narrative, highlighting MBS’s growing authoritarianism and the jailing of those that spoke out against his agenda, be they journalists, academics or feminist activists. Fearing for his life, Khashoggi fled to the United States where he wrote for the Washington Post. He later flew to Turkey to attend a conference where he was interviewed by Cengiz, a Turkish graduate student. The two fell in love and quickly decided to get married.

Cengiz waited until nightfall for Khashoggi to return. But he never did. In fact, he was already dead.

Inside the consulate, a 15-man assassination team was waiting. Khashoggi was beaten, strangled, drugged and then dismembered with a bone saw. The Saudi authorities furiously denied they were responsible but the sheer weight of evidence made that position untenable. They would eventually blame the killing on “rogue” Saudi agents, who were closely linked to MBS’s inner circle (five low-ranked members of the hit squad were sentenced to death in a Saudi court, but those closest to MBS were cleared). MBS himself would later take responsibility for Khashoggi’s death, but denied he ordered it, saying it was a “mistake” that should never have happened. The CIA later concluded he most likely did order the killing. MBS has rejected that finding as “flawed”.

Saudi Arabia’s allies, including the US and the UK, sought to quickly put the incident behind them, but struggled to reassert MBS’s credentials as a young reformer focused on weening his country’s economy off its tremendous — but rapidly diminishing — oil wealth.

Meanwhile, in the 18 months since her fiancé was brutally murdered by Saudi operatives, Cengiz had grown used to the online abuse as she waited in vain for justice to be fully served. Ever since, she has been hounded by trolls, who she believes are “flies” — state-sanctioned Saudi social media trolls who swarm around any remarks critical of Saudi Arabia.

US intelligence claimed they had uncovered a plot by the Saudi secret service to spy on her while she was in hiding in London, though Saudi Arabia has previously denied using surveillance tools against human rights activists and critics of the kingdom. Cengiz feared for her safety but continued to campaign to bring Khashoggi’s killers, and those who directed them, to book.

The speed at which the West sought to normalise relations with MBS and Saudi Arabia was deeply distasteful to her. But then it was announced that Newcastle United were to be bought by a consortium bankrolled by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF). MBS is the chairman of the PIF and sits on the board.

It was a deal too far.

“It has been 18 months since the murder and nothing has been done. There is no accountability and there is no responsibility,” Cengiz says in an interview with The Athletic, switching between English and Arabic, her voice cracking with emotion. “The world powers, especially in the West, remained silent about the crime and they didn’t hold him (MBS) accountable. And we see the result of the silence. To buy this football club and no one can stop him. He sends a message that he can buy whatever he wants. That is why I felt I had to speak out.”

So, last weekend, Cengiz released a statement on Twitter urging the Premier League to block Newcastle United’s sale. A tirade of abuse followed, a mixture of the “flies” and frustrated Newcastle fans desperate to see an end to the disastrous Mike Ashley era. Other Newcastle fans decried the abuse of a bereaved woman.

A few days later, her barrister sent a letter to the English Premier League, who were vetting the deal under their owners’ and directors’ test, urging them to reject the takeover. “There should be no place in the Premier League, and English football, for anyone involved in such abhorrent acts,” wrote Rodney Dixon QC. The same pattern of abuse followed.

“I can say that the one incident that has hurt the reputation of Saudi Arabia the most was Jamal’s murder. It has destroyed his (MBS’s) reputation, he’s desperately trying to use these type of deals to repair his image,” she says, explaining as to why she felt she had to speak out about the Newcastle takeover deal.

“Since the murder, many companies and countries don’t want to partner or do business because of the backlash. He wants legitimacy and credibility. Buying a team like Newcastle in the Premier League, in one of the most powerful countries in Europe and the world? You buy legitimacy in the international community. He’s accepted and celebrated for rescuing a struggling team. Everyone then sees everything in a different light.”

Ever since the proposed Newcastle takeover materialised, fronted by the British-born, Dubai-based dealmaker Amanda Staveley and backed by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, there have been many questions over the proposed £300 million deal. Chief among them was why would the Saudi state want to buy a Premier League football club?

For Cengiz, the reason was clear: to help rebrand Saudi Arabia, especially its crown prince. It wouldn’t be the first country to attempt that.

Since the turn of the 21st century, Gulf monarchies have poured tens of billions of dollars into sport to project a more positive vision of themselves. Dubai, one of the UAE’s seven emirates and its second biggest after the capital Abu Dhabi, and Qatar pioneered sports investments in football, tennis, golf and others, as a way to present a fresh image of themselves.

In 2005, Qatar opened its Aspire Academy — launched with a rare appearance of Pele and Diego Maradona on the same stage — which would become a lynchpin for the next ten years of investments, whether that was winning the bid for the 2022 World Cup or purchasing smaller, feeder clubs across Europe.

A Qatari sovereign investment vehicle bought French giants PSG and set up a new broadcaster, beIN Sports, that would come to be one of the industry’s biggest players. Its state-owned companies, like Qatar Airways, enjoy plumb advertising space on shirts and pitch-side electronic hoardings. The 2008 global financial crisis saw Abu Dhabi step up its investments in sport, purchasing Manchester City and setting a blueprint of how to invest successfully in an undervalued asset while presenting a carefully curated image of itself that was often at odds with the political realities on the ground.

Staveley, famously, played a role in bringing Sheikh Mansour Al-Nahyan, one of the most powerful figures in the UAE and a brother of the crown prince Mohammed bin Zayed, to Manchester in the first place. And it was a meeting, first reported by the Financial Times, between Staveley and MBS on his super yacht “Serene”, worth almost half a billion dollars, that secured the PIF’s involvement in the Newcastle deal and brought it back on track. But there is little doubt who the true beneficial owner of Newcastle would be.

“Saudi Arabia is a family business and it runs a very tight ship,” said Oliver Bullough, author of Moneyland: The Inside Story of the Crooks and Kleptocrats Who Rule the World. “Whoever has got their hand on the tiller will be in charge of all of this.”

Others have been more sceptical of the deal, which appears to contradict Saudi Arabia’s event-driven strategy focused on investing in Saudi Arabia. According to Professor Simon Chadwick, from the Emlyon Business School, the Newcastle deal doesn’t fit in with many of the country’s other investments.

“If you’re doing a quick count on the back of a cigarette packet: the F1 Grand Prix in Qiddiya in 2023 and the new high-tech city, Neom, plus other Red Sea projects… I estimate that Saudi Arabia is spending over a trillion dollars on those three initiatives,” he said. “So why would you buy Newcastle?”

The answer to that may lie in something much harder to define. “The Saudi involvement in the Newcastle takeover is about buying a prestige asset for state-branding purposes because the investment does not contribute to the PIF’s mission to assist in economic diversification or job creation in Saudi Arabia,” said Dr Kristian Ulrichsen, a fellow at the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, as well as the author of Qatar and the Gulf Crisis.

“There is an intangible factor which the Saudis will be looking for in such an investment which is more about soft power projection, changing the image of Saudi Arabia abroad and utilising the mass appeal of football as a way to reach new constituencies.”

Changing the image of a country abroad is difficult at the best of times, but Saudi Arabia’s international reputation, especially when it comes to human rights, is perhaps the hardest to burnish. Ever since the country was founded by Ibn Saud in 1932, Saudi Arabia has followed an ultra-conservative form of Islam called Wahhabism. There have been heavy restrictions on women and a guardianship system that has created a form of gender apartheid.

There is little democracy or freedom of speech. Reporters Without Borders’ 2020 World Press Freedom Index places Saudi Arabia 170th out of 180 countries. It also routinely executes more people than almost any other country. In 2019, Saudi Arabia executed a record 184 people, some of them children at the time of their convictions, including 37 people executed on a single day. In April this year, it was announced that Saudi Arabia would stop executing people who had been convicted when they were minors for some crimes. Public flogging was also to end.

Enter Mohammed bin Salman, a prince who was never meant to be king. Ibn Saud had 36 sons and 27 daughters. It is estimated that the family could number 15,000. But the throne only passes through the sons and it took a series of deaths, from sons and crown princes who passed away from poor health, before Ibn Saud’s 25th son, Salman bin Abdulaziz, the former governor of Riyadh, became king in 2015. MBS was King Salman’s sixth, but favourite, son. When Salman bin Abdulaziz became king in 2015, MBS was made deputy crown prince and handed the defence portfolio. In 2017 he was elevated to crown prince, and King Salman’s anointed successor.

MBS embarked on an impressive social reform programme which charmed world leaders, especially Donald Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner.

He took away powers from the hated Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, a religious body whose officers would often harass women for not covering properly or mixing with unmarried men, and other perceived religious infractions.

Cinemas, which had been closed since 1979, were opened up. Concerts were hosted for the first time, featuring Arabic and Western artists. WWE events and heavyweight boxing championship fights were hosted. The Spanish and Italian Super Cups were both held in Saudi Arabia.

The guardianship system was partially dismantled. Women could apply for passports and travel without the permission of male relatives. Women would also be allowed to work in more industries and, finally, be allowed to drive.

One of the biggest barriers to fall was the ban on women attending Saudi football matches.

Unlike the UAE and Qatar, where league crowds can be counted in their dozens, the Saudi Pro League has the highest attendances in the region. The Al-Hilal versus Al-Ittihad derby, the biggest teams from Riyadh and Jeddah, usually attracts more than 50,000 fans. Tifos of MBS and King Salman were displayed before the derby last year.

It was Jeddah’s other team, Al-Ahli, that hosted women for the first time, against Al-Batin in January 2018. Ahli won 5-0.

Last season Al-Hilal won the Asian Champions League and led Brazil’s Flamengo in the semi-final of the Club World Cup before succumbing to two late goals.

“Saudi Arabia wants its top clubs to be in the Deloitte Football Money League top 30,” says Professor Chadwick. Part of that plan has involved privatising the clubs, which at times had appeared to be little more than royal fiefdoms. “The privatisation program was all about improving commercial performance by making them more efficient, about making them more businesslike,” he added.

There would be big economic changes, too. The multi-billion-dollar Vision 2030 project, the cornerstone of MBS’s reform agenda, envisioned a new tech-led Saudi Arabia no longer dependent on oil revenues. Brand new tourism, entertainment, sport and technology industries were built almost from scratch. A futuristic city, Neom, was to be built by the Red Sea. The PIF, as outlined in a 2018 prospectus, would be one of the most important actors in bringing MBS’s vision to life by being “the engine behind economic diversity in the Kingdom”.

“He’s very, very, very popular,” says Ahmad, one longtime Newcastle supporter from Saudi Arabia, when asked by The Athletic this week how Saudis feel about MBS. “Saudi Arabia had a lot of money, but they were not investing this money properly.

“Now he (MBS) has a vision and plan and he is going straight with the plan. And nothing is stopping him. What he did in the last few years has changed a lot for the better. He is viewed very highly by the young generation. For me personally, I respect him a lot.”

That reformist zeal hasn’t stretched to political rights or foreign policy. When MBS was handed the defence ministry in 2015 he embarked on a disastrous military campaign in Yemen after rebel Houthi forces (whom the Saudis accuse of being proxies for their great regional rival, Iran) took the capital of Sanaa, forcing the government into exile.

Alongside his mentor Mohammed bin Zayed, crown prince of the UAE, and with support and weapons from the US and UK, MBS oversaw a ruinous air campaign and naval blockade that killed thousands of civilians and starved much of the country. The Houthis still remain a powerful force five years later.

In 2017, after MBS was named crown prince, hundreds of prominent Saudis were invited to the Ritz Carlton in Riyadh, including possibly Saudi Arabia’s best-known billionaire investor, Prince al-Waleed bin Talal. The hotel had been transformed into a gilded prison. They were held for weeks until many signed over large parts of their fortunes. Seventeen people later claimed they had been tortured, with one person dying in captivity. Saudi Arabia dismissed the allegations of abuse as “absolutely untrue”.

It was portrayed by MBS and his allies in the West as an “anti-corruption” crackdown designed to repatriate hundreds of billions of dollars back to state coffers. It was a coincidence that many of the people arrested were MBS’s rivals during his rise to power. In the same year, MBS led a coalition including the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt that cut diplomatic and economic ties with neighbours Qatar, which they accused of supporting Iran and Islamist forces in the region. That has also backfired — Qatar has not been isolated economically or politically.

At the same time as loosening social restrictions, Saudi Arabia was jailing and allegedly torturing people who spoke out against the regime, even on issues for which MBS had taken credit. Loujain al-Hathloul, a female activist who had campaigned for the lifting of the ban on women driving, was arrested and, according to her family, tortured and threatened with rape. She remains in jail.

But it is the fallout from the killing of Khashoggi that has most threatened MBS’s plans. “Jamal told me that, when he (MBS) first came to power as the deputy crown prince, he thought that reform would come. He was optimistic about the future in some ways,” recalls Cengiz. “He preferred to stay in his country and not to leave. He was proud to be Saudi. He wanted to help his country. He was optimistic.”

But over the months and years, under sustained online attack, it was clear he had to leave the country. “He often told me he always wished he was wrong. He hoped this would all change and the analysis would not be true,” Cengiz says. “He paid the ultimate price for it. He never thought they could go this far.”

Cengiz will likely spend the foreseeable future looking over her shoulder. In June last year, a report by Agnes Callamard, a human rights specialist who serves as an independent expert on extrajudicial killings for the UN, released a report that stated “there is credible evidence warranting further investigation of high-level Saudi officials’ individual liability, including the crown prince’s”. The government rejects the report and denies the crown prince was involved in the killing.

As the New York Times journalist Ben Hubbard wrote in his new book MBS: The Rise to Power of Mohammed bin Salman: “Regardless of MBS’s role in the murder, he fostered an environment in which 15 government agents and a number of Saudi diplomats believed that butchering a non-violent writer inside a consulate was the appropriate response to some newspaper columns. It’s hard to believe he had no idea what they were planning.”

Yet the allegations of MBS’s role in Khashoggi’s killing is not the only thing that has been brought to the attention of the Premier League. PIF’s proposed takeover of Newcastle is understood to have received particular scrutiny in recent days over the Saudi state’s alleged involvement — which it denies — in the pirating of football content from Qatari broadcaster beIN, one of the sub-plots from the ongoing Gulf blockade.

There are also issues surrounding perceived conflicts of interest. Sheffield United are owned by Prince Abdullah bin Musaad. Like MBS, Prince Abdullah is also a grandson of Ibn Saud, albeit with less political power. “The Ritz Carlton affair doesn’t just demonstrate his (MBS’s) absolute control over the Al-Saud family and other members of the elite,” said Nicholas McGeehan, director of Fair/Square, a human rights NGO. “It also shows his willingness and capacity to exercise that power.”

There remains, though, a general expectation within football that the takeover will proceed.

For Cengiz, the sale wouldn’t just allow MBS to present a different face to the world. It would fly in the face of the values that the West claims to hold dear.

“People will not listen to places like UK and US because they are willing to look the other way when people have a lot of power, a lot of wealth and a lot of oil,” she says. “They look the other way when you want to sell them weapons.”

She doesn’t blame Newcastle fans for questioning her intervention. She believes them to be victims, pawns in a wider political battle. “We have to stop it,” says Cengiz, whose fiancé’s remains have never been found. “It’s not about me, but about us. It is about all the people under these repressed regimes.”

Vesper · May 2, 2020

‘Wealth over health is my concern – decisions made because of a TV contract’

https://theathletic.com/1788473/2020/05/02/coronavirus-paul-warne-james-chester-efl-season-doors-masks/

Welcome to week seven of Chester and Warne…

Over the coming weeks, while there is no football, Rotherham United manager Paul Warne and Stoke City defender James Chester will explain to us what is going on behind the scenes for them, their teams and their families.

Please drop in questions at the bottom for both men and they’ll try to answer them in upcoming columns.

Paul Warne, Rotherham manager

Another week, another meeting. It’s the EFL and PFA, but I’m not expecting much out of that. I don’t really expect the EFL to come out with anything definitive until they know what the Premier League is doing.

All it’s been this week is rumours all the time. The sad thing is my players read everything, like we all do. I can’t tell them anything because I don’t know anything definitive, and I can’t go around saying this and that isn’t true because some of the things they have read are based on some truth. Some are probably leaked to see what the public opinion is. Any story a member of my staff, friend or player finds that looks either good or bad on us, just gets sent to me. Then I send it on. I can start the day reading something and think ‘This looks promising’, like the league’s coming back. Then, 20 minutes later, there will be a story that makes you think the other extreme.

What I think has changed this week is that France cancelling its season will have a bit of a ripple, and there doesn’t seem as much confidence in Germany about restarting as there was. One German coach I spoke to said their preparations have been three weeks of training, no 11 v 11 and no contact at all – and they’re only a few weeks away from supposedly playing again.

For this amount of time off we would do about five weeks of pre-season, play five friendlies. They can only do that amount of training but not with the intensity, without the games, and then they go back to top-level football. If it comes back, will it look as good? I think the football will look a little bit off.

As for some of the things that are coming out… Players wearing face masks? That will never happen. I can believe there is a desire for people to watch football. I get that, because everyone’s a bit bored. But in May and June we wouldn’t get much football anyway. We’d all look to tennis or something else.

I never thought we’d kick a ball again this season from the outset. But there are so many things now, like Liverpool’s mayor saying it would be a catastrophe if they played again because there would be crowds congregating. I don’t think anyone in football would have any complaint if Liverpool got the title. I know they’re going to get stick off certain fans saying you never really won it, but people who are sensible and get the game know they’ve won it.

We’ve had a good season at Rotherham. We’re second. We’re in a good place and maybe the football gods will allow us to go up. Maybe they won’t. I’d be hugely disappointed if we don’t go up because you dedicate your working life to it. But if it doesn’t happen, fine. I am fully accepting of that. I just want to know. I want to know, roughly, when next season starts. It might start behind closed doors but we might be a bit further forward medically by then too, so it will be safer. And then I’d like to think there will be some support in place financially to help clubs until fans are allowed back in.

Wealth over health. That’s my concern. If the decisions are made and everyone is safe and healthy, then I understand. But if a decision is made just because there is a TV contract obligation then I don’t really think that’s the right reason to do it.

The wealth of the TV deals is weighing everything down. If it wasn’t there or the broadcasters collectively said, ‘Don’t worry about the cost, just you do what’s right’, I don’t believe anyone on any board anywhere would suggest going to China, playing in face masks, no crowds, televising games and sending them back.

As for playing an eight-team mini-league to sort promotion, it would give the rest of the league much more time to prepare for the next season and if you’re a team that doesn’t go up in that tournament, you’ve potentially weakened your hand for 2020-21.

Players are clearly concerned about what coming back into training right now would mean and I saw Kenny Jackett (manager of Portsmouth, who are two points behind Rotherham in League One) came out earlier in the week saying if none of his players wanted to come back and train or play, then he can’t force them. And he’d be right. They’ve got their own families to look after. The thing is, what happens if a Premier League club says that?

I like to think of the good in people but there is always an element that feels a bit sinister. What anyone says is always under the scrutiny of their position. If anyone asks me what I think, I say the fairest system is to promote teams and don’t relegate anyone, so no one’s lost. But people think I would say that, because we’re second in League One, and that’s a fair argument. We are, and my view is biased.

The only major thing that happened to me in the last week was that I lost the weekly online staff quiz night, so we had to sing Take That as a punishment — Greatest Day. It was quite enjoyable! My daughter wasn’t best pleased when we played it back to her but I was excellent I thought.

I also got a text from my mate Twiggy — or Matt Twigg, if we’re being formal — who was on the committee for my Rotherham testimonial in 2013. The club decided this week to put the game on our YouTube channel.

Late-on that day, I saw them put my number up to bring me off. Shock horror. But the board said No 10 was being replaced by No 10, and I’m thinking, ‘Who the hell is that?’ Twiggy had sorted out for my son Mack to come on in my place, and I had no idea. He was only nine at the time. When I realised what was happening, all I could do was laugh. But I thoroughly enjoyed watching that.

Then on Facebook, a friend put up a video of when we won the FA Vase with Diss Town at Wembley, 26 years ago next week. Our manager then, a former Norwich striker called Bill Punton, was really hard on me but he made me as well. I saw him at full-time when we won it and he was crying. It really upset me, watching that. When you play, you just see your manager as someone who used to play and now just stands there shouting at you. Now I’m a manager, I understand how much it took out of him and what it meant to win.

My daughter was mocking me for crying. I told her I wasn’t, I was just a bit emotional because I was watching someone I really liked getting emotional themselves. It’s good to have a bit of empathy.

She just said, ‘You’re crying, you baby!’

James Chester: There is no way of maintaining social distance on a pitch. Would people play against their instincts?

There has been a lot of talk about players having concerns over returning to action when the rest of the country is still on lockdown and it’s certainly a thought that’s crossed my mind.

Without meaning to sound disrespectful to the families of anybody who has died, I feel that being 31 and in good physical condition, if I caught coronavirus, (with all the information I have read) it shouldn’t have such a detrimental effect. Maybe I’d be wrong. It can be indiscriminate.

But if I was carrying it, unaware of who I could be passing it on to, that is a concern. The reports emerging of (Juventus forward) Paulo Dybala testing positive four times in six weeks are certainly a worry. We don’t know for sure the circumstances there, but we do know it is possible – likely even – to have the disease without symptoms, so people can infect others and not even know.

My wife is pregnant, and I’ve got a one-year-old boy. I don’t want to be putting them in jeopardy if the call comes to return to playing. The same applies to people I might not know but happen to come into contact with.

I know there are plenty of professions out working now, and I’m thankful those people are helping this country keep going. But football forces physical contact. There is no way of maintaining social distance on a pitch. Would people play against their instincts if asked to perform in this current climate?

The only time I leave my house is for exercise or to do the weekly shop. I don’t wear gloves or a mask. But I take some hand sanitiser and disinfectant wipes for the trolley.

Sometimes I do get a little tetchy at shoppers who stand too close to me. The etiquette does make me chuckle, it’s become poor form if you have to go back the way (down an aisle) because you’ve forgotten something.

I always have a good chat with the lady behind the till because I’ve not seen anybody else for a week! I’m always buying food for Henri, my boy, so that starts the conversation off. “How young is your baby?” She was telling me about walks she’s going on and how her daughter is an only child but if she’d had her way, she would have had dozens.

Henri is eating like a horse. I made spaghetti bolognese this week and his palate is varied. He loves olives and blueberries. But give him potato smiley faces and he’s not interested. It’s mind-boggling, they were my favourites as a kid.

I’ve also enjoyed quizzing this week. We won, so it was a very proud day in the Chester household. We had a round where the questions related to tweets our wives had sent in 2010. My missus posted about looking forward to watching a Trevor McDonald documentary but had no recollection at all. It was quite fun remembering things we’d all forgotten.

Back on to more serious matters, and the issue of contracts ending on June 30 is an interesting one. My Aston Villa deal (Chester is at Stoke on loan) ends on that date but I haven’t really discussed it as there is no definitive stance yet. There is the chance contracts could be extended automatically to the end of the season, whatever the new date is, and that would be fine be me. But I can see other situations where a player might not want to play on to avoid risking injury and jeopardising any move.

I think the crisis will change how the free agent market works. Five years ago, being 31 and out of contract would have been a wonderful position. But the dynamic of football seems to have altered in that time, where clubs prefer to spend money on younger players, hoping for them to improve and their value to rise. Now though, if clubs have tighter budgets, a free transfer might become popular again.

I’m fortunate in that the money I’ve earned in my career gives me a buffer whatever happens. In League One and League Two, it’s a huge issue for players. There are a lot out of contract and it could be that clubs don’t have the finances to continue paying into July. I think most players would happily extend given the choice. I think of Adam Lallana at Liverpool. Why wouldn’t he want to continue at the club if he’s about to win the Premier League?

They should be crowned champions whatever happens. They’d pretty much won it anyway. But if you’ve been given something that wasn’t as clear-cut, it might not be such celebration. I’m thinking of those teams promoted from Ligue 2 this week (Lorient and Lens) despite it being such a close race.

Then, of course, we’ve seen Lyon’s legal case launched after they were denied European qualification. That’s the thing, if the Premier League or Championship is cancelled, there will be a lot of court disputes. It is a very difficult scenario for everyone.

Vesper · May 3, 2020

Eight 'neutral' grounds given green light by Premier League clubs if football returns

The clubs were presented with 'Project Restart' plans Friday and it is understood there is no possibility that it can now finish on a home-and-away basis for safety reasons

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/eight-neutral-grounds-given-green-21966822

Premier League clubs have given the green light to play the remaining 2019-20 matches at eight neutral venues up and down the country, according to reports.

The clubs were presented with the league's 'Project Restart' plans at a meeting on Friday, and while a statement was issued reconfirming the clubs' commitment to finishing the season, it is understood there is no possibility that it can now finish on a home-and-away basis for safety reasons.

The restart plans were understood to have been well received, but there remains opposition on competition and integrity grounds about the idea of finishing the season at neutral venues.

It is understood the Premier League will look at using between eight and 10 stadiums, with venues likely to be chosen for ease of ensuring social distancing - which would appear to favour more out-of-town sites.

snip

NikkiCFC · May 3, 2020

Laylabelle · May 3, 2020

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

Eight 'neutral' grounds given green light by Premier League clubs if football returns

The clubs were presented with 'Project Restart' plans Friday and it is understood there is no possibility that it can now finish on a home-and-away basis for safety reasons

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/eight-neutral-grounds-given-green-21966822

Premier League clubs have given the green light to play the remaining 2019-20 matches at eight neutral venues up and down the country, according to reports.

The clubs were presented with the league's 'Project Restart' plans at a meeting on Friday, and while a statement was issued reconfirming the clubs' commitment to finishing the season, it is understood there is no possibility that it can now finish on a home-and-away basis for safety reasons.

The restart plans were understood to have been well received, but there remains opposition on competition and integrity grounds about the idea of finishing the season at neutral venues.

It is understood the Premier League will look at using between eight and 10 stadiums, with venues likely to be chosen for ease of ensuring social distancing - which would appear to favour more out-of-town sites.

snip

Awwwww be like the FA Cup semi finals again!

Still seems a crazy idea though

Vesper · May 4, 2020

Why Manchester United no longer want a director of football calling the shots

https://theathletic.com/1790691/2020/05/04/manchester-united-directoroffootball-woodward/

As sure as night follows day, there is one issue guaranteed to appear when The Athletic opens the floor to questions from Manchester United fans.

Director. Of. Football.

It is only natural. This summer will mark two years since the search was started and supporters are entitled to wonder whether finding the right appointment should really take that long when in the same period, nine new skyscrapers have popped up over the city’s horizon.

Unless, of course, introducing a senior member into the Old Trafford hierarchy is no longer an active pursuit. Or not at least in the way it was originally perceived.

Recruitment was the driving aspect to the proposed job when first mooted during Jose Mourinho’s tempestuous final transfer window in the summer of 2018. But it is safe to say that such a precise role is not on the agenda anymore.

United do not seek a guru to lead policy for signings, nor will anybody come in to take ownership of who sits in the dugout.

At other clubs, a director of football — or sporting director — has great influence over those twin areas of performance. They are ultimately responsible for picking players to add to a squad and choosing managers.

At United, the structure is different. Principally, the status of the manager is paramount and the club want to stay close to the level of authority Sir Alex Ferguson maintained. Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s line to Ed Woodward will always be direct, rather than bisected by another individual. Their relationship is described as “vital”.

Then when it comes to hiring and firing, the decision rests with executive vice-chairman Woodward, who remains trusted by the Glazer family even after David Moyes, Louis van Gaal and Mourinho have come and gone.

The expensive lurch from one mode of signing to another as each man entered and left Old Trafford can be scrutinised, of course, and that is why many within the football industry feel United would benefit from the consistency of player selection that a director of football ought to bring.

That was the argument made by Luis Campos, Lille’s director of football, during an interview with Sky Sports in October. Campos has bought and sold the likes of Fabinho, Bernardo Silva, Thomas Lemar, Anthony Martial and Nicolas Pepe, and worked with Mourinho at Real Madrid.

He was also, coincidentally, linked with United as recently as this year — the latest name in a new niche section of the transfer market. Forget United’s next signing: the real buzz revolved around which suited executive was going to begin unearthing the next player.

There were reportedly advanced talks with Antero Henrique, the man who took Kylian Mbappe to Paris Saint-Germain (although the small matter of £160 million might have had something to do with it) but, just as an agent might leak interest in his client to generate interest, the reality here was a little different.

There were also varying levels of dialogue with experienced administrators such as ex-Everton director of football Steve Walsh, Tottenham’s former recruitment chief Paul Mitchell, Red Bull’s head of sport and development Ralf Rangnick, Stuart Webber at Norwich City, and former United goalkeeper Edwin van der Sar, now chief executive at Ajax.

Talks have also been held with Rio Ferdinand, Patrice Evra, Nemanja Vidic and Darren Fletcher — but it became apparent the ex-players were providing valued opinion rather than anything more formal.

The simple truth is that anybody who now joins will not be given the influence typically associated with such a role because United are eminently satisfied at their collaborative approach, which has been constructed in the years since Ferguson left and took his unique blend of connections, knowledge and leverage with him.

United have had to divest the responsibility that lay across those large shoulders, adding layers of data analysis and broadening out the scope for opinions. It is at a stage where two strands stand clear.

There is the football management side, led by Solskjaer and Mike Phelan, and there is the recruitment side, which has, at its top, Marcel Bout (head of global scouting), Mick Court (technical chief scout), and Jim Lawlor (chief scout).

Simon Wells, described as Solskjaer’s personal scout, has an influence and Stephen Brown has also grown in importance as head of scouting operations. Brown is now at the intersection between the scouts and the science, heading up the team using United’s bespoke data measurements.

It is a drastically evolved system to the one in place when Lawlor knocked on Ferguson’s door to suggest Henrik Larsson might assist United’s title bid in 2007. “There was a lot of instinct and personal judgement, not necessarily backed up by massive data, even though Larsson was an experienced pro,” says a source.

Now, the targets are vetted through both sight and statistics — even Odion Ighalo – and both the manager and recruitment department hold the power of veto. This collegiate structure has the ambition of establishing consistent player profiles beyond each manager.

If the numbers do not stack up, it falls on Woodward to convey the message, and that meant telling Mourinho his choice of central defender was not suitable. That episode contained all the fireworks you might expect from the Portuguese but, contrary to a narrative that has emerged since his departure, The Athletic understands Mourinho was very much against the idea of a director of football while at the club.

Woodward’s function, to that end, would remain the same, regardless of the identity of the manager or any new appointments, and his involvement in the football side of things can continue to be seen. He was present at Carrington in March for the visit of Birmingham’s Jude Bellingham and his family, he flew with Solskjaer to Salzburg to talk directly with Erling Haaland in December, and he was the one who gave Bournemouth chief executive Neill Blake 15 minutes to decide on United’s final offer for Joshua King during the January window.

So any director of football would supplement those tasks, rather than supplant. A “reporting mechanism” rather than a “unicorn figure”, sources suggest.

Given a number of departments feed directly into Woodward — recruitment, academy, facilities to name a few — some believe there is scope for the appointment of an individual to ease that particular load, to stitch together those areas. Chief executives usually delegate at that level.

There are others who believe United would still benefit from having an experienced football administrator at the club, to specifically capitalise on networks and contract information. Matt Judge, United’s chief negotiator, talks with agents daily and has built up a solid reputation in the six years since joining the club from his career in corporate finance.

Judge overlays his work on to the lists drawn up by United’s recruitment team, presenting the financial realities of each target before engaging in talks with clubs and player representatives. Often, he progresses more than one signing to the final stages to leave United with options.

But some feel United could be quicker in the market, citing the drawn-out process for getting Bruno Fernandes, and that having an experienced individual in a tailored role dedicated to gathering information on player availability and contract clauses would be beneficial.

Sources say those at Old Trafford were unaware of Takumi Minamino’s £7.25 million release clause from RB Salzburg, for example, and while United were not rivalling Liverpool for his signature, there is obvious potential for increased resale value whatever his abilities.

Clearly those kinds of details can come from any avenue — a fortunate conversation with a former colleague perhaps, or a favour returned. And United’s recent record for signings is positive. All five arrivals under Solskjaer have made a good impression and that only strengthens the idea that, actually, United already have a de facto director of football in the shape of the Norwegian.

Like Ferguson, Solskjaer delegates his coaching and thinks of the bigger picture, and you can be sure that as long as he is in charge, the signings will fit a unified template. The debate would come if he goes. Would the next manager take such a holistic approach?

United are adamant that the current system means stability for the squad and that the days of a new manager meaning a completely new team have gone. This is why there is no great desire for a director of football — at least as the role has been understood before.

Vesper · May 4, 2020

Sheffield United’s miracle – explained by data

https://theathletic.com/1788946/2020/05/04/sheffield-united-wilder-chris-defence-henderson-back-five-centre-backs-overlapping/

George Baldock, the Sheffield United wing-back, pauses for a second.

He has just been asked by The Athletic about the secret behind a defensive record that is the envy of all in the Premier League bar runaway leaders Liverpool.

United have conceded 25 goals in 28 games since returning to the top flight. To put that into context, reigning champions Manchester City’s back line has been breached six more times this season and Chelsea’s a whopping 14.

Others who can only admire the Yorkshire club’s defensive solidity include Manchester United (30 goals conceded), Tottenham Hotspur (40) and Arsenal (36). Aston Villa and Norwich City, the two other sides promoted from the Championship alongside Chris Wilder’s men, have shipped 56 and 52 goals respectively.

This remarkably stingy record is behind our enquiry to Baldock about a team that has also kept 10 clean sheets, the joint third-highest in the division behind Liverpool and Burnley.

“The bottom line is we love defending,” says the 27-year-old, an ever-present this season. “Especially the back five. The players further forward do it as part of their jobs but we are desperate to keep the opposition out.”

Joining Baldock in this “back five” are Enda Stevens on the opposite flank plus Jack O’Connell, John Egan and Chris Basham in the middle. Between the quintet, they have missed just one league start all season. Illness picked up on international duty meant Egan had to sit out the 3-3 draw at home to Manchester United, a fixture that also saw goalkeeper Dean Henderson on the sidelines under the terms of his loan switch from Old Trafford.

Speaking via Skype, Baldock adds: “If there is a secret, it is that we have 11 men on the pitch at one time who are putting everything out there for the shirt. Our defensive record is great and the big thing is we do defend from the front.

“The midfield three do so much in helping that. Obviously, you have me and Enda (Stevens), who are up and down the flanks. Then we have the three brick walls to get past, even if you get past us. Even if you get through all the other barriers, there is one of the best keepers in the country in Hendo to get past.

“What that means is we have got a bit of insurance in our team. If you beat one, you have to then beat another and another. The defensive record is great and looking back at that — plus reading the stats — is a great feeling and a proud moment for all of us.”

United sit seventh in the table as the Premier League looks for ways to safely restart a season put into hibernation in March. If that proves impossible and league positions are decided by points-per-game, Wilder’s men will leapfrog Wolverhampton Wanderers into sixth.

That Manchester United would be just the thickness of a cigarette paper ahead — Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s men have a points-per-game ratio that is 0.01 higher — speaks volumes for how well the Blades have performed among the elite.

Here we take an in-depth look at the reasons behind that defensive solidity, ask if it can be maintained going forward and assess the biggest issues that will face Wilder and assistant Alan Knill in the 2020-21 campaign.

If there’s one word that sums up Sheffield United as a club in 2019-20 it should be “consistency”.

No other team has stuck to their formation as much as United have, with a 3-5-2 being played in all games this season. Not even Sean Dyche, whose 4-4-2 rarely gets tweaked, managed to stick to his guns this year, employing 4-4-1-1 in a couple of games this season.

There’s also the consistency of the playing personnel. This season, United have used just 22 players and have the most number of “regulars” (defined as those who play at least 80 per cent of minutes) compared to any team in the Premier League.

Consistent tactics and line-ups have culminated in a team that conceded just 25 goals this season and when adjusting per game, make for the second-best defence in the Premier League this season, conceding just 0.89 goals per game. United, Leicester and Liverpool are the only teams to concede below a goal a game in the Premier League this season. The 10 clean sheets kept by Henderson also makes for good reading — only Nick Pope has more with 11.

So the results on paper look good. This is a team that’s stunned everyone: a bunch of Premier League cast-offs and players who were plying their trade in the lower levels of English football not so long ago. A true fairytale. The English football equivalent of the Oakland A’s making the play-offs on a shoestring budget (finally, a Moneyball reference).

But what about the underlying quality of the chances that the team has conceded? Is this a defence built on solid foundations or getting a bit lucky? Do United look as good as we think they might be?

The quick answer is that this is certainly a solid Premier League defence but maybe not one that is going to repeat the same achievements next season.

The reason for that is that there’s a relatively simple formula that teams need to adhere to to build a strong defence in the Premier League. Tick all of the boxes and you’ve got yourself a well-built defence. Fail to tick any and you might quickly find your fortunes reversed.

Any defence in the league wants to keep the number of shots that they’re facing down to a minimum. If you can’t do that, at least try to keep the quality of them down and force teams to shoot from far away, under pressure, or from tight angles. If you can’t do that then you want to try to make them as easy as possible for the keeper to save, or stop them from reaching him. If you can’t do that either, then you’re probably going to need to score plenty of goals to not get relegated.

The 11.4 shots per game that the Blades concede is joint with Wolves and straight away illustrative that maybe this team isn’t as stingy at the back as the number of goals they concede alludes to.

In terms of xG conceded per game, this is where the separation between process and results begins to show itself. United’s expected goals against per game, when removing penalties, sits at 1.33 per game — 10th-best in the league. The gap between themselves, Arsenal and Brighton isn’t that large.

United are conceding fairly high-quality chances — just relatively few of them per game. When looking at their xG/shot against, which quantifies the average quality of a shot that is conceded, United have the third-highest figure in the league of 0.12. When teams finally do break Wilder’s 3-5-2 down, they’re creating a good chance. The rigidity of the team structure is such that, thankfully, this doesn’t happen many times per game.

The disconnect between the quality of chances conceded and the actual number of goals conceded has something to do with what happens after the shot is taken.

Over a small period of games, you might get away with having a keeper who’s playing a blinder week in, week out, or a defence who get in front of all that’s throw at them.

If nothing changes, then in the long run, you’ll get caught out. The wider media will look to untangle “what’s gone wrong” and “where the cracks started to appear” but the signs may well have been there for a while for all to see.

With United, they’re getting fortunate due to a few reasons.

The chart below shows how good the chances a team concedes are before the shot is taken (xG) compared to how good they are after the shot is taken (xGOT). For an explainer on the difference between the two, take a look here.

Teams who sit below the line are helping their goalkeeper out: actively reducing the work he has to do through either forcing more shots off target or making saves easier. The teams above the line are those who are making the goalkeeper’s life hell, giving him more work to do than you’d expect, leaving him exposed and at the mercy of opposition.

Here, United’s back line can take some of the credit for why they’ve overperformed versus expectation. They’re helping to actively reduce the quality of on-target shots that Henderson has to deal with. The biggest reason is that of the shots they do concede: only 30.8 per cent of them end up on target, the lowest rate in the league.

The rest of the credit, a fair chunk of it at that, sits with Henderson between the sticks. Per Opta, Henderson is expected to concede 29.2 goals on average this season based on the quality of on-target shots he’s facing, yet he’s conceded just 22.

That difference of 7.2 is only bested by Martin Dubravka and Vicente Guaita, both of whom are called into action far more. This table doesn’t take penalties into account either, of which Henderson’s saved the only on-target one he’s faced this season, when he faced Gabriel Jesus at Bramall Lane.

While he’s not perfect — the dropping of Gini Wijnaldum’s tame effort at home to Liverpool is a small blemish — Henderson has shown he’s capable of performing well at the highest level and at 23, has a big year ahead of him, at Bramall Lane or elsewhere.

Tying all the above together, Sheffield United are a team that concede a middling number of shots, of a very high quality on average, but force plenty of them off-target. The defence is integral to limiting the amount of work Henderson needs to do but, when he is called into action, he’s been exceptional.

This must be causing quite the headache for Wilder and Knill. With European football on the horizon (at some point), they are going to be competing in four competitions next season with a threadbare squad.

Maintaining balance will be key and to do so, resolving the goalkeeper position is probably the first thing on the to-do list. While plenty of Blades fans, players and staff hope to retain the services of Henderson for a further season, the likelihood of that happening is up in the air.

With David De Gea having a mixed season, it’s never been a better time to lay down a marker to be first-choice back in Manchester. Equally, if Solskjaer does intend to stick with the Spaniard, Wilder and Sheffield United would be more than happy to welcome back someone who has really bought into every aspect of the club.

If that does not happen, United’s need to replace Henderson might be the toughest transfer decision any club in the Premier League faces when the window reopens.

The one bit of relief for Wilder and Knill is that goalkeeping performances tend to be quite noisy. One year, you look like a world-beater, the next, purely league average. This isn’t to say Henderson isn’t a fantastic goalkeeper but it’s better to try and fix what you have some sort of control over instead of worrying about part of the game that is inherently prone to randomness.

Should Henderson not re-sign, it would make more sense to spend more time looking at how to reduce the number and/or quality of shots faced per game. Rather than tear up the system and start again, the answer probably lies in how to find a place for Sander Berge to let him shine, or consider which of the “regulars” could be marginally improved upon (a nice way of saying replaced) in the summer.

The toughest part of bringing up a team through the leagues is needing to break it up but if that’s what it takes for Wilder to improve and keep building upon the successes he’s already had, then that’s what he’ll have to do.

Sheffield, a city once famous for forging steel but now a leading producer of England defenders.

Or so it felt during the 2018 World Cup, as Kyle Walker and Harry Maguire shone in a back three that took Gareth Southgate’s side all the way to the semi-finals. John Stones, born and raised a few miles away in Barnsley, completed a triumvirate who had been tipped for the top since an early age.

United’s current back line have taken a more circuitous route to the upper echelons of the Premier League. Basham worked at McDonald’s after being released by Newcastle United, while Egan and O’Connell both failed to make the grade at their first clubs.

Baldock, meanwhile, had to gradually work his way up from League Two via a loan spell in Iceland and Stevens needed two years under Paul Cook at Portsmouth in the basement division to get his own career back on track.

All have been on a long journey, something that Baldock admits can mask just how well they have all done since reaching the top flight.

“We don’t give ourselves enough credit,” says the United right wing-back. “Things have been so good. It has actually taken this period of isolation to step out of that bubble and realise how well we’ve have done this year.

“We are such an honest group of lads; we sometimes don’t give ourselves credit for what we do. We always want to strive more. So to step back and look at what we have done is great.

“Mind, I, for one, can’t wait to get back and do what we did last season — which was to come on strong at the end.”

Vesper · May 4, 2020

Persuasive Parish brings a calming voice to football’s coronavirus dilemma

https://theathletic.com/1785462/2020/05/03/steve-parish-crystal-palace-coronavirus-neutral-venues-premier-league/

Steve Parish’s argument, laid out in 1,400 words and published in the Sunday Times as well as on Crystal Palace’s website, was articulate and persuasive. It was timely, too, given the crescendo of calls for more openness from club hierarchies. It began with an acknowledgement of the wider issue, a nod to the grim context which, for many, has damned Project Restart from the outset. But there was no beating about the bush.

“Yes, it is partly about the money,” he admitted, having already outlined the reasons for seeking to finish the current campaign on the grounds of sporting integrity. “Nobody wins if the Premier League receives less money. Nobody.”

Palace’s chairman spoke of football’s status as “one of the most efficient tax-generating industries in Britain”, and pointed out that, for all the criticism of players being paid too much, 50 per cent of those salaries go straight back into the public purse. Premier League clubs pay around £3.3 billion in tax every year; parachute and solidarity payments totalling £400 million drift annually down the pyramid into the English Football League; the National League and leagues further down receive £25 million. Then, of course, there is the impact clubs have on local businesses in their respective communities. They are integral.

This, he continued, “is about football’s whole ecosystem and the exchequer, and the many secondary industries football enriches.” So yes, it is about money. And it is only right and proper that discussions over what happens next, whenever next proves to be, take place.

Cue the chorus of disgust from those crying “greed”. But, for all the romantic attachment they hold for their fans, football clubs are businesses. They are as eager to crank back into life as those shops currently paying hefty rents while boarded up on a deserted high street. These have been unprecedented times, a situation no one had ever envisaged.

As Parish reflected, no business is immune to the realities of sliding profits and cash-flow problems. Of course, there are cogent arguments that those in the elite division pay too much when it comes to salaries, and are disproportionately over-reliant upon broadcast revenues to make ends meet. But no one anticipated a global pandemic which would threaten that influx of television money and render the entire sport at risk overnight.

Parish and Palace are approaching this from the position of a team ensconced in mid-table. Three successive victories ahead of the suspension had thrust them closer to the European qualification places than the relegation cut-off. Some might consider them relatively neutral as a result, though the truth is every Premier League club has a vested interest. The prize money on offer per place of around £2.5 million ensures as much. They are also a team anxious to maintain their development.

Palace’s own model relies heavily on those broadcast revenues which could be cut off if the season is abandoned now. Their annual wage bill in their last published accounts in 2017-18 was £117 million. The club were comfortable with how their business operated while television monies amounted to £121 million — more than 80 per cent of their entire revenue of £150 million. Like clubs up and down the division, they will not want to contemplate the sudden loss of their primary revenue stream.

“I also have a duty to my club, staff and the wider sport,” wrote Parish. Palace continue to pay their staff in full. They surveyed the scene as the crisis first gripped and considered their options, but ultimately decided against furloughing or tapping into the government’s job retention scheme.

Like every other club, Palace are doing what they can at a local level to help in the fight against coronavirus, from providing 900 meals a week for frontline NHS workers in cooperation with food charity, City Harvest London, to helping arrange the safe delivery of 3,000 personal protection masks to Croydon Health Services NHS Trust.

The ability to provide such services, however, can only carry on while their business is still viable. The bottom line remains that they need football to return and their contracts with broadcasters to be fulfilled.

Some of those chairmen who sat in on Friday’s Premier League meeting undoubtedly left the talks frustrated at proceedings. All would accept these are desperately difficult negotiations and there is no perfect solution while no vaccine exists for COVID-19. But there was grumblings that, come what may, some teams seemed intent upon effectively blocking the completion of the campaign. They have cited the reality that playing almost a quarter of the campaign in neutral venues damages the sporting integrity of the league. There has been talk of a rift between those most threatened by relegation, and the rest.

Parish stressed that if the current season cannot be concluded, why should we assume the next can start in August or September? “Are we convinced things will look so much different from how they do today? Many of the same issues regarding player welfare, venues and closed-doors matches will exist then. The more we can work it out now, the better chance we have of coming out of this with the game we all love in a position to recover over time.”

Not that this was a club owner blindly dismissing all the doubts, concerns and even distaste, felt by plenty, at the thought of live sport returning. The fight against the virus is ongoing across a world in mourning. Parish acknowledged that talks over Project Restart were instigated with a caveat: “If the nation decides that the gravity of events dictates that it’s simply not appropriate to play, then we must and will respect that.”

But the return of the game in some guise — even if it is behind closed doors and devoid of the crackle and excitement provided by partisan supporters in stadiums — could raise spirits. Some will find the thought abhorrent, but plenty of others will consider football a positive distraction, one that could even prove vital to the nation’s collective mental health.

“Football is meaningless — but it is magnificently meaningless,” wrote Parish.

Again, there was a sense of perspective in his approach when it came to potential public order issues (from fans congregating at stadiums) or the prospect of paramedics and ambulances being drawn from the front-line to the stadiums. Similarly, there remains the thorny matter of testing — “We cannot take testing capacity from one person in greater need” — and an acknowledgement that players must not feel browbeaten into returning prematurely. The mood among Palace’s own squad is understood to be one of eagerness to train with a view to playing matches once more, and there is an underlying faith in the advice that the club’s medical staff will provide for them.

One player indicated to The Athletic a conviction that the club would only allow them back to their base in Beckenham once they were sure the appropriate level of medical testing was in place, and they would be “as well protected as is possible” to resume matches.

“They wouldn’t be pushing for this if they didn’t feel they could offer us that when the time comes,” he says. “They know what would happen if one of us fell ill, and the knock-on effects that would have through the club, and even the sport.

“There are always going to be a million different arguments against playing. You could probably use the same arguments to avoid the supermarkets or never leave your house. It all comes down to risk and players are probably lower risk than most who will be going back to work in the weeks and months ahead.”

That view apparently reflects the general mood within the group. Others may well have reservations, understandably, but there is an acceptance that a dialogue will be required to convince all parties that this is the right way to move forward.

Palace’s reaction to the current crisis, like that of plenty of other clubs in the Premier League, has been impressive. But, as a business, they need the hope that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Parish’s appraisal was honest and thoughtful, acknowledging there are grey areas and that reaching an agreement that pleases everyone will be tricky.

There was no turning a blind eye to the bigger problems facing society as a whole. “But caring about the terrible situation around us, and caring about our clubs and industry are not mutually exclusive.”

NikkiCFC · May 6, 2020

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8290885/Angel-Di-Marias-wife-recalls-s-time-Manchester-United.html

😂😂

Fulham Broadway · May 6, 2020

Looking likely the Prem League will resume now Merkel has announced its all ok for the Bundesliga to start up again mid May.

NikkiCFC · May 6, 2020

Most disgusting club as usual...

Vesper · May 6, 2020

10 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8290885/Angel-Di-Marias-wife-recalls-s-time-Manchester-United.html

😂😂

it was Manchester, what did he expect?

poxy shithole

Vesper · May 9, 2020

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/08/premier-league-clubs-to-debate-whether-to-dump-var-for-rest-of-season-five-substitutions-ifab

Ifab gives green light but clubs expected to stick with it

Vote needed on whether to allow five substitutions

Premier League clubs will debate whether to dump VAR for the remainder of the season – if it can be completed – after the International Football Association Board (Ifab) said that individual competitions can do so if they want to.

The clubs, who will hold a conference call on Monday, must also vote on another Ifab temporary amendment – whether to agree to the use of five substitutes in matches.

It is not thought that the clubs will veto the use of VAR partly because, until the Ifab announcement, it had not been on the agenda. The clubs agreed to introduce the technology for this season and it could be argued that a move away from it for the final matches would compromise the integrity of the competition. Furthermore, it would seem strange to remove a feature of the game that would return at the start of the following season.

There has been the suggestion that dropping VAR would make it slightly easier to plan for the resumption of play but it has no material impact on the staging of games from a logistical standpoint.

If clubs agree to extra substitutions, each side will have three opportunities, excluding half-time, to make changes. Fifa said the measure could be applied in competitions that finish before the end of 2020.

“The temporary amendment comes into force with immediate effect,” it said, “and has been made as matches may be played in a condensed period in different weather conditions, both of which could have impacts on player welfare.”

snip

NikkiCFC · May 9, 2020

Jase · May 9, 2020

6 hours ago, Vesper said:

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/08/premier-league-clubs-to-debate-whether-to-dump-var-for-rest-of-season-five-substitutions-ifab

Ifab gives green light but clubs expected to stick with it

Vote needed on whether to allow five substitutions

Premier League clubs will debate whether to dump VAR for the remainder of the season – if it can be completed – after the International Football Association Board (Ifab) said that individual competitions can do so if they want to.

The clubs, who will hold a conference call on Monday, must also vote on another Ifab temporary amendment – whether to agree to the use of five substitutes in matches.

It is not thought that the clubs will veto the use of VAR partly because, until the Ifab announcement, it had not been on the agenda. The clubs agreed to introduce the technology for this season and it could be argued that a move away from it for the final matches would compromise the integrity of the competition. Furthermore, it would seem strange to remove a feature of the game that would return at the start of the following season.

There has been the suggestion that dropping VAR would make it slightly easier to plan for the resumption of play but it has no material impact on the staging of games from a logistical standpoint.

If clubs agree to extra substitutions, each side will have three opportunities, excluding half-time, to make changes. Fifa said the measure could be applied in competitions that finish before the end of 2020.

“The temporary amendment comes into force with immediate effect,” it said, “and has been made as matches may be played in a condensed period in different weather conditions, both of which could have impacts on player welfare.”

snip

The Premier League:

We want to maintain the integrity of the competition.

Also the Premier League:

Let's reduce each half of football.

Let's play at neutral grounds.

Let's dump VAR for the rest of the season.

Sign In

The English Football Thread

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tomo

bababoom

Ankit

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Eight 'neutral' grounds given green light by Premier League clubs if football returns

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Eight 'neutral' grounds given green light by Premier League clubs if football returns

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

'You are walking and you don't know if they are going to kill you': Angel Di Maria's wife recalls 's***' time at Manchester United, brands English people 'weird', the food 'disgusting' and says girls wear too much make-up

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Premier League clubs to debate whether to dump VAR for rest of season

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

1 member are here!