“Champions” League? You’re havin’ a laugh!

Now that the dust has settled after Manchester United’s victory over Barcelona last night, attention switches to the second semi final to determine who will play Sir Alex Ferguson’s men in the Champions League final at Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium. Will it be Chelsea, hot on United’s heels in the Premier League, or their arch enemy Liverpool?

While I believe that Chelsea will just about edge the tie thanks to the 1-1draw they secured in the first leg at Anfield (goals from that are below), that isn’t the point of this latest post. My latest whine is one which has bugged me for quite a while, and that is the set-up of Europe’s elite club competition.

This year’s final will be the third in which two sides from the same country will go head to head for the European Cup, as it was known when the tournament first started. In 2000, Real Madrid defeated Valencia 3-0 in Paris, while in 2003 Ac Milan edged Juventus on penalties at Old Trafford after a forgettable 0-0 stalemate. We are now guranteed an English winner of the competition.

Listening to Richard Bacon’s show on Radio 5 Live last night, he urged callers to phone in with regards the difficulties in which fans of the English clubs will face getting to Moscow and while they are there. Main concerns included the cost of flights and accomodation, with one Manchester United fan telling how he’d spent £5,000 to be there, as well as visas which are needed to enter Russia. These can take a while to process and while UEFA are confident the visas will be issued on time to supporters of the clubs involved in time for the final, fans are still worried.

So cue calls for the game to be moved to Wembley, the home of the English game, to make it easier for fans. Undoubtedly it would, but it shouldn’t be moved, and neither should there be as many as 42,000 visas to process.

Because, my friends, the Champions League should live it to its name- ie, be for Champions only. Since the tournament began in 1955, the cup was solely for the league winners of each European country. Other qualifiers included the Fairs Cities (now UEFA) Cup and the now defunct Cup Winners Cup, which was, you’ve guessed it, a tournament for domestic cup winners across the continent.

But in the 90s, UEFA in their wisdom ditched the CWC (the last ever final played in Birmingham and won by Italian side Lazio) and increased the Champions League, allowing runners up in domestic leagues to qualify for the tournament. Indeed, Manchester United qualified for the 1998/99 tournament after finishing 2nd in the English league to Arsenal, and went on to lift the trophy.

It has now been extended to the point where up to four teams from the bigger leagues in Europe can qualify for the tournament. Whats “Champion” about that? Why not rebrand it the “1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th place” league?

While there is no doubt that the bigger sides in Europe can provide entertainment, there is a detremental effect. There is no doubt that the big name advertisers of the competiton, for example Sony, Mastercard and Vodafone, would rather the big guns participated all the time and provide much more revenue.

But, as the rich get richer, the poorer get poorer and we now see the winner of the tournament is near enough guaranteed to be an English, Spanish or Italian team, barring some exceptions, such as Porto in 2004. What chance have clubs from the Belgian league or Swedish league have of competing if they face a couple of rounds to qualify, despite winning their league, while the likes of Arsenal can qualify after finishing third in theirs, simply because the English league has a higher standing according to Michel Platini and the UEFA fat cats? It isn’t fair.

In 1994, Sweden’s IFK Gothenburg knocked Manchester United out of the Champions League. Now, it’s a struggle for Sweden’s champions to even participate. The worst thing UEFA could do was get rid of a successful competition in order to create a bigger Champions League to benefit the bigger clubs.

Some might say they’d far rather watch Liverpool V Chelsea instead of an Anderlecht V Barcelona as the gulf in the latter game would be massive, while the former would be close. Me? Well, give me the latter. If clubs from around Europe, not just the big names, were given a fair and equal shot at qualifying, the experience and finance they’d generate would enable them to compete in the coming years. As it stands, games we see at least twice a season domestically are becoming four or more due to being on Europe’s biggest stage. Its dull and its wrong.

“Champions” League? You are indeed having a laugh.