Platini - Whats your view?

TFF,

but teams like Red Star will never win the CL again, there league simply isn't strong enough to produce teams capable...

To get other leagues to a better standard, there has to be investment (the very thing Platini is waxing lyrically clubs shouldn't have)

Making one less team enter from the 'big 3' will not affect this...

Voted for a new President.

Platini = Blatter's populist henchman. Blatter is a corrupt bastard.

Platini was a great footballer, who now has chosen the wrong friends.

His plans are typical Blatter stuff too. Their only aim is getting more support for themselves.

Football Genius wrote:TFF,

but teams like Red Star will never win the CL again, there league simply isn't strong enough to produce teams capable...

To get other leagues to a better standard, there has to be investment (the very thing Platini is waxing lyrically clubs shouldn't have)

Making one less team enter from the 'big 3' will not affect this...

And the leagues aren't strong enough because:

a). Having one less CL spot than other nations means that teams get less money from CL television revenue - Hence the financial divide between the leagues gets larger.

b). With no foreign investment, clubs would have to rely on revenue from local investors and fans. So teams from less glamorous countries would be on a much more equal footing.

c). The lack of a consistent CL spot also means less interest from football fans - thus less attendance and less money.

The question isn't of raising the other leagues' standards. It's of trying to make the disparities smaller. It's a very socialist view of football, but after all Platini is French.

theflyingfrenchman wrote:

Football Genius wrote:TFF,

but teams like Red Star will never win the CL again, there league simply isn't strong enough to produce teams capable...

To get other leagues to a better standard, there has to be investment (the very thing Platini is waxing lyrically clubs shouldn't have)

Making one less team enter from the 'big 3' will not affect this...

And the leagues aren't strong enough because:

a). Having one less CL spot than other nations means that teams get less money from CL television revenue - Hence the financial divide between the leagues gets larger.

b). With no foreign investment, clubs would have to rely on revenue from local investors and fans. So teams from less glamorous countries would be on a much more equal footing.

c). The lack of a consistent CL spot also means less interest from football fans - thus less attendance and less money.

The question isn't of raising the other leagues' standards. It's of trying to make the disparities smaller. It's a very socialist view of football, but after all Platini is French.

I think you are living on cookoo land if you think giving an extra champions league spot will make any difference to these teams and leagues.

The fact is they will simply be eliminated at the first stage... and say that they make the group stages, where will they invest their extra 10million? in internationally renoun footballers?

This solves nothing, the entire league has to become more marketable, and the stark realisation is that the Premier League is the ideal role model for this, in the early nineties we were light years away, but when the league was reformatted and commercially rebranded the ability was there to grow. The fact this was able to be done was the huge interest in the UK for football, and the population having a better GDP to buy into our most favoured sport... this just isn't the case in the smaller european nations.

Football Genius wrote:

theflyingfrenchman wrote:

Football Genius wrote:TFF,

but teams like Red Star will never win the CL again, there league simply isn't strong enough to produce teams capable...

To get other leagues to a better standard, there has to be investment (the very thing Platini is waxing lyrically clubs shouldn't have)

Making one less team enter from the 'big 3' will not affect this...

And the leagues aren't strong enough because:

a). Having one less CL spot than other nations means that teams get less money from CL television revenue - Hence the financial divide between the leagues gets larger.

b). With no foreign investment, clubs would have to rely on revenue from local investors and fans. So teams from less glamorous countries would be on a much more equal footing.

c). The lack of a consistent CL spot also means less interest from football fans - thus less attendance and less money.

The question isn't of raising the other leagues' standards. It's of trying to make the disparities smaller. It's a very socialist view of football, but after all Platini is French.

I think you are living on cookoo land if you think giving an extra champions league spot will make any difference to these teams and leagues.

The fact is they will simply be eliminated at the first stage... and say that they make the group stages, where will they invest their extra 10million? in internationally renoun footballers?

This solves nothing, the entire league has to become more marketable, and the stark realisation is that the Premier League is the ideal role model for this, in the early nineties we were light years away, but when the league was reformatted and commercially rebranded the ability was there to grow. The fact this was able to be done was the huge interest in the UK for football, and the population having a better GDP to buy into our most favoured sport... this just isn't the case in the smaller european nations.

Of course it won't work. The main problem is that the smaller clubs are nowhere near fashionable enough to attract the players that would make them able to compete. The last two clubs who made it from smaller footballing nations were Monaco and Porto, 4 years ago.

Bar some really drastic measures i.e. the quota of homegrown players, the smaller nations will forever be behind the big 3.

Seems to have some good ideas i think. But hes french therefore i say get a new president!

Poor mans Zidane

Rez wrote:

Oleguerisntthatbad wrote:He has a couple of good points..

Cutting down on the cynical fouling to protect the skillful players is great (but purely from my biased point of view)

As for Chelsea investing in youth Foreign investors use their money on foreign players.. Where are all the brilliant young English players that Chelsea mass produce (or Man Utd, Liverpool for that sake). Platini has a point about the foreign investors, but mostly from a market distortion point of view. Too much money in semi decent English clubs is screwing it up for the rest of Europe.

United won the treble and 6 league titles on the back there youth players. Liverpools CL win was spearheaded by two of their youth players. Chelseas captain is also a youth player. Barcelonas best players arent Spanish youth players and since I have been watching football Barcelonas best players were foriegn (usually Brazillian).



No one was talking about money when non CL teams like Lazio were spending £37m on a forward or when Real Madrid were breaking the world transfer fee record every year. But as soon as England have the money it's suddenly a bad thing. The whole money argument is pure jealousy, because your league, no longer has the money to attract the best players.

I felt the need to applaud there, but I have to admit that I do not like single ownership in general. Success should be on the back of the club, not on an individual's wealth. Abramovich can buy most football players in the world I should think, where is the incentive for Chelsea to balance the books? Is it fair on other clubs? Even when Man U had the most money we had to be careful not to overspend whereas the only reason Chelsea are doing so now is to make their success look more worthy.

He acts like the atypical western European. Exploit till you lose, then whinge, then take the high ground, then dodge the bullet repeatedly as they realise there claims are groundless.

Effectively, a disgruntled anti-G14 English candidate should be the most useful.