Being currently based on a couch in Yonkers, New York, has given me ample time to watch SportsCenter on ESPN. For readers not familiar with this show, its essentially round the clock sports news, summed up best by this clip from Will Ferrell.
Even for as ardent a sportsfan as myself, it's nauseating.
The latest news story that the station has got into a tizzy over is the NBA and NHL drafts. Simplistically under a draft system the club who finished last the previous season, has first choice of a player pool. This pool generally consists of young players never exposed to professional sports, mixed with players recently released by their clubs. Having personally guided players through the AFL draft, I doubt if there is a more nerve-wrecking experience for the young hopefuls, as they wait for their names to be called out. The purpose of this blog is not to discuss why I think this system is infinitely unfair on players but on the lengths sports go to, to maintain "competitive balance".
The notion put forward by most sports governing bodies is for their sport to strive, an even playing field must be maintained. To roll this even playing field, they use techniques like a draft system, a salary cap or a handicap system. As the gap between the rich and the poor in English Football gets to American society levels pundits continue to clamor to regain some form of competition. Since the arrival of the Premier League only 4 teams have lofted the trophy. In that time only 7 teams have won the FA Cup. Stepping it up a level and only 2 English teams have won a Champions League. It doesn't take a genius to work out that there are a lot more fans not celebrating then celebrating come late May. Oh how the Newcastle fans among us dream of throwing away 12 point leads again. This doesn't even begin to look at the impending financial armagedon facing clubs. My esteemed colleague, Greg, covered that on Wednesday (http://kingbetireland.blogspot.com/2011/06/putting-lid-on-it-case-for-wage-caps.html).
This is on a purely competitive point of view. The argument doesn't look any better in Spain where in the number of teams to win the league in the last 20 years is 5 the exact same number as Italy. And wow to the person who thinks international football is any better. The point I'm trying to illustrate is that unless you support Man Utd, Barcelona or Inter Milan, don't stock up on champagne. However has this really done the sport any harm? On the surface it seems not as viewing figures for soccer continue to sky rocket.
This is on a purely competitive point of view. The argument doesn't look any better in Spain where in the number of teams to win the league in the last 20 years is 5 the exact same number as Italy. And wow to the person who thinks international football is any better. The point I'm trying to illustrate is that unless you support Man Utd, Barcelona or Inter Milan, don't stock up on champagne. However has this really done the sport any harm? On the surface it seems not as viewing figures for soccer continue to sky rocket.
Scratch beneeth the surface however and cracks begin to show. Let's look at snooker. The most famous final of all time is the Davis-Talyor final in 1985 watched on TV by 18 million people. Fast forward to 2009 and the viewing figure is closer to 4 million. What turned these 14 million people off? Some of the blame lays sorely at Stephen Hendrys' door.
When Hendry first burst onto the scene his shot selection and scary efficieny were at first
a joy to watch before quickly becoming what all sports dread, predictable. Sport is supposedly above predictable, its a theatre that keeps us dummies coming back for more. We're supposed to wake up and say "What if Nadal has an off day?", to believe that the underdog can win. In English football holding this belief is becoming increasingly naive. In snooker during Hendry reign, it was shattered. All dominant forces are initially loved before their vice grip on the sport turns all but the die-hards off, see Schumacher, Sampres or Armstrong.
The Australian Football League reckon they've the fairest league in the world. Every team in the 16 team competition has been as far as a quarter final in the past ten years. Since the AFL Premiership began in 1990, 13 different teams have won the competition. In that game there is a salary cap and a draft and you truly do see teams move through cycles. However there is a very definate top and bottom 8 in the competition and the lure of better picks in the draft has lead teams to "tank". Lose on purpose to pick up a better player come draft time. There is also an impending labour dispute very similar to what we're seeing in the NFL and NBA, as players feel the salary cap is too low. So they haven't got it right either.
I'm not for one minute accusing Stephen Hendry or Michael Schumacher of ruining a sport. I dream of the time that I can be involved in the careers of a player so dominant the law makers have to come up with ways to beat them. I'm merely illustrating that sport needs competition to survive. We inherently want upsets which is why we support the underdogs. While football may now be going through it's "golden era" it should heed the warnings of snooker and protect what is sacred about sport - its unpredictability. If maintaining unpredictability, means I have to sit through two grown men discussing what the Minnosota Timberwolves 4th pick had for breakfast, then sign me up.
Post by Seamus McDaid. You can follow Seamus on twitter @fbspecial
Sometimes the best clubs can get the best players. Remember Mitch Duncan?
ReplyDelete