Richard MichaelEngland in Europe - the best and the worst
"It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.”
England are the best in Europe. England are the worst in Europe. The pantheon of club competition, the European Cup, will soon be in the English hands (whether they are Ferdinand’s or Terry’s) and yet in a couple of months when Europe’s finest gather European Championships both will be barred. How can such a dichotomy exist? How can they
The truth of course is both representations are inaccurate, and should be treated as impostors. But how representative are the highest echelons – the filthy rich four – of the quality of the league in entirety?
Three out of four champions league semi finalists cannot be baulked at, but is the English premier league really the world’s premier league. The cooing of pundits and promotion of clubs searching for a billionaire to fall for would suggest so, and the scandal induced demise of the Italian league and struggles of Spain’s top clubs offers substance to the assertion. But the monopolising of the Champions League is not an expression of the omnipotence of the English clubs.
While the champion’s league confidently says yes, the UEFA cup screams no! The middle tier English clubs have been shown up by their continental counterparts. This season has brought new meaning to the anonymity of mid-table mediocrity - West Ham have coasted to a top ten finish, a glitteringly average Newcastle side have won seven in a row and Bolton Wanderers have avoided relegation! Derby, Sunderland, Reading, Birmingham, Bolton, Fulham and so on - so many candidates only three vacancies. Has the relegation reaper ever had such choice?
Beyond the top four, beyond the mega bucks, beyond the foreign influence, the Premier league is no that premier. And when it comes to the top four how English are they anymore? Like any cheeseburger flogging multinational, the roots of their identity are increasingly submerged by their reliance on foreign investment, importation of skills and dedication to overseas markets. Admittedly a solid core of English internationals and faithful British fans give them a home-grown facade, where would Chelsea be if were not for Abramovich. Certainly not in the Champions League final. Had the band of billionaires chosen the economically less attractive Spanish and Italian leagues over England, would the monopolising top four be as domineering? No. Although Arsenal with Wenger and United with Ferguson would have had a chance. English European success is built on foreign cash, and so if it is English success, it is substantially diluted.
And so the national team is not the best in Europe, but nor is it the worst. Despite the furore about their doomed Euro 2008 campaign in terms of calibre of player available the 1990s were darker days. You only have to look at, yes, the Champions League. Scholes, Ferdinand, Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney etc - they have been among the main protagonists. Sure we could do with more top quality, a Ronaldo here, a Messi there, but England are not poor. But they have underachieved in the international arena. There will be no three lions renditions this summer, but in terms of player quality there have been darker – may be that is the real angst. There is talent, no matter how tarnished, and under Capello they should qualify for the World Cup and what happens then who knows.
But it is not a time for true despair – that should kept in reserve – nor is it the time for Premier League elation. The two impostors must be treated the same.
England are the best in Europe. England are the worst in Europe. The pantheon of club competition, the European Cup, will soon be in the English hands (whether they are Ferdinand’s or Terry’s) and yet in a couple of months when Europe’s finest gather European Championships both will be barred. How can such a dichotomy exist? How can they
The truth of course is both representations are inaccurate, and should be treated as impostors. But how representative are the highest echelons – the filthy rich four – of the quality of the league in entirety?
Three out of four champions league semi finalists cannot be baulked at, but is the English premier league really the world’s premier league. The cooing of pundits and promotion of clubs searching for a billionaire to fall for would suggest so, and the scandal induced demise of the Italian league and struggles of Spain’s top clubs offers substance to the assertion. But the monopolising of the Champions League is not an expression of the omnipotence of the English clubs.
While the champion’s league confidently says yes, the UEFA cup screams no! The middle tier English clubs have been shown up by their continental counterparts. This season has brought new meaning to the anonymity of mid-table mediocrity - West Ham have coasted to a top ten finish, a glitteringly average Newcastle side have won seven in a row and Bolton Wanderers have avoided relegation! Derby, Sunderland, Reading, Birmingham, Bolton, Fulham and so on - so many candidates only three vacancies. Has the relegation reaper ever had such choice?
Beyond the top four, beyond the mega bucks, beyond the foreign influence, the Premier league is no that premier. And when it comes to the top four how English are they anymore? Like any cheeseburger flogging multinational, the roots of their identity are increasingly submerged by their reliance on foreign investment, importation of skills and dedication to overseas markets. Admittedly a solid core of English internationals and faithful British fans give them a home-grown facade, where would Chelsea be if were not for Abramovich. Certainly not in the Champions League final. Had the band of billionaires chosen the economically less attractive Spanish and Italian leagues over England, would the monopolising top four be as domineering? No. Although Arsenal with Wenger and United with Ferguson would have had a chance. English European success is built on foreign cash, and so if it is English success, it is substantially diluted.
And so the national team is not the best in Europe, but nor is it the worst. Despite the furore about their doomed Euro 2008 campaign in terms of calibre of player available the 1990s were darker days. You only have to look at, yes, the Champions League. Scholes, Ferdinand, Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney etc - they have been among the main protagonists. Sure we could do with more top quality, a Ronaldo here, a Messi there, but England are not poor. But they have underachieved in the international arena. There will be no three lions renditions this summer, but in terms of player quality there have been darker – may be that is the real angst. There is talent, no matter how tarnished, and under Capello they should qualify for the World Cup and what happens then who knows.
But it is not a time for true despair – that should kept in reserve – nor is it the time for Premier League elation. The two impostors must be treated the same.
Sydney Fun
Melbourne DiaryStar
Orble News
Urban Hint
Blog Adviser
Jon's Bookmarks
Debate Battle
Orblepedia
You may also need to add the email address admin -at- orblemail.com to your address book in order to receive Orble admin emails in the future.
Thanks,
Jon.
(Orble Admin)