\n<\/p>\n
One game was a fling with a sexually adventurous gymnast; the other was eating chips with your gran and spilling vinegar down your shirt. Two very different approaches to kicking a football, born out of different economic and cultural architectures.<\/p>\n
When talking about PSG v Bayern Munich<\/strong> compared to Atleti to Arsenal<\/strong>it\u2019s tempting to say one is much superior entertainment to the other, that eating chips doesn\u2019t compare to licking cream off a willing woman who can bend double. And they\u2019d be absolutely right. Why choose or accept the quotidian when you can have your synapses blown by an insatiable double-jointed woman?\u2019<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t about scores, success, competition or league positions. It\u2019s about entertainment.<\/p>\n Yes, we want variety but not the good then boring, then mostly boring, then poor but dressed up as great, then okay for a half sort of variety. And we don\u2019t wish to be unrealistic, it\u2019s just that there is an obvious difference to football more usually played in the Premier League to anywhere else. Not that this is an absolutist position. There are always examples to be picked to prove or disprove an argument. It\u2019s about generalities.<\/p>\n But this gulf in enjoyment is quite deliberate. You absolutely can have a more enjoyable game, but you can\u2019t have it if things remain the same. Everything that has become normal must change, but the mentality and the structure of the Premier League doesn\u2019t allow it to change. The major concern is the endless pursuit of money. The majority of European clubs make a profit, so are less desperate for cash and aren\u2019t so needy for every bit. It\u2019s less of a disaster for most clubs if they lose.<\/p>\n The Premier League generates more cash than the Bundesliga and Serie A put together and yet only six out of 20 clubs make a pre-tax profit. They receive and generate more money, play more games, do more broadcasts, play more tournaments, make more overseas summer tours to play meaningless games against each other, yet still despite all that, the vast majority operate at a loss and constantly need more money to prop up what is apparently an unsustainable lifestyle, rather than live more modestly. They\u2019re overspending on everything and exploiting their assets at every turn.<\/p>\n No matter how the players protest, the howls of torn hamstrings and ruined bodies are never heard, only the call of avarice, even as the entertainment gets less and less. It\u2019s fine for Mikel Arteta to say the Premier League leaves players tired but he has to make the logical point which is \u2018play us less, pay us less\u2019, but that seems too salty a steak for him to swallow.<\/p>\n You can make a competitive argument if you want \u2013 though the gap between top and bottom is largely the same in the top five leagues at 61, 60, 60, 58 and the lowest 54 in Ligue Un, ironically enough \u2013 that doesn\u2019t excuse the frequently dull periods of play. You can\u2019t justify eating sh*t just because there\u2019s some sugar in it. This weekend did you see the Leverkusen game? It was a pulsating and open 3-1 win over Leipzig that never let up, whereas the Arsenal game, which admittedly I ignored, was described by the Guardian as a \u2018pedestrian second half\u2019. That first half will be dressed up as the whole game but you didn\u2019t pay for 45 minutes, you paid for 90.<\/p>\n This all requires bigger squads and bigger squads means more income, which means more games which require bigger squads. That\u2019s the hamster wheel they\u2019re on. So wedded to earning money are most clubs that many will sell all available spaces on all available kits, as long as they can get what is often a soul-destroying sponsor to help pay sky-high wages and endless overpriced acquisitions.<\/p>\n The solution is obviously to play much less football and to have a refocus on the actual sport and not the money. Play fewer games so everyone is less knackered. One look at Declan Rice during a game reveals a man who appears to be sweating half his body weight from his forehead and who looks on the edge of exhaustion. Of course it would mean less money for players\u2019 salaries but I\u2019d wager all of them would play for less money that is still 100 times more than they\u2019d earn doing anything else.<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t to ignore the realities of how PSG and Bayern are financed and the nature of their own leagues. But as I say, this is purely about entertainment.<\/p>\n While the amount of football is significant, there\u2019s other forces at play too. There\u2019s a reason European football is consistently more enjoyable and Premier League games have prolonged phases of some of the most boring play. These are players who often play brilliantly elsewhere but are strangled here in this dysfunctional financial world, Scott McTominay being the obvious example.<\/p>\n Yes, Clarence, there\u2019s enjoyment in great defending<\/strong> but what gets forgotten in much of this debate is that football is supposed, at core, to be fun. Have you forgotten that? Fun. The whole \u2018points not performance are what matters\u2019 attitude should not be treated as accepted wisdom. And if you want to hold up Atleti v Arsenal as fun then good luck. That wasn\u2019t enjoyable defending, it was just attritional guts and sweat and often tedious. Is this what Clarence Seedorf wants? I\u2019m sure only masochists would agree.<\/p>\n The debate this has highlighted is \u2013 once you\u2019ve allowed for the tiredness element \u2013 a difference in attitude to what football is and how it should be played and it is inseparable from the finances that the omniscience of win-at-all-costs, negative, defensive football can reap.<\/p>\n So what if PSG let in four at home \u2013 this is only a weakness if you see football in a cold, clinical way. Firstly, they scored five, so suck that up and second, call the defenders rubbish if you want but that\u2019s what we want to see. Attacking brilliance that gets the better of defenders is why we pay the money. And it doesn\u2019t mean the defenders are terrible footballers, just that the attacking is better than their defending. That\u2019s good and only a perversion of perception doesn\u2019t agree.<\/p>\n It\u2019s all got far too serious. Money makes it that way in the Premier League, not exclusively but predominantly. It\u2019s pointless to think every game could be like that PSG match for a whole host of reasons but plenty could be much more entertaining. Players here are capable of much more than they\u2019re allowed to achieve. Managers who are more pragmatic \u2013 no matter how many times Martin Keown approvingly says the teeth-grinding cliche \u201cget it over the line \u2013 are cowards, too afraid of losing to take any chances, or slaves to a bottom line which is already overdrawn.<\/p>\n No one got into the game in any era to watch grind-core, but it\u2019s become a default and is now passed off as the only way and even admirable. So when we see how it could be, it\u2019s become a real shock, as it was last week. Football has become much less than it could be. In short, the Premier League has been revealed as the sepia world of the chip-eating granny, but that double-jointed gymnast is there if we just stop accepting this version of reality and demand better.<\/p>\n <\/div>\n