Before any accusations are made: I have always been a Jensen Button fan. I realise this is much easier to say now that he is leading the World Championship, but Button and, in particular, his BAR / Honda / Brawn team has been a the top of my Formula 1 preferences since I first started following the sport. From the outset, I liked this at-the-time-young British hopeful, a fine example of modesty and skill which far outclassed the arrogant (see David Coulthard) and rubbish (see Alan McNish) British drivers of the time. I have always liked how Button would point the finger firmly at himself whenever he was wrong, an honesty rarely seen in this sport of rear-enders and finger-flickers. I have enjoyed the up-and-down-and-up pattern of his career and how he has revived hopes in himself just when it seemed that we had all lost faith in him. The fact that he teamed up with perennial nice guy Reubens Barrichello a few years ago gave further credence to his place in my sporting affections, and even the temptation to leave him in favour of an actual British winner in Lewis Hamilton was resisted in a successful effort to avoid bandwagon-jumping, even if this came at the expense of finally being able to celebrate a championship. So you would think that to finally see Button at the top of the standings would be a cause for jubilation.
Instead, it is not. For a wily sports fan like myself knows full well that a sportsman rarely becomes good again overnight. The annals of sporting history are instead littered with failed attempts at recapturing past glories, of athletes refusing to accept their diminishing talents and the increasingly younger competition, only to see evidence of their wilting through poor performance and, at times, undignified defeat. I can accept, however, that there are exceptions, that, only very occasionally, does this athlete recover his former greatness (see André Agassi), but for this to happen to two individuals – as has happened to Button and to the even older and past-his-prime Barrichello – is unheard of. At least as far as their own talents are concerned.
For the resurgence of the British and Brazilian drivers is not down to a hectic off-season training schedule, or a sudden injection of youth, but is simply further evidence of the huge role that mechanical engineering plays in Formula 1 success. While this is nothing new, the recent triumphs of youngsters like Fernando Alonso, Kimi Raikonnen and Hamilton gave the impression that the sport was being re-gained by the driver, and that the precisely balanced combination of car and pilot represented the sport’s Holy Grail. Instead, this season we have two drivers who, while they have enjoyed success in the past, have been dismal for at least two seasons and are suddenly good again.
The difference? Nothing other than technical expertise, mostly provided by former Ferrari technical director Ross Brawn who, upon purchasing the team for this season, brought with him his considerable knowledge, experience and contacts, combining all of them to produce a car which would make a winner out of a good, rather than excellent, driver. True, confidence in his equipment would also have made some contribution to Button’s success, but, ultimately, the driver must ensure he qualifies well, keeps the car on the road, and not make mistakes. A simple and effective guide for winning, but one which, alas, does not a great driver make.
So Button’s unexpected success has not brought with it the enjoyment I would predicted. Instead, it has cast a further shadow on the role of the individual behind the wheel in favour of boffins behind computers. And until the sport is returned to the drivers, it will fail to capture my imagination, no matter how much I like the leader.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
"Boring!" - Or European Football
The upcoming Champions League final between Manchester United and Barcelona, while undoubtedly exhilarating for the teams’ many fans, and galling for Liverpool and Real Madrid supporters, nonetheless brings into focus the predictable tedium of European football’s finest annual extravaganza. While it can be safely argued that the tournament’s finale will pit together the Old Continent’s strongest teams of the moment, the spectre of banality hangs over the conflict with the familiar sense of quasi-déjà vu.
This showpiece feud scores a point in favour of American sports over its European counterparts. The statistics – at least as far as the continents’ largest sports are concerned – speak for themselves. Since its inception in 1955, only 6 teams (Real Madrid, AC Milan, Liverpool, Bayern Munich, Ajax Amsterdam and Manchester United) have won over 60% of the European Cup / (not-just-for) Champions League tournaments. The number is similar for the NFL, although the latter has been running for eleven years fewer and involves a lower amount of teams. Less than half of the forty semi-final appearances in the Champions League over the past ten years have been made by different teams, in which period there have been seven different winners – the same as in the NFL.
However, to compare the 32-team NFL to the 76-team Champions League (which change from year-to-year) is not the fairest of juxtapositions. Instead, comparisons can be made with the (admittedly smaller) national leagues, where the figures are even more once-sided. Since 1994, when the NFL introduced the salary cap, there have been 12 champions. In the same period, the Premier League trophy has been held aloft by only four different clubs; the Spanish La Liga and Italian Serie A fare little better, with only five different champions in the same period. Even adjusting for the lower amount of teams in the European leagues, the gulf between both traditions in terms of parity is significant.
The reasons for these differences can be attributed to three main superior practices in American sports: free agency, the draft, and the afore-mentioned salary cap. European football clubs have no league-imposed wage restrictions, meaning that the richer – and, usually, more successful – franchises can simply buy any player they want. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that the ten richest football clubs account for over 30 Champions League titles and over 170 domestic league titles. And, of course, as these teams enjoy more success, their coffers grow……and so on. Conversely, the NFL tightly regulates each clubs’ spending, throwing more focus on teamwork, coaching and player development, and avoiding the “player-off-the-shelf” shopping-spree mentality that has affected clubs such as Real Madrid and Chelsea. The NFL has traditionally employed a rigid “hard-cap” approach, which contrasts with the “soft-cap” strategy of the NBA, a league where compromises are made and loopholes are found, resulting in a less well-distributed list of victors.
Free agency is enjoyed by sports organisations on both sides of the Atlantic but, again, the salary cap plays a big role. The introduction of free agency had a significant impact in European football in terms of player movement, with free agents signing with the highest bidder. This concept, however, is misshapen when the highest bidder has greater flexibility. NFL teams, for example, are restricted by the salary cap ceiling from making big-name signings they cannot “afford”, giving a fairer advantage to teams with a lower payroll. These smaller teams, however, are simply pushed aside by the big European clubs, who can eclipse their bids in the annual player auction. The lack of a salary cap also helps these teams to re-sign their players during their contracts, thereby avoiding free agency, a luxury not always available to American sports teams. Instead, player movement is increased, leading towards greater parity and an annual sense of hope as franchises get a chance to consider signing proven superstars.
The draft, however, is probably the best example of giving all teams a fair chance. Unlike in Europe, American sports franchises cannot sign promising young players and “own” their rights before they have even stepped on a professional playing field. Instead, aspiring NFL players must pass through the well-funded collegiate ranks where they receive world-class training without the intervention of any professional sports team. Once they have done this for a few years, they are given the chance to enter the NFL’s annual draft, where teams can select new players for their franchises. In the interests of parity, the worst-performing team from the previous season is given the first choice, allowing the club to potentially sign the best play in that year’s college crop. This has allowed underperforming franchises to change their fortunes (as was the case with the Indianapolis Colts’ drafting of Peyton Manning), an exercise in equal opportunities that is replicated in the NBA, the NHL and many of America’s major sporting organisations.
But not, sadly, in Europe. Teams sign players to their academies at a ridiculously young age, with the top teams getting the chance to handpick their future stars. These youngsters play at various levels and receive an indoctrination into the club that has signed them, with the services of the majority dispensed with, forcing them to the ‘lower’ clubs. Again, the rich get richer.
As successful as these measures have proved in America in terms of creating unpredictability, excitement and equality, they have not gone beyond the discussion stage in European football (although major European rugby leagues do employ salary cap restrictions). There is simply too much money involved, and the richest clubs enjoy a tremendous amount of power and influence. Most importantly, however, the move is unlikely to receive the support of the players themselves, despite the fact that American athletes saw the value of a salary cap system and approved the measure. In the US, the organisation, and, in particular, their commissioners wield the power; in Europe, this falls on the clubs.
And, instead, the opposite is likely to happen. The news that the NFL and its players’ union is yet to agree on a renewed Collective Bargaining Agreement that will keep the salary cap is disturbing. Should the situation continue, next season could be the last one regulated with a salary cap. With insiders predicting that any disappearance of the salary cap would be permanent, one must only wonder what the future holds for small-market teams such as the Buffalo Bills and Tennessee Titans when up against the Dallas Cowboys and New York Giants: a future as predictable as what the league itself would become.
This showpiece feud scores a point in favour of American sports over its European counterparts. The statistics – at least as far as the continents’ largest sports are concerned – speak for themselves. Since its inception in 1955, only 6 teams (Real Madrid, AC Milan, Liverpool, Bayern Munich, Ajax Amsterdam and Manchester United) have won over 60% of the European Cup / (not-just-for) Champions League tournaments. The number is similar for the NFL, although the latter has been running for eleven years fewer and involves a lower amount of teams. Less than half of the forty semi-final appearances in the Champions League over the past ten years have been made by different teams, in which period there have been seven different winners – the same as in the NFL.
However, to compare the 32-team NFL to the 76-team Champions League (which change from year-to-year) is not the fairest of juxtapositions. Instead, comparisons can be made with the (admittedly smaller) national leagues, where the figures are even more once-sided. Since 1994, when the NFL introduced the salary cap, there have been 12 champions. In the same period, the Premier League trophy has been held aloft by only four different clubs; the Spanish La Liga and Italian Serie A fare little better, with only five different champions in the same period. Even adjusting for the lower amount of teams in the European leagues, the gulf between both traditions in terms of parity is significant.
The reasons for these differences can be attributed to three main superior practices in American sports: free agency, the draft, and the afore-mentioned salary cap. European football clubs have no league-imposed wage restrictions, meaning that the richer – and, usually, more successful – franchises can simply buy any player they want. It is, therefore, hardly surprising that the ten richest football clubs account for over 30 Champions League titles and over 170 domestic league titles. And, of course, as these teams enjoy more success, their coffers grow……and so on. Conversely, the NFL tightly regulates each clubs’ spending, throwing more focus on teamwork, coaching and player development, and avoiding the “player-off-the-shelf” shopping-spree mentality that has affected clubs such as Real Madrid and Chelsea. The NFL has traditionally employed a rigid “hard-cap” approach, which contrasts with the “soft-cap” strategy of the NBA, a league where compromises are made and loopholes are found, resulting in a less well-distributed list of victors.
Free agency is enjoyed by sports organisations on both sides of the Atlantic but, again, the salary cap plays a big role. The introduction of free agency had a significant impact in European football in terms of player movement, with free agents signing with the highest bidder. This concept, however, is misshapen when the highest bidder has greater flexibility. NFL teams, for example, are restricted by the salary cap ceiling from making big-name signings they cannot “afford”, giving a fairer advantage to teams with a lower payroll. These smaller teams, however, are simply pushed aside by the big European clubs, who can eclipse their bids in the annual player auction. The lack of a salary cap also helps these teams to re-sign their players during their contracts, thereby avoiding free agency, a luxury not always available to American sports teams. Instead, player movement is increased, leading towards greater parity and an annual sense of hope as franchises get a chance to consider signing proven superstars.
The draft, however, is probably the best example of giving all teams a fair chance. Unlike in Europe, American sports franchises cannot sign promising young players and “own” their rights before they have even stepped on a professional playing field. Instead, aspiring NFL players must pass through the well-funded collegiate ranks where they receive world-class training without the intervention of any professional sports team. Once they have done this for a few years, they are given the chance to enter the NFL’s annual draft, where teams can select new players for their franchises. In the interests of parity, the worst-performing team from the previous season is given the first choice, allowing the club to potentially sign the best play in that year’s college crop. This has allowed underperforming franchises to change their fortunes (as was the case with the Indianapolis Colts’ drafting of Peyton Manning), an exercise in equal opportunities that is replicated in the NBA, the NHL and many of America’s major sporting organisations.
But not, sadly, in Europe. Teams sign players to their academies at a ridiculously young age, with the top teams getting the chance to handpick their future stars. These youngsters play at various levels and receive an indoctrination into the club that has signed them, with the services of the majority dispensed with, forcing them to the ‘lower’ clubs. Again, the rich get richer.
As successful as these measures have proved in America in terms of creating unpredictability, excitement and equality, they have not gone beyond the discussion stage in European football (although major European rugby leagues do employ salary cap restrictions). There is simply too much money involved, and the richest clubs enjoy a tremendous amount of power and influence. Most importantly, however, the move is unlikely to receive the support of the players themselves, despite the fact that American athletes saw the value of a salary cap system and approved the measure. In the US, the organisation, and, in particular, their commissioners wield the power; in Europe, this falls on the clubs.
And, instead, the opposite is likely to happen. The news that the NFL and its players’ union is yet to agree on a renewed Collective Bargaining Agreement that will keep the salary cap is disturbing. Should the situation continue, next season could be the last one regulated with a salary cap. With insiders predicting that any disappearance of the salary cap would be permanent, one must only wonder what the future holds for small-market teams such as the Buffalo Bills and Tennessee Titans when up against the Dallas Cowboys and New York Giants: a future as predictable as what the league itself would become.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
