Guest Post – Club v Country Debate – One Option
Oct 9th, 2016 by 'holic
Thank you to regular drinker Pangloss for contributing a thought-provoking (and decidedly radical) piece as a response to a healthy discussion in the last drinks. The relationship between supporters of club and country has changed a great deal in the last thirty years. Pangloss presents an option that I am sure will provoke a healthy response. The cricket analogy is an interesting one, and many Yorkshire fans will point out the potential flaws given their experience of the last game of this county championship season. Nonetheless this is a discussion piece, and I am grateful to Pangloss for his contribution. Join the debate respectfully in the drinks, please.
I read North Bank Ned and TTG’s exchange about FIFA/UEFA competitions in a previous bar with interest, although I’m not sure I agree with their preferred solution. They suggested that the World Cup and European Championships be played more along the lines of the FA Cup, with stronger teams entering the competitions at later stages, although they had some misgivings as to whether the FA would like this idea as they may expect to sell fewer tickets to the friendly matches they anticipate would replace the current, well-attended, competitive games. (This is an honest attempt to summarise their discussion and I apologise if I have misremembered/misrepresented anything; if so I would like several previous offences to be taken into consideration.)
A few years ago when the club-before-country controversy before last was raging, I recall chatting to a Wolves supporter and a Welsh rugby fan. They felt that the FA should run the game in a way that would lead to the strongest possible national team. I responded that the current organisation tended to ensure that the best possible football was available to fans on a week-to-week basis. We didn’t discuss the matter any further, but I believe that this dichotomy lies at the heart of discussions such as Ned and TTG’s.
As Arsenal supporters, we have grown used to starting the season with a justifiable feeling that our team will challenge for honours – we have been disappointed too often over the past few years, but usually we can maintain this belief until Christmas at least. Even so, we’ve had the thrill of watching our team make a run into (or sustain their position in) the upper reaches of the table to ensure European qualification. Fans of only half-a-dozen or so clubs regularly have this experience. Those of the other 86 teams have to get their excitement elsewhere, and it’s likely that they will follow their national teams more closely than do many of us.
I don’t think Ned and TTG’s ideas are sufficiently radical and I wonder whether some “central contracts” scheme as in cricket might be workable. I propose something along these lines. National football teams select squads of 25 players around the end of July. They assume responsibility for the salaries of these players who will not be paid by their clubs while they are members of the national squad. I’m inclined to think that international salaries should be subject to a seperate negotiation between players’ agents and the national FAs. If that leads to lower salaries and players retiring from international football earlier, then so be it.
National teams are allowed to call up additional players to join their squads on January 1, releasing a corresponding number back to their clubs. Additional players are paid by the national FAs from Jan 1, and returning players are paid by their clubs from the same date. These call-ups and releases must be announced before December 1. The dates are chosen to allow clubs to recruit replacements during the existing transfer windows (add there probably needs to be some tweaking to this to cover players getting injured between Dec 1 and Jan 1, which should include an extension of the window so that clubs can recruit replacements for players called up late, and for any player traded as a replacement etc.)
International teams would play a full program of League matches and tournament qualifiers about once a fortnight between August and May, with the final stages of tournaments during the close season as at present. The nations would be responsible for negotiating TV deals for the World Cup and other tournaments, from which they would need to finance the players’ salaries and any other expenses.
I believe that this system would appeal to the national bodies as they’d have more matches, or money-making opportunities to use Ned and TTG’s terminology. It should appeal to the fans of the leading clubs as there would no longer need to be any Intralulls (the irritating gaps in proper football previously known as Interlulls). It should also appeal to fans of lesser clubs as they would have more international football to watch.
I claim that the above is a free-market system in which the demand for international football would be reflected in the sums that players could earn for turning out for their countries. The major disadvantage to my mind is that, with the increased day-to-day contact with the players that this would lead to, the position of England manager might actually appeal to Arsene Wenger, something I don’t consider particularly likely at present. Others might, of course, see this as a point in its favour.
Of course, such a major reorganisation of international football would have to be agreed by all the national bodies, which makes the whole thing more than a little unlikely to happen, but I think I, for one, could probably live with it if it happened.
48 Responses to “Guest Post – Club v Country Debate – One Option”
Not speaking for Ttg, but my ‘preferred solution’ was more a top of the head idea. But your ‘radical approach’ is interesting. Some questions: would the players on international central contracts be barred from playing in national leagues for their clubs for the duration? Could clubs contractually bar their players from taking central contracts? Could players decline the offer of a central contract? How would the TV scheduling work for national leagues and international competitions running in parallel?
Central contracts wouldn’t work for a number of reasons, not least because in cricket the national team is all, and that is not the case in football.
If a centrally contracted player was ordered out of a big game (or even a run of the mill fixture) as they do in cricket, the fans would be in uproar. Also if you have a centrally contracted player paid for by the national association, clubs would have to compensate the FA if that player was injured playing for his club and was not available for selection.
International football just needs to die. It’s seen by those in the game as the peak, but for your average fan it is an irritation. Who needs the World Cup when it is tarnished by a corrupt bidding process, awarded to a country that cannot stage it, meaning football has to grind to a halt to accommodate the host nation’s weather?
We don’t need it. We don’t need the ACN, the Copa America, the Euros or any of it. We need Arsenal vs Stoke more than that other shite.
Ned, truth to tell, my ‘radical approach’ started as a top pf the head drink for the last bar. Then it grew snd grew; I became interested in thinking through some of the ideas, I offered it to the gaffer and here we are.
As to your quedtions, I definitely wouldn’t allow playerd to play for their clubs if in the national squad ‘ which disposes of ‘Holic’s Yorkshire problem.
I would prefer not to allow clubs to decline to release players, but I would allow players to retire from international football thus ruling themselves out of consideration for a central contract. I hadn’t considered allowing them to make themselves available again, kind of un-retiring, but now you raise the idea, I don’t have a problem with it, provided it’s all done in public so the players can face the tabloid fury. Finally, if we’re going down that route we may as well allow clubs to insert ‘no internationals’ clauses in contracts, since they would otherwise just pressure the players to decline the central contract by some other means. The important change is that all this would be for a full season, no more dodgy doctors notes to miss a friendly just before a big club game.
As to TV sceduling, I don’t really care. There are plenty of times in the week without football, perhaps internatio al league games could be playdd on Mondays, or Saturday evenings, or maybe – shock! horror! – all club games could kick off at 3.00 pm on a Saturday.
Cynic – My idea is that players are removed from their clubs for the season (or half season), so there would be no question of them being injured playing for their clubs. They wouldn’t be allowed to play for them in the first place.
The fans wouldn’t like it, at first. It would require some “interesting” decisions in club (and national team) recruitment, and I’m not at all sure what the long-term effects would be.
Forgive me for saying this, but I think your suggestion that international football must simply die and that we don’t need it is a little elitist. Football fans whose clubs aren’t in the running for a title, a European place, promotion, avoiding relegation or engaged on a cup run, which let’s face it, is the majority of fans, want to get involved with something and they seem to turn to the national side.
You’d like to see the end of internationals, and I could live with it, but I think it’s even less likely to happen than the kind of reorganisation I suggest above (and now seem to be in a position to have to defend).
Apologies, folks. The hardware is letting me down. I have the choice of a teeny tiny “keyboard” on the phone that Panglossdroid II uses which doesn’t get on with my fat fingers, and a “proper” keyboard on the laptop that I’m using now which has developed the habit recently of not seeing b, h, and n unless I press them very carefully.
The likelihood a national body could (or would want to) match the salaries currently played by clubs seems remote. Almost as remote as players prepared to take a pay cut to represent their national team. The result would be many players declining the invitation to become internationals at all. Unworkable, imo.
As for your claim that “we have grown used to starting the season with a justifiable feeling that our team will challenge for honours” that feeling is a distinctly recent phenomenon. For most of the 66 years I have followed Arsenal’s fortunes I have started the season reasonably confident that we will avoid relegation, hopeful we will have a good run in the cup, dreaming of a title win, and everything firmly crossed that we beat (or at least don’t lose to) the LWCs.
I’m not sure that a national body wouldn’t be able to pay close to a player’s club salary. Essentially, it comes down to who the TV companies pay their money to, and I can’t see any reason why they’d pay significantly less to show playing for their countries rather than their clubs. It’s a free-market solution (I’ve only been following the Arsenal for about 53 years, but that still makes me old enough to remember that the free market is everything and Knows Best), and if the national bodies can’t get the money in from TV then it must be because the TV customers don’t want to watch it, so it will die out, as you’d like.
I suspect that earlier in your time following Arsenal you were more interested in England’s fortunes than you are now. I know I was.
Apologies, Chris – it was Cynic that wanted to see internationals die out; I managed to misread “hris” as “ynic”.
Must be time for me to go to bed.
Nite all.
Rats.
My second sentence @7 above should have read: “Essentially, it comes down to who the TV companies pay their money to, and I can’t see any reason why they’d pay significantly less to show «Insert list of good players’ names here» playing for their countries rather than their clubs”. (I forget the need for “magic” angle brackets.)
I hope it makes a little more sense now.
Cricket isn’t a mass audience sport at club level. Could you imagine the reaction of fan base that sees Ozil, for example, removed from the Arsenal side for half a season, so he can be ready to play half a dozen times for Germany?
Pangloss,
Ommmming and reformulating international football at the same time is a prodigious act of multitasking so more power to you even if some of your proposed system sounds a bit unworkable to me. Some international squads might have difficulty finding eleven players over eleven years old willing to forego playing for club teams but even that could make these friendlies and qualifiers a bit more interesting than they are now. 🙂
Interesting suggestion, Pangloss.
Personally I don’t like the idea of our squad being eviscerated for part or all of the season by national associations even if they pay the players’ salaries. The effect on the current, international-rich Arsenal squad would be catastrophic. We would be left with a League Cup style squad for all our competitions.
In practical terms however it cannot happen. While the FA and its German and Spanish equivalents could perhaps fund equivalent contracts to those offered by top clubs to top players, few or indeed no other national associations could command the income to do so. Furthermore, the prospect of all national associations reaching agreement on such a development is extremely remote. The FA would far rather spend/waste their money on unproductive projects and their equivalents in much of the world allegedly have other far less legal ways to spend the money that comes their way. It’s unlikely that they would divert these resources to player contracts.
I have to confess that I have fallen out of love with international football and feel this condition is quite likely to spread to the Premiership if we lose the class, dignity and style brought to it by Arsene Wenger.
Cynic@10 – I agree that fans of the leading teams would howl in anguish. However, if the powers that be wanted to impliment a system such as I outline, I think it’s eminently sellable. To an outsider, it seems natural that the leading talent should play in the leading tournaments and that the leading tournaments should be international. As an insider, at least to the extent that I follow the game, it doesn’t seem natural that the leading tournaments should be international, and as a fans of a leading club team it doesn’t even seem desirable, but nationalism is a powerful persuasive force.
Bt8@11 – Thank you for your praise of my powers of multitasking. I know that my ommmmmmms were less effective yesterday afternoon and I blame any holes in the proposal on the limited extent of those powers.
Bath@12 – I don’t like the idea of losing Özil, Sanchez, Giroud, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain etc. either. I am consoled at the thought that other teams would be at least as severlely affected. Given that such a reorganisation wouldn’t happen overnight, clubs would have plenty of warning and would both have to, and be able to, adjust their recruitment policies to take international calls into account. I am confident that Arsenal are well-equipped to formulate a new policy.
I’ve been thinking some more about how clubs should be compensated, and I think that the national associations ought also to pass over a good whack of the amortised transfer fee relative to the length of the player’s contract. I.e. – you sign a player on a four-year contract for £40M. This is amortised at £10M/year, so the national FA need to pay the club, say £7.5M to call them up for the season. If the compensation were the full amortised fee, then there’s an obvious way for clubs to profit – buy a leading international for silly money on a one-year contract; he gets called up and you get all your money back from his home country.
As far as I can make out, the proposed system would lead to a kind of inverted loan system where the up-and-coming talent stays and plays for the clubs that are developing them and the top, top talent is loaned out to their home nations.
As I admitted above, I started thinking about this to fill the time during the Intralull and I’m far from certain how much I would really like to see it introduced. Worryingly, I haven’t yet come across a really knockdown argument against it other than the adverse reaction from fans of leading clubs, which can be argued against and probably also ignored.
It’s likely that there are even dafter ways to organise international football and almost certain that there’s someone in FIFA dreaming them up. It can’t do any harm for fans to knock around ideas about reorganisations and how to argue against them. Who knows? We might be doing it for real in a year or two.
PS Back on a desktop machine with a proper, and properly working, keyboard. Any typos in this drink are all my own work, unaided by technology.
Pangloss,
Very well written article which I have considered together with the “drinks”.
My respectful observation – as requested by Holic – is NURSE !!!
I apologise if someone has already mentioned this above and I skimmed over it but –
It seems one very obvious flaw in this system has been missed altogether. Never mind who would pay for whom and who would play for whom for a whole season – the issue is this.
Are you assuming that international class players would only remain international class and be retained on their central contract for one season ?
Most top class players remain the desired choice of their national sides for many seasons. That would mean that any club signing a top top player would then immediately say goodbye to them for the rest of their careers. Or is the national team only allowed to have their services for one season ?
I’m sure you know me well enough by now to understand my meaning when I say I await your answer, on international football, with complete disinterest. ?
Afternoon all.
It’s not the rest of their careers Trev. I had intended that players would generally be offered central contracts for several season, so I agree players would be unavailable for club football for a significant part of their careers. I guess an unintended consequence of the proposed system would be to boost further the price of English players as they generally do remain of international class for only the one season.
‘Holic, I object in the strongest possible terms to the shirt you suggest I am wearing.
?
burn all bridges
.
BURN ALL BRIDGES
No detail of potentially dangerous behaviour which young children are likely to copy.
Mild sex references and innuendo only.
General viewing, but some photos may be unsuitable for young children.
Three alternatives: 1. Make international football for ‘legends’, ie. those who have retired (permanently) from the professional game. 2. Make international football amateur. Ban all professionals. 3. Ban international football.
I vote for 3
Funny you should post that pic H.
I had an email from my Brother,who sent me some posts from the Spuds website both before and after the loss to Newcastle that cost them 2nd place.
All absolutely hilarious.
The best of the pre match ones was this one.
“We simply have to finish above them,regardless of whether it is goal difference or 5pts.
We need to fucking demolish these cunts.
Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see Woolwich struggle,get relegated and die,whilst we become the best team in the world.”
And this one,
” If we don’t finish above Woolwich after all this,I’m jumping off the fucking Tyne Bridge after the game.
These players owe us that much ”
And the best one,
“Don’t you yearn with every fibre of your being to finish above those horrible bastards. ?
Doesn’t the St Totteringham day bullshit drive you to the point of insanity.?
Don’t the 21 yrs weigh on you like a ton of bricks.?
For me,it’s like I’ve not had a wank for 21 yrs,was expecting to have one with an excellent stash of porn,then someone’s told me i have to wait at least another year,and probably won’t be able to have one even then.”
These were the best of the post match ones.
” Not ashamed to admit that i cried, silently, all the way home. ”
And this one,
” I got to sleep with the aid of a special cigarette,woke up at 4am,and spent 3 horrible hours trying to come to terms with what happened.”
And this one,
” Fucking fucking wankers,i was embarrassed and ashamed to be walking around London in my Spurs shirt and Jacket yesterday.
The amount of shit i got from random passers by on the way back to Victoria station yesterday was unreal.
Had to hide at the back of a Wetherspoons for ages until my bus came,
and wouldn’t you fucking know it,on the bus were several Gooners,a couple of Chavskis and a fucking Watforder. ”
And the best of the lot,
“Fucking embarrassing cunts.
I immediately went home and had the angriest wank of all time just for some fleeting semblance of a good feeling,but this cunt of a club has broken my heart again “
Sorry, fellas, I know it’s old hat but after Clive’s post I just had to –
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q7wCfttJVnQ
?
I don’t understand why they get so upset, it’s not like it’s anything new. Kinda like staying married to the same woman for half your life despite realising it was a drunken mistake on your wedding night.
Simple solution for spud fans is to quit martyring yourselves and go support the chavs instead … or the cottagers or qpr or palace or Brentford. Yeah, Brentford would be about the right level for spuds.
It turns out Samsung, the previous sponsor of the shirts worn by Chelsea Football Club, makes phones that not only emit smoke but present a severe fire “Hazard” which makes we wonder what the product of their current shirt sponsor, Yokohama Tyres, smells like when lit afire. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Pangloss
Thanks for a provocative and well- written article although you are trying to emulate my Spillchucker antics at times.?
Let’s look at an example of a young English player. Rob Holding has a breakthrough season with us and is offered a central contract next season. He accepts because he wants to play in the World Cup in Russia does well and is offered a central contract for the next four seasons. So for the next four seasons he plays ten games a season. How does he feel about that? Would we renew his contract knowing we will only get him back when he is probably declining as a player?
How would the TV companies feel about paying out huge amounts of money to screen games that will not feature any of the best players in the world?
Would UEFA want a Champions League denuded of all its top stars? Either we have a Premier League with all of its top players missing or all the major players retire from international football and countries are represented by radically under- strength teams that in no way reflect the quality of the country’s best talent.
Also can the Argentine FA offer Messi, Higuain and Aguero etc, contracts enticing enough to make them relinquish club football ? Could they or the Brazilian FA afford it? Could the African nations afford it?
Within months the world’s players would undoubtedly choose to retire from international football and it would become even more of a waste of time than it is now.
I fear the law of unintended consequences will take effect. In rugby where there is a halfway house it works better but it works in cricket because the county game is a poor relation and can be bypassed because it has no financial clout.
The suggestion that Wenger came up with was to synchronise every major league in the world so the African Nations Cup occurs when the Euros and Copa America do ( both finals and qualifying ) , the qualifying games could take place before the start of the domestic seasons and the finals at the end. That might make sense but I still think pragmatism as represented by our suggestion wins out over this radical but I fear impractical scheme.
Clive
That was an extract from the Gooner where David O’ Brien looks at the chat rooms of the opposition . Usually it’s when we play them but on that day it had to be the Spuds.
From memory it seemed most of them appear to wank as a way of blotting out the pain. Lots of masturbatory references whether they win or lose . It’s a hard image to get out of your mind with supplies of Kleenex all over that part of North London being decimated after the Newcastle debacle . It makes for very funny reading . A very sticky business being a Spud.
I peeked into one of their chat rooms that evening and I wet myself laughing at their discomfiture. Utterly hilarious , they are the gift that keeps on giving.
Pangloss your solution is quite radical indeed. But I wonder if such a massive re-shuffle is required at all.
If the club football calendar is currently able to accommodate all the interlulls in between, why not have an uninterrupted club season from start to finish in one go. Let’s say the club season lasts from August to March. There is a two week break after that and then the international season begins which last from mid-april to end of June. All the players get an automatic 4 to 5 week break in July. Also the clubs pay salaries from August to March and the national associations pay the salaries from April to July.
The problem with this kind of scheduling would be to synchronise the timetable of all the leagues from August to March which might not be possible owing to climatic conditions in some countries. Otherwise it might be a win win situation for both club and national sides in terms of continuity and rhythm of squads and also paying salaries.
For an away gooner from a far off land, spuds are just not in our league. Yes, there probably could be a day in my lifetime that they may finish above us( well I am 35 after all) but that is small solace for them and them alone. They are not, never will be at our level and deep down they know it. Screw them.
Country vs club is a never ending debate. Country does matter but how do the players treat these games is a question mark. i am not doubting their loyalties but deep down in their minds if they know there is a big club game coming up, will they give their 100% in an” international friendly?”. For me qualifying to the euros/ WC/African nations/Copa etc, is way too long and international friendlies are an absolute no-no.
In the end, should there be international football? yes, for representing your country is an absolute honour.
Cheers for the blog Pangloss. My take on international football – can’t stand it, and have had no real interest since Euros 88.
Now this is for Cba;
What a weekend mate! Highlights were; Killing Joke, St Etienne, Wedding Present, Lee Scratch Perry, Jah Wobble (filthy LWC he may be but what a performance) and WIRE!
THEY WERE COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY MAGNIFICENT.
TTG@27 – Interesting; I blame the hardware, you the software. Hmmm…
I understand your misgivings about the potential problems for Rob Holding (or other young player). I proposed limiting national squads to 25 players, which I think will serve to dissuade national managers from taking a punt on up-and-coming talent, similarly as they would only be able to add to their squads from January 1, they are likely to avoid older (and) injury-prone players. I also proposed greatly increasing the number of international matches (heresy, I know), which would mean players on a central contract would play many more than about 10 games a season.
I’m not sure about the ability of national organisations to match the money that players could earn at clubs – it depends on how attractive international football became with the best players developing better understanding with each other by training together week-in week-out.
If, players retired from international football in their droves, I don’t think that international football would “become even more of a waste of time”; I think it would fade out altogether – a result that few here (if I recall the drinks correctly) would mourn, and many would actively welcome.
I’m sure that there would be unintended consequences and I’m happy that the general discussion has identified some of them. I’m not sure that we’ve come up with any that I find completely unacceptable (to be sure, many are worrying).
How does rugby union’s “halfway house” work – or rather what is it?
I thought that FIFA had managed to synchronise all competitions (I’d conveniently forgotten about the ACN). They have managed to agree/impose[*] synchronised transfer windows, haven’t they?
desi@29 – I agree that a radical reorganisation isn’t necessarily required. I started wondering how we could get rid of these damned intralulls, thought about how a central contracts system might work and the rest is history.
I do like the idea of a synchronised international season as mentioned by you and TTG. There are problems (of course). One is that Northern and Southern hemispheres will (I imagine) have their football seasons at different times, which will make it difficult/impossible to find a suitable two-month window to hold it – I suspect it would be possible to find some mutually agreeable time, maybe at the start of one hemisphere season and the end of the other’s, possibly alternating to share the drawbacks fairly between the hemispheres. Another is the need to satisfy the yearnings of fans of international football – surely there are some, even if they don’t drink in this bar. I think a strength of my proposal is that such fans would get regular international football (actually quite a bit more than at present).
Vinay@30 – I agree with you that international friendlies hold little attraction. You don’t like the qualifying rounds, but what’s the alternative?
Esso@31 – Thanks!
[*]Delete according to personal choice.
154
Yeah
Evening Esso,
That sounds like one cracking weekend mate.
It was mate, gonna take a while to get over it.
I notice Mesut didn’t come out for 2nd half of Germany game tonight.
With the scoreline only 2 nil,cannot believe it was tactical.
The Irish side were very physical,lots of shall we say ‘ Robust ‘ tackles,so fingers crossed he hasn’t picked up a knock.
Mustafi only played the last 20 mins of this game,and didn’t play at all in the first one last week,so he hasn’t had too much exertion.
No reports of injuries picked up elsewhere,so just Alexis the last man standing for Chile later tonight,to get through unscathed.
re: my earlier suggestion of running the World Cup like the FA Cup with stronger teams not entering until later rounds. CONCACAF’s Word Cup qualifiers already work like that and its new president wants an end to it because the minnows don’t get enough games agains the regional big boys, which are the USA, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama and Trinidad & Tobago. So he wants more meaningless qualifying games not fewer.
Ommmmmmmmmmm.
You have international football, Hitler and Mussolini in a single room. You have a pistol with two bullets left in it. Whom all will you shoot?
International football. Twice. Just to make sure.
Pangloss
Re the Rugby situation, what I meant was that there are central contracts for England players but they are also allowed to play for their clubs and if the national team call them up that takes precedence. In Rugby Union the national team is the pinnacle and there is general acquiescence about it taking precedence. The Premiership and other competitions continue during the Autumn and Hone internationals. It works because club rugby is seen as subservient to the national team and people accept the absences of their players although it distorts the competition. Fir example in recent years Saracens have lost lots of players but Exeter comparatively few( this is changing) and the season tends to run in phases according to the strength of the best teams.
SteveT and other rugger experts might want to slightly edit my comments but I’m sure I’m roughly right.
As for your comment about international football withering on the vine if the top players all deserted it you are quite right. It has nowhere to go. I didn’t see any of England’s game as I’m in Hawaii as I write but it appears to have been a pitiful display. I keep telling those who listen this is the worst England side I can remember and with results like this and Jordan Henderson as skipper I don’t think I’m far wrong.
Clive
Mesut has tweeted that he is ok. I suspect they felt they could rest him given the opposition.
How does qualifying work for rugby’s World Cup? I can’t imagine that there are the number of games football’s equivalent involves. And don’t the top countries get automatic qualification for the finals?
Here in NZ The Ranfurly Shield, colloquially known as the Log o’ Wood, is a trophy in New Zealand’s domestic rugby union competition. First played for in 1904, the Shield is based on a challenge system rather than a league or knockout competition as with most football trophies. The holding union must defend the shield in challenge matches, and a successful challenger becomes the new holder of the Shield. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranfurly_Shield
Strikes me that this would make a good model for a future football World Cup. Whoever wins the next FIFA World Cup (in 2018) becomes the first holder and must accept challenges from other nations every, say, 3 months until the lose a game. At which point the winner takes over as holder and on we go.
With 211 FIFA affiliated associations this would mean one challenge per country every 70 years (assuming equal opportunity). Given we (England) will probably lose when it’s our turn, I reckon one international in an average life-time would be about right.
TTG @ 40
Breathes a sigh of relief. !!
Looks like Alexis came through unscathed in win over Peru this morning,so hopefully all the boys will arrive back at the Ems unscathed.
4 home games on the bounce to come,all very winnable,so let’s keep the unbeaten run going.
Pochettino says it is too early say whether Spurs will win the title.
Too early? Has he been smoking something?
Of course they will win the title. Just check out history.
Oh.
Chris, thats a bit like the Unofficial World Cup (current holders Uruguay) and a great idea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unofficial_Football_World_Championships
Thanks again Pangloss. I enjoyed my ‘break’. 🙂 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>