Football politics – GAME OF THE PEOPLE

NO MATTER what industry or company, when the chief announces he or she is leaving in several months’ time, there is a loss of power, impetus and focus. The boss will not be the boss in the near future, so human nature changes the dynamic. Those that were close to the boss are nervous because their sponsor is leaving. Those that didn’t like the boss are relieved, even excited. For everyone, the uncertainty that comes with a change of management can be destructive.

From football’s perspective, revealing a coach is leaving at the end of the current season several months before it is due to happen is a rather foolish strategy. Firstly, if a coach announces he or she is moving on, it implies the mind may be elsewhere. Few will ever say it, but once a decision has been made, it is hard for anyone to commit in quite the same way. Likewise, for the players, the signal that an era is ending, that the party is breaking up, can affect the morale of the unit. The thing that will keep playing on the squad’s mind will be about the future – who will come in and what will they demand? Liverpool’s players are probably asking themselves this every day.

Some members of the squad may decide it is time to go. Nobody stays forever, so a new coach, representing the start of a new phase, could be the ideal time to seek a fresh challenge. Jürgen Klopp is a huge character, one that has impacted not just the football team but the whole of Liverpool and indeed, English football. But the timing of his announcement was not especially beneficial for the club or the team, because it had the potential to destabilise. From that point, every moment, every game, to some extent, has had the accompanying mantra of “let’s do it for Jürgen”. That may have added some pressure on the team. Today, after a week in which Liverpool’s Premier League and Europa League hopes have been compromised by severely damaging home defeats, Klopp’s team looks jaded and they don’t have much time to get back on track.

Similarly, Emma Hayes announced she is moving to the US to become the USWNT coach. Again, this was months before the event takes place and came at a stage of the season when Chelsea, were battling on all fronts. Her all-conquering side are out of the Women’s FA Cup, they lost the League Cup final and they are second in the WSL. Furthermore, they have a very tough UEFA Champions League semi-final against Barcelona to look forward to. They may win the WSL again and they will doubtless give the European champions a game, but have Chelsea been knocked out of sync by Hayes’ early news?

On the other hand, some clubs make a habit of letting everyone know their coach is leaving at the end of the season when the campaign is still in full flow. For example, Bayern Munich have done just that with regards to Thomas Tuchel.

Both Liverpool and Chelsea would have done well to delay their news release on Klopp and Hayes, but there may be other reasons why they were eager to get the information out. Both need replacements for very successful managers, so letting the world know that there is a lucrative job on offer may deter would-be candidates from applying elsewhere. Secondly, you have to assume these are going to be sought-after positions and the selection process may be arduous in a summer that includes EURO 2024 and the Olympics. Lastly, it may have been a case of releasing the news before a leak got to the media.

Nobody outside of the clubs will ever know if the anticipated loss of Klopp and Hayes has in fact affected the form of their teams and it’s a fair assumption that no-one will be prepared to admit it has influenced the outcome of matches. Given that clubs employ communications professionals to manage the flow of information, surely the timing would have been discussed?

TRENT Alexander-Arnold (TAA) is entitled to his opinion about the meaning and fabric of success in football, but his comments are no more valid than myopic fan lit claiming their club is more special than others. Since Nick Hornby’s excellent Fever Pitch, we have been inundated with books and articles where “the fan” believes his or her relationship is somehow different and oh so meaningful. The fact is, nothing could be further from the truth; fanatic supporters are all irrational, over-dependent and blindly loyal to their clubs, which are – whether they like it or not – businesses with customers who buy into their product. While some believe football and their club are a form of religion, it is a faith that charges its disciples a huge sum of money to “believe”.

All clubs crave success, so TAA’s view that success at Liverpool “means more” than a club with vast sums of money is ludicrous. Liverpool are not a poor club, they are one of the world’s top 10 wealthiest football institutions. They were, at one time, far wealthier than many of their domestic rivals, in the days when they won lots of trophies and left the opposition way behind. The big three that were, Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool, were richer than most clubs but this trio has been more vocal about the “new order” that has made their life more difficult.

Liverpool’s resurgence under the chariasmatic Jürgen Klopp has not been a case of the club shopping in poor street and discovering bargains, although they have not spent as much as Manchester City, Manchester United and Chelsea in this era. They have, largely, bought very well and they have one of the top two coaches in the world. They are exciting to watch and the connection between club, support and manager has been revived and is much-envied. Like every club, they make a lot of noise when they win something.

Success on an annual basis does make the lifting of silverware almost routine. Liverpool should know this only too well because between 1972-73 and 1989-90, they won 11 league titles, four FA Cups, four FL Cups, two UEFA Cups and four European Cups. In 18 years, 25 cups. In that period, Liverpool were the fourth biggest spenders on a gross basis but on a net basis, their £ 10 million outlay was only beaten by Manchester United who had spent around £ 16 million. Liverpool’s record was outstanding, but United, who were desperate for success, won only a handful of cups.

When United did finally win the title, they were ecstatic. They had, after all, ended a 26-year period without a league triumph. Manchester City, when they won their first Abu Dhabi-era league championship in 2012, were equally hysterical. The decisive game has lived on in broadcasting folklore, statues of heroes have been erected and a springboard was put in place. City’s current situation is such they are becoming as dominant as Real Madrid in the 1950s, Ajax in the 1970s and Liverpool in their pomp. Each piece of silverware is greeted in the same way that a new bauble is welcomed at Anfield, Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge.

It is not for TAA to claim it means more at Liverpool – he cannot possibly know that. The only people that will believe that are Liverpool’s fans. Manchester City may be the latest new kid in town, representing football capitalism at its most extreme, but in all probability, Liverpool’s next owners will be from the middle east or another US owner steeped in the culture of Wall Street. As this footballing business paradigm further develops, if a club does not have an owner/investor from these sources, they will not be able to compete in the future. That’s not to say this is the right way, but it is surely the new reality.

When Chelsea won the FA Cup in 1997, the pent-up frustration of 26 years without a major trophy was very obvious and when the Premier was secured in 2005, it was hard to believe for so many fans who had never seen the club fly so high. West Ham won the Conference League in 2023 and although it may be a relatively modest competition, the Hammers’ fans have only just stopped celebrating. Fans want success and more often than not, they don’t care how it is achieved. Spending money doesn’t always guarantee positive outcomes, as Chelsea are discovering in the 2023-24 season.

It is all relative, of course – promotion from League Two means as much to the fans of the successful clubs as a Champions League win means to Liverpool or Chelsea. Furthermore, a non-league club winning their county cup celebrates as if they have just won at Wembley (well, perhaps not quite…). For all fans, success for their club is often years in the making. Manchester City, for example, won the Football League Cup in 1976 and followed that up with the FA Cup – 43 years later. Surely, such a period of underperformance gives them the right to enjoy their success?

Trying to take the moral high ground is all very well, but most clubs live behind a glass screen that can easily be shattered. Implying that financial backing creates a club that lacks credibility is a fragile position to take because one day, your club may actually be benefitting from the type of ownership that Manchester City currently enjoys. And if you’re an excellent player like Trent, you might just be criticising a future employer.