- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 17,010
- Reactions
- 7,286
- Points
- 113
What do we think of the Saudi’s oil money enticing so many footballers? Ronaldo was basically the first, but now there’s a glut of greedy boyos grabbing for the giant paycheck.
And not only players fit for retirement: Nevez is 26, he was Wolves captain. Mahrez is 32, just won the treble with City. Jordan Henderson contacted Garreth Southgate to see if the move would affect his chances of playing for England. Southgate says he’d see how Henderson plays in Saudi.
How he plays!? It’s non-league football. He’s basically retired from competition and yet he wants to play for England. Southgate should have told him this. But Henderson was only on £35m a year in England, and he’ll triple that in Saudi Arabia. Hard to turn it down, I suppose, if you feel 35 mill per annum is insultingly cheap.
This is only beginning, essentially players only wanting money but no prestige, no tradition. No glory. I don’t blame footballers wanting more money if it’s there - they’re free to ply their trade anywhere - but what are the long term problems with oil money taking over sport?
The World Cup was in Qatar and as we know, the usual complainers (sorry, activists) were unusually silent. Even climate activists said not a peep about huge air conditioned stadiums.
Golf went through serious turbulence then capitulated. Tennis might be next. Imagine a tennis world that’s divided, where a nobody in terms of achievement has earned more than Sampras plus the Big 3, in only a couple of seasons of ME sponsored novel events. It would be massively to the detriment of tennis. It would pit the old inspirational enticements, such as Wimbledon titles, grand slam glory, against essentially lucrative exhibitions.
Who’ll think of the kids, as they say. When I was growing up I dreamt of Wimbledon, the FA Cup. When the football season was played, I dreamt of scoring winning goals in matches that mattered, and they mattered not because of money, but because they had an exclusive list of legendary winners, they were acknowledged by everybody as the greatest fields in sports.
That’s going to change, right?
And not only players fit for retirement: Nevez is 26, he was Wolves captain. Mahrez is 32, just won the treble with City. Jordan Henderson contacted Garreth Southgate to see if the move would affect his chances of playing for England. Southgate says he’d see how Henderson plays in Saudi.
How he plays!? It’s non-league football. He’s basically retired from competition and yet he wants to play for England. Southgate should have told him this. But Henderson was only on £35m a year in England, and he’ll triple that in Saudi Arabia. Hard to turn it down, I suppose, if you feel 35 mill per annum is insultingly cheap.
This is only beginning, essentially players only wanting money but no prestige, no tradition. No glory. I don’t blame footballers wanting more money if it’s there - they’re free to ply their trade anywhere - but what are the long term problems with oil money taking over sport?
The World Cup was in Qatar and as we know, the usual complainers (sorry, activists) were unusually silent. Even climate activists said not a peep about huge air conditioned stadiums.
Golf went through serious turbulence then capitulated. Tennis might be next. Imagine a tennis world that’s divided, where a nobody in terms of achievement has earned more than Sampras plus the Big 3, in only a couple of seasons of ME sponsored novel events. It would be massively to the detriment of tennis. It would pit the old inspirational enticements, such as Wimbledon titles, grand slam glory, against essentially lucrative exhibitions.
Who’ll think of the kids, as they say. When I was growing up I dreamt of Wimbledon, the FA Cup. When the football season was played, I dreamt of scoring winning goals in matches that mattered, and they mattered not because of money, but because they had an exclusive list of legendary winners, they were acknowledged by everybody as the greatest fields in sports.
That’s going to change, right?