Liverpool`s plan to break up collective TV rights for international broadcasting of Premier League games appears to have the support of absolutely no other club in the Premier League.
The idea, formulated yesterday by Mr Ian Ayre, Liverpool`s managing director, was that when the current TV deal expired, individual clubs could negotiated their own individual deals rather than having the revenue collectively distributed to all clubs.
As the undersigned wrote yesterday in response, this would be the first stage in undermining the collective system that has maintained the English League competitive. Ironically Mr Ayre cited as his example the Spanish system, which has brought a vast quantity of money for two of the clubs in the table but has reduced the other 18 to the status of cannon fodder. Clearly Mr Ayre saw his club as one of those that would stand to increase money, and failed to notice that the Spanish Liga has now become so uncompetitive that the rest of the clubs are planning a revolt.
These details have not escaped other clubs, who reacted very negatively to Liverpool`s proposal. Strangely, the most outspoken comments have been from clubs who would probably stand to gain from the idea. Chelsea, for one, said through a spokesperson that “we are supportive of the Premier League on this and want to continue with the way they sell TV rights collectively”. Another of the clubs that is likely to better through negotiating individually is Arsenal. But the Gunner`s chief executive Ivan Gazidis gave a thoughtful but robust rejection. “The stability the Premier League has in terms of revenue sharing is, in my view, one of the strengths of the league”, Mr Gazidis declared.
“If we look at Spain then their issues, particularly in this economic climate, are exacerbated by the fact they do not have solidarity. I think it is placing owners of Spanish clubs under tremendous pressure and is damaging the game there.” That`s the game as a whole, Mr Ayre, not just the two biggest clubs.
Joining Arsenal are the chairmen of Wigan and Stoke City, who have already spoken out against the proposal. Manchester United are also believed to be against the idea which, if confirmed, would constitute a major blow to the project: Manchester United is the club that could possibly profit the most from any individual deals. If even they are opposed, we can assume that the plan is never going to get off the ground. In any case, it would need 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs to agree and the numbers simply aren`t there.
You have to ask what on earth was going through Mr Ayre`s brain when he decided to launch the idea. As well as being a bad idea, it was badly expressed: if you are serious about reforming a system that requires the approval of most of the 20 Premier League clubs, it would have been much better to sound out some of the clubs in question. Discretely. That gives you an idea whether to launch the idea publically, and it`s only then that you speak to the press. As it is, Mr Ayre badly underestimated how unpopular his plan was, and he`s experienced a load of people slamming the doors in his face. If anything, the defence of the existing system is much easier by virtue of everyone rejecting Mr Ayre`s self-centred scheme.
Oh dear. It would appear that what is good for Liverpool (a selfish undermining of what has made the Premier League successful in order that Liverpool FC can trouser more cash at the expense of the League`s more modest clubs) is not that popular. Apparently Liverpool over-estimated the greed even of the clubs who would have benefited from the proposal. It`s the Liverpool way.
Share this article
