The Guardian's David Conn blogs about Michel Platini's criticism of the business model behind the English Premier League:
"he has gone out of his way to criticise the English Premier League, scorning its "ultralibérale" (free-market) commercial approach, the takeovers of its clubs by rich individuals and the preponderance of foreign players which, he argues, has drained our football of home-grown depth and led to the national team's absence from the forthcoming European Championship."
Richard Scudamore, the Premier League chief executive, has another take. He claims "that the Premier League's great popularity, commercial power and, now, success on the field are a vindication of his and his club bosses' ideology of openness, to foreign players and club takeovers, a triumph for their opposition to regulation, whether by Uefa or any other body."
But Platini has a point. Is debt the best way to build success? It may be the American (and now Russian) way, but it does result in keeping gate prices high and in effect locks fans out of the beautiful game.
I think Platini's right.
Read Conn's post here >>