It's literally there in the bit where I start 'The problem with saying "Let's do what Sweden did" is...'
Originally Posted by me
Genuinely struggling to make the connection. Yeah there are a load of incongruities within the club structure that may differ from Sweden, but we’re talking about merging clubs to create a viable and sustainable league. It may not solve every problem in the game at every level, but it’s the only way we will develop a league that can compete in Europe and develop players for the national team.
It's kind of hard to really engage in a debate if you don't actively address any of the points being made tbh.
Yes, there are issues with Irish football. I agree the standard isn't great and I've argued against LoI fans here in terms of player call-ups to the national team for example.
But I don't see how merging clubs is going to solve anything while the huge structural issues - not just the pyramid, though it's the most important one in terms of spicing up the new league and helping focus on new population areas (which was your suggestion, albeit in an unnatural way), but also prize money, TV deals, underage setups (being addressed in fairness) and so on.
You say "It may not solve every problem in the game at every level, but it’s the only way we will develop a league that can compete in Europe and develop players for the national team", but you haven't said how it will solve any problems, and it's not true that it's the only way the league will develop player for the national team because we saw, in the cash-rich 00s, that the LoI did start developing players for the national team, even with both Dundalk and Drogheda in the league. It still didn't do great, but it was improving when the (inevitable) crash happened, and it's never really recovered since.
There is merit in merging clubs, but I don't see it at the top level. The likes of, say, Mullingar Athletic and Mullingar Town would be a better bet. But without an adequate structure for them to improve up through, what's the point? That's why, for me, the structure is the most important thing at the moment, and why the Swedish example just isn't relevant here at the moment.
Last edited by pineapple stu; 04/11/2021 at 6:39 PM.
I don’t think it will solve all the problems as I said, and to be fair you make a lot of decent points about the dysfunctional structures at every level, but I guess we’re going back to Sweden. Let’s imagine there are only two clubs in Dublin, you immediately pool the best players, and increase the potential supporter catchment. A better team playing in a better league with less local competition attracts more supporters = more revenue, which attracts more investment, improving facilities, attracting more supporters, generating even more revenue, investing in better players, improving the product and so on and so on. It’s what can happen when you start from the right place. We’re in the wrong place. Too many small clubs competing in the same geography, poor facilities, low standard of product, few spectators, inadequate revenue, little investment, viscous circle.
If there’s another way, I’d love to know what it is. I think we all want the same outcome - a better international team and Irish clubs competing (really competing) in Europe.
But that's very idealistic. Why would you risk the biggest clubs in the league? You're genuinely risking alienating the biggest fan groups in the league for something which may or may not have any impact.
Also, if you generate say, Bohbourne and Shamrock Athletic, do you end with a stronger league? You've removed two Premier sides and you promote two First Division sides. Unless they take the Shelhemians/St Pat's Rovers players (and will they go to Galway/UCD/Treaty?), then you end up with a weaker league, not a stronger one.
Also, don't knock local competition. Derby games are big draws. Local competition is important in the LoI.
Poor facilities, low standard, few spectators, inadequate revenue, little investment - sure. But if you create Bohemians, the FAI will still be broke and people will still watch TV football and you'll still have all those problems.
Gothenburg is of tradition a three team city; IFK, ÖIS and GAIS. The current "top team" in the city is another team called Häcken. Add to these four are a couple of smaller clubs in the third tier of the pyramid system. Gothenburg is about half Dublin's size.
What worked in Sweden btw? Not understanding the mentions of Sweden in the last pages.
But who do they play ?
All the population center clubs on the other coast take it in turns to completely implode, From Derry to Waterford and all between them at regular intervals. There is no overall fix potential in this proposal & it punishes clubs who have demonstrated durability at LOI level over the long haul, we need more of those, not less.
The Dublin scenario is for instance not a complete solution. You would need to start with a fresh slate, not simply promote teams to take the place of merged ones. There’s no gradualist solution for what’s broken. I hate the word and the idea of franchises, but in a way that is the model. The starting point has got to be a viable business model, because that is what football today is based on.
But it's not - Kildare County and Sporting Fingal were franchises set up explicitly to target population gaps in the LoI, and they barely lasted 15 years between them before going bust with minimal traction in the stands.
What are you suggesting will be different this time?
Merging clubs - third policeman is suggesting merging (say) Bohs/Shels, Pat's/Rovers, Dundalk/Drogheda will significantly improve the LoI.
[QUOTE=pineapple stu;2093606]But it's not - Kildare County and Sporting Fingal were franchises set up explicitly to target population gaps in the LoI, and they barely lasted 15 years between them before going bust with minimal traction in the stands.
What are you suggesting will be different this time?
It’s not about gaps, it’s about viable catchments to support viable clubs. Those examples are irrelevant and actually make my pint. They were adding to the congestion and unsustainability of what’s already not working.
The thing that could make this work is novelty. It’s new, ambitious and configured on a sound and sustainable business model. It could therefore attract sponsorship, investment, media contracts that the LOI can’t and hasn’t. The LOI is appealing to a tiny demographic of diehards. It’s been struggling for decades, and by the way, you still haven’t suggested an alternative solution.
Kildare absolutely was a gap. One of the most populous counties in Ireland without a senior side.
If you don't want to take Fingal, then what about Monaghan or Kilkenny? Wexford have hardly done great things since joining the league. Tralee's experience was a disaster. All effectively franchises. None of that backs up your point.
And novelty? Come off it. The LoI was relaunched and rebranded in 2007. Nothing happened. Novelty is a nothing argument. It also wears off quickly.
As for an alternative solution - I have suggested the FAI increase prize money (while acknowledging they're broke at the moment). I have suggested clubs put better long-term strategic planning in place to avoid Shels/Dundalk-style wasting of funds with nothing to show. I have suggested a proper pyramid system to help encourage new clubs to push themselves - extending the pyramid has churned up the lower leagues in England and Scotland in recent years, which is good.
But you seem to think there's a quick fix. There's not.
Ok. Obviously a non-runner for anyone with a vested interest in established clubs (Ireland or elsewhere). Not sure what the example of merged clubs in Sweden is. Östersund, maybe? But that was the equivalent of junior clubs joining forces in a city covered in snow and darkness half the year. Not a (sustainable) success story either.
The biggest thing we can learn from Sweden is probably the municipal support for sport there. Ireland doesn't understand the value to society of what economists call public goods
Basically we know the price of everything, the value of nothing.
Using a country that didn't re-align and merge its tops clubs as an example of same when discussing the LOI is new departure for me I must say.
"But it worked in Sweden" - what worked in Sweden? I am 100% confused
I can’t see that working to be honest. It’s all sensible stuff but predicated on the FAI being able to make it happen.
I accept that the merger/ franchise/ start again option is never going to happen, so we might as well both get back to facing reality and living in an imperfect world.
Thanks for the argument.
It's definitely predicated on the FAI being able to make it happen. That's what they're the governing body of football for, though. Bohbourne isn't going anywhere without more general LoI support from the FAI either.
The comments from ifk/RAM/Stutts are interesting too - not just on the success of mergers, but also the municipal involvement. OK, a lot of clubs here have rent-free or peppercorn rent deals on their grounds, but that's about it in terms of support. It's much more active elsewhere afaik.
I remember your good post about this previously.
But would add there is a different taxation system + governance in Sweden, there is a local tax levy so Swedish municipalities probably have more financial muscle? And then, the Swedish leaning is more socialist so the concept of public good is more digestible/ understood perhaps.
I think that there isn't really an alternative to football as a summer sport in Sweden has relevance. There's no GAA/ rugby comparable. And added to that, traditional football cities (places likes Malmö, Norrköping, Helsingborg, Borås) do not really have competition from other sports so arguably easier to draw on municipality support. For example, football is really the only show in town when it comes to Malmö. There is an ice hockey team but that's an "imported" sport and doesn't have the tradition of football. There are Malmö teams in the lower divisions of the pyramid system but they are all basically supports to the city's main team in terms of fanbases.
There would be understandable opposition to this, but would mention stadium sharing. The three main teams in Gothenburg play out of the same stadium, 2 teams in Stockholm.
Well on stadium sharing, that's where Bohs/Shels are going anyway.
I had thought there were more mergers in Sweden too - though I wonder was third policeman (as well as myself) thinking of FC Copenhagen instead? Obviously Danish, not Swedish, but similar enough. B1903 were one of the top teams at the time, but KB had dropped down to the second tier, if not the third tier. There's also been mergers in Luxembourg - F91 Dudelange are the best example, but that was a second tier team absorbing two third tier teams, so again not comparable to Bohbourne. (But it is comparable to the example I gave of merging Mullingar Town and Mullingar Athletic, but then you need a pathway for that new team to rise through the leagues if the merger is to make any sense)
Sure, but long process and not there yet. Mention of Pats/ Rovers sharing in the past too that was quickly shot down?
Not really up to speed on the Danish club scene, but yes Copenhagen is the merger of note. Get the sense there is still a strong distaste towards FCK because of this, not just in Denmark but across Scandinavia. There are mergers in Sweden, but not among "traditional powers". Know of two lower level clubs that merged some time back but previous club members broke away and restarted the individual teams at the bottom of the pyramid system - so no love for merging in Sweden.
Yep, but I think the Bohs/Shels thing is more likely to happen. There's a definite timeline (2025 for both to be playing in a redeveloped Dalymount), and there was a first drawdown of funds (€1m this year) which makes it far more tangible than the Rovers/Pat's groundshare ever was.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks