What is the point of super-rich football?

first_imgLiverpool (UK news) Reuse this content Barney Ronay’s excellent article about Neymar (Sport, 20 January) sums up all that is wrong with modern football. As he states, the “breathtaking individual goal” Neymar scored against Dijon was, doubtless “sensational”, but completely devoid of meaning. Its true value comparable to a famous – but equally inconsequential – solo effort by George Best, for the San Jose Earthquakes against Fort Lauderdale Strikers, in the 1980s North American Soccer League. (When asked about the goal in later life, he is said to have replied, “crap defence”). Once scandalously described as a “slum sport, played in slum stadiums, watched by slum people”, football is now at elite level, a “super-rich sport, played by the super-rich, in super-rich stadiums”. I rarely watch the game nowadays. Only reports of a classic regarding the recent Liverpool-Man City match briefly (re)aroused my interest. It was a surreal sight watching the once mighty Liverpool FC, being urged on as underdogs by neutrals who chiefly wanted to see the petro-dollars-backed Man City come a cropper, aroused my interest. What exactly is the competitive point when essentially just six clubs (Manchester City, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventus and Paris-Saint German) dominate European football? This status quo is unsustainable. Perhaps it’s time we finally recognised that football is just too important to be left solely to the football men (and their wealthy paymasters).   Will GobleRayleigh, Essex• Join the debate – email [email protected]• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters Neymar The super-rich George Best Share on Facebook Share via Email Topics letterscenter_img Share on LinkedIn Liverpool (Football) Share on Twitter Share on Messenger Manchester City Share on Pinterest Share on WhatsApp Footballlast_img