Football and putting the fun back into funding

Interesting question raised during the week in the world of football. As Di Matteo was sacked as Chelsea boss (their eighth manager in as many years, I think), there was a comparison between Chelsea’s success in all competitions and Arsenal’s lack of trophies over the same period. The contrast is stark – Arsene Wenger has been at Arsenal for a while now and has qualified for the Champions League many times, whilst Chelsea have had more managers than there have been repeats of Dallas on TV, it seems! Chelsea, on one level, seem to be the more successful club.

But which is the more successful model for the future of football finance? Manchester City are clearly doing things their way – loyal to the (current) manager, who they clearly believe in (perhaps more than the players do sometimes), but not putting in any more money for transfers at the moment.

Meanwhile, there’s many fans who simply cannot afford to go to the games anymore. Whatever happened to what Silvio Berlusconi (excuse the spelling) apparantly said – that one day, clubs like AC Milan will no longer need to charge supporters to go and watch a football match. Like so much about football’s finances, it seems a long time ago now.