Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Daniel Brigham

History turns against Celtic

Recommended Posts

Hello all, here''s my latest blog ...Celtic fans love a bit of history. They can’t stop going on about it. So

they probably know all of this already, but here''s a quick history

recap. For 242 years St Paul''s Cathedral stood as the tallest

building in London, admired and respected throughout Europe. Now it is

overshadowed by much of London, no longer looking down on its neighbours

but up at glass temples to a changing, commerce-driven world. In

comparison, St Paul’s is a rather dumpy relic, its magnificence defined

by its past, a monument to memories.  Its place in the world and

its history is forever established, but time moves on. Celtic fans

should take note. Many of them can not accept that they are no longer a

big club lauding it above much of Europe, that teams, including Norwich,

Southampton and, it appears, even Championship sides, have steadily

outgrown them to the extent where they can pluck away their best

players.  Like Del Boy losing his millions, Celtic’s fall from

grace is slightly difficult to watch. But it happens to all teams. In

the early 1920s Burnley fans would have

mocked their Lancashire rivals Liverpool and Manchester United for being

weaker than them. Just four years ago Portsmouth fans would snigger at

Southampton’s position. Yet it would be easier to feel sympathy for

their fans if so many of them weren''t blindly reliant on the word

‘history’ as a means of justifying their place in the footballing world.

You wouldn''t get George Foreman using history as a defense in a fight

with Wladimir Klitschko would you? He''d have the crap kicked out of him.

 History, in terms of grandeur, is relative. Saying Celtic have

history in the Scottish Premiership is like saying Norwich have history

in the East Anglian derby. It is true that there is a romance about

Celtic (served with a large dose of sectarian violence) and it is

undeniably an extraordinary place to play football in big games. They

have had some wonderful nights – far, far more than Norwich. When Celtic

won the European Cup in 1967, Norwich were in Division Two, losing to

Carlisle and Rotherham as they finished 11th, still five seasons from

reaching the top tier of English football for the first time.But

1967 doesn''t count for anything now and claiming history as a factor

for attracting players to a club is nonsense. If you were offered the

chance to send a message using a top-of-the-range 1980s fax machine,

you''d probably decline and just use email instead. Some of their

fans like to assert that most of the European leagues are homogenous,

with only a couple of sides competing for the title. It’s an absurd

theory. In the last 20 seasons the Premier League has had five different

winners, the Bundesliga six, La Liga five, Serie A six, France’s Ligue 1

nine, Holland’s Eredivisie five, Portugal’s Primeira Liga four and the

Belgian Pro League five. Scotland, meanwhile, has had two winners. It’s

like two whales in a paddling pool. No wonder they’ve gone a little mad

up there. When Sky bought the soul of the English top tier in

1991, it marked the beginning of the end of the SPL as a force. Although

Paul Gascoigne chose to sign for Rangers rather than a Premier League

side when he left Lazio in 1995 it was the last desperate kicks of a

long-distance runner who knew they were about to be overtaken. The

only way for Celtic – and Rangers – to get out of rather embarrassing

state is to do a Swansea and a Cardiff: join the English league. They

have such huge fan bases that it wouldn’t take long for them to become

major players in the Premiership. But it''s not going to happen.

The boards of the two Manchester clubs, Arsenal and Chelsea have

enormous influence over the Premier League and wouldn''t let it happen.

They have self-interest to protect and want a monopoly on the top five;

they know that the two Glasgow clubs would be a very real threat to that

and therefore Champions League qualification. Unless money is

invested into rival Scottish sides to make the league more competitive

and more attractive to players, then those buildings around Celtic will

only continue to grow, leaving them further and further behind. It can’t

be much fun for their fans, but it’s the reality they face and there’s

nothing their history can do to change that. Daniel Brigham is features editor of The Cricketer. You can follow him on Twitter: @cricketer_dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i used to think your blogs were crap, and petes constant bigging you up got on my wick... but i have to say i have started to enjoy them particualry the goodbye grant holt one you did last time  [:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
makes for a good and informative readmy suggestion is that once Rangers get back into the top flight much of that maybe forgotten and the inward looking SPL Or whatever it is now) will continue as before ....................... having less and less meaning by the season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"]makes for a good and informative readmy suggestion is that once Rangers get back into the top flight much of that maybe forgotten and the inward looking SPL Or whatever it is now) will continue as before ....................... having less and less meaning by the season

[/quote]I''m pretty sure Neil Doncaster has a plan to stop that happening.

<cough>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scotland may have been domintaed by two teams for longer, but, imo its a pattern that is beginning to be replicated in other leagues.

Take 2012-13 for example

In Germany, 3rd placed team was 36 points behind Bayern.

In Spain, 3rd was 24 points behind Barcelona

In Italy, 3rd was 15 points behind Juventus

In France, 3rd was 12 points behind PSG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I agree with your sentiment I don''t think your analysis of the league domination is particularly valid.

England in particular as you say has only had 5 different winners from a league of now 20 teams since the PL''s inception.

Once by Blackburn (Showing the new bright future of buying the league!)

then the other 4 are of course Man U/Arsenal/Chelsea and as of only just over a year ago Man City.

When we have double amount of teams and only 4 different winners in the last 15 plus years are we any less dominated?

Considering there was 7 different winners in the preceding 20 years, and 11 different winners in the 20 years proceeding that, is a declining trend not in effect?

Without the cash injections received by Chelsea and Man City might not Man U and Arsenal have continued to vye between themselves for the title without the interruption of other clubs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Monty. Agreed that the PL is guilty of becoming less competitive. It''s a less fun, inclusive competition since the Sky deal. The cash injection point is valid, and I make the point that that''s the only scenario that will save the SPL.

Agree that certainly Barca and Madrid are increasingly dominating in Spain. Interesting to see if this trend continues whether or not they''ll become less attractive destinations for players in 10 years'' time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that point about the SPL i wholeheartedly agree with, the problem being its Catch-22, I think without massive TV revenue the SPL will struggle to attract investors, yet without a more competitive league they won''t secure a better deal.

I don''t think Spain has the same issue as they are still very competitive in the Champions League even if the domestic league suffers from the same dominance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, in 10 years'' time Europe''s biggest clubs will probably have formed a European league. Perhaps then the Premier League, missing Man Utd and Arsenal, will invite Celtic and Rangers to join ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Double Dutch"]Scotland may have been domintaed by two teams for longer, but, imo its a pattern that is beginning to be replicated in other leagues.

Take 2012-13 for example

In Germany, 3rd placed team was 36 points behind Bayern.

In Spain, 3rd was 24 points behind Barcelona

In Italy, 3rd was 15 points behind Juventus

In France, 3rd was 12 points behind PSG[/quote][quote user="Double Dutch"]

Forest don''t harp on about their past?

One of the stands is THE BRIAN CLOUGH STAND!

I don''t mean to be rude, but, give your brain a chance you inbred f***wit

[/quote]the binboy is back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Daniel Brigham"]Actually, in 10 years'' time Europe''s biggest clubs will probably have formed a European league. Perhaps then the Premier League, missing Man Utd and Arsenal, will invite Celtic and Rangers to join ...[/quote]Guaranteed someone said exactly the same thing 10 years ago.  I can''t see it happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...