And so it comes to pass that the 2020 UEFA European Championships will be a pan-regional affair.
Early comment and analysis is understandably sceptical and critical. There will be too much travelling for the players, meaning they will tire easier and the performance and entertainment will drop nearer the end of the competition.
The fans will be the biggest losers. A cross-continent tournament would limit the number of supporter’s who can follow their country round to all games. Travel costs, accommodation, and distance will all dampen the atmosphere even more and provide more seats for the stuffy sponsors and partners.
These sorts of comments seem justified but full details of the logistical side of running this sort of competition have yet to be decided on. Perhaps these fears will be addressed.
Cynicism will win out here though. On the face of it there seems to be one reason for this decision – money. Money for UEFA and money for the host cities, which one would assume would be the ones with the best stadia and usually fairly well-off anyway.
But the focus in this particular piece is on another aspect of the money trail, that of the sponsors. What sort of a factor, if any, this had on the decision will never be known, but an outsider looking in can certainly see a number of benefits for the sponsors.
Rather than promoting their brand in one country, they will have several. Exposure is the key for sponsors. The number of different avenues with which sponsorship and advertising will filter through to the audience will increase manifold by hosting the tournament across a number of cities.
Prepare for a bombardment of advertising the likes of which will have never been seen before. Further cementing their influence on the market, with the tournament spreading more cities will see smaller businesses and sponsor rivals effectively censored from anything remotely connected to the competition.
A further sacrifice at the alter of globalisation and commercialism? It would appear that way and is going to take something special from UEFA to convince many of us otherwise. The idea of spreading football sounds good, but is it so good when you consider most members of the general public of the host city will be unable to get tickets to the matches?
The ball is now in UEFA’s court. When they call something a success, who do they mean a success for? Usually when something is a success, monetary figures are also quoted. Of course it will be a success for sponsors. But it is up to UEFA to make sure it is a successful tournament for the fans, otherwise they run the risk of games being played in front of disinterested business partners with no passion or emotional attachment to the game they are watching.
Daniel Smith – @dmsmith1987
Introducing the neat little app that’ll pay you to view content tailored to your interests:
ThisisFutbol.com are seeking new writers to join the team! If you’re passionate about football, drop us a line at “thisisfutbol.com@snack-media.com” to learn more.