 |
| Keith Treacy was a real influence |
Instead we hot-footed it (in between tailbacks) back up the M1 on Friday so as to be back for the home game against Watford and Iwelumo and Jimmy Mac’s MBE. Jimmy said that in M&S whilst shopping one day, one little old dear had given him a real dressing down for not going to the palace. Quite honestly I don’t think I’d bother going all that way either, just to sit there in a queue of 200 waiting for my 20-second slot.
Meanwhile back at home there was a bit of catching up to do, and back at the ranch, the messageboards had initially been very unkind to the boardroom hierarchy at Turf Moor with accusations of leaving Eddie Howe high and dry regarding signings and availability of money although the chairman would later tell a small gathering of shareholders what the future held. Tellingly there were more posts expressing understanding as to why Owen Coyle left.
“He’d seen the iceberg and got out, pretty fast,” was one.
The official website was confusing and misleading stating that Burnley were locked in negotiations for “several” permanent signings. Just a couple of paragraphs later Howe was quoted as saying that people shouldn’t expect too many and he would like a couple “if we can.” It was hardly inspirational. Certainly prior to the Sunderland game and before the Treacy signing you’d have thought that Burnley were a desperate club, facing penury, paring things down to the bone, and without a penny to their name were only managing loan signings.
However, there was an interesting observation on one of the messageboards. It pointed to the increased parachute payments in a sense being unbudgeted income. There was a certain sum at the end of the Premier season (we’ll take the money and run someone said at the beginning of it), and there was in addition £22million parachute money over 2 years. This, it was said, was going to ensure the security of the club for the next ten years.
But then (lucky Burnley) it was increased to £48million over four years. The considerable difference between the two sums thus became an unexpected windfall, extra money; surplus to whatever financial projections had been envisaged. It represented £26million extra, although admittedly over 4 years. In simplistic terms surely then it was possible to say hey we’ve got a bit spare in the jar on the mantelpiece.
Except: It wasn’t exactly a bombshell that Barry Kilby dropped at the shareholders’ Q & A session but…. The abridged version was in the Watford programme.
What he talked about was already in the public domain but like many things, perhaps it doesn’t sink in until you hear it in person and you hear it in relation to your own club. Quite simply in a years time rules come into force that will prevent Championship clubs from having a wage bill of more than 60% of their ‘football’ income. In Burnley’s case that income is projected to be around £10million (or £18million when you add on the third parachute payment). That means a maximum wage bill of just under £11million. It would be the same the year after, the final year of parachute payments. But after that when there are no payments, the stark reality is, if income is only £10million, a wage ceiling of £6million is what’s in prospect which certainly doesn’t buy you a top team these days unless you strike very lucky and stumble upon a winning bunch of players on the cheap.
The arguments and discussions that followed on from that were all about balance and not paring wages too aggressively too soon. Do that and it would lead to mediocrity and a downward trend in results, attendances and income… and yet another consequent reduction in the wage ceiling.
The bigger the club, the bigger the attendances and commercial income, the more advantage they have over the small clubs. The side issue and question fequently posed on messageboards was just what then was the Premier season legacy? Maybe one legacy was the avoidance of administration. This was a club that prior to Wembley was barely solvent. I have a hunch Barry Kilby remembers those days vividly and will do everything to avoid a repeat. The next legacies were the parachute payments. With those to prop up the wage bill for the next couple of seasons, panic about the impending rules is unnecessary and there is time to think how to increase revenue further. But one thing is clear; reducing the wage bill to £6million too soon, before it is really necessary in 2014/15 when there are no more parachute payments, would be false economy.
It certainly won’t help future budgets when TV coverage is so unbalanced. The Leeds evening paper revealed that Leeds will be featured on TV seven times between now and November. How many times will Burnley be on? Once – so work out the difference in TV income. The difference is outrageous. One of their appearances was the opening game. They lost 3–1, such a shame.
The financial scenario begged the question; is this the last season therefore when a real effort can be made to win back a premier place? And one more question – is this the end of director loans, the very thing that propped up this club for years before the one season of Premier megabucks. Or are they still permissible as football-related income?
Another unexpected announcement came, and maybe this was the bombshell, when the chairman announced that there had been a £4million loss last season. A few mouths gaped at that one wondering just how that had happened when there had been a hefty wedge of parachute money.
There were those who became utterly gloomy at the future wages-to-income scenario; there were those who said ‘about time’, and there were those who said so what? Wouldn’t the wage bill be reduced anyway? Or: wouldn’t a budget of £6million still cover an average player wage of just under £5k a week with a squad of 24? It would still enable a small number of players to be on a wage higher than that within that group. Wouldn’t all clubs be in the same boat and wouldn’t those, like Leicester City, who were currently throwing money at a last hope of promotion, come a real cropper in a year’s time if they failed. Or: would clubs just find a way round it and carry on as normal?
Some of this I picked up from the websites whilst down in Sussex, watching the cows coming up and down the lane, counting the woodpeckers in the garden, paddling at Bognor, walking in the woods and barbecueing sausages and burgers to a nice tasty crisp. On the way back up the M1 we counted 75 Eddie Stobarts which I hereby claim as a world record for the journey back up to Leeds.
One thing was certain when the Watford game kicked off – even with the signing of Keith Treacy from Preston, and the displays of Mee and Trippier, Burnley was a club where supporter aspirations to be a real top contender this season were not that widespread. The sudden loss of Eagles and Mears, the club’s policy of not “smashing” the wage structure in order to pursue Jack Cork (a seven figure sum had been offered to Chelsea) had left supporters feeling that the flair players had gone and Eddie Howe’s plans must have gone up in smoke. The one hope was that Birmingham City would maybe go into administration, as reports were rumouring, so that would be one relegation spot probably taken care of. Of the other clubs we could only look to Doncaster, Barnsley, Coventry, Palace and maybe Peterborough as being ‘weak’ and vulnerable clubs in a division that was filled with big hitters, some of them absolutely determined to get back into the Prem come what may.
It therefore came as a huge surprise to see that esteemed Mirror journalist Oliver Holt had tipped Burnley for automatic promotion. Quite a few eyes popped out on stalks on seeing that. A few of us are hoping, nay even optimistic, that a top ten finish might be on the cards; but automatic promotion – surely not.
It was a pleasant change therefore to be reduced to fits of loud laughter when I took a look on YouTube at the Blackburn Rovers Venky chicken advert. It was 25 seconds of pure face-crinkling, yuk-inducing, cringe-inspiring embarrassment. There remains something quite mind-boggling about a leading football club funded by Indian chicken take-aways. It adds new meaning to any Blackburn scout claiming to have found a real nugget. Three Prem clubs face relagation in nine months time. Blackburn must surely be one of the favourites.
But, how good it was to see the merry-go-round start up again and to get back to a meaningful football match; the first of the season at home to Watford. Burnley began the season with just the one pre-season purchased player. There had been much talk of a third loan signing from Man City, Vladimir Weiss, a tricky winger. Alas there was no sign of him, although another loan was mentioned – this one from Nat West.
It was a cracking game on a day of abysmal weather. The presentation to Jimmy Mac of his MBE was genuinely moving. Applause burst out frequently. People confessed to having a lump in the throat and moist eyes. This man is truly loved. His wish for 3 points sadly went unanswered; in fact it could have been a disastrous defeat but for a stirring rally and two Burnley goals after they had gone 2–0 down. But how niggardly it was of the BBC not to feature any of it on the Football League Show later that night.
This was a game of three halves (you know what I mean). In the first half there were 35 minutes of fantastic, fizzing Burnley play, with terrific moves, first time passing, superb crosses, penetrating runs and dazzling footwork. We waited for the goal to come. It duly did. But it was Watford who delivered the classic sucker punch just before half time with a totally unexpected goal that had us shaking our heads in disbelief. Not only that but in the middle 30 minutes while Burnley huffed and puffed and barely a player rose above mediocre, in fact some of them just about vanished, Watford scored a second. More than just a few people headed for the exits. We feared the worst. How could this be? Burnley had looked superb in that first spell. But then in the third half Burnley came back into it; Austin had replaced Pato and when Treacy came on he was a real influence. Both of them scored although it looked like Austin’s goal was Treacy’s shot that he deflected. Mee, Treacy, Fox and Trippier were the pick of the bunch. New man Amougou looked remarkably like a slimmer Bikey (and played like him). The mystery was the Pato substitution with the player allegedly holding his leg several times… asking to be taken off at half time…. said he couldn’t play to his full potential… and reports say he sat in the Cricket Field Stand for the second half. He’d played a pretty thankless, unsuccessful role whilst he was on. Was his old injury not fully cleared up over the summer? Was this some sort of mental problem? Ironically, what Burnley seemed to lack was an Iwelumo – but one with pace and movement. You couldn’t help feel that a big man would have been on the end of some of those first half crosses.
The return of Iwelumo with Watford was nothing to get excited about as he disproved the theory that a returning player will always score against his old club. An attendance of 14,617 wasn’t bad I suppose considering how few came from Watford. But it’s a long time since I felt cold on an opening match in August, or saw the floodlights switched on in the unseasonal gloom. General consensus seemed to be that this was “nearly” a good side. But to become a consistently good side you have to put away chances at one end during the periods when you play well and dominate; and eliminate the soft goals at the other. And I suppose if you could do that you’d be Barcelona. Only a draw then: but there was much to admire and feel good about in two out of the three halves.