By Panos Bletsos

The Champions League is arguably the flagship of club football competitions across the globe, involving the elite of European sides, the majority of top-class players, some of the temples of the Beautiful Game and – of course – money; big money. For the past 20 years or so, the Champions League has almost become synonymous to football itself, something like an annual World Cup. But is that era drawing to a close?

Olympique de Marseille’s come-back victory in Dortmund (3-2), in a game which ended several minutes later than every other match on the last matchday (and left Olympiakos Pirea stranded) and even more so Olympique Lyonnais’ notorious 7-1 away battering of Dinamo Zagreb (combined with two Ajax goals being highly controversially ruled out against Real Madrid in Amsterdam at the same time) opened up Pandora’s box. The Greek champions, who thought they were qualified to the last 16 after their 3-1 beating of Arsenal, lodged a complaint to UEFA but to no avail, while Frankie de Boer openly expressed the Dutch giants’ frustration. But the damage had been done.

Johansson’s brainchild

When Lennart Johansson assumed the European football governing body’s presidency in April 1990, he knew that in a time of changes there was only one thing that could help the Champions League survive: credibility. With the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up and the number of UEFA member associations gradually rising to 53, the perspicacious Swede had to add political turmoil to his list of new challenges ahead, which also included television, marketing, finance, sponsorship and global resonance. It wasn’t easy, but he made it happen. The best taking on the best on a regular basis, several times per season and not exclusively depending on the outcome of a draw attracted fans, clubs, footballers and coaches alike - and thus generated income, eventually turning the old European Champions Cup into the Champions League we are all familiar with today.

The pros…

The trick seemed to work fine. The competition went through several changes of format since 1992, but the key to its success was without a shred of a doubt the introduction of group play. The likes of Real Madrid, Milan, Liverpool, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Manchester United, Internazionale and Juventus Turin formed the hard core of the Champions League, most (if not all) of them featuring in every edition and thus playing each other week in, week out. Television ratings rocketed to the sky and high-profile sponsors, a number of major multinational corporations, lined up to take advantage. Advertising and large scale ticket sales brought money and power to UEFA and clubs taking part, subsequently altering the face of the European game.

… the cons…

It seemed as if everything was coming up roses – but was it really? As I have pointed out before, the increase of places allocated to the most prominent footballing countries of the continent (England, Spain, Italy, Germany, France) allowed a small number of clubs, such as the aforementioned, to establish themselves as Champions League regulars. That only made them richer and richer and as the financial gap between them and the plebs of Europe grew bigger and bigger, the competition slowly but steadily turned into a private club of roughly ten actual contenders – if you add London rivals Arsenal and Chelsea to the mix.

… and the suspicions

Give the people what they want, one could argue. That’s true. But one must also take under account that the group-based format also opened the door to controversy. And suspicions of match-rigging did not emerge for the first time this season. Let me just remind you of a few examples.

December 9, 2003. Already qualified Milan welcome second-placed Celta, who’d only won once in their five previous group H games. The Champions league holders take a late first-half lead through Kaká, but Jesuli equalizes just two minutes later and the Spaniards finally turn the game on its head thanks to a José Ignacio 71st minute strike (1-2). The result meant that Brugge, 2-1 winners over Ajax, finished third, a point behind the Vigo outfit, who were taking part in the competition for the first (and only to date) time in their history.

December 8, 2004. The final matchday of group A. Third-placed Monaco travel to A Coruña to take on a disappointing Deportivo. The winless Spanish had only mustered two points and the principality side hammered them 5-0 at the Municipal de Riazor, thus claiming top spot. At the same time Liverpool came from behind to beat Olympiakos 3-1, a late Stevie Gerrard long-distance drive keeping the English in the tournament they eventually won at the expense of the Greeks. Final group standings: Monaco 12, Liverpool, Olympiakos 10.

Two years later it was another Greek side left frustrated at the end of the Champions League group stage. After consecutively overcoming Lille and Milan, second-placed AEK visited rock-bottom Anderlecht, while the French had to beat the Italian giants at Giuseppe Meazza to stand any chance of going through. AEK fought their way back from two down to draw 2-2 in Brussels, but Les dogues recorded one of their most famous victories ever, overcoming Milan 2-0 to leapfrog the Greeks by a single point and thus qualify.

High-profile cases, part II

Similar stories have cast their shadow on the Europa League as well. On December 15, 2004, second division German side Alemannia Aachen beat AEK 2-0 in Athens and qualified instead of Zenit, who would soon after claim both the UEFA Cup and the European Super Cup. On December 17, 2008, Nancy went down 1-0 to Deportivo, who went through, while the French were knocked out as Polish outfit Lech won 1-0 at fallen heroes Feyenoord. And only a few weeks ago two one-all draws (PAOK – Rubin and Brugge – Sporting de Braga) on the final matchday assured all four teams involved passed on to the next round, breaking the English hearts of Tottenham Hotspur and Birmingham City.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not implying that any of the matches mentioned above were fixed. I’m simply pointing out the fact that group play has its flaws – given the circumstances, one may “win” without playing for a victory. And if you’re still not convinced, there are some more distinct examples on the international front. Argentina’s 6-0 drubbing of Peru in the 1978 FIFA World Cup (when the hosts sealed their place in the final at the expense of Brazil on goal difference), West Germany beating neighbouring Austria 1-0 four years on (they both went through, as Algeria crashed out, again on goal difference) and the 2004 European Championship “Nordic victory”, when Denmark and Sweden drew 2-2 (and qualified both, leaving Italy out on number of goals scored between the three) easily come to mind.

Back to the future

So, what can be done? I believe it all comes down to choosing the right path: gaining trustworthiness or making a fortune. Going with easy money, UEFA will change nothing and will maintain the current competition format. Given Michel Platini’s comments after the Zagreb game, this is what will happen. Selecting reliability, why not opt to return to the all-time classic Champions Cup format of two-legged ties all the way to an one-off final – just like it used to be up until the 1990-’91 campaign. That ensures no casual encounters on the final (if not even earlier) matchday of group play, while also guaranteeing to a certain extent coaches fielding their best available line-ups in every game, which is hardly the case these days when the likes of Barcelona, Arsenal or Manchester United, for example, are involved.

Can it be done? Of course. A total of 76 clubs took part in the running tournament, including those starting off in the summer qualifiers. Should the group stage be abolished, a single qualifying round including the 24 sides further down on the ranking list could downsize participants to 64, who would then carry on up to the title match. What’s more, such a change would not affect the allocation of places – England, Spain and Italy could still feature with four teams each, Germany, France and Russia with three each etc.

What do YOU think?

Radical, right? That may well be, but it could also be a proposal worth considering by UEFA, in an effort to protect their own investment. I’m not THAT romantic, of course, but I’d really like you to share your thoughts with Soccer365.