Why the German football model is the way forward

Ah, Germany. Land of hot dogs and...well, Germans. I can't really think of much else. How I envy them. "WHY!" I hear you cry. Well, sit back, dear reader, and I shall explain.

With news that Alisher Usmanov, an Uzbek, is attempting to increase his share in Arsenal to rival majority shareholder Stan Kroenke, an American, it's really hit home that no club is free from the grasp of foreign investors. Chelsea, Man City, United, Liverpool and several others have already seen their club bought out by foreign investors, making fans uneasy - see the ongoing Green and Gold protest at United, for example.

So, where does Germany come into play? Well, it's my view that the German model of football club ownership is one that we should all aspire to. The clubs, basically, are not run as businesses as such, but as sporting organisations which the fans are members of. The club members must own at least a 51% stake of the club. This means that no foreign owner can come in and automatically take control of the club, and that the club members generally always have the final say in the direction their club takes on issues. It means investment by those with an interest in the club can still take place, hence certain clubs being able to pay relatively large wages and transfer fees, but they will never be able to compete with the Man Cities and Chelseas of this world.

Club members are therefore understandably seen as vital to the ongoing success of the club and are treated less as customers and more as investors. It also means that revenue the clubs make is automatically put back into the club, and not used to line the pockets of a faceless Arabic millionaire. Clubs can therefore afford to set relatively low prices for match tickets, and add extra incentives. Schalke, for example, offer their fans bus transfers to and from the game included in the price of a match ticket. According to some figures I've pulled from the Bundesliga website, the average ticket price was just under 22 euros, the cheapest average price of all the major European leagues. Meanwhile, the average attendance was 41, 802 fans per game (both of these stats are from the 09-10 season). The average attendance was the highest in Europe, and with the number of people attending games sitting at 17.37 million fans over the course of the season, it doesn't take a genius to surmise that low ticket prices are a strong contributory factor.

Now, I'm not going to sit here and say that we should all follow their example. The fans must clearly have the best interests of the club at heart, if this model is to work. It could be argued that fans will encourage huge spending if it means the club will be successful in the league and in Europe, which could lead to huge future debt (further reading - Borussia Dortmund). Also, the German model is not without it's loopholes - teams like Hoffenheim, funded by a millionaire, Leipzeig, funded by Red Bull and others manage to attract significant investment that leaves other clubs trailing in their wake. It could be argued that this is the German equivalent of the rich Arabs, Indians and Russians ploughing their money into Premiership clubs. That is not to say they do not conform to the 51% club ownership rule - of course they do, or they would not be competing in their respective leagues - but they have managed to attract significant corporate investment which other clubs lack.

However - my final point. Is lacking investment a good thing? Youth development is now a key area in German football's overhaul. We saw from the German squad at the World Cup, stuffed full of young players like Ozil, Khedira, Muller and Boateng, that it is possible to play well with young, relatively untested players. It could be argued that they were perhaps the most skilful, entertaining team in South Africa - a far cry from the gritty, determined German teams of the past. The German FA invests £16.5m per year into youth player development, has created 366 grassroots football training centres nationwide that function using the infrastructure provided by local clubs that provide weekly two hour training sessions to 11-14 year olds delivered by an FA-approved and appointed coach, in addition to their training with their clubs. Leading on from that, there are a further 46 club academies and further education schools that have been designated football schools, which allow youth players to continue their education as they would at a normal school, combined with extra football coaching. This is vitally important, as it means players who may not eventually make it in the game have a sound educational grounding and are ideally placed to move on to University or the jobs market. Finally, national youth football teams have access to the same facilities and staff as the first team, which indoctrinates them into what is required at international level from an early age. Wolfgang Nierschbach, general secretary of the German FA, claims that this set up is to ensure that "no player with good potential shall be allowed to slip through the net."

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions as to whether this model should be replicated elsewhere. But one final thought - In Germany, they have terracing.

My thoughts on Diouf

El-Hadji Diouf. Never before have three words provoked such a gigantic backlash in Scotland. Well, aside from "fucking POLL TAX?!"

Now, I am a Celtic fan, but I am going to try and write as neutrally as possible. So firstly, let me outline Diouf's crime count as quickly as possible:

Motoring offences. Several. Unconfirmed reports that it was he who caused Princess Diana to crash in Paris.
Spitting offences. Many. Coca Cola are thinking of contacting him to use his saliva as their new bottled water following the forced withdrawal of Desani.
Racial abuse. Calling a boy "white." Sources state he was accurate, however ball boy takes offence.
Abusing cripples and encouraging fucking legs. A strange fetish.

Now, if there had just been one or two incidents of note, or it had merely been motoring offences, we could perhaps overlook it. However, Diouf's previous misdemeanors are extensive and troubling. Spitting on an 11 year old fan is particularly reprehensible, and I assume universally condemned by anyone with half a brain. I cannot deny, Celtic have signed players in the past with interesting back stories - Roy Keane being a prime example, however there is something particularly distasteful about Diouf - possibly the fact that his offences are so varied, or simply so numerous, that it seems he simply does not learn his lesson.

His signing represents a huge risk by Rangers. I actually (whisper it) have a lot of time for Walter Smith, despite his walking out on Scotland - were I Scotland manager and Celtic had come in for me, I would have acted in exactly the same way. Smith is a shrewd manager, he has managed troubled, yet talented players in the past, and obviously thinks he can encourage Diouf to keep his head down and showcase his undoubted talent. However, the question I ask is this - is Scottish football not in a poor enough state as it is, without allowing players such as this into our clubs? With supporters already under intense scrutiny, Old Firm games being a cauldron of hatred already, there is surely a higher than average chance that Diouf could respond in ways he has shown he is capable of in the past, and enrage fans further?

I hope I am wrong, and that he keeps his head down and sticks to the football. But I am of the opinion that a tiger never changes his stripes, and that his signing could be a huge step in the wrong direction for Rangers, the SPL and Scottish football as a whole.