Two days into the Club World Cup, it's time for sweeping judgements. Worthy addition to the calendar or shameful vanity project that will lead to the apocalypse?
It's depressing, Jonathan. It's profoundly depressing. My view is that this wretched competition exacerbates the most negative forces at work in every national context. I believe you (or someone else in Libero) have made the point about New Zealand. One obvious consequence for New Zealand is that there will not be another true competition there for the foreseeable future, because the couple million quid that Auckland City got just for showing up and being thrashed guarantees that no one else will be able to challenge them there.
Let me make the point about Brazil. Brazilians are pathologically obsessed with the "champions of the world" title. Because we have won five World Cups, nothing but the World Cup matters. It is not uncommon to see Brazilians saying "what did this Cruyff dude do? What did he win? He won nothing." Cruyff won multiple editions of every competition in which he played or coached, but for Brazilians "he won nothing" because he did not win the World Cup and his Barcelona could not beat São Paulo FC. Brazilians who are old enough to remember the 1990s will remember the time when we did not even celebrate Copa America titles. They were just taken for granted.
It has been depressing to see the Brazilian press, pages, and social media this morning. There's nothing but raucous chauvinistic celebration of the "massacre" imposed by Palmeiras on Porto. Try to measure how humiliating this is: the greatest Brazilian winner of this decade took on a European team who are outside the top 5 national leagues and didn't even qualify for the Champions League last season. The game ended nil-nil, with the European team running about 70% of what they usually run in a CL match (125 km/ game in Europe, 85km last night). And the Brazilian media are on fire, celebrating the fact that Porto exchanged a few passes in their defensive half, waiting for the game to end.
I don't know what the most destructive mentality in England or continental Europe is, but in Brazil it's "pachequismo"-- that typically Brazilian self-centered chauvinism. In addition to exacerbating the economic disparities within Brazil, this competition will exacerbate pachequismo, regardless of the outcome of the tournament. Don't feel bad about what your misgivings regarding this tournament, there are plenty of us around the world who share your feelings.
This is not Montevideo 1930, this is not Paris/ Basel 1955. This is destructive to an unprecedented level.
I believe that the interest in the discussion about the value of the Club World Cup does not lie in the quality of the game itself, but rather in the extent to which the tournament, as an institution, helps develop networks that can spread the “footballing excellence” of the more advanced leagues to every corner of the planet. As far as this aspect is concerned—since I do believe that a Club World Cup is necessary—I consider that the game’s tactical and technical evolution now advances much faster at club level than the four-year gap between tournaments allows. This leads to significant distortions, which are reflected in the composition of the participating teams.
I wouldn’t compare it to the ventures of 1930 (the World Cup) or 1960 (the EURO), which were experimental new competitions. Those obviously faced challenges—both technical, due to the sport’s lower global level of economic development at the time, and in terms of wider acceptance. In an overstretched analogy, I’d say the appropriate comparison would be with the Club World Cup of 2000, the first edition of the tournament—not with this year’s, the 21st.
I believe this competition is necessary for the globalization of the game, but this must be done using different criteria—criteria that would allow it to host the highest level of football each year.
It's depressing, Jonathan. It's profoundly depressing. My view is that this wretched competition exacerbates the most negative forces at work in every national context. I believe you (or someone else in Libero) have made the point about New Zealand. One obvious consequence for New Zealand is that there will not be another true competition there for the foreseeable future, because the couple million quid that Auckland City got just for showing up and being thrashed guarantees that no one else will be able to challenge them there.
Let me make the point about Brazil. Brazilians are pathologically obsessed with the "champions of the world" title. Because we have won five World Cups, nothing but the World Cup matters. It is not uncommon to see Brazilians saying "what did this Cruyff dude do? What did he win? He won nothing." Cruyff won multiple editions of every competition in which he played or coached, but for Brazilians "he won nothing" because he did not win the World Cup and his Barcelona could not beat São Paulo FC. Brazilians who are old enough to remember the 1990s will remember the time when we did not even celebrate Copa America titles. They were just taken for granted.
It has been depressing to see the Brazilian press, pages, and social media this morning. There's nothing but raucous chauvinistic celebration of the "massacre" imposed by Palmeiras on Porto. Try to measure how humiliating this is: the greatest Brazilian winner of this decade took on a European team who are outside the top 5 national leagues and didn't even qualify for the Champions League last season. The game ended nil-nil, with the European team running about 70% of what they usually run in a CL match (125 km/ game in Europe, 85km last night). And the Brazilian media are on fire, celebrating the fact that Porto exchanged a few passes in their defensive half, waiting for the game to end.
I don't know what the most destructive mentality in England or continental Europe is, but in Brazil it's "pachequismo"-- that typically Brazilian self-centered chauvinism. In addition to exacerbating the economic disparities within Brazil, this competition will exacerbate pachequismo, regardless of the outcome of the tournament. Don't feel bad about what your misgivings regarding this tournament, there are plenty of us around the world who share your feelings.
This is not Montevideo 1930, this is not Paris/ Basel 1955. This is destructive to an unprecedented level.
I believe that the interest in the discussion about the value of the Club World Cup does not lie in the quality of the game itself, but rather in the extent to which the tournament, as an institution, helps develop networks that can spread the “footballing excellence” of the more advanced leagues to every corner of the planet. As far as this aspect is concerned—since I do believe that a Club World Cup is necessary—I consider that the game’s tactical and technical evolution now advances much faster at club level than the four-year gap between tournaments allows. This leads to significant distortions, which are reflected in the composition of the participating teams.
I wouldn’t compare it to the ventures of 1930 (the World Cup) or 1960 (the EURO), which were experimental new competitions. Those obviously faced challenges—both technical, due to the sport’s lower global level of economic development at the time, and in terms of wider acceptance. In an overstretched analogy, I’d say the appropriate comparison would be with the Club World Cup of 2000, the first edition of the tournament—not with this year’s, the 21st.
I believe this competition is necessary for the globalization of the game, but this must be done using different criteria—criteria that would allow it to host the highest level of football each year.
I’ve laid out my thoughts in more detail in a piece I wrote online—they are available here: https://substack.com/home/post/p-166065611