For a third time, Europe's newest international competition, the UEFA Nations League, is under way - with a quickfire four-game burst getting the 2022-23 campaign up and running this month.
The finals tournament is due to be held next year, just after the conclusion of an extended club season with the Qatar 2022 World Cup marooned in the middle, so questions continue to arise about the Nations League's worth.
First introduced in 2018, UEFA's aim was apparently to add more 'sporting meaning' to international football and reduce the number of pointless friendlies.
As a competition that involves all 55 member nations, it provides a structure in which promotion and relegation can be achieved on merit, with backdoor routes to World Cup and European Championship playoffs also available.
Many so-called lesser nations have lauded its arrival, but with player workload a significant issue to wrangle for the global game's administrators, Sports Mole now considers whether the Nations League should be streamlined, and if so, how?
POWERLESS PLAYERS?
© Reuters
While UEFA's latest ventures, the Nations and Europa Conference Leagues, have proved themselves popular, against all expectations at the outset, their many benefits do not come without placing further pressure on players who have turned out relentlessly since football resumed while the COVID-19 pandemic still raged at its deadliest.
The players' union Fifpro recently suggested a mandatory mid-season break of between 10 and 14 days to help players cope with an ever-increasing workload, and have called for a limit to the number of games to protect players from burnout.
According to their analysis, making two appearances of at least 45 minutes with fewer than five days in between constitutes 'back-to-back' fixtures, and almost nine in 10 players who took part in a Fifpro survey agreed that such instances should be limited to six successive games or fewer.
Indeed, the union states that no player should play more than 55 matches per season, and almost half of those questioned would prefer to see longer but less frequent international breaks in order to reduce travel.
Though this summer's Nations League blitz, with most teams taking part in four fixtures in under a fortnight, actually fits the latter objective, its timing has caused many observers to call for a change, as they sit through some listless performances from the game's greatest names.
This has intensified scrutiny on a competition which seemed to be settling in nicely to the international calendar, but by nature of its competitive element - in many ways a positive factor - coaches are less inclined to experiment and give game-time to fresh faces.
So what could be done to retain the Nations League's appeal - teams playing others of a like stature, a pyramid structure based on sporting merit, and increased exposure for the international game amid the clubs' growing hegemony - but reduce demands on weary players before they reach saturation point?
A NEW-LOOK NATIONS LEAGUE
© Reuters
Continuing the creeping trend towards an entirely stuffed schedule, in which fans are presented with innumerable 'important' games featuring the most attractive teams for TV rights-bidders, UEFA recently announced a change to the format of their glistening crown jewel - the Champions League.
Partly in a bid to ward off the still present danger of a breakaway Super League, the number of teams in the competition's group stage will rise from 32 to 36 in the 2024-25 season, and each qualifying club will play eight games over a total of 10 matchdays - up from six currently.
While this runs counter to the requirements of Fifpro, and may ultimately dilute the European game's most prized 'product', the shift in setup could possibly hold the key to a player-focused reform of the Nations League.
The new format will feature an initial phase including one single league table, which sees all sides playing eight games against different opponents, with four home ties and four away.
Then, the top eight progress to the knockout stage, while those from ninth to 24th compete in a playoff to join them - an arrangement related to the renowned 'Swiss-system' tournament.
Such a format features fewer matches than a standard round-robin would do, and each team does not play all the other competitors - this could be applied in the Nations Leagues' four divisions: A, B, C and D.
The Swiss system is used for competitions in which there are considered too many entrants for a full round-robin, and eliminating competitors early on is undesirable, as in the Nations League.
Variations are used in competitions diverse as chess, curling, Scrabble, and even the wonderful world of Pokemon, but would international football be ready for such a shake-up which could cause confusion and misunderstanding in its early stages?
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
© Reuters
It may have already been forgotten, but the original Nations League, which kicked off in 2018, comprised numerous three-team groups and featured four-game campaigns; taking up less of the ram-packed calendar.
Certainly, such a move would remove two competitive fixtures from the schedule with the flick of a switch on UEFA's supercomputer, which may or may not exist, but there could also be consequences for fairness in the competition.
That format has long been criticised for not having each team competing at the same time, therefore allowing a competitive advantage to teams who play last; knowing what is required in the final game to secure qualification at others' expense - see the 'Disgrace of Gijon', a 1982 World Cup carve-up between Austria and West Germany.
Another alternative, then, could be to retain the current pyramid structure, but with five teams in each group. They would each play twice both home and away but not the relevant 'reverse' match - again, though, accusations of unfairness could arise depending on how the fixtures break down for your particular nation.
For instance, would France benefit from playing say Germany and Belgium at home before tackling Switzerland and Czech Republic on the road, compared to the Germans taking on both their main rivals for top spot away from home?
FUTURE EXPANSION
© Reuters
There is no doubt that the Nations League is here to stay, having come a long way since the initial consultation process with Europe's member associations began back in 2011.
At that time, it was stated that the driver of the competition would be 'sporting integrity' as associations, coaches, players and supporters apparently felt friendly internationals were not adequate in this regard. UEFA also wanted to realise its goal of improving the standing of national team football against the dominant club game; allowing all nations to play competitively at an appropriate level.
That much, it is fair to say, has been achieved to some extent, but rather than reign in the Nations League's current demands on players, there remain plans afoot to 'expand the franchise'.
Though a mooted Global Nations League - including all 223 members of FIFA's six continental confederations and taking place every two years - never quite got off the ground, change is surely coming.
In the framework for that competition, group winners would have advanced to eight-team intercontinental tournaments in each of seven divisions, to be played every other summer and broadcast around the clock - that may yet be revived in the more distant future.
However, UEFA have already agreed a deal with CONMEBOL to accept 10 more participants from 2024 onwards, with South American countries joining the competition: controversially, all games would be played in Europe.
The top six CONMEBOL nations according to the World Cup qualifying table are set to join League A, while the other four slots into the second-tier League B. Leagues C and D would remain unchanged.
Progress is assured, then, but with a 24-team Club World Cup also in the offing, it may be a case of moving on to bigger but not necessarily better things.
Jonathan O'Shea
