1. Scotland in the sun: How La Liga’s problems are more than just skin deep

The pie

“Well, you’re not looking at the whole pie Jenny,” David Brent muttered confusingly to his boss. “Wernham Hogg is one big pie, and if they’ve let me in charge of that one big pie, I’ll be in charge of the pie, and the people are the fruit, and I’m-”

“I don’t have time for the pie thing, David,” his boss retorted.

“...Pie thing...you don’t want it, no,” Brent realised.

These are the words of a failing manager of a paper merchants, based in Slough, in a fictional, satirical comedy. His boss, however, had had enough of the pie thing. 

Ricky Gervais has won worldwide acclaim with his BBC hit show The Office thanks to his creation of Brent and the hideous way in which he manages his work.

Brent’s boss is not the only one who has had enough of the pie thing. Sevilla’s president, Jose Maria del Nido, amongst others, is not happy with it either. This is the television money pie shared amongst the clubs in Spain’s top flight.

Only, this is no laughing matter.

As Barcelona and Real Madrid have accelerated ahead in the last few years, the rest of Spanish football trail in their wake, both on, and off, the field.

Barca and Real can argue that they generate all this money through their success on the pitch, with ticket sales and through merchandising, so they deserve such a large percentage (currently that share stands at 49%) of the pie but the long-term health of club football in Spain is at risk, with many clubs in financial disarray throughout the country.

Just last year former Almeria coach, Juanma Lillo, said: “The difference between Madrid and Barcelona and the rest is insuperbale. How can Valencia ever hope to keep hold of (David) Villa and (David) Silva? The rest of us have been turned into mere suppliers of players for them.”

If this was just down to gate receipts, good management and fine marketing then it could be tolerated. After all, there is little to be done about that, other than to be admired, and even attempt to match it elsewhere by applying similar strategies in an effort to catch up. The highest form of flattery is, after all, imitation.

Other big clubs around Europe are pushing these boundaries too, both in their domestic leagues, and in European competition, most notably Bayern Munich and Manchester United.

However, Spain’s top two have a distinct advantage over their rivals, both in La Liga and in European competition. This stems from the television deal they are able to negotiate. Last year their combined television revenue totalled €280 million. The other eighteen clubs in the country’s top flight earned a similar amount – between them.

In Germany, things could not be more different, as German football writer, Claus Melchior, describes: “The Bundesliga is more competitive than most of the other top European Leagues. I think it has quite a bit to do with the distribution of TV money. Whereas clubs in Spain have individual contracts with TV stations, Bundesliga rights are sold collectively. They bring less money than TV rights in Britain, but the money is fairly evenly distributed.”

Javier Tebas, sports lawyer and a central figure in the new television rights deal, claims part of the problem is mentality. He illustrates the difference between the Spanish and Anglo-Saxon perspective perfectly when he says: “The Anglo-Saxon philosophy is a lot different to the Italian and Spanish philosophy (in terms of promoting the competition). In the Latin world people always think: what can I get out of this? The Anglo-Saxon way is more long term: what can I give to this and then what can I get out of this later? What can I bring (provide) to the table? Then what can I take away. The Latin idea is much more immediate: what’s in it for me (as in right now)? Whereas the English idea is more long term. It’s the (difference in) mentality.”

The German way is not too dissimilar to the English. “They are like the Anglo-Saxons in their mentality,” Tebas added.

However, he could not conceal his contempt for his compatriots’ thinking. “The problem is with the Latins. It’s a problem because they always want immediate results. They have no patience. The Germans, but more the English, have lots of patience.

“In conclusion: the English and the Germans believe in their leagues and this philosophy but the Spanish clubs don’t believe in La Liga. This is the problem.”

And he had words of praise for the Premier League as he felt their mindset gave them a significant advantage over their Latin counterparts. “The Premier League is the biggest competition in the world and it’s not just by co-incidence. Ten years ago it wasn’t so big but they have put in a lot of hard work into the competition itself.”

Nevertheless, the differences can be attributed to more than just attitude. “This is because in Spain, the league doesn’t manage the TV rights,” Tebas opined. “In England, they do. And you have no power if you have no control over the main income source. This is the fundamental difference. The money in England is for the Premier League, then the competing clubs. In Spain this is different.”

When the Glazers took over at Manchester United they did so in the belief that the Premier League model had to follow that of its Spanish rival. The Americans were convinced that United would ultimately end up with a greater share of the television money.

The BBC’s business editor, Jeff Randall, confirmed to BBC Radio 5 live at the time of the takeover in 2005: "The key point of Glazer's business plan is football television rights. If United can break with the Premier League collective agreement and negotiate on their own then maybe they can jack up their income. “

The Premier League were quick to quell their ambitions. The League’s chief executive, Richard Scudamore, said in response to those ideas: “It's always proved impossible to break away. If they want to do so 14 of the 20 clubs have to do it and it is almost impossible to think that can happen.”

Today, that prospect looks even less likely and in 2010/11 the Premier League enjoyed one of its most competitive seasons since its inception nearly 20 years ago.

Surely the most outspoken advocate of change in the distribution of television money in Spain is Sevilla president Jose Maria del Nido.

“We demand a fair distribution of television rights,” Del Nido told Marca. “There cannot be much difference between them. The league is going to be s***. According to the current deal only Madrid and Barcelona benefit and in the coming season the same thing as happened this year will happen where they get 100 points, nearly thirty points away from third place.”

“You have to lay a fair foundation. Clubs have to be serious in this matter because, as it stands, it will end up with only Madrid and Barcelona having to face each other 19 times.”

Del Nido wants to see a more competitive league and would love to see La Liga offering up the kind of random results on offer in England.

He added: “Sevilla are championing the fight for a better deal. Look at the Premier League results. Manchester United win 2-0, Chelsea lose 1-0 and Tottenham beat Arsenal at home. That is a league!

“Not Almeria losing 8-0 or Athletic Bilbao losing 5-1 at the Bernabeu. That is not a real competition. I call on all football fans to fight for a settlement of equal rights so that competition can exist and not sell the league from the opening day to the two largest teams.”

In October 2010 a revolt was threatened but such a movement was merely no more than a threat, like the proverbial kid in the playground telling a supposed friend he wanted his ball back only to realise he had no hope as he was infinitely smaller than the thief.

The next set of TV rights for La Liga is almost certainly going to be sold collectively, rather than individually, as the clubs have recognised that they can make more money from this kind of deal. But don’t expect Real Madrid or Barcelona to lose out as a result.

The Guardian’s Spanish football writer, Sid Lowe, explains: “The new package will still enshrine the inequality because Real Madrid and Barcelona, within the league, have the power to say: ‘you want a league without us, go ahead’.”

The big two can say this because they know the broadcasting companies will be less attracted to La Liga without them and therefore the other clubs would solicit far less money from any future deal.

"The reason why clubs have accepted the new deal is realism," Lowe continued. "A club like Osasuna looks at this and thinks: ‘my overall amount of money will be better, I’m not going to win the league anyway, why not enshrine my inequality to make sure I protect myself.”

Barcelona and Real Madrid’s share of the pie may diminish with a new deal (from 49% to 34%) but their overall income will increase as the collective deal will be worth so much more than its predecessor. As a result, it is clear to see the advantages from their perspective.

For Barca and Real they believe this new arrangement can help them dominate the rest of Europe, as well as their domestic rivals.

Sid Lowe described the other winners and losers: "The teams that have some sort of pretension of challenging Madrid and Barcelona are the ones who’ve had a difficult decision to make.

“Atletico Madrid and Valencia are reasonably happy because they have been enshrined as 3^rd and 4^th in Spain by this new deal.

“Sevilla and Villareal, who aspire to those positions, are the ones who are furious. They’re saying this means Madrid and Barcelona are going to win the league forever more. Of course, they are absolutely right but they are slightly dishonest because they manoeuvred themselves to try and be those 3^rd and 4^th placed teams. They’re criticising Valencia and Atletico Madrid for enshrining their weakness against Real and Barca, but protecting their strength against the rest, whereas if they had been able to manoeuvre themselves into that position, they would have done exactly the same thing.”