Image from

A Short-sighted Show of Strength

Image from
New rule changes will only benefit the likes of Alexei Miller and his Zenit team.

If ever there was a sign that money talks in Russian football, events of the last week have provided it. A meeting of club chairmen and Russian Football Union officials took place in midweek to discuss changes to the rules of the upcoming Premier League, and the outcome shows a worrying shift in power away from the many and into the hands of the wealthy few.

It must first be stated that of the 26 voters to take part in the decision-making process, only seven opposed to motion to relax the limit on the number of foreign players on the field at any given time. Leading the opposition movement was Leonid Fedun, head of Spartak Moscow and a man determined to use his side’s history of producing promising young talent to full advantage – it was a golden generation of Spartak youth that made up the majority of Oleg Romantsev’s legendary team of the 90s. Dinamo’s representative is also rumoured to have opposed the motion, and is to be commended for sticking to his club’s philosophy of blooding youngsters alongside their imports.

Yet the other 19 voters all fell in favour of the rule change, which now gives managers to right to field seven non-Russians at any given time, rather than the previous six. Whilst such a small change may seem unimportant in the immediate future, the background to the decision could signal a change in attitude from one of self-preservation to one of winning at all costs – including the survival of other clubs and the future of the national team.

It speaks volumes that those leading the ‘for’ lobby were those representing the three richest clubs in Russia – Alexei Miller and Zenit, CSKA chairman Evgeni Giner, and Anzhi’s wealthy backer Suleyman Kerimov. Whilst a number of other clubs and organisations voted with them, these three symbolise the power of money in the modern game, and the willingness of the bigger clubs to disregard the welfare of other, small sides in their bid for success. At the moment, both Zenit and CSKA possess a good number of Russian players capable of competing at the top level – both sides made it to the Champions League knockout phase, and a combination of the two clubs effectively made up the national team at Euro 2012. However, age is a concern – the Berezutsky twins and Sergei Ignashevich are only getting older and slower, whilst Zenit will not be able to rely on Zyryanov, Anyukov, Kerzhakov and Semak for much longer. Whilst btoh sides can claim one or two bright sparks among their younger players – Pavel Mamaev and Georgi Schennikov at CSKA, Maxim Kannunikov at Zenit – neither Luciano Spalletti nor Leonid Slutsky can possibly hope to fill those gaps with their own academy graduates.

Of course, both sides possess the funds necessary to simply purchase the best of the Russian talent on offer at other clubs, but the selling clubs are all too aware of this. Prices are pushed higher as a result – see Alexander Bukharov’s €11m move from Rubin to Zenit – and the recipient of the fee is able to strengthen their own team in an attempt to compensate for their loss. However, with one more space now available for foreign-born talent, it makes it even easier for the big teams to maintain a conveyor belt of international stars, selling established names on to bigger European clubs and replacing them cheaply from abroad. None of this money filters down through the league, and although the small teams keep their own stars, they often lack the funds and ambition to hold them down in the long-term and suffer as a result. For an emerging club such an Anzhi, who have almost unlimited funds but little in the way of an established, productive youth development program, the ability to field another foreigner could make the difference between pushing for Europe and challenging for the title.

As well as pointing to short-sightedness from the other clubs backing the motion, who will now be forced to compete with the bigger names for foreign talent only to inevitably lose it further down the line, there have also been concerned raised by those in charge of the national team and its future. After all, with the incentive to develop homegrown talent disappearing – the rule forcing a Russian youth player to be named in the matchday squad was ditched midway through last season – there are many who worry that Russian football could be about to enter a bleak period in which few genuine international quality players are able to make the step up. There are already signs of this in the extreme continuity favoured in outgoing manager Dick Advocaat’s squads, but when the current crop of players draw the curtain on their international careers, their replacements are far from obvious. Academies such as the Abramovich-backed Togliatti school may be notable success stories, but Russia’s footballing infrastructure pales in comparison to other European nations, and there is a real danger that the country could be left behind if measures are not put in place to prevent it.

With this rule change there comes a sense of turkeys voting for Christmas – a more competitive elite in the Champions League, but at the cost of a talent drain from sides lower down the pecking order, fewer chances of progress for young players, and a national team struggling to find a future. The knock-on effects outside of the Premier League remain to be seen, but for now the amendment screams of short-term success being prioritised at the expense of years to come. Spartak and Dinamo may be holding fast to their principles, but even they are only able to do so because they have the money necessary to invest in their youth. For the rest of the clubs outside the elite, the situation they are presented with offers little consolation, and only adds to growing uncertainty in the Russian game.


7 thoughts on “A Short-sighted Show of Strength

  1. I think its good for Russia. Elite players need to play in the Champions League, so when the national team needs to perform, the players are used to the pressure to perform. This group of Russians have been mentally weak, and getting bounced out by Second Division Swiss sides (Loko) or Irish sides (Kryla) or Zenit to second rate Nacional and Auxerre does not help.

    It is no coincidence the best National term performance coincided with Zenit’s positive UEFA Cup and not long after CSKA won UEFA cup either.

    Without players playing against elite players, you’ll lose in stupid ways like the national team did. Now with only one Russian team in group stage, and a lot of ground to make up to close the gap, the there are even fewer opportunities in Europe.

    1. I agree up to a point, in that playing alongside better players will improve the Russians in the side, but I think there’s a lot to be said for the alternative. My fear is that with so much foreign talent available cheaply it will become the default option for the likes of Zenit, CSKA and Anzhi, with Russians thrown in to make up the numbers – see Anzhi’s full-backs last season. It seems to me that the rule change helps remove any incentive to produce homegrown talent, and whilst Anzhi seem to have a grand plan in place, there is little coming out of Zenit at the moment. If this carries on, no amount of foreign talent will help the national side even if European success at club level is more likely. A question of priority for the clubs I guess, but I can’t see how this benefits the majority in the long term.

  2. I agree that this new rule decisively benefits the wealthiest clubs (Zenit, CSKA, Anzhi, Lokomotiv, and, ironically, Dinamo and Spartak). On the other hand, the Russian league hasn’t been known for parity outside of St. Petersburg and Moscow, in any case, with big-spending Rubin and Anzhi the only real exceptions in the last ten years.

    As John pointed out, I think it’s significant that the new rule will help Russian clubs succeed in Europe. Ultimately, that success – along with the arrival of more famous international players, such as Eto’o – may prove just as helpful to the development of Russian football as the previous foreigner limit. For instance, in Dagestan, where Anzhi plays, football has grown tremendously in popularity in just two years, despite Anzhi releasing or not playing many of its former Dagestani stars. I guess I’m optimistic that the short term loss of playing time for Russians will lead to future gains because of a rise in popularity for the sport in Russia. Russia’s ability to harness that popularity will hinge on the national football union’s and clubs’ commitment to invest in youth academies, which, as you point out, may not happen given the new foreigner limit. In Anzhi’s case, however, the club has repeatedly stressed that their goal is to develop football in Dagestan. They’ve nearly completed a brand-new youth academy outside of Makhachkala and plan to open seven more training centers in the republic. We’ll see if they, and other clubs, follow through on their promises.

    1. An interesting thought, it will be interesting to see if the top sides are able to attract top talent – Anzhi and Zenit seem to be doing a fairly good job – and whether that will filter through to increased popularity. Certainly in Dagestan the increased infrastructure will help, as will the impact of Anzhi becoming a truly local team in the near future with the completion of their facilities in Makhachkala.
      Thinking about it, a lot seems to hinge on 2018 and how much of that momentum translates into growth of the game. If that materialises, the new stadia may not be left as white elephants, and Russia could go through something of a revival. Anything before that seems unlikely at the moment.
      One question out of curiosity for you guys and anyone else reading – do you think complete removal of the foreigner limit would ultimately benefit the Russian game and/or team?

      1. I don’t know what the proper balance is. I think it’s important that at least 3 spots be reserved for home-grown talent, but that’s just a guess. It will be interesting to see how the season plays out with the new limit.

  3. This change lessens the incentive for the top sides to snap up all the young russian talent and force them onto the field, letting kids stay at lower level clubs and develop their game more, instead of needing to learn a specific role that they can play to get on the field for the top sides.

    Also it will boost the competition for playing time at those top clubs, so that young stars can not become as complacent, as clubs won’t be forced to keep playing underachieving russian players.

    1. An interesting thought, an definitely a positive spin and what has been taken fairly negatively by a lot of people.

      I see the two sides of your argument as a little contradictory however – on the one hand, youngsters will get more game time at smaller clubs, on the other, those clubs are now able to buy in more foreigners to force them out. Whilst I can see the sense, I get the worrying impression that the big sides will if anything step up their pursuit of young Russians – if they get them young, they won’t have to pay such a premium for top-level domestic talent at a later date.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s