With the new Champions League format in full swing, the season has sparked much conversation around the number of matches players are expected to play. Now, 36 teams are competing instead of 32. In a league system where each team plays eight games, the old group stage is replaced with eight groups of four teams.
Burnout has long been an issue for football players, but the recent expansion of UEFA’s club competitions and FIFA’s newly introduced Club World Cup have brought the matter to the forefront.
Just last month, Manchester City midfielder Rodrigo Hernández Cascante, better known as Rodri, said players want to strike over the increased number of games. He said 40 to 50 matches a season is the right amount, not the 70 they are expected to play.
This week served as a pause for many club soccer fans as an international soccer window took place. This window runs from Oct. 7-15, and national teams are not allowed to play more than two matches. Many refer to it as an “international break,” but nothing about it is a break.
Many fans dislike the international breaks because they disrupt the flow of the season. A fan’s usual Saturday routine — watching a game, following goal updates, the comforting rhythm of “Final Score” or “Match of the Day” — is put on hold for the sake of international games that do not carry the same importance of a Champions League match.
From the players’ perspectives, these breaks also cause problems. Players who are called up to the national teams are most likely playing in every competition –– this means they are more prone to injuries or overall fatigue.
For example, Manchester United’s Bruno Fernandes played 70 matches last year and totaled 6,071 minutes, in contrast to Crystal Palace’s Eberechi Eze who played in 36 games last year, totalling 2,429 minutes.
The best players are playing too much football. And those players are the same ones expected to play in the Champions League.
These breaks can also be seen as football’s great equalizer. Teams with top international players understand these individuals will be unavailable for stretches of the season due to national team duties, like the FIFA World Cup and the UEFA European Championship.
It is expected that big clubs, with their larger squads, will manage around it. This absence of key players presents opportunities for lower-ranked teams to gain ground and younger players to play more minutes.
Also, not all international games are a waste of time. Many World Cup qualifiers and Conmebol disputes are just as entertaining as domestic league games.
Many South America fans wait all regular season to see their countries play. With teams like Argentina and Brazil –– two of the most successful national teams in history — Latin America is a football powerhouse.
While the region is known for its great players as well, Latin American league structures are notoriously complicated and plagued with corruption. As a result, international football offers fans an escape from these issues.
Still, the demands of constant travel and the overload of matches for top players need to be addressed. The international break not only disrupts football by putting the Champions League and domestic competitions on hold, but it also lowers the quality of play due to player fatigue.
FIFA and UEFA must take responsibility for their overloaded schedules and make some compromises. Is a 32-team Club World Cup or the European Nations League — a lesser version of the EUROs — really necessary?
Probably not.
