Strife in the Fast Lane

The word ‘tumultuous’ was invented for people like Lewis Hamilton. He’s the sort of sportsman who cannot go through a season in his career without a heap of controversy and incident being levelled upon his shoulders, but despite this he is still considered one of the best Formula One drivers on the grid. How does such a star lend himself to such inconsistency, you might ask (if you were talking to him)?

There’s been much written about Lewis’ recent chequered form. A lot of people say it’s a problem with his attitude, some say he lacks support, some say he’s just not that good a driver. Whatever the reasons for his lack of consistency, I think the truth is his dip has been marginal, at worst. This year was never going to be his year with the fantastically quick Red Bulls tearing up the field, but Lewis has consolidated a decent 168 points thus far, with a solitary win in China to his name.

As people point out though, he’s been outclassed this season by his team-mate Jenson Button, a perhaps less fancied driver amongst the Formula One ranks up until this season. I don’t think this would be a fair reflection on Button though, as in my opinion he’s a driver that just defines quality in each department. He’s pacy, a fighter, a tactician. To be behind Button is no disgrace at all.

Besides, Jenson has much more experience than Hamilton. His many years in fairly average cars such as the BAR and the Renault were a steep learning curve for Button, but going through such a school of hard knocks has clearly worked wonders for him. When his chance came in a competitive car, he was far readier than his team-mate at the time Rubens Barrichello, who had spent quite a few years playing the safe understudy role to Michael Schumacher. Still, this perhaps doesn’t explain why Hamilton has fallen behind his team-mate.

Whatever the reason, it’s clear that Lewis is currently going through a school of much harder knocks. It’s true that he’s never had to participate in a useless car for more than a few races at a time, but he’s always been in a fight for something, no matter what season it was, and he’s always been making mistakes along the way. It’s easy to forget though, that Hamilton’s career is still in relative infancy, and these mistakes will continue for a few years yet.

But that will come to be his advantage in the near future. If we look at Sebastian Vettel at the moment, he is enjoying the benefits of an absolutely amazing car. There’s nothing wrong with that particularly, but it’s quite incredible that practically no misfortune has befallen Vettel throughout the whole season.

You could say that’s great; that he isn’t making mistakes and he’s matured from his more petulant 2010, but I feel that he’s missing the sort of fight that characterizes Hamilton and Button. It’s rare that he isn’t leading races into the first corner, it’s rare that he gets overtaken and it’s rare that he has to deal with any problems during the race. The Red Bull won’t always be the best car on the field, rather like the McLaren wasn’t in 2008. But whereas Hamilton created the opportunity for the title that year, I have my doubts that Vettel will be able to do the same in the future.

So what about these many incidents that Hamilton’s been having? Why is his style reminiscent of bumper-karts at the moment? I think that this is just the nature of the beast. Hamilton’s style is to absolutely hammer every chance to overtake, and when he gets this right it’s completely spectacular. Nothing compares to it in modern day F1. However, when he’s off-form, this sort of style will take the unfortunate appearance of Hamilton just getting one thing wrong and thumping someone off the road.

That’s why I say Lewis’ dip in form is marginal – He’s only making the odd mistake when you consider how often he gets himself into a scrap on track. Just look at Monza. He spent 27 laps trying every trick in the book to get past Schumacher, and only our old German friend’s brilliant defending snuffed the opportunities out. If Hamilton had really lost his head, he would have ended up going into the back of Schumi’s Mercedes at some point.

So although it’s difficult to know why Hamilton is struggling at the moment, I think there’s no need to fear for him. He’s had a difficult year but he’ll have learned a lot. There was never really an inkling of hope that he’d win the title thanks to Christian Horner and Adrian Newey being Gods amongst men, but next year he’ll be more prepared than ever.

Rise of the Machines

It’s finally happening. Sense has been seen. During March next year, FIFA will finally be discussing potentially introducing goal-line technology, where it seems likely that measures will be put in place to implement it, or at least trial it, for the 2012-2013 season. A nation still thwarting from the wounds of World Cup injustice weeps with relief.

In contrast, until quite recently I was one of those fusty conservative stalwarts who opposed any plans to introduce technology into football, even following Lampard’s disallowed goal against Germany in the World Cup. Perhaps it’s pure nostalgia and emotion that speaks these words, but I do feel that football’s simplicity is its key, and should be preserved at all costs.

That said, I’m not a backwards yokel and I’m willing to accept that, as one of the few objective decisions a referee has to make, goal-line technology can earn its place in the game if it’s used in the correct way. As a result I’ve come up with a few guidelines I’d want to see followed if FIFA are going to push the proposal through. Not that I have any authority or reverence that would make FIFA listen to me, but nonetheless, here is the criteria I believe it is imperative the technology follows:

1. Goal-line technology must be 99.9% accurate: This seems a rather obvious one, but still extremely important. If the technology shows itself to be at all erroneous, then I can see it conjuring up more controversy than 1000 Graham Polls could ever hope to amass. If it doesn’t work practically every time, it’s not worth considering.

2. Goal-line technology should not be simply a replay system: During the 2010 FA Cup Final, Drogba took a shot that bounced onto the line, and after seeing a replay, Clive Tyldesley was shouting “Look, we can see that’s in, why aren’t video replays being used?”. Then they showed the incident from another angle, clarifying the incident as not being a goal, and Tyldesley said “Well, maybe it wasn’t a goal. Still, it’s a good point isn’t it?” No actually Clive. You just blew your point out the water.

3. The notification as to whether or not a goal has been scored should be instantaneous: There’s been a lot of scenarios banded about on the internet about how one team could have a goal-line scramble, and then the other team goes up the other end and scores, causing a confusion for the rule if a decision takes time to be made. While these situations are pretty unlikely, referees have to be prepared for any event, and such possible ambiguities could cause all sorts of problems. This wouldn’t happen if referees were instantly informed as to whether a goal has been scored or not, so I think that’s important.

4. The technology should not affect the flight of the ball: I saw an image on the internet of a potential goal-line technology system that involved having what looked like an electrocuted spider spanning the whole inside of the ball. There’s absolutely no way something like that wouldn’t have an effect on the way the ball runs, which would be a compromise too far for the clarity technology provides.

5. This is not the thin end of the wedge: This is the crux of my point, and my biggest fear over this movement. I know it’s easy to fall down the old slippery slope fallacy, but I still think that accepting goal-line technology could well lead to more equipment being used for other decisions, such as penalty calls, fouls, offsides, etc. I’d hate this to happen. Hate it.

As I mentioned earlier, goals are one of the simplest, most objective entities in football. It’s either over the line or it isn’t. That can be worked into the game. But for things like penalties, not only are we relying on a wholly unnecessary video ref to make a decision that could just as conceivably be idiotic, we also get the game breaking up as everything gets appealed, the match barely moves, the on-field referee seldom has say on anything anymore, and the game stagnates as a result.

The reason why football is so exciting is because of its pace, and simplicity. It’s the ball, two teams, and two goals. Don’t use your hands, don’t hit each other. Let’s play. If you tune into a football match halfway into the game, it’s very likely that the ball will be in play; Do that with cricket, or rugby, or baseball, or many other sports, and the chances of that are largely inferior. As I say, goal-line technology is fine, but if football becomes infused with an insufferable amount of technology, then I can see the game losing a lot of its attraction.

Damage Limitation - A review of Portsmouth's 2010/11 season

This season could have been a continuation of utter freefall for Pompey, or even a discontinuation of the club itself. However, manager Steve Cotterill and chairman Balram Chainrai did their best to attach a bungee rope to the club on its way down to the Championship, and Portsmouth were lucky enough to stop just before smacking their face on the hard cold ground of a second consecutive relegation.

The story of Pompey's 2010/11 campaign has been largely based on how much could be made of the smallest squad in the league. Beginning with the financial turmoil that followed the club after their FA Cup triumph in 2008, every year since has been a battle to retrieve the players already unfortunate enough to be in the paybooks of the club. So with the mass exodus that inevitably occurs following a relegation from the top tier, Pompey fans were contemplating the very distinct possibility that the club could be hit with another disastrous season followed by a further drop in league.

The hiring of Steve Cotterill after Avram Grant resigned was a key moment. It's not so apparent, but Cotterill has done a magnificent job in stabilising the club to keep them out of harms way for the whole season. With practically no resources at his disposal, a very limited opportunity to sign players and a squad low on form and morale, it was imperative that he was shrewd, tactically astute and motivating.

His first big move was to sign two players with a Premier League pedigree, favouring quality over quantity in what was a risky move. The arrivals of Dave Kitson and Liam Lawrence took time to inspire the team, as Pompey went through their first eight league ties without a victory. It seemed like the early predictions of impending doom were starting to reign true. However everything changed on the back of the extraordinary 6-1 win over Leicester in September.

Suddenly it had all fallen into place for Cotterill. The defence wasn't playing well, but the team seemed to be scoring goals, and it was enough to fire them to five victories in their next six games, shooting them up the table and putting them in a position that led to a few people daring to suggest the play-offs weren't out of reach. The general consensus amongst the fans was, however, that the team wasn't actually playing that well, but a certain amount of Premier League quality in the players that Pompey had managed to retain - Players like Nugent, Utaka and Mullins - was giving them the edge that would see them safe.

After this stretch of form, Portsmouth began to settle into a rhythm, albeit a sporadic and inconsistent one. It is also at this point that I must confess I didn't find the time to attend many games at all after New Years. So while the first part of this review was taken from a purely 'fan-in-the-stands' perspective, the reality of the next part is that it's an outside observer's opinion.

Despite our unpredictable form, the hopes of a possible play-off place started to mount, and it seemed like people where perhaps getting ahead of themselves. With such a small squad, the likelihood was always that Pompey were going to burn themselves out towards the end of the season, and despite the loan signings of impressive young players like Ritchie De Laet and Jonathan Hogg, burnt out is what we were come Spring. Despite this, one of the undoubted highlights of the season was a miraculous run of form, in which Pompey managed six wins and six clean sheets on the trot. It was a testament to the strides of improvement the defence had been making during the season, and showed that the team was developing a lot of character and spirit.

All the while though, Cotterill seemed to have attained a rather irritating habit of criticising the referee during every post-match interview. As the season went on, his complaints grew more frustrated and ludicrous. It's hard to say whether or not he was justified in his grievances just by gleaning a feel from highlights, but I'm highly dubious that there is any conspiracy amongst referees concerning Portsmouth Football Club. I'm pretty certain Cotterill would have done more good into talking about the players' match performances.

Also off the field, there were rumours of possible takeover bids being made. This wasn't particularly surprising, given Balram Chainrai is not interested in owning the club at all, but the signs of interest were encouraging. It signalled that Portsmouth was a viable business opportunity for somebody out there, and perhaps that the dark times were soon to be a true thing of the past. The issue is yet to be resolved, but it must be said that Chainrai is due credit from the fans. He would have been blameless if he'd let the club go into insolvency, but he's kept Portsmouth alive and is looking to put us in good hands. At one point there was a rumour that Gaddafi's son was interested (the one who's now dead). If Chainrai wanted a firesale, we could have been in the hands of a tyrannical murderer (who would've easily passed the Fit and Proper Persons Test, no doubt).

In the end, Pompey finished 16th. It's not a season that most teams would see as a success, but for Cotterill and his team, it was mission accomplished. The goal was to survive, and that was done with many games to spare. Without question, nothing more could have been asked of the side.

It was so important that we got through the year without a disaster, allowing us to get through this transitional phase for Portsmouth Football Club. Now that we are stabilised, we can look ahead to securing our position and starting to plan how we'll move up the table. The future's not exactly bright, but there is at least a future to look forward to.

To finish, here's my seasonal awards:

Player of the Season: Jamie Ashdown - The patience he's had during his time at the club was certainly rewarded this season, and Ashdown delivered some heroic and spectacular performances. He made a few mistakes during the season, but nothing that couldn't be forgiven for considering his excellent form

Young Player of the Season: Joel Ward - Has probably played in just about every position this season, but he's shown a firm sense of commitment in every role and has done well to settle into the first-team so quickly.

Worst Player of the Season: Carl Dickinson - He definitely improved towards the end of the season, but I have tremendous doubts about his ability as a footballer. Furthermore, his red card at Doncaster was one of the most reckless and poor tackles I've seen.

Game of the Season (only counting those which I attended): Portsmouth 3-2 Watford - A very entertaining game that we probably didn't deserve to win. I liked this mostly because my Dad was in the away end, so it was nice to get the bragging rights on the journey back.

Worst Game of the Season: QPR 2-0 Portsmouth - That was my first away game, and while the experience itself was great, the game was a drab one, featuring a lacklustre QPR side that just had enough in its engine to take victory.

Spooky Coincidence of the Season: Floodlight Failures during Portsmouth 2-2 Leeds - This was a bit weird considering the exact same thing happened the last time the two sides met in the league. And it's not like it's a regular occurrence at Fratton Park either - the last time we met Leeds was in 2003, and there hasn't been a floodlight failure since. Weird, innit?

Fan Shout of the Season: A blind kid near me shouted "I'm the blind one lino, not you". It's a nice clever line, but considering that the linesman probably wasn't aware the fan was blind, it probably seemed to him like a lovely bit of self-deprecatory encouragement.

Goal of the Season: Mullins vs Watford - Super 30-yarder that the TV cameras missed.

Transfer Deal of the Season: Liam Lawrence - He was exactly what we needed. A man who knew how to link the midfield to the attack, and wasn't afraid to try and create chances. He had a huge positive impact on the team.

Wish for next season: Cotterill to stop moaning.

That's about all for now then. Come back for my full season review of like, everything in the football... stuff. When it's finished, I mean. The year.

Better than di Resta

The young Scot has settled into F1 magnificently

So the new season is underway. Vettel is still near-impossible to beat, Schumacher is still struggling, Hispania are still baffling people by continuing to live, and Eddie Jordan is still spouting absolute drivel each race. Some things in F1 don't change.

But luckily, there's always a plethora of new drivers to talk about and rather unfairly judge at this early stage of the season. I say plethora - I mean four. Four new drivers to discuss - Paul di Resta, Jerome D'Ambrosio, Sergio Perez and Pastor Maldonado. Still, that's enough opportunity to be cruelly downbeat on the careers of a few young lads, isn't it?

Well actually, it is very difficult to make calls at such an early stage, especially when certain cars haven't been performing. The jury is still out on Maldonado and D'Ambrosio, due to the woeful Williams and Virgin cars not giving either of them a chance to shine. Perez on the other hand has benefitted from a decent Sauber. He's looked a good counterpart for the exciting Kobayashi, mostly thanks to his excellent (but discounted) fifth place finish in Australia courtesy of some magical tyre management. It'd seem apparent that he has a future in Formula One, but perhaps one not as bright as Paul di Resta's.

There's already an odd sense of familiarity about Paul di Resta's presence in Formula One. While British attention is highly focussed on the world-champion pairing of Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton at the front of the grid, we've all also been aware of young di Resta starting his career in a very solid fashion. He's scored points in two out of his three races, and finished ahead of his team-mate Adrian Sutil in two out of his three races.

And yet there's no surprise or great hype about the ability di Resta has shown so far. I think perhaps we were expecting him to do well, having been introduced to him quite thoroughly during BBC's coverage over the last season, but when we take a step back to consider how he's done, it's quite a remarkable beginning for him.

The best way to illustrate just how well di Resta has done is by comparison. Adrian Sutil, for example, is undoubtedly a very competent driver who now has a fair wealth of experience under his belt. Over the last few years he's driven a less-than-impressive Force India to its absolute limit, with one particular highlight being his extraordinary drive at Monaco in 2008 which saw him up to fourth, before Kimi Raikkonen ploughed into the back of the blameless German forcing him to retire. Last season, Sutil practically carried the Force India team to 7th place in the Constructors Championship, scoring 47 points along the way. In short, he's no mug.

And yet di Resta has settled into the car spectacularly to beat him on two occasions. That is by no means an achievement that should be overlooked - few drivers are confident enough to finish ahead of their far more experienced team-mate within the first set of races, and those that do inevitably blossom into a talent worthy of great things.

Not only this, Paul di Resta comes across as a well-rounded, confident young man. This is essential for him, because the Force India car is not good enough to give him the opportunity of points-finishes every race. He needs to be strong in order to make the best of what he gets, which is where Jenson Button went wrong during those two turgid years for Honda, and where Lewis Hamilton struggled when the car wasn't up to scratch in 2009. Going through that learning-curve could one day mould him into an effective challenger for a title - somebody who would be skilled in the craft of damage limitation.

It's quite ambitious to talk about di Resta as a prospective Championship challenger, but the early potential he's shown is promising. Champions like Mika Hakkinen, Kimi Raikkonen and Sebastian Vettel all begun their careers by making the best of bad cars, grinding out results where they could. Paul is doing just that at the moment, and whilst it's too early to make a call on just how far his career could take him, these early signs are nothing but encouraging.

Already there are rumours that di Resta could replace Schumacher at Mercedes if Schumi retires. Clearly the insiders of F1 also see that the young Scot is somebody who can go places in the sport. Here's hoping that the millennium's third British champion is already on the grid.

The Importance of Being Loyal

Football fans get the most out of the game by sticking with the same team...

I've never been a fan of the notion that you have to support your so-called 'home club'. It's absurd to set such a limitation. People become smitten with lots of different clubs for different reasons, and sometimes supporting the 'home club' just isn't practical, or fun. Anyone can support whoever they like. It's a free country after all.

And people are more than welcome to chop and change as they see fit. Arsenal not looking like winning anything this year? Change your allegiance to Man United. Supporting Everton not working out for you? Liverpool could be the answer. Again, it's a free country. You can profess to be a fan of any club in the world.

But people who do swap clubs like trading cards ought to realise that there's no way they'll enjoy the ups and downs of supporting a football team more than someone who sticks with a club for the whole of their life, no matter how many trophies they see their adopted side(s) win. I can understand that certain people aren't into football enough to want to make the effort, but for those of us who can, we must stay loyal, and here's why.

Football is all about peaks and troughs. One year you could be sailing to an FA Cup win, the next you could be going through financial choppy waters that decimate the club entirely. No-one denies that there can be some pretty tough moments for fans who devote themselves to one side, but it's these desperate times that lead to the most satisfying of victories.

Any fan can say "I support Man United now", watch them win a couple of trophies and claim to have enjoyed themselves over it. But it's nonsense. Deep down they'll feel totally vapid about the success and try to feign the noises they think football fans are supposed to make when they're elated. The reason for this is they've never understood anything but success at this point, and this makes an achievement such as league title a pretty empty victory for the 'tag-along' fans.

Compare that with loyalty. If a man turns up at his chosen team's ground for ten years, has to watch horrible football and mighty struggles on and off the field, and then something happens and the team wins a division or a trophy, the success will mean a million times more to him then the glory hunter. It's not just about the winning, it's about what you go through beforehand that makes it so much more meaningful. 

I'm not trying to differentiate between the traditionally successful clubs and the so-called 'little' clubs, because both have very loyal fans, each worthy of any success that comes their way. It is admittedly different for Man United fans who have grown up knowing nothing but the Ferguson helm, yet there will be a time when the team struggles, and their potential to stick through it will be tested. This is when the real fans will show themselves, and once the cycle is complete and the club becomes triumphant, they will be the most rewarded.

Somebody raised an interesting point on a messageboard the other day. They said that during the time somebody supports a club, the players will change, the manager will change, the owners will change, the stadium might even change... what is it that we are supporting?

The answer to this is that as fans, we are a community intrinsically linked with the club and everything it symbolises. Every memory of those great players, great moments and great games is part of the community, and though the club can become an entirely different creature, it will always represent that great wealth of nostalgia, and the droves of fans that understand its culture. 

It's not immediately clear why we enjoy supporting a club so much with such a vigorous loyalty, but when you stare the possibility of losing the very team you grew up with in the face, and then have that team achieve a victory beyond your wildest dreams that takes them to a historic high, you understand then. When Portsmouth beat Tottenham in the FA Cup Semi-Final last year, I understood then what it meant. You can lose every week, but that one victory, that rights an injustice or garners an irresistibly satisfying revenge, makes every painful moment worth it.

What they need is some arguments - not ridiculous, and frankly odd comparisons.

Those AV posters are driving me up the wall.

I don't know if you've noticed the billboards with anti-Alternative-Vote messages across them, but they may just be the most empty arguments in the run-up to a referendum I've ever seen.

If you haven't had the chance to catch one, it basically goes like this. Firstly we see the image of the archetypal British figure of sickeningly patronising respect, such as a soldier or a policemen. I'm not having a go at either the army or the police force, I think they do a good job. But the amount of times I see the picture of a soldier drawn into an irrelevancy purely for emotive effect genuinely angers me.

Then next to it we have the text. "He needs a bulletproof vest... not AV".

WHAT!!! THAT'S THE BEST YOU CAN DO???!?!?

It doesn't make sense. I know he needs a bulletproof vest. Sure, go get him one. But seriously, it's not like if we do implement Alternative Vote, we'll be so busy furrowing our brows at the polling station that we'll forget to arm our troops and they'll be massacred thanks to this evil system. They aren't related. We can have both. It's like having a picture of an African child and saying "He needs food and water... not David Cameron". It's utterly stupid

I mean, really. I know posters are hardly the canvas for an essay about this sort of thing, but is that really the only argument they could come up with? I only did politics for a year at A level, but my vague experience of voting systems could lead me to about five other arguments that would have fit nicely on a poster, and perhaps showed some, uh, I dunno, relevance.

For example, how about the problem that AV would be less likely to create a majority government. You could have something like "Hung Parliaments forever?" as a suggestion of uncertainty that would at least hold some legitimacy behind it. Or what about a picture of Nick Griffin smiling with the caption "AV... Making fringe parties win". It would be silly and hyperbolic, but again, there'd be a legitimate point made.

Instead, they've practically run away from AV, which I should be pleased about I guess. I'm firmly in support of voting reform, and I'd love to see them go further and implement my own version of PR, but that long-winded explanation is for another time.

My worry is though, that people will just say "Yeah, true that" and ignore the actual facts and mechanisms of the voting systems. It's a true shame, because when the referendum goes against AV, that could be the last attempt at reform for a very long time. Any party wishing to introduce will be under the burden of knowing that the people voted against it, and this could make it an area worth ignoring.

Anyway, I don't mind political posters, but I really don't like such a facile message. Make some sense next time, please. 

Euro-Bore League

Europe's second string is subjected to the most deathly dull competition in football

I hate the Europa League.

Let me explain. Not so long ago the now re-named UEFA Cup was a two-legged-knockout 'anyone-can-play-anyone' type tournament, as I'm sure you'll remember. It wasn't too much of a challenge, and most any team could get a bit of luck and find themselves in the latter stages of the cup, with a genuine chance of silverware. It was exactly what a cup should be. Not a ruthless test of mettle, but a chance for a trophy to be won by a team who enjoy some form and good fortune.

Nowadays that isn't the case. Instead of two-legged knockout we have four qualifying rounds leading up to an interminably slow group stage that comprises of another six games. Then the knockout begins, where a team can find themselves battling through another five rounds before finishing the competition.

In case you weren't counting, that's a possible twenty-one games you'd have to face in order to win this competition. And we're not talking about the Champions League. No, this is the far-less prestigious Europa League. Is all the effort involved really worthwhile?

In a time where there are so many games during a season, and the physical fitness of players is more important then ever, it surely isn't fair that those teams who performed well enough in the previous season to taste the glories of Europe have to carry the burden of this extra competition, which is as drawn-out as half a league season. It bears no surprise that some managers are suspected of having intentionally got their team eliminated to concentrate on the league, and can you blame them?

It perhaps is ironic that I complain about the Europa League's group system. After all, were it not for the introduction of this stage, one of the all-time great encounters at Fratton Park would have never happened. Our 2-2 draw against AC Milan will go down in Pompey folklore, and maybe the group stages should be credited for making this sort of tie happen.

But those David and Goliath encounters aside, most games in the Europa League are beyond awful. The amount of drab 0-0's that the English clubs have been involved in this season is a testament to how disinterested the teams really are. Liverpool and Man City, this year's representatives, look like two teams still despondent about missing out on the Champions League this year, and their European encounters reflect their obvious lack of enthusiasm.

This may be unfair though, because while two teams with higher ambitions might not show much concern towards their Europa League journeys, for smaller teams the awe and excitement can take them to great heights. Fulham are the perfect example of this. The club have never really achieved much, so a trip into Europe was a historic and thrilling prospect, and they certainly made the most of it. They extraordinarily made their way through the toughest opposition imaginable to reach the final, narrowly losing to an impressive Atletico side.

These examples are extremely few and far between though. I can't see a story like Fulham's ever being repeated under this current format. Or at least, not without it having a massive detrimental effect on the club's league performance. It's a shame, because the sort of story we saw with Fulham is exactly what the Europa League should be like. We should see more hard-working smaller clubs who are going through the good times reach the latter stages of the tournament. However, when squads aren't used to such a fixture-laden season, it usually just becomes too much for them.

I still feel the tournament has life in it, although it needs to be radically overhauled. If UEFA took the following steps in the next reform of this competition, I think the interest and magic would flood back into it.

• Straight knockout. That's to say, the whole competition is knockout based and there are no group stages whatsoever.
• Single-legged games. I know home advantage plays a bigger part in Europe, but for me this would be part of the fun. It would give the smaller teams a better opportunity to knock out the big guns, make the fixtures more exciting, and reduce the number of games in the competition significantly.
• No seeding. Anyone should be able to play anyone. 
• No Champions League Drop-outs. I don't think it's fair that a team can fail at one competition and then be given a bye half-way into a much easier competition as a result. If you can't make it through the CL group stages, tough luck.

Nothing unreasonable in that list, is there? I mean, luck's influence takes a little increase, but if that makes it more entertaining, then what does it matter. It doesn't. So stop saying it does.