Manchester City Takeover Suggests Dark Days Ahead for Premier League

Just deserts, fresh meat, and a sprinkle of come-uppance. How does it taste Mr Abramovich?

Your own medicine, that is. Like sour grapes perhaps?

As football’s financial hierarchy welcomes yet another influx of foreign capital, Manchester city’s newest fit-and-proper owner signals a spiralling climate yet to rear its ugly head.

A serving of culinary analogies does however, fail to mask a pretentious premonition that presents an idea not entirely unique. Spare my negativity and excuse the pessimism, but claims that Robinho’s arrival signals a shift in the landscape of Premiership football fail to truly address a deteriorating predicament.

More money means more problems, and problems that are now increasingly solved by money. Money buys better players and managers, yet cannot solely create them.

The Manchester city takeover suggests a continued trend accentuating investment in the wrong end of football. Once all the good players and managers are sold, where will the new breed develop?

The increasing oligarchy of English football suggests an ignorance towards potential, opting for a polished gem over a diamond in the rough. This in turn will out cast systems like Arsenal, that aim to build today what excels tomorrow. Surely however, the realisation will dawn, that “if you can’t beat em‘, join em‘.”

If the gap of supremacy continues to increase, where lies the spectacle? How long can a system, like Arsenal's, continue to punch above its weight? No money, no chance?

Perhaps increasingly so, the next question then more worryingly is, is there no point?

The making of a team may soon resemble a playground dispute where fans argue over the right to claim that “my team is richer than your’s.”

An individual that typifies my pessimism is City’s latest acquisition prior to the shock arrival of Robinho, Shaun Wright-Phillips. Once, or more realistically if, as promised, the worlds best arrive at City’s doorstep, will Wright-Phillips ever get a game? Has he not left one Chelsea for another?

Exciting as it may be for Man City to welcome talent such as Robinho and look forward to acquiring more, what will happen to an academy and its graduates that includes talents such as Micah Richards, Michael Johnson, Stephen Ireland, and Daniel Sturridge?

Hughes may well be the man for the job and City may yet prosper, opting to create a spine of home grown talent boosted by the arrival of genuine class to inject title winning potential. Managers must manage and players must play.

Yet as with Chelski, the Middle Eastlands run the risk of replicating an all too familiar situation, where owners pull far too many strings and ask far too many questions.

Robinho’s heart, we’re told, lied with Chelsea. Yet his signature more importantly went with City. Robinho’s antics earned the disapproval of the Madrid faithful and many are now glad to see the back of him, and his stepovers.

His public expressions to vacate the Bernebau realistically forced Madrid’s hand. Yet a series of failed transfer targets, most notably a twinkle toed Portuguese poser, and Chelsea’s arrogance, installed a reluctance to allow the Brazilian‘s departure.

Transfer conduct between an increasing percentage of Premier League clubs has been less than amicable to say the least. But as Spurs decide to bury a Bulgarian-sized hatchet, perhaps £30 million will ease the pain of succumbing to Fergusson’s continual bully boy tactics.

The idea of foreign investment, dwindling English talent, nosey owners and passionless players is nothing new. The Robinho transfer does however reiterate a growing concern that only worsens.

As “the new Pele” heads to Manchester instead of London, some may claim an Eastlands triumph. The financial omnipotency of the Premier League's elite has been weakened. This, therefore, may represent a triumph in overpowering the oligarchy of English football.

Yet the reality is that such a “victory” is only achieved from one billionaire toppling another. More money, means more problems, as multiple clubs may now battle for a single signature. More money, means more teams can now compete financially, thus ensuring players are far more overpriced than before.

This therefore, will drive a wedge further between those that can afford success, and those that can't.

A change in landscape yes, but only in the shape of a trillion dollar sized mountain to rival a 13 billion pound mole hill.