Last weekend the whole of the footballing world turned to Germany and the Bundesliga to witness the return of live football. The games were played without fans, saw skeleton staff wear protective masks and had substitutes socially distanced. With more top-flight leagues across Europe to soon follow suit, 3-At-The-Back analyse and critique football “behind closed doors”.
The Borussia Dortmund v Schalke 04 derby took centre stage on Saturday, much to a revered celebration of football’s return. However, the typical must-watch atmosphere of derby day was severely lacking. The absence of fans, and the noise they bring, gave the fixture a “training game” feel. Yes, the quality of the teams is undeniable; but without any fans, the Signal Iduna Park could’ve been replaced by any training ground anywhere in the world. There was no roaring emotion of a packed stand – such as Dortmund’s famed yellow wall - and the match suffered as a result. The tempo was sluggish, and the game never really got going.
Even celebrations didn’t evoke feelings that players cared. Socially distanced celebrations make little sense: teams can pack nineteen players in the box for a corner, but two players can’t even approach each other to celebrate a goal over their team’s arch-rivals. The justification has been made that it is to limit contact – and it is somewhat understandable – but seems to fall apart with the often-used corner analogy.
As the highlight game dragged on, I found myself drawn to the relegation clash of Fortuna Düsseldorf v SC Paderborn – two teams currently in the midst of a relegation scrap. A result for Düsseldorf would’ve almost certainly condemned Paderborn to a return to Germany’s second division. The ability of the players and the quality of football on offer struggled to emulate the Dortmund fixture. Yet, this generated a more exciting fixture. The two clubs went direct, played on the counter, defended with spirit and commitment – as if their lives depended on it. The match felt real. It was not a training game; with teams encouraged to play out and improve. As the quality of the game decreased, the intensity and competitiveness seemed to skyrocket.
The Borussia Dortmund v Schalke 04 derby took centre stage on Saturday, much to a revered celebration of football’s return. However, the typical must-watch atmosphere of derby day was severely lacking. The absence of fans, and the noise they bring, gave the fixture a “training game” feel. Yes, the quality of the teams is undeniable; but without any fans, the Signal Iduna Park could’ve been replaced by any training ground anywhere in the world. There was no roaring emotion of a packed stand – such as Dortmund’s famed yellow wall - and the match suffered as a result. The tempo was sluggish, and the game never really got going.
Even celebrations didn’t evoke feelings that players cared. Socially distanced celebrations make little sense: teams can pack nineteen players in the box for a corner, but two players can’t even approach each other to celebrate a goal over their team’s arch-rivals. The justification has been made that it is to limit contact – and it is somewhat understandable – but seems to fall apart with the often-used corner analogy.
As the highlight game dragged on, I found myself drawn to the relegation clash of Fortuna Düsseldorf v SC Paderborn – two teams currently in the midst of a relegation scrap. A result for Düsseldorf would’ve almost certainly condemned Paderborn to a return to Germany’s second division. The ability of the players and the quality of football on offer struggled to emulate the Dortmund fixture. Yet, this generated a more exciting fixture. The two clubs went direct, played on the counter, defended with spirit and commitment – as if their lives depended on it. The match felt real. It was not a training game; with teams encouraged to play out and improve. As the quality of the game decreased, the intensity and competitiveness seemed to skyrocket.
With the backdrop of an empty yellow-wall, Haaland and co. embark upon their socially-distanced goal celebration
There may have been no fans, who would’ve added to this heated atmosphere, but it felt as if I was finally watching football. It was far from perfect, the game was littered with mistakes and individual errors, but the desire to win by any means necessary had returned. In comparison, it seemed Schalke were unwilling to adapt their style in order to go and attack the game – something often associated with the nature of training.
The introduction of five substitutes - increased from the standard three - seems to lack basis. The strongest part of this decision is the time-slot system of multiple substitutions. The game is separated into brackets where managers can make multiple substitutions (at the same time). This limits the number of people every player can come into contact with – and would thus somewhat prevent the spread of coronavirus from player to player if anyone was infected. However, the increase of substitutions allowed (from three to five) damages the integrity of the competition. What if team x had been allowed to bring on another player to defend (or attack) the game at an earlier point in the season?
The main justification for this decision seems to be to fight fatigue. Obviously, fatigue is a natural part of football – especially as the season comes to a close and players have played most of their allocated fixtures. This is no ordinary season, however. Players have had a mini “pre-season” and despite not playing any fixtures because it is the same for every team, every club is in the same boat. Nobody wants to see players injured but changing the number of substitutes allowed doesn’t seem to be the answer to this – at least not midway through a season.
The introduction of five substitutes - increased from the standard three - seems to lack basis. The strongest part of this decision is the time-slot system of multiple substitutions. The game is separated into brackets where managers can make multiple substitutions (at the same time). This limits the number of people every player can come into contact with – and would thus somewhat prevent the spread of coronavirus from player to player if anyone was infected. However, the increase of substitutions allowed (from three to five) damages the integrity of the competition. What if team x had been allowed to bring on another player to defend (or attack) the game at an earlier point in the season?
The main justification for this decision seems to be to fight fatigue. Obviously, fatigue is a natural part of football – especially as the season comes to a close and players have played most of their allocated fixtures. This is no ordinary season, however. Players have had a mini “pre-season” and despite not playing any fixtures because it is the same for every team, every club is in the same boat. Nobody wants to see players injured but changing the number of substitutes allowed doesn’t seem to be the answer to this – at least not midway through a season.
Bayern Munich substitutes wore protective face masks and maintained social distancing in the stands
A lot of these issues can be put down to teething problems – something the footballing world expected as we begin to return to a new normal in sport. Germany and the Bundesliga are football’s guinea pigs; it would not be surprising to see changes made as we continue forward. Yes, there were issues and yes, football without fans is just not the same. It is not the football we know and love, but it is football. Football which has been sorely missed. Football which has been on the tip of all our tongues since it disappeared in early March. It may not be perfect, but it is here to stay for the foreseeable future. Once fans are allowed back to games, one thing is for sure, the football we know – with crammed stadiums and wild atmospheres – will never be taken for granted again.
Written by - James McEvoy
Edited by - 3-At-The-Back
Edited by - 3-At-The-Back