Visiting another country to watch your team contest a European final is not far off the zenith of existence – better even than finishing fourth in the league. And though it may not always seem that way, such occasions cannot be taken for granted.
Real Madrid, easily Europe’s most successful club, were absent from them between 1986 and 1998, then again between 2002 and 2014. Accordingly, it is incumbent on every match-goer to enjoy every opportunity to the fullest extent, because who knows when the next one will come along?
But, as with anything to do with football, it is rarely as easy as it should be. Thanks to the various corporations seeking maximum cash for minimum effort, as soon as Manchester United and Ajax won their Europa League semi-finals, flights to Stockholm from England and the Netherlands sharply increased in price; thus does pleasure became pressure.
“A simple case of supply and demand,” say A-level economists, but the love and addiction involved in football impute a moral dimension. People who pour time, money and hope into watching their teams are entitled to be there for their biggest games, not for free but for fair.
Though airline ticket pricing has nothing to do with the game’s governing bodies, Thomas Cook has paid Manchester United, one shudders to think how much, in order to run their official trips. Presumably, this “partnership” allows them to charge fans the most it is thought they will pay – in this case £499, because £500 is just too much. United have not felt the need to cap or subsidise this.
Still, there are numerous reasons to swerve an official trip and a few alternative options. Before United won their quarter-final, flights could be bought for £170, and given the weakness of the field, those who gambled and lost would be left with far greater worries than an unwanted ticket to Stockholm. But making this work required either cash or credit, along with confidence in a misfiring team and the ability to withstand a loss.
Another way of ameliorating the situation is to go for longer and call it a holiday. Flights then cost less, though the money saved is simply repatriated and spent elsewhere, the ultimate effect making things more, not less expensive.
The other, probably better, option is to fly to a nearby city – Gothenburg or Malmo, say – before travelling the rest of the way overland. Journeys of this ilk tend to involve long, leisurely and refreshing train rides, with the fringe benefits of avoiding jester-hat cringe and zealous police for as long as possible.
Though prevailing on airlines is beyond Uefa, helping with accommodation might not be. When finals are doled out, discussions with bidding cities focus on bed numbers rather than affordability, but perhaps there is a better way. Why not ask municipalities to prevent hotels, already fuller than usual and making more money on food and drink than usual, from raising prices? This might be tricky to administrate from a legal and practical perspective, but the intention and understanding should always be there nonetheless.
Uefa’s power over match tickets, on the other hand, is absolute, and in this instance they are priced at €150, €100, €70 and €40. This is not appalling, but the significantly higher Champions League final prices – €450, €317, €162 and €69, charged in a larger ground that is guaranteed to sell out – suggest a desire to maximise profit.
For context, a ticket to the 1999 Champions League final cost £12 and since then, the money coming into the game through sponsorship and broadcasting rights has increased at an exponential rate; there is no need to lean on supporters already paying for transport, accommodation and sundries. It is reasonable that costs are covered but even though it is a final – in fact because it is a final – the ethos of “twenty’s plenty” should still apply.
These prices, though, only affect those lucky enough to get a ticket. On the night, the Friends Arena will have a capacity of 48,000 – not ideal for a match featuring clubs as well-supported as United and Ajax. That is not to say the biggest games should simply rotate around a few large venues; for many Europa League finals, they would be entirely inappropriate. On top of that, a trip to a first-time final host is far less cloying than the Champions League paying Wembley’s mortgage twice in three seasons as in 2011 and 2013, while for those who travel regularly to games, it is a treat to visit somewhere not on the usual circuit.
Even in that context, it is impossible to defend the allocation of 17,000 tickets for public sale against just 10,000 each to the clubs. United’s average home attendance is 75,290 and Ajax’s is 49,619. Last season, despite a final venue with a capacity of 35,000, Liverpool were given 10,236 tickets.
Football is parochial and emotive, a huge part of people’s heritage and identity; that is what Uefa is selling, and that is how a suitable atmosphere is created. Though it is nice for locals to enjoy a final jaunt, it is not essential, which is why they ought not to be there in such numbers at the expense of partisans who have followed their team through the competition.
The same applies to Uefa’s 11,000-strong “family” – those loins must really be something – many of whom would be perfectly happy watching at home. That is what many neutrals will end up doing, judging by the number of tickets for sale on the secondary market before the identity of the competing clubs was known.
It is true Uefa had no idea which teams would reach the final – had Celta Vigo and Lyon won through, fewer fans would have travelled and selling to neutrals at that later stage would have been harder. Of course, it is important grounds are full, but there is another way.
If, in less than two weeks, more than 20,000 United and Ajax fans can find the means to get to Stockholm, then in that same period the authorities should be able to make any leftover tickets available to local children and accompanying adults, for cheap or even for free. Uefa’s motto is “we care about football”; looking after fans would be a fine way of living up to it.
.jpg?w=600)
