Biggest City ≠ Biggest Club

I have a lot of respect for Branko Cullina as a coach but to call or even suggest that Sydney FC is the "Manchester United" of the A-League as reported in today's Daily Telegraph is a bit of joke. Sydney seemed to be obsessed with giving themselves titles, -ie calling themselves the "glamour club". You don't see any of the other seven teams labelling themselves. By insinuating that they are the "Manchester United" of the league, is Branko Cullina suggesting that they are the biggest team in the league? Branko, being in the biggest city does not equal biggest club. To call yourself the biggest club, that means you would have to have at least have a decent membership base and average attendance to games. And to the best of my knowledge, Sydney FC doesn't meet any of these criteria. They barely averaged 16,000 people to a game in a 40,000 seater stadium (which is third behind both Melbourne and Queensland) and even struggled to get good turnouts for their Asian Champions League matches. Also, when it comes down to style of play from last year, both Melbourne and Newcastle can claim the mantle of having the most attractive game to watch.

Here in the A-League we shouldn't have to resort to labelling ourselves the "Manchester United" or "Liverpool" of the league. We are simply the "Melbourne Victory" or the "Central Coast Mariners" of the league. To compare ourselves to other large clubs is to belittle ourselves in order to make ourselves feel better and is not paying enough respect to the players and supporters involved. Branko, worry about Sydney FC putting in a better performance on the pitch this season and building a quality club - one that has a good membership base and gets good crowd attendances.