Gunning for the other league, not Arsenal

Soccer Interview with David O'LearyMichael Walker hears the Aston Villa manager declare that clubs like his own cannot compete with the Champions League-fuelled resources of Arsenal, Manchester United and Chelsea

David O'Leary rocked back in his chair and swore. He had just been informed of Aston Villa's odds of winning at Highbury this afternoon and thereby ending Arsenal's unbeaten 48-game league run (9-1) and was asked how a club like Villa, who finished 34 points behind Arsenal last season, realistically competes with the Big Three. "How do we compete?" he said.

"Bloody hell . . ." What followed from O'Leary was a frank assessment of the state of the Premiership. Though he thinks it "far from boring", Scotland was mentioned twice. Villa were sixth last season, O'Leary's first in charge, and might be considered the sort of side that could trouble Arsenal - for whom he made more than 700 appearances. Yet O'Leary spoke about next weekend's Arsenal fixture at Manchester United as if they had already negotiated today's. "The 50th and what a game," he said.

The effect of the ever-growing concentration of money and the disparity that follows perturbs the Irishman. He agreed it produces predictability, less so that predictability kills sport.

"Kills? I'm not sure about that," O'Leary said, eyebrows rising. "But there are only three teams who are going to win this league and that is not going to change. As things stand, can Aston Villa win the league again? No. As things stand, only the top three can win it.

"Newcastle and Liverpool have top chairmen who may go mad for it again and they have the resources, the infrastructure. But even with that I think the other three have gone into the distance. In my opinion Liverpool and Newcastle are looking to qualify for the Champions League. The other three are looking to win the Premier League. Finishing second is not good enough for the top three; finishing second for the other two would be a brilliant season."

Villa did not even get a mention. Nonetheless O'Leary (46), is about to commit himself to the future, signing a contract extension to 2007. By then it is odds-on that Arsenal, United and Chelsea will have another three years of Champions League money in the bank.

"My agenda is to try and win the other league - finishing sixth," O'Leary said. "I won it last year but it'll be harder this year because of Middlesbrough. They're spend, spend, spend. If we finish above them, then I think we'll win it again.

"This is not a defeatist attitude. We got beaten on goal difference for fifth place last year. Why? We had a small squad but got hardly any injuries. We did exceptionally well. But the fourth and fifth clubs (Liverpool and Newcastle) underperformed and you've seen what they have done since. Newcastle went out and got four quality players in the summer.

"Liverpool have spent nearly £30 million and look what they have spent over the past few years. Yet last season the gap from the top three (15 points) was like the gap from second to third in Scotland (last season 13 points; 34 points in 2003). That is the way it's going, leagues within leagues. There is an imbalance compared to before."

Does he not find this depressing, particularly as, when at Leeds United, O'Leary briefly threatened the established order? And why in the 1970s and 1980s when Liverpool were dominant did so many clubs, from QPR to Ipswich, Watford and Southampton, finish second?

"In the old days teams had only one on the bench," O'Leary offered as one reason. "Today they have five on the bench. When Chelsea came here Scott Parker and Damien Duff weren't even on it. So you don't catch the big boys off guard the way you did if Liverpool had, say, three injuries. It's not 11 v 11, it's 16 v 16, and that's where their depth counts. I don't find this depressing because I've enough to worry about. But I do envy Arsenal, Manchester United. And Chelsea are Chelsea - bankrolled.

"The Champions League just reinforces their dominance. If they get knocked out of that, they go into the UEFA Cup. If UEFA want to revamp the UEFA Cup, stop belittling it just to keep the rich happy with a bail-out: yes, modify it but don't let the Champions League teams in; they get enough games. Maybe the winners of the UEFA Cup could go into the Champions League, that would give it real importance again.

"Now it's a safety net for the wealthy. Look who's won it lately; Galatasaray knocked us (Leeds) out in the semi-final (in 2000). They met Arsenal in the final: two Champions League clubs."

Such acceptance of the status quo from a spiky figure like O'Leary should provoke wider concern. Recently Charlton vice-chairman Richard Murray spoke about the long-term effect of an anti-competitive league. Charlton and Villa should be two of England's aspiring middle class but middle England is staring through a glass ceiling. O'Leary's view is the only response is to buy.

"Because one thing I do fear is the lack of young players coming through. I'm not seeing the talent, a new generation. Even compared to five years ago I'm not seeing it. You've seen what's happened in Scotland, less and less players coming through; I'm worried about that in England now. When I took the job at Leeds - they were so big George (Graham) left for Tottenham - I had £4 million to spend. But there was (Jonathan) Woodgate, (Harry) Kewell, (Stephen) McPhail and Alan Smith already there. I knew I'd put them in. I said 'Get me (David) Batty'. I thought we could give it a go with those five.

"We got into Europe at the end of that season and there was money available. But what really started the bandwagon was the money we got for Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink. Atletico Madrid could not get credit from the banks because of the (Jesus) Gil fella (Atletico's owner), so they had to pay the £12 million up front. But people forget how we started - some young players and a bit of money."

Leeds United is like a different planet now. But O'Leary has changed too, he said. "At the end I'd become a right asshole, rent-a-quote. But did I deserve the sack? No. Am I better for it? Yes. It was the best thing for me. I have become myself again. I'm not a bully, I'm not trying to be something that I'm not. And like in my first three years at Leeds, I am back out there on the training ground every day."

He then added: "If certain things had been implemented and I hadn't been sacked, Leeds would still be up there."

At Villa he is "impressed there is no debt" but the issue of investment remains. "The ultimate ambition is to put this club back up there. Somebody has got to do it sometime and I want to try. This has the potential to be a big club. But tradition, fantastic though it is, doesn't get you into the top six. We have stabilised a club that finished 16th, turned it around, but with a few injuries we could easily finish 14th.

"Where do we want to go? That's the question for Aston Villa. If the club says there's not a penny, then I'll see out the 18 months without any qualms. Where I do get into conflict with people is if I hear we should still be challenging the top four. Let's get in the real world; we need five quality players to do that. That is a different agenda. The club is at a crossroads."

If the Arsenal, United and Chelsea procession continues, then the Premiership, too, will be there soon.