Calendar Congestion in Football: Save the Date or Save the Players?

Calendar congestion in football is more and more fiercely debated, with the main stakeholders (players/coaches vs governing bodies/sponsors) vying for public support. In a recent analysis of footballers in The Price of Non-Stop Play, 80 percent of the year is devoted to “working time,” whether for the club or the nation. Moreover, there has been a growing voice of high-profile players threatening to strike over football’s calendar congestion. Football, however, appears to be expanding as competitions expand, resulting in more fixtures. So, do you support a players’ strike?

 

 

Calendar Congestion in Football: Save the date or save the players?

 

Is there a calendar congestion crisis?

 

Football’s calendar congestion refers to the crowded schedule of matches and tournaments that professional football players and teams have to navigate throughout the year. This congestion is a result of domestic leagues, international competitions, and various cup tournaments, all vying for time slots within the football calendar. Calendar congestion is becoming increasingly common for international players who face the greatest workload.

 

Over the last year or so, a number of high-profile, elite competitions have expanded. In 2024/25, the new Champions League format saw an increase of 64 more matches in the competition, resulting in all teams playing an extra two matches, with the winners/runners up facing a potential increase of four games. The 2026 World Cup will see an extra knockout round, resulting in four teams playing an extra game in the tournament.

 

 

In 2025, the Club World Cup competition will see a huge revamp, expanding to 32 teams from seven teams in 2024. This will only occur every four years, with the Intercontinental Cup taking place every other year (basically replacing the Club World Cup as it is now). Nonetheless, the teams reaching the final in 2025 will now play seven games as opposed to two or three (depending on which Federation they are representing) games in 2024.

 

Interestingly, despite competitions adding more games to the calendar, a Sky Sports study into fixture congestion revealed that First Division teams in England in 1985-86 played an average of 53.5 games in all competitions, which is nearly six more than the 47.9 games played by Premier League clubs in 2023/24.

 

 

More football, less games – how does that work?

 

In England there have been two notable changes over the last few decades. Firstly, the Premier League decreased from 22 to 20 teams in 1995, thus each team played four less games per season. Secondly, clubs are participating in fewer domestic cup games to counteract the effect of the extra European games. An average of 11.5 domestic cup games were played by First Division clubs in 1985/86 nearly twice as many as in 2023-24.

 

 

But what about the busiest clubs? Despite the fact that winning sides in cup tournaments invariably play more as they progress, the Sky Sports study found there is no discernible upward trend in the number of games played by the busiest clubs each season.

 

But what about international players? In 2019, a study of 543 footballers investigating how top professional football players felt about the International Match Calendar revealed that 35 and 40 percent of the players said they played too many games in a season and didn’t take enough days off. International teams are playing more than ever thanks to the expansion of the World Cup and European Championship. This decade, England has averaged 13.4 games annually, on pace to set a new record. Elite athletes seem to have more work to do when representing their nations.

 

 

Calendar Congestion is real then?

 

In the summer of 2024, the CIES Football Observatory published three reports on match calendar and player workload. (Find the complete series report on match calendar and player workload here.) The purpose of the reports was to better understand trends in the number and frequency of matches played around the world during the past 12 years. They also examined the consequences of suggested changes to several contests’ structures (such as above). So, what trends (i.e., arguments) did they discover?

 

The first report titled Number of Matches and Weight of Organisers analyses players from 40 of the top leagues in the world, across five confederations, over the years 2012 to 2024. On average, just 0.31% of players (61 football players per season) played more than 60 games across all competitions. Football players who participated in more than fifty games and forty games was 2.2% and 9.1% respectively. Conversely, 70.9% of football players played a maximum of 30 games across all competitions, while 44% of players played no more than 20 games.

 

Charts taken from the CIES Football Observatory’s report on match calendar and player workload.

 

During the twelve-year study period, 0.29% of players (56 football players on average) were fielded for more than 5,000 minutes across all tournaments. Conversely, more than one-third played fewer than 1,000 minutes, and almost two-thirds played fewer than 2,000 minutes. Thus, the workload problem appears to affect only a small percentage of players.

 

The second report on Match Calendar and Player Workload focused on Match Schedules. Over the course of twelve years, the 663 teams polled per season participated in 41.5 official matches on a seasonal average (excluding friendlies). During the evaluation period, no significant changes were noted other from these cyclical fluctuations. However, the 2019/20 season – due to Covid – was an anomaly, and the report should provide a second calculation with this removed. So, using the other eleven seasons only, it puts the seasonal average to 42.3 games (not the 41.5 reported).

 

UEFA Champions League participants 2000-2024

 

The European ‘big five’ leagues are surely busier? Contrary to popular belief that the match calendar is getting increasingly crowded for the top clubs, an analysis of the average number of official matches per season for the five major European leagues’ representatives in the Champions League since the 2000–01 season reveals that the number of fixtures is relatively stable, or even slightly down (see image below). Furthermore, the study shows that during the 2000s, the percentage of clubs that play 60 or more games a season (excluding friendlies) has remained constant at around 5%. The busiest teams are Colombian and Brazilian.

Average games for UEFA Champions League Participants

Chart taken from the CIES Football Observatory’s report on match calendar and player workload.

 

The third CIES report titled Players Most In-Demand: Current Stats and Trends, focused on the most sought-after footballers. As a yearly average, just 0.88 percent of the players in the 40 leagues examined globally between 2012 and 2024 played more than 4,500 minutes (50 full games) annually (169 football players per season).

 

 

Calendar Projections: worse to come?

 

Comparing the previous four-year cycle (2020-2024) to the next four-year cycle (2024-2028, the CIES reported a number of projections on player workload. (1) With the exception of club friendlies, football players will play the same number of minutes and 1.4% more games overall across all tournaments. (2) The number of teams playing in 50–69 official games each year has will rise 1.6% to 19.7% of all clubs. However, clubs that play in at least 70 official games a year are not expected to experience any substantial changes (less 2%). (3) The proportion of football players who play more than 4,500 official game minutes per season will be slightly lower (1.02%) than that observed over the previous four years (1.07%).

 

So, 1.4% more games but football players will play the same number of minutes? The COVID-19 pandemic’s crowded game schedule temporarily raised the number of substitutions allowed by teams from three to five during a match. In several leagues, this modification has been made permanent over the last few seasons, enabling managers to give the most in-demand players greater rest.

 

Chart taken from the CIES Football Observatory’s report on match calendar and player workload.

 

Since the permanent five substitutes rule, substitutes have, on average, played 86,775 more minutes per season. This represents a 51.1% increase over the total recorded during the previous year with only three substitutes permitted. In a zero-sum game, this figure translates to an equally lower number of minutes on the field for players who were initially in the starting eleven. With an average increase of 34% in the number of minutes played by substitutes, Premier League clubs made the least use of the new capacity. Comparatively speaking, that figure was 63% for the Spanish La Liga, 58% for the Italian Serie A, and 49% for the German Bundesliga.

 

The core XI of teams is now under less pressure thanks to this rotation. Regarding the Premier League, only 70.8% of all available league minutes were played by the most in-demand players. It represents the lowest proportion in the 14 Premier League seasons prior. Clubs are also changing lineups more in domestic cup competitions. In England, last season, 476 players competed in domestic cup matches, up from 426 in 2012–13. These changes are helping reduce workload on the most in-demand players, giving managers, and players, more responsibility to manage workload.

 

Is Calendar Congestion making careers shorter?

 

One common argument put forward is that careers are/will be shortened due to the demands placed on modern footballers. Factors such as increased physical demands, higher intensity (more on this later), early specialisation and mental health and burnout all potentially shorten a career. Individual players are often used in the debate to support whichever side of the argument you are on. For example, pointing to players who retired because of chronic ailments such as Michael Owen, or conversely to players who continue to play in their late thirties, early forties such as Ronaldo, Ryan Giggs & Zlatan Ibrahimović.

 

According to a study conducted by the University of Stirling and the Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA), professional football players’ average retirement age has been rising. The report claims that improvements in sports science, nutrition, and medical care have led to footballers retiring later than they did a decade ago. This is further supported by data from the Transfer market which shows the average age at which Premier League players retire has increased. For instance, compared to previous decades, the average retirement age in the 2020–2021 season was higher at 35.

 

More evidence showing careers getting longer is available in the CIES workload report, pointing out that elite players are actually lengthening their careers. The average age of the top ten players in the Ballon d’Or rankings has been continuously growing and in 2024 was higher than it has ever been. The findings also show an increasing number of international players reaching 100 international caps along with a total international career span of at least 15 years. Whilst the trending age for the Ballon d’Or could be argued against (award biases) and with more international matches these days (as mentioned above), more players reaching 100 would be expected, the international career length is telling.

 

Whilst these findings suggest careers are getting longer, the general picture is complicated and differs from player to player, even if there are trends that point to both shorter and longer careers. Careers may be shortened by the game’s higher physical and mental demands, but prolonged by developments in sports science, medicine, and training. The length of a football player’s career is ultimately determined by personal aspects like playing style, injury history, and personal preferences. Another large factor in a player’s longevity is their ability, i.e., better players can hold off competition for longer periods of time. Finally, today’s astronomical financial rewards must also be factored in with players wanting to play for longer.

 

Modern football is more intense

 

Another argument put forward against the ever-increasing workload players face these days is that the game is played at a faster pace than before. The graphic below shows the number of sprints per game in the Premier League increased over the last number of seasons. In the 2023/24 season, players were averaging nearly 140 sprints per game, which is an increase of 9.6% from three seasons prior (data from calendar congestion study). Erling Haaland shares his view on the unrealistic expectations on elite players stating, “You can’t expect me to sprint for 70 games with over 1,000 metres of sprinting per game.”

 

 

Additionally, whilst there may not be significantly more matches, there is significantly more travelling, which impacts on recovery. As noted earlier on, First Division clubs in 1985/86 played nearly twice as many domestic cup matches as in 2023-24. However, these more local domestic matches have been replaced with more European and International matches that require significantly more travel. So, do players need to strike or are their alternative solutions to help reduce fix football’s calendar congestion?

 

 

How can the calendar congestion in football be fixed?

 

This section will discuss four ways to reduce player workload.

 

 

Fix 1: Impose Player Welfare limits

 

The workload problem seems to an issue for the most in-demand players only. As shown earlier, on average, just 0.31% of players (61 football players per season) played more than 60 games across all competitions in the top 40 leagues worldwide. And only 0.29% of players (56 football players on average) were fielded for more than 5,000 minutes across all tournaments.

 

In order to protect the most in-demand players, football’s governing bodies should set limits on the maximum number of squad inclusions, appearances, minutes played and back-to-back matches a player is subjected to. For example, a player who is 21 years old (or older) at the start of the season could be included in a maximum 70 matchday squads or make 60 appearances or play 4,500 minutes (that’s 83% of 60 full 90 minutes), and be included in a maximum 10 back-to-back matches. See table below.

 

 

There would be additional limits on players under 21 years old at the beginning of the season (or on 1st July). For young players who play multiple seasons before turning 21, this would involve small incremental steps. To illustrate this point, if a youngster makes the squad at age 18 (at the start of the year), they can only be included in 55 match day squads, or make 50 appearances, or play 3,750 minutes and only play in six back-to-back matches. The following year, when they are 19 at the start of the season, they can only be included in 60 match day squads, make 52 appearances, or play 3,900 minutes and only play in seven back-to-back matches. This would increase slightly for their third season.

 

Now, if an exceptionally talented player, like Lamine Yamal were to start playing earlier than 18 years old (FC Barcelona debut at just 15 years and 291 days old ), if they were to complete more than three seasons whilst under 21, they would remain at that limit for a fourth or even fifth year (65 squad inclusions, 55 appearances, 4125 minutes and eight back-to-back matches). All minutes calculated above are 83% of the maximum number of appearances made. Also to note, whichever limit a player reaches first between squad inclusions, appearances and minutes played will be used. So, if a manager/player chooses to play 50 full matches in a season (4,500 minutes), then they have reached their maximum minutes first, despite making 10 less appearances than the maximum allowed.

 

Whilst these thresholds could of course be altered using further data analysis, the point remains: the most in-demand players and young footballers need to be protected. In FIFPRO’s Men’s 2024 Player Workload Monitoring football report a survey with almost 100 high-performance specialists was conducted. According to 88% of the experts surveyed, football players shouldn’t play more than 55 games in a season. Reaching this level raises the danger of damage and burnout considerably. Acknowledging these results, the above suggestive limits may not go far enough. Nonetheless, it appears managers need help as they are the ones who seem incapable of giving their best players enough rest.

 

Fix 2: Reduce Extra Time

 

In recent times, extra time (ET) has become more significant as a determining factor in cup tournaments and tournament outcomes. Since the 1986 FIFA World Cup campaign, 33% of knockout matches have required ET. In the 2014 World Cup, 50% of the knockout matches required ET, compared to 38% of matches in the 2006 tournament and 25% of matches in the 2002 and 2010 games.

 

In 2022, a systematic review evaluated the body of research on soccer-specific exercise lasting 120 minutes. They discovered that footballers covered a distance of 5% to 12% less during ET (measured in meters per minute) than they did in the 90 minutes prior. During ET, there were also noticeable declines in technical skills as dribbling, passes, and shooting speed.

 

 

As early as 1897, extra time was incorporated into the English Football Association’s rules of play. The “golden goal” rule, which declares that the first team to score in extra time wins the match, and the “silver goal” rule, which states that the team with the lead at the end of the first 15 minutes wins the match, were introduced by soccer’s governing bodies in 1993. However, the current regulations mandate that a complete 30-minute ET time be played, and these alternative ET forms were abolished in late 2004.

 

To help with football’s calendar congestion, extra time should be reduced to 10 minutes each way (i.e., 20 minutes in total, 33% less). With extra time becoming more and more prevalent in international tournaments (the ones with the most in-demand players), and the fact that most of games are rarely decided in ET (e.g., in the 2018 FIFA World Cup knockout stages, 31% of matches advanced to ET, and just one match result was resolved), a change is needed. Furthermore, with discernible drops in technical proficiency, a shorter, more fast-paced and more exciting ET is needed.

 

Over the last few years, extra time is slowly being removed in a number of competitions in England (in 2018/19 no ET till semi-finals in domestic cup and in 2023/24 no ET in the Community Shield). ET is still relevant and valid, it just needs to be adjusted. Furthermore, with no replays in the FA Cup since 2024/25, more matches could head to ET (we will see). In a study investigating the impact of 120 minutes of football on recovery, found that creatine kinase (CK) recovery time is slowed up to 72 hours after the game. With the Premier League having significantly more (87 in total) domestic back-to-back games (matches played within 72 hours from the previous one), recovery is critical for the most in-demand players. For comparison, Spain (55), Italy (19), France (13) and Germany (13). Thus, recovery time is more critical in England and would benefit from a reduced ET.

 

Fix 3: Reduce Pre/Post Season Tours

 

The CIES Football Observatory showed that between July 2000 and May 2024, Premier League teams participated in 573 international friendly, traveling to 23 different nations and touching down on almost every continent on the planet. In the two years following the epidemic, Premier League clubs travelled over 300,000 kilometres on average per season to take part in friendly matches outside Europe; these figures were nearly identical to the record of 350,649 kilometres achieved in 2014/2015.

 

573 Friendly matches played by Premier League clubs outside Europe since July 2000

Figure taken from CIES Player Workload report.

 

Whilst clubs will of course want to further internationalise their club/brand/players (for monetary reasons), they need to take responsibility on player workload. Individual football clubs do (owners/shareholders aside) have the choice where and who to play. With the busiest clubs having to travel more and more distances to fulfil the expansion of European matches, as well as more and more domestic Super Cup matches (semi finals and finals) taking place outside the domestic league’s boarders further adding to travel. In 2024/25, nine domestic Super Cup matches will take place outside the league’s country from the ‘Big 5’ leagues).

 

Fix 4: Managers Manage better

 

With the utilization of technology and data, training sessions and player workloads can be more effectively scheduled by tracking player fatigue and effort. Managers/Clubs can use this information to determine when to give players rest and how best to manage their schedules. Alongside the new five substitutes rule, managers, put simply, need to take greater responsibility in fulfilling their role ‘managing’ a team and not solely relying on the most in-demand players.

 

 

Conclusion: Is there a workload crisis in football?

 

In golf, the term “distance creep” describes how golfers’ hitting distance gradually increases over time, mostly as a result of improvements in club and ball technology. Regarding football’s calendar congestion, is there a player workload crisis? No. However, their does seem to be a “workload creep” for the most in-demand players. Over the next four years, football players will play 1.4% more games, the number of teams playing in 50–69 official games each year will rise 1.6%, greater distances travelled to accommodate the increase in European and international matches as well as more and more sprints in each game.

 

So, should players strike?

 

No. And anyway, which players are we referring to? The ones who have the most secure contracts and best salaries, negotiated by the most ruthless agents. Is there really a worker solidarity amongst players to oppose the unrestricted free market? The same unfettered free market that has immensely benefited the same players that are talking about going on strike. There is no issue with the quantity of football played for thousands of players at the bottom of the pyramid who rely on appearance bonuses to augment their limited income. Do these wildly disparate life experiences share a common goal?

 

With a career spanning eight years, the average Premier League player can afford a comfortable retirement for sixty-five years, ten months, and twenty-six days based on a 50-30-20 savings model (50% needs, 30% wants, and 20% savings and debt repayment). In contrast, a League Two team’s football player who retires after the same amount of time would run out of money in just two years, eight months, and eighteen days.

 

Another argument against footballer’s striking is that footballers are out of touch with reality. Premier League football players make, on average, 2634% more than the ordinary UK worker. With the pay aside, tens of millions of workers across Europe spend more time at work than these elite footballers.

 

The Stat Squabbler says:

• For the majority of professional football players, the calendar congestion is not an issue.
• A number of simple changes could significantly help reduce the workload on the most in-demand players such as welfare limits.
• Players, managers and clubs need to take greater responsibility themselves. In light of technological advances as well as the five substitutes rule give greater responsibility to manage workloads.

 

Do you agree with the Stat Squabbler that there is not a football calendar congestion crisis and is mainly limited to only those players in greatest demand? Do you agree with the player welfare limits? Have any suggestions yourself?

 

Post your comment(s) below.