Once the celebrations had died down at Wembley, Manchester United did something familiar to all Premier League players: they took a flight home.
United beat Newcastle 2-0 on Sunday to win the Carabao Cup and end their six-year wait for silverware. It was a momentous achievement for Erik ten Hag and his players, who are still in contention to win a further three trophies this season.
Their success means more games. And more games means greater strain – physically and mentally for the players and staff and logistically for the club. United could not dwell on their cup final win for long; they host West Ham at Old Trafford on Wednesday night in the fifth round of the FA Cup.
For Ten Hag, once the elation of victory had subsided, it was all about the next match. And that is why United chose to take a 32-minute flight from London back to Manchester. When they had time on their side, the club were happy to take the train from Stockport to the capital some 200 miles away, but, in many cases, player recovery trumps other factors.
After an intense and physically demanding match, like the clash with Newcastle, minimising the time players spend sitting down helps reduce the risk of muscle injuries and soreness. Marginal gains are seized upon in elite sport, with the impact to the environment pushed to one side.
After reporting on Liverpool’s 33-minute flight back from Newcastle recently, Mirror Football has looked into the prevalence of short-haul domestic flights in the Premier League. We can now reveal:
-
Domestic flights are commonplace in the Premier League, with player welfare considerations often trumping the financial cost and environmental impact
-
Packed fixture schedules mean clubs sometimes feel like they are left with little choice but to fly back from far-off away games
-
The unreliability of the rail network amid a time of strikes and difficulties in chartering private carriages have caused frustration
-
Domestic flights would likely be even more common in the Premier League had Brexit not made it more difficult to charter planes in the UK
-
Chartering a plane for a short-haul flight is around 25 to 30 times worse for the environment than driving the same distance in a coach
Huge environmental impact
Sustainability is something that the Premier League and its clubs are thinking about more than ever. Initiatives like Green Football Weekend means that fans are the most engaged they have ever been on the subject. Yet that reality lives alongside another where teams frequently embark upon one of the most environmentally damaging activities possible, all in the name of performance.
"Whether it is right or wrong, I think it is pretty normal for a team, in the Premier League particularly, and for a lot of Championship teams, to fly distances like that.” Those were the words of Nottingham Forest manager Steve Cooper after his side were criticised for taking a 20-minute flight to Blackpool in January.
He is right. It is pretty normal – Pep Guardiola let slip in his press conference on Monday that Manchester City would be flying to play Bristol City in the FA Cup on Tuesday. But the science is unequivocal: short-haul flights are hugely damaging to the environment.
Mirror Football has enlisted the help of Dr Chris Smith and Dr Sally Cairns from the University of Leeds to see just how bad flying is.
Working independently of each other, Dr Smith and Dr Cairns concluded that Liverpool ’s flight back from Newcastle following their 2-0 win earlier this month was between 25 and 30 times worse for the environment than taking the team coach. The calculations, which took into account all the variables, revealed that Liverpool’s coach produced up to 135kgCO2e, compared to well over 3000kgCO2e for the plane.
“Taking a coach would have been at least 25 times better for the climate compared with chartering the plane,” Dr Cairns said. “Prioritising climate change in decision making is critical if we are to meet climate targets. Sports stars, politicians and other celebrities have a key leadership role to play.
"The use of a private plane is usually one of the most polluting ways to travel, and organisations that are serious about their climate commitments should find other ways of travelling where possible.”
Ease of travel
Manchester United's decision to fly back from Wembley was taken due to the lateness of things wrapping up at Wembley and the short turnaround before their FA Cup tie against West Ham. The club always tries to use trains and coaches, where possible, but so far this season that hasn’t always been possible.
United have taken a return flight to two domestic matches and have flown back from two others, after arriving by alternative means. The club, which was ranked fifth in Sport Positive’s sustainability league last year, is considering carbon offsetting and the use of sustainable aviation fuel to reduce their carbon footprint.
The Premier League recently hired a head of sustainability and is working on an environmental strategy, which will be launched later this year. But they currently do not impose any rules on travel – clubs are free to take whatever method of transport they choose.
HAVE YOUR SAY! What do you make of Premier League clubs' regular short-haul flights? Comment below.
Clubs are not blind to the climate crisis – and there is a collective desire to reduce carbon emissions – but in many cases those ideals are sacrificed at the altar of performance.
An Arsenal spokesperson told Mirror Football: “Domestic flights are sometimes a necessity based on player welfare and operational needs. The need to fly often depends on the kick-off time, the time in between our matches and the reliability of alternative transport methods. We are always looking at ways to improve our travel operations.”
Leeds are understood to have flown just once this season, to Cardiff for an FA Cup tie in January, while West Ham only fly to far-flung opponents in the north of the country, where alternative methods of transport are not deemed viable.
When they travel by train, Premier League clubs are able to charter a private carriage for their players and staff. If the opposition lie on a major railway route then that is the preferred method of transport for most clubs.
But months of strikes and train delays and cancellations have eroded the faith some teams have and swayed them to shell out on planes for longer journeys. The fact there are seven Premier League clubs based in London this season has helped matters, but the impact of that quirk has been reduced by the long distances between south coast clubs like Southampton, Bournemouth and Brighton and those based in Newcastle, Manchester and Liverpool.
‘Clubs must lead by example’
There is an awareness that action must be taken. The Premier League committed to the UN Sports for Climate Action Framework in November 2021. That means it aims to cut its emissions in half by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2040.
Four of the 20 clubs in the Premier League – Tottenham, Arsenal, Liverpool and Southampton – are also signed up to the UN Sports for Climate Action initiative. Many others are involved in noble schemes and are trying to engage their fans on the subject.
But the clear contradiction between what they say and what they do means that clubs leave themselves open to accusations of hypocrisy. Short-haul domestic flights are a neat example of the challenges the industry faces in the coming years.
“We can only solve crises if we treat them as such, and whilst fan engagement is a positive step in the right direction, we need to see clubs developing and delivering against ambitious sustainability commitments with science-based targets,” said Elliot Arthur-Worsop, the founder of sustainability charity Football For Future.
“With aviation being one of the most carbon-intensive activities we can undertake as individuals, short-haul domestic flights should be top of the list of things for football to tackle. It’s not about being perfect, but the future of the planet is at risk, and with clubs as community hubs and players as influencers, they have a responsibility to lead by example.”
