European Super League

[Manc]

I'll be livid if no blood is spilled from this.

[Pepe]

I find it a bit lol that the ones of you in this thread ENRAGED about this happening all write 'I hardly watch any football these days, and now I will watch it any less.' Well, there is your answer.

[Pepe]

Also lol at everyone turning fully authoritarian once football as they know it is threatened.

EDIT: My prediction is that this will happen sooner or later (The Champions League is already this), old people, ie us, will moan about it (while still watching) and talk about how back in the day football was about PASSION and LOVE FOR THE SHIRT, while young people / the foreigners will love it.

[Don]

I'd assume it's not as straightforward for City or whoever to pull out at this point. I suspect the ESL lizards have protected themselves sufficiently with contracts also which could explain the delay in comments from the guilty parties as they and their legal team scramble around looking for a way out.

[Kikó]

Pepe with two spectacularly wrong posts in quick succession. Good work!

[Spikey M]

I find it a bit lol that the ones of you in this thread ENRAGED about this happening all write 'I hardly watch any football these days, and now I will watch it any less.' Well, there is your answer.

Who is enraged exactly?

[Pepe]

Who is enraged exactly?

There you go:

It's grubby and can fuck off. As if I needed more conformation that United's owners were only interested in one thing.

Dock them points, relegate them from the top leagues, do whatever it takes. Reform the league while you've got a chance (nationalise the top clubs if you want to get a fans model).

I think this is it really. Support the players/the franchise rather than have any affiliation with the club.

I feel as sick as I did at the Glazer takeover.

[Sir Andy Mahowry]

Shots fired.

[Ian]

https://www.theguardian.com/football...ying-breakaway

"an unpublished European Super League document in the hidden code of its new website"

Good work, lads.

[Spikey M]

"Talk of ‘technology-enhanced rule implementation’"

Well, I assume everyone is on board now?

[Don]

Pepe is wrong but is Kiko still bending over to take the full 8 inch girth of capitalism full-time whilst calling us out for our morals?

[Pepe]

What am I wrong about? About it happening sooner or later, about the CL being basically the same thing, that most of you will still watch, or that young people / foreigners will love it?

[Yevrah]

Pepe's pretty bang on here. The values of fairness and a level playing field have long since left the sport and ok, this is taking that to the extreme, but those getting seriously arsed about it are clinging onto a vision they have of the game that died years ago.

[Serj]

A New York Times article which I thought was a good read, along the lines of Pepe's argument:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/18/s...liverpool.html

Toggle Spoiler

Outrage About European Super League Is Muffled by Our Cheers

A breakaway league would remake European soccer to benefit a few rich teams, but we will watch it anyway. The Liverpool owner John Henry has seen his team win the Champions League. Now it will walk away from the competition.

Published April 18, 2021Updated April 19, 2021, 11:39 a.m. ET

Real Madrid’s players pumped fists and exchanged hugs. A scoreless tie at Liverpool on Wednesday night had assured that the Spanish club had taken what it saw as its rightful place in the semifinals of the Champions League. All of a sudden, a 14th European Cup title hung tantalizingly close.

No club has quite so much of its identity bound up with the Champions League as Real Madrid. It regards the tournament as its personal fief. Its sees its pursuit of continental primacy as its central, animating force. At much the same time as Zinedine Zidane’s team was celebrating victory, though, the club’s president, Florentino Pérez, was putting the finishing touches to a plan designed, in effect, to destroy the competition forever.

Pérez spent the tail end of last week making calls and lobbying support and quieting nerves among some of European soccer’s most powerful executives for a plan years in the making.

On Sunday, the fruits of that labor were revealed: A dozen leading clubs — Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester City, Chelsea and Tottenham from the Premier League; Juventus, Inter Milan and A.C. Milan of Italy; and Real Madrid, Barcelona and Atlético from Spain — had agreed to become founding members of a breakaway superleague.

Pérez and his allies must have known what the reaction would be: a great torrent of caustic condemnations, each one flecked with scarcely concealed rage. UEFA released a statement, also signed by the Premier League, Spain’s La Liga and Italy’s Serie A, threatening the conspirators with expulsion if they continued down this dark and murky path. The Bundesliga of Germany lent its support, even though its teams had refused to sign up to the proposals. The French league did the same.

Executives from those teams that would be cut adrift spoke gravely of the need to protect soccer’s pyramid. Fan groups rejected any rupture en masse and outright. So, too, did various national associations. Gary Neville, the former Manchester United player who has become a staple of British television broadcasts, had his say.

Almost as important, Britain’s prime minister, Boris Johnson, gravely intoned that the clubs involved would have to answer to their fans. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, released a statement decrying the idea. None of his country’s teams had agreed to take part. Only Paris St.-Germain had been asked. It said no. For now.

That none of these parties can be considered truly dispassionate goes without saying. Of course UEFA does not want the Champions League to be usurped. Of course the major domestic leagues cannot countenance the idea of seeing their competitions diminished. Of course executives at those clubs who would be excluded do not want to see the gravy train they are currently riding overtaken by an express.

They are all compromised in one way or another, but that does not render their outrage unjustified. They might be no less avaricious or cynical in their thinking than the rebel clubs. Their calls to arms over the sanctity of soccer’s pyramid might ring deafeningly hollow. But the problem with the plan is not that it accentuates money; it is that it eliminates risk.

For the dozen founding members, the appeal of a Super League is that it is predictable. There would no longer be any need to worry about qualifying for the Champions League — it is possible that at least four of the signatories will miss out on next season’s edition simply through not being good enough in their domestic leagues — in order to have access to soccer’s most lucrative prize pot. The income would, instead, be guaranteed.

The problem with that, of course, is that unpredictability — what is rather grandly known in the sport’s argot as competitive balance — is at least part of the secret of soccer’s appeal. In March, F.C. Porto knocked Juventus out of the Champions League in the round of 16. Its elimination came in the same week that the Juventus president, Andrea Agnelli, had ill advisedly gone public with his latest harebrained schemes for improving the sport he purports to love.

From a business perspective, his club’s exit was bad. Juventus is the champion of Italy. It is one of the most popular teams in the world. It has far more box office appeal than Porto; the longer it stays in the Champions League, the better not only for Juventus itself, but to some extent for the competition as a whole. From a sporting perspective, though, its demise was compelling, spellbinding drama, and at the center of the plot was jeopardy: Something was riding on this. Remove the stakes, and it is highly likely that the product will suffer.

To American sensibilities, of course, none of this is alien. The major professional leagues of North America all function as closed shops, unencumbered by the specter of promotion and relegation, and they are doing quite nicely, thank you. Their example has percolated into the thinking of not only those European clubs whose owners have interests in the N.F.L. or Major League Baseball, but of those who look on enviously both at the broadcast deals they can command and the cost control measures at their disposal.

Here too, though, there is a misunderstanding. Soccer is, as the historian David Goldblatt has written, a global cultural phenomenon of almost unparalleled scale. Cristiano Ronaldo is by some distance more famous now than the Beatles were even in their heyday. To the major clubs, this is a point in their favor; they are the teams, after all, that people across the planet pay to watch. Why should they spread the wealth they generate to everyone else?

The riposte is quite simple: They have not built their popularity alone. What soccer has become is testament to the richness of its heritage, to the stories told not by a handful of clubs but by hundreds of them.

By seeking to sever the link between the elite and the masses, the dozen rebel clubs are effectively trying to reap for themselves rewards that are due the collective at what is, effectively, an arbitrary point in history. Had this plan been stifled for another five years, would Tottenham still have been invited to join, or might its place have been taken by Leicester City? In a decade, might A.C. Milan have been replaced by Napoli?

In another light, there is nothing arbitrary at all about this moment. It is possible, of course, that all of this will come to nothing, that letters of intent will prove rather easier than actually conjuring a superleague into being. A gantlet of obstacles awaits, both from soccer’s authorities and from those that lie above them, in the form of national governments and the European Union.

But even if this plan stumbles, the concept will be back, sooner rather than later, in some vaguely modified form. A superleague is, in effect, inevitable; European soccer has been drifting, inexorably, to this point for years.

And it is here that those who hope to benefit from shutting the door, from fixing the rules of engagement, cannot take all of the blame. Many of those who spent Sunday spitting fury at the greed of the conspirators have been complicit, over the last 30 years or so, in making this — or something very much like it — the only conclusion possible.


That is true of the Premier League, which waved in money from anyone and everyone who could afford to buy a club, which took great pride in its “ownership neutral” approach, which never stopped to ask whether any of it was good for the game. It is true of the Spanish authorities, who made it clear that the rules did not really apply to Real Madrid or Barcelona.

It is true, perhaps most of all, of UEFA, which has grown fat and rich on the proceeds of the Champions League, from bowing to the demands of its most powerful constituent clubs, giving more and more power away just to keep the show on the road. It is true, even, of the rest of us in soccer’s thrall — the news media and the commentariat and the fans — who celebrated the multimillion-dollar transfers and the massive television deals and the conspicuous consumption of money and did not stop to ask where it would all go.

It is no surprise, really, that the rebels believe that their plan might work, that there is no such thing as a red line, that whatever they do, we will all keep watching and the ball will keep rolling. It is no surprise that they think they can do whatever they like. That is what they have done for years, after all, and nobody has stopped them yet.

[Spikey M]

The Village we're moving to has a Football Team with a 250 seater stadium in the Isthmian North Division. £200 for a family season ticket. I'm tempted.

[Raoul Duke]

Bayern have come out and told them to eat shit. Not very often The Empire is the good guy

[Don]

Yes the current set-up has flaws and is not a completely level playing field but the changes that escalate this further go beyond the limits that today's fans will accept.

It's obviously inevitable as time goes but they've shot their load too early by a good decade or two. They need to slowly adapt the game and condition fans to accept it. This is well on the way with increased technology use like VAR, unneccesary changes to the rules like handball and general behavioural patterns of people consumed by social media and the virtual world.

But if they think the residents of the cities would allow this shit in 2021, they're having a lol. As I keep saying, these stadiums will be burned to the ground before any ESL fixture is played. The legacy lot are too powerful still, let them age and wither a bit more and be made irrelevant by the new generation who are too busy mining cryptocoins/minecraft resources to care about real world goings on.

[Yevrah]

Yes the current set-up has flaws and is not a completely level playing field but the changes that escalate this further go beyond the limits that today's fans will accept.

There seems to be a sense of entitlement that it's the fans' game. It isn't, it hasn't been for a long time and we've all contributed towards that with our Sky subscriptions, paying £60 for what amounts to a T-shirt etc.

"Today's fans" might not accept it, but they're irrelevant. Like a jilted lover who spends their time hitting the bottle while their ex isn't giving them a second thought, it's an utterly futile mindset to be in.

The legacy lot are too powerful still

They're just not. They like to think they are as it harks back to that entitled view of it being 'their game', but in reality they are utterly irrelevant and there is nothing they nor the government can do to stop this if the clubs involved stick to their guns.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Pepe's pretty bang on here. The values of fairness and a level playing field have long since left the sport and ok, this is taking that to the extreme, but those getting seriously arsed about it are clinging onto a vision they have of the game that died years ago.

It's not an all or nothing situation. No one involved is morally pure and nor would they ever be. Status quo is creeping ultra-capitalism but ultimately everything still decided by sporting contests. Super league proposal consigns the importance of sporting contests to the dustbin of history. You don't have to be Che Guevara to oppose that move.

[phonics]

People like Yev who go 'What are you so mad about, football was already money oriented' is as fucking dumb as the people who think 'but you own an iPhone' is a good argument.

Just absolute guff.

[Lewis]

Pepe is wrong but is Kiko still bending over to take the full 8 inch girth of capitalism full-time whilst calling us out for our morals?

Not to mention his gay little 'Forum Super League' on WhatsApp.

[Yevrah]

People like Yev who go 'What are you so mad about, football was already money oriented' is as fucking dumb as the people who think 'but you own an iPhone' is a good argument.

Just absolute guff.

I understand why people are mad, I'm just saying it's utterly pointless to be. The game is not what it was and nor will it probably be in our lifetimes and anyone who thinks they're going to change that by hanging a banner from a plane or standing outside a stadium is deluded beyond belief. The clubs have all of the power. Every last bit of it.

[Yevrah]

It's not an all or nothing situation. No one involved is morally pure and nor would they ever be. Status quo is creeping ultra-capitalism but ultimately everything still decided by sporting contests. Super league proposal consigns the importance of sporting contests to the dustbin of history. You don't have to be Che Guevara to oppose that move.

It's the hypocrisy I struggle with. Red Nev is there at the barracades claiming he supports a free market, when what he actually means is he only supports it as long as it doesn't do something he disagrees with.

And I genuinely don't see how this is much worse than the shower of shit UEFA had implemented for 2024 onwards or what they've already done to the Euros.

[Jimmy Floyd]

It's the hypocrisy I struggle with. Red Nev is there at the barracades claiming he supports a free market, when what he actually means is he only supports it as long as it doesn't do something he disagrees with.

And I genuinely don't see how this is much worse than the shower of shit UEFA had implemented for 2024 onwards or what they've already done to the Euros.

So what? Everyone acts in their own interests. If it takes a coalition of diverse hypocrites to take down the most damaging possible outcome for the sport, then so be it.

[Kikó]

Having an enforced closed shop at the top of the game which nullifies competition is a massive change to the current status quo. Yeah it's currently unfair (top 4 guaranteed from each major league for example) and it's a long way from the 70s but we still have a semi competitive football environment across Europe. This is a clear move to superbowling it and destroying football heritage across the UK and Europe. If you don't get annoyed by this then when will you? Reinvent the game with the momentum and bring the fans back into club ownership.

[phonics]

Yev was the guy in 1902 saying 'The Games Gone'

[Yevrah]

Reinvent the game with the momentum and bring the fans back into club ownership.

How do you actually do that though?

[Lewis]

Have fans ever had any serious club ownership here?

[Kikó]

There are a number of clubs with fan ownership.

[Kikó]

How do you actually do that though?

Government.

[Ian]

Hasn't the horse bolted in the case of most English clubs? Surely you can't just tell a club owner "Oh by the way you only own 49% of this now"? Because presumably if you're wanting fan ownership there's not that much point unless you're going full German model?

[Spoonsky]

It's the hypocrisy I struggle with. Red Nev is there at the barracades claiming he supports a free market, when what he actually means is he only supports it as long as it doesn't do something he disagrees with.

And I genuinely don't see how this is much worse than the shower of shit UEFA had implemented for 2024 onwards or what they've already done to the Euros.

There's no way you can't see the difference between the Champions League (as unequal as it is, and will be even more so from 2024) and this.

Have PSG made a statement? Bizarre to see them and Bayern emerge as the good guys in this.

[Yevrah]

There's no way you can't see the difference between the Champions League (as unequal as it is, and will be even more so from 2024) and this.

I can see the difference hence why I said it isn't much worse. UEFA might come out moralising about greed and being screwed (oh the lols), but their Swiss abomination had qualification protection based on historic performance and was a truly dreadful format. They're only annoyed someone's beaten them to it.

[Yevrah]

Hasn't the horse bolted in the case of most English clubs? Surely you can't just tell a club owner "Oh by the way you only own 49% of this now"? Because presumably if you're wanting fan ownership there's not that much point unless you're going full German model?

We could dig up Corbyn and get him to do the honours I guess.

[Kikó]

Hasn't the horse bolted in the case of most English clubs? Surely you can't just tell a club owner "Oh by the way you only own 49% of this now"? Because presumably if you're wanting fan ownership there's not that much point unless you're going full German model?

They're small enterprises - the government could afford to nationalise them/impose a model of fan majority ownership.

[Lewis]

There could be downsides to setting business/foreign investment confidence back fifty years though.

[Jimmy Floyd]

They won't nationalise football clubs, but they might do a bunch of things that prevents any hope of any future Super League breakaway.

[Don]

The UEFA CL revamp is dogshit but it's not in the same stratosphere.

Qualification for the UEFA Champions League will continue to be open and earned through a team’s performance in domestic competitions.

One of the additional places will go to the club ranked third in the championship of the association in fifth position in the UEFA national association ranking. Another will be awarded to a domestic champion by extending from four to five the number of clubs qualifying via the so-called “Champions Path”.

The final two places will go to the clubs with the highest club coefficient over the last five years that have not qualified for the Champions League group stage but have qualified either for the Champions League qualification phase, the Europa League or the Europa Conference League.

[Kikó]

There could be downsides to setting business/foreign investment confidence back fifty years though.

:***( how will we cope without leveraged buyouts of our sporting institutions.

[Lewis]

I bet it would be amazing being the first team to win it after only getting in on a coefficient place.

[Manc]

Yev siding with a lad who's probably never seen the sport. Have a day off.

[Yevrah]

The UEFA CL revamp is dogshit but it's not in the same stratosphere.

Qualification for the UEFA Champions League will continue to be open and earned through a team’s performance in domestic competitions.

One of the additional places will go to the club ranked third in the championship of the association in fifth position in the UEFA national association ranking. Another will be awarded to a domestic champion by extending from four to five the number of clubs qualifying via the so-called “Champions Path”.

The final two places will go to the clubs with the highest club coefficient over the last five years that have not qualified for the Champions League group stage but have qualified either for the Champions League qualification phase, the Europa League or the Europa Conference League.

Reading that has hut my head. What the bollocks is this shit?

the club ranked third in the championship of the association in fifth position in the UEFA national association ranking

Qualifying for the damn thing makes about as much sense as the group stage league table will come December 24.

[Yevrah]

Just as a reminder:

Taking the total number of teams from 32 to 36 in the UEFA Champions League, the biggest change will see a transformation from the traditional group stage to a single league stage including all participating teams. Every club will now be guaranteed a minimum of 10 league stage games against 10 different opponents (five home games, five away) rather than the previous six matches against three teams, played on a home and away basis.

The top eight sides in the league will qualify automatically for the knockout stage, while the teams finishing in ninth to 24th place will compete in a two-legged play-off to secure their path to the last 16 of the competition.

I genuinely don't think I could have come up with anything worse if I'd tried. The amount of dead rubbers and generally shit games is going to be obscene.

[Lewis]

Which is what this is a reaction to. More games, but not necessarily more money for the clubs who consider them a ballache. I think the eventual climbdown will see those proposals canned.

[Jimmy Floyd]

If there's a climbdown now, it won't be on terms beneficial to the rebels. They've shot their load. Which is why I don't think there will be a climbdown per se, but the grind of hatred towards them will eventually wear down the less evangelical clubs and leave the others high and dry.

[Lewis]

View Tweet

I've just spent a grand on United merchandise to cancel him out.

[Spikey M]

Imagine filming that, watching it back and thinking "yep... let's go".

[Sir Andy Mahowry]

I bet he'll be down there at the Emirates to see them get twatted by Barcelona.

[Kikó]

Just as a reminder:



I genuinely don't think I could have come up with anything worse if I'd tried. The amount of dead rubbers and generally shit games is going to be obscene.

You know all those ESL clubs will have been involved in the discussions and bringing this live/signing it off. It's not like it happened in a bubble.

[Pepe]

Not to mention his gay little 'Forum Super League' on WhatsApp.