They should stick the Big Six into their own league, make them play each other once, top three get to stay in the Premier League, bottom three are relegated to the Conference. If they don't want jeopardy, let's give them some.
I think the Premier league could create a season like no other next year by deducting those six clubs 10 points each. The following season MAY see one or two new clubs in the champions league and Europa. This would stand as a good reminder that season of what happened. If the Spanish and Italian Leagues did the same they would really be giving something back to the fans that stood up.
I think the Premier league could create a season like no other next year by deducting those six clubs 10 points each. The following season MAY see one or two new clubs in the champions league and Europa. This would stand as a good reminder that season of what happened. If the Spanish and Italian Leagues did the same they would really be giving something back to the fans that stood up.
If they all had 10 points less: 1st Man City, 64pts 2nd Man Utd, 56pts 11th Chelsea 45pts 12th Liverpool 43pts 13th Spurs 40pts 14th Arsenal 36pts
It’s not really a punishment when the biggest teams are so much better than the others, imo
Ok maybe I should rephrase. All of them should be banned from UEFA Competitions for the next 1/2 years, because knocking 10pts off them all doesn't punish Manchester's United or City
Think any punishment needs implemented soon. I don’t know the detail of all the applicable rules, but there is a risk affected clubs could sue ( e.g. Sheffield for getting relegated, WHU and Leicester for not getting European football, £££s for PL places, etc).
They should stick the Big Six into their own league, make them play each other once, top three get to stay in the Premier League, bottom three are relegated to the Conference. If they don't want jeopardy, let's give them some.
The only thing wrong with that, if I understand it correctly, is that the Blunts would stay up.
On another point, someone posted on here that they were sure that if WHU had been invited they would have accepted. If they had accepted, I'm pretty sure that the PL would have stated that one of the clubs would have to suffer a VERY severe penalty. No prizes for guessing who that would have been.
However, I personally don't think that we would have accepted, not with the 2 (or at least 1) genuine West Ham supporters in charge.
Not read all of the comments so don't know if this has been raised before, but could all of this been a smoke screen and distraction played by the clubs involved and UEFA? Whilst all the attention of the footballing world was being drawn to this side show, the main event slipped quietly under the wire.....
The changes to the current Champions League competition were enacted, with the provision of the prior performance co-efficient to calculate which 2 other teams would be allocated a slot, should they not qualify by right through their own leagues or winning the competition/Europa League.
The Clubs most likely to benefit from this are those in the EFL, Sierra A and La Liga -
So maybe the ESL was all a storm in a teacup with no intention of being enacted, with the owners involved deciding the risk from the fall out was worth it, fake apologies and all, just to ensure that from 2024, even if they failed to qualify they would still get a berth in the top competition? Funny how when all the CL changes went through quietly the clubs started to pull out of the 'ESL Project' under the guise of Fan and other Pressures.
In six months time the owners will still be in place and the ESL Project will be a long distant memory and there will be a meeting of the 'Top Six' (LoL) owners with much back slapping and congratulations on a job well done.
Ok maybe I should rephrase. All of them should be banned from UEFA Competitions for the next 1/2 years, because knocking 10pts off them all doesn't punish Manchester's United or City
Regardless, Liverpool should be for the actions of the fans the other week - and 15 point EPL deduction next season and banned from both domestic cups...
You may have guessed, I am not keen on 'Pool, least favourite team (or most hated - take you pick)
Not read all of the comments so don't know if this has been raised before, but could all of this been a smoke screen and distraction played by the clubs involved and UEFA? Whilst all the attention of the footballing world was being drawn to this side show, the main event slipped quietly under the wire.....
The changes to the current Champions League competition were enacted, with the provision of the prior performance co-efficient to calculate which 2 other teams would be allocated a slot, should they not qualify by right through their own leagues or winning the competition/Europa League.
The Clubs most likely to benefit from this are those in the EFL, Sierra A and La Liga -
So maybe the ESL was all a storm in a teacup with no intention of being enacted, with the owners involved deciding the risk from the fall out was worth it, fake apologies and all, just to ensure that from 2024, even if they failed to qualify they would still get a berth in the top competition? Funny how when all the CL changes went through quietly the clubs started to pull out of the 'ESL Project' under the guise of Fan and other Pressures.
In six months time the owners will still be in place and the ESL Project will be a long distant memory and there will be a meeting of the 'Top Six' (LoL) owners with much back slapping and congratulations on a job well done.
doubt it as execs have been sacked/left and the owners not know for contrition have had to eat public humble pie
I'm interested to see just how many people who are supportive of capitalism (so, are Tory voting, or on the right of the political spectrum, or pour scorn on so called loony-left or liberals or socialist economic policies, or are in favour of private sector rather than nationalised industry and so on) who are thoroughly outraged by an initiative that is purely driven by market forces.
I do find it odd.
Isn't the super league the epitome of capitalist economics? And the idea that governments should legislate to restrict the operation of the market, anathema?
You can be a capitalist and not be a tory voter, its also a narrow view to say Capitalism places you on the right side of a political spectrum maybe from an economic perspective it can but you can be socially left on the political spectrum and still be considered "a leftie" overall even after supporting a Capitalist market.
Likewise you can be a capitalist and think football isn't just a business transaction. I would also argue that some Capitalists would actually argue that government legislation is absolutely needed to make sure the well-being of people can be met through taxation to enhance society. It would largely depend on what version or what definition of Capitalism you ascribe to.
I agree, I think it's possible to have a view that capitalism is an acceptable system but that it must also have regulation. A view that capitalism can encourage growth and entrepreneurial spirit and that in turn can help increase amounts taken in tax which can be used to increase the welfare of the whole.
The problem is in that regulation. In my view the taxation system should be used to generate money where and at rates appropriate and sadly there are too many tax loop holes. In general tax has been made a dirty word rather than associated with providing the countries needs. Take it from the right places and spend it properly.
I would love to see the Tax free amount raise to £18k so you can earn £1500 per month without paying tax, work out the cost and raise the rates over 80k upwards to fund it and possibly business tax in combination.
No student loans but a graduate tax of around 5-7% on earnings over 25k paid until the age of 40 years. No exemption through paying fees up front so wealthy parents cant avoid it. Level playing field in that if you benefit from the university system you pay the graduate tax.
IMF, WTO, UN Security Council have Key players in each all hold the cards in decision making and wealth. The ESL was another attempt to create an organisation where the power and wealth stays with the few.
I'm interested to see just how many people who are supportive of capitalism (so, are Tory voting, or on the right of the political spectrum, or pour scorn on so called loony-left or liberals or socialist economic policies, or are in favour of private sector rather than nationalised industry and so on) who are thoroughly outraged by an initiative that is purely driven by market forces.
I do find it odd.
Isn't the super league the epitome of capitalist economics? And the idea that governments should legislate to restrict the operation of the market, anathema?
Am I the only one who Googled what anathema meant?
C&B the graduate bit is roughly how it works. Student loans pay for tuition and part accommodation but it isn’t a debt to the student as the media makes out. Graduates pay interest on the total amount of the loan at the rate of 9% on earnings in excess of £27500 starting the April after graduation. If they don’t earn that amount they pay nothing. Loans are wiped out after 30 years.
I'm interested to see just how many people who are supportive of capitalism (so, are Tory voting, or on the right of the political spectrum, or pour scorn on so called loony-left or liberals or socialist economic policies, or are in favour of private sector rather than nationalised industry and so on) who are thoroughly outraged by an initiative that is purely driven by market forces.
I do find it odd.
Isn't the super league the epitome of capitalist economics? And the idea that governments should legislate to restrict the operation of the market, anathema?
Whilst I see some similarities in what you are saying here I disagree from 2 different angles:
The Super League was looking to create a protected monopoly for 15 clubs around Europe - and probably spreading to a Global League relatively soon. They tried to dress it up a little more acceptably by adding the sop of 5 other clubs being able to qualify. But to all intents and purposes it was a protected monopoly. Maybe the 5 qualifying clubs would be the ones to fall away in order to add Brazilian, Argentinian or other clubs to cement the World Series Titles ... Many governments legislate against Monopoly, although clearly they are a goal for many Capitalists.
I am still naive enough to think of football as a Sport. As a sport the prospect of teams position in a league being protected is just plain wrong, you should get what you deserve through your performances and results; there should always be the opportunity for teams to earn and achieve promotion to the highest leagues. It was good to hear this being pushed from the likes of Guardiola over the last couple of days.
I keep seeing some stupid argument against point deductions, basically saying it wouldn't be fair as it would punish the fans and players for owner actions.
So, like basically every other situation where points are deducted, then? Are fans to blame for administration or owners doing dodgy deals involving their stadiums etc?
I keep seeing some stupid argument against point deductions, basically saying it wouldn't be fair as it would punish the fans and players for owner actions.
So, like basically every other situation where points are deducted, then? Are fans to blame for administration or owners doing dodgy deals involving their stadiums etc?
Yep is an utter nonsense argument. I felt Dawson getting sent off last week was also unfair on the fans.
There are plenty of clubs who have been deducted points and fined for breaking the rules including us why should they get away with it because they are big clubs. I presume there are rules that have been broken and it’s up to the PL to show that all clubs are treated the same
I think the other 14 clubs are against points deductions primarily this could affect European qualification and that is one of the reasons they objected to the new Superleague. I think they want the owners punished even to the extent of their removal although I don’t see how that could be achieved.
Comments
1st Man City, 64pts
2nd Man Utd, 56pts
11th Chelsea 45pts
12th Liverpool 43pts
13th Spurs 40pts
14th Arsenal 36pts
It’s not really a punishment when the biggest teams are so much better than the others, imo
On another point, someone posted on here that they were sure that if WHU had been invited they would have accepted.
If they had accepted, I'm pretty sure that the PL would have stated that one of the clubs would have to suffer a VERY severe penalty. No prizes for guessing who that would have been.
However, I personally don't think that we would have accepted, not with the 2 (or at least 1) genuine West Ham supporters in charge.
Not read all of the comments so don't know if this has been raised before, but could all of this been a smoke screen and distraction played by the clubs involved and UEFA? Whilst all the attention of the footballing world was being drawn to this side show, the main event slipped quietly under the wire.....
The changes to the current Champions League competition were enacted, with the provision of the prior performance co-efficient to calculate which 2 other teams would be allocated a slot, should they not qualify by right through their own leagues or winning the competition/Europa League.
The Clubs most likely to benefit from this are those in the EFL, Sierra A and La Liga -
So maybe the ESL was all a storm in a teacup with no intention of being enacted, with the owners involved deciding the risk from the fall out was worth it, fake apologies and all, just to ensure that from 2024, even if they failed to qualify they would still get a berth in the top competition? Funny how when all the CL changes went through quietly the clubs started to pull out of the 'ESL Project' under the guise of Fan and other Pressures.
In six months time the owners will still be in place and the ESL Project will be a long distant memory and there will be a meeting of the 'Top Six' (LoL) owners with much back slapping and congratulations on a job well done.
You may have guessed, I am not keen on 'Pool, least favourite team (or most hated - take you pick)
I do find it odd.
Isn't the super league the epitome of capitalist economics? And the idea that governments should legislate to restrict the operation of the market, anathema?
Likewise you can be a capitalist and think football isn't just a business transaction. I would also argue that some Capitalists would actually argue that government legislation is absolutely needed to make sure the well-being of people can be met through taxation to enhance society. It would largely depend on what version or what definition of Capitalism you ascribe to.
The problem is in that regulation. In my view the taxation system should be used to generate money where and at rates appropriate and sadly there are too many tax loop holes. In general tax has been made a dirty word rather than associated with providing the countries needs. Take it from the right places and spend it properly.
I would love to see the Tax free amount raise to £18k so you can earn £1500 per month without paying tax, work out the cost and raise the rates over 80k upwards to fund it and possibly business tax in combination.
No student loans but a graduate tax of around 5-7% on earnings over 25k paid until the age of 40 years. No exemption through paying fees up front so wealthy parents cant avoid it. Level playing field in that if you benefit from the university system you pay the graduate tax.
sorry going way off topic now......
The ESL was another attempt to create an organisation where the power and wealth stays with the few.
Am I the only one who Googled what anathema meant?
The Super League was looking to create a protected monopoly for 15 clubs around Europe - and probably spreading to a Global League relatively soon. They tried to dress it up a little more acceptably by adding the sop of 5 other clubs being able to qualify. But to all intents and purposes it was a protected monopoly. Maybe the 5 qualifying clubs would be the ones to fall away in order to add Brazilian, Argentinian or other clubs to cement the World Series Titles ... Many governments legislate against Monopoly, although clearly they are a goal for many Capitalists.
I am still naive enough to think of football as a Sport. As a sport the prospect of teams position in a league being protected is just plain wrong, you should get what you deserve through your performances and results; there should always be the opportunity for teams to earn and achieve promotion to the highest leagues. It was good to hear this being pushed from the likes of Guardiola over the last couple of days.
Well worth a few minutes of your time.
So, like basically every other situation where points are deducted, then? Are fans to blame for administration or owners doing dodgy deals involving their stadiums etc?
I felt Dawson getting sent off last week was also unfair on the fans.
I think they want the owners punished even to the extent of their removal although I don’t see how that could be achieved.