New super league

1…34689…17

Comments

  • Dodger58Dodger58
    edited April 2021
    ASLEFshrugged said:


    What are they going to do, play a 22 game season between themselves?

    They may have to go to the Scottish model and play each other twice home and away ...

  • Expat_HammerExpat_Hammer
    And then moan about the fixture pile up =)
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    I am not sure if this has already been raised as have not read the whole thread, but is this not really just a coup to wrestle the Champions league from UEFA into the clubs themselves and the backers of the super league?

    Is it not a case of now seeing who will recognise the Super league as a legitimate organisation? it's not going well so far.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Man U shares are up 8.5% in early trading on Wall St. That is why I believe this isn't a bluff. It may not come off but it isn't a bluff.
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    Ironherb, that is all the Glazers and the other US owners are interested in.
  • ScotHammerScotHammer
    Back in the 70s, I seem to remember some sort of ban for players who moved to an unsanctioned US soccer league. I was still running round the playground then, but does anybody else know if this is correct and any detail?
  • jay_in_cptjay_in_cpt
    Don’t see many laughing though Aslef👍🏻
  • eskimokingeskimoking
    They (Man U and the three Italian clubs at least) have withdrawn as members of one of the European collective. They would not have done that if this was a bluff, they won’t get that position and control back. It’s not a bluff.
  • jay_in_cptjay_in_cpt
    edited April 2021
    This IMO is a complete farce... It’s terrible timing and embarrassing, happy to not be a hated team...

  • HamstewHamstew
    eskimoking said:

    They (Man U and the three Italian clubs at least) have withdrawn as members of one of the European collective. They would not have done that if this was a bluff, they won’t get that position and control back. It’s not a bluff.

    Does that meant they can't compete in any UEFA competitions?
  • eskimokingeskimoking
    No, that’s their position on a board type thing, not related to the team.
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    I think they know if they don't go for it now they will have lost all power in future attempts. I think the resignations and strong wording etc is a desperate attempt to convince that this is a done deal so that UEFA will negotiate as though it's possible. All UEFA need to is stand firm. They have governing bodies, all other clubs, fans and politicians on their side. The broadcasters could end this now by withdrawing support, not that they will but they could secure themselves a massive PR win by simply saying we Sky and BT will not be bidding for TV rights. It ends there and then, with sky looking very fan friendly, as do the politicians. The clubs involved end up needing embark on a damage limitation exercise.
  • yoyoyoyo
    Man Utd shares up nearly 10%. That's what it's about
  • eskimokingeskimoking
    ECA, that’s the acronym if you wish to search :)
  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    edited April 2021
    At this rate with all the threat of suspensions of the teams PSG win the Champions League, Villarreal v Roma is the Europa League Final and West Ham will win the Premier League, now which of those three is least likely to come to fruition?
  • Ravel49Ravel49
    Am I right in saying this results in an extra 18 midweek games minimum?

    2 groups of 10 playing each other home and away
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    The whole thing is funded by J P Morgan and there will be no relegation J P Morgan expect to get their money back and loads more from the TV rights. Several streaming sites have said they’re not interested so it needs the likes of Sky to say the same.
    I certainly wouldn’t watch any of the games because if the results don’t matter what’s the point. Even neutral PL games I tend to favour one side or the other because I like to see one fail.
    Imagine this season and Sheff Utd finishing bottom but not caring because they’ll still be in it next year.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited April 2021
    Diamantis_Are_Forever said:

    Am I right in saying this results in an extra 18 midweek games minimum?

    2 groups of 10 playing each other home and away

    Minimum. Then there's a play-off thing between the top teams in the 2 groups.
  • Ravel49Ravel49
    And also the players are getting punished for a decision made above them ie not being able to play in certain comps / internationally

    It’s not like they signed knowing this was the plan longer term
  • yoyoyoyo
    It's like major U.S leagues, baseball, American football, same old teams year after year
  • alderzalderz
    claretandbluesky said:

    I think they know if they don't go for it now they will have lost all power in future attempts. I think the resignations and strong wording etc is a desperate attempt to convince that this is a done deal so that UEFA will negotiate as though it's possible. All UEFA need to is stand firm. They have governing bodies, all other clubs, fans and politicians on their side. The broadcasters could end this now by withdrawing support, not that they will but they could secure themselves a massive PR win by simply saying we Sky and BT will not be bidding for TV rights. It ends there and then, with sky looking very fan friendly, as do the politicians. The clubs involved end up needing embark on a damage limitation exercise.

    re: broadcasters

    You're right that it would never happen, but even if it did it wouldn't matter. The American model of a closed league means they can play players in NFL, NBA and MLB beyond what the elite footballers earn, even. This is entirely for the US market, and their broadcasters are not going to turn it down even if the rest of the world did.

    I really want to see all the clubs punished, but tbh I don't think they will be. All the talk of points deductions, fines, etc just feels fanciful to me. Realistically, the leagues (PL, La Liga, Serie A) still need those clubs to be in them to remain as profitable as they are. UEFA need them to make the Champions League profitable. If they slap them with fines or relegate them or whatever else then they will just go and form the ESL regardless because stuff it why stay if they are going to be punished? Broadcasters would 100% buy up the rights for record sums, and then then the leagues would all end up devalued and with very little.

    I personally still feel that this is not going to happen, but I think that UEFA will end up negotiating their revamp plans to meet the clubs somewhere in the middle.
  • alderzalderz
    yoyo said:

    It's like major U.S leagues, baseball, American football, same old teams year after year

    And the US fans (and people across the world, tbf) eat it up. Those leagues are the most profitable in the world, so the model works for those within it, and for the fans who buy into it.
  • ScotHammerScotHammer
    Do you think this will feed the transfer market or kill it dead? On one hand, the players will want to play at the very top - on the other they may want to continue to play in a real competition which feeds their competitiveness? IMO it may help clubs like us who’s players may not want to join the “big teams” with all the uncertainty over the future. This

    The whole thing makes me think of the Harlem Globetrotters who became a sideshow to the real competitive sport. I’m sure they made someone very rich in the short term while it was a novelty!

  • FortuneseekerFortuneseeker
    The rumour is the big six will struggle to get work permits for any new signings they may wish to make as the government can veto them.
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    edited April 2021
    alderz said:



    I personally still feel that this is not going to happen, but I think that UEFA will end up negotiating their revamp plans to meet the clubs somewhere in the middle.

    I don't see where they can meet in the middle other than just giving those clubs more money. At which point you might as well just let them go down the super league route because if they win this battle they know they can keep bullying them for more and more.
  • alderzalderz
    Yeoldhammer said:

    alderz said:



    I personally still feel that this is not going to happen, but I think that UEFA will end up negotiating their revamp plans to meet the clubs somewhere in the middle.

    I don't see where they can meet in the middle other than just giving those clubs more money. At which point you might as well just let them go down the super league route because if they win this battle they know they can keep bullying them for more and more.
    I’m definitely not disagreeing with that, but I just fee that UEFA will end up negotiating. Maybe they’ll expand the numbers of teams allowed in each year or something to preserve the chances of these teams getting in? I’m not sure, but I’d be very surprised if they didn’t end up conceding something
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    For UEFA to do that they would have to throw the PL under the bus. (which they probably dont mind doing)
  • Jorderz_Moyes_will_be_MoyesJorderz_Moyes_will_be_Moyes
    Alderz,

    That's what UEFA were going to announce today - a bigger competition with more games and more places.

    I 100% think an example should be made of these clubs, including transfer embargos, fines and points deductions.

    This is an attempted coup and if you give in then they can do this every few years and get whatever they want. Giving into their demands will get us nowhere and if anything make them greedier and more arrogant.

    It's clear the leagues will suffer massively without these teams, but they'll suffer massively if the ESL goes ahead anyway. So better to attack them and risk the ESL happening, with the aim of restoring some of the power balance.

    I just think this has to be met with huge force. The PL needs to be bold in its punishment or this sort of thing will never go away.
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    The only way i see this not happening is:-

    1) UEFA give in and hand over the money
    2) one of the founding members U-turns and just collapses the whole thing.

    otherwise i think this plan has been in the works for a while and they already have the legal battle lines drawn for what is it come.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited April 2021
    Fortuneseeker said:

    The rumour is the big six will struggle to get work permits for any new signings they may wish to make as the government can veto them.

    Not sure about this.

    If you set requirements relating to number of international appearances (as is - correct me if I'm wrong - the current standard of a sporting visas) I think it would be illegal to discriminate against players who meet those requirements but who play for a club you don't like. The govt could try to rewrite the regulations to exclude players signing for named clubs, or who are going to play in a named competition, but I'd be very doubtful that this would be seen as a legitimate distinction.

    And you know what, I don't agree with a govt picking and choosing like that anyway. It doesn't sit right with me to set immigration criteria in this way. It seems unfair.

    Plus, it's against everything the Tories campaigned on in terms of skilled jobs. (Not that I care about eg on their face, and we aren't surprised by any more U-turns they might make.)



Sign In or Register to comment.