European Super League

Do you want the ESL to happen?


  • Total voters
    1,921
  • Poll closed .
Finally, football fans will see legislation governing us through democracy and parliament - however flawed - has potential to change things for the better.

Wouldn't count my chickens on it being the government who actually would pull the plug on this just yet.
 
yes, it looks like someone knocked it up in the few hours between the leak and the announcement
In that case it was probably the same people that ran Man Utd’s fantastic website for years before it was finally updated.
 
Analysis: The PM has set himself against the elite club plans. Here are some ways they could be challenged

While ministers might be united with fans and opposition parties in pledging to oppose a European Super League (ESL) including six English clubs, precisely how that might happen remains unclear for now – and is by no means straightforward. Here are some possible options:

A change to the law

This would pass easily through parliament, with Labour saying it would back emergency legislation to stop Manchester City, Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham breaking away to join the new league.

However, it remains unclear what form a new law would take. One option under consideration is to oblige English football clubs to have the German-style model of ownership by which fans are guaranteed a majority of share ownership, with the only exception in Germany being for people or companies that have invested for 20 or more years continuously.

This would almost certainly stop English clubs joining the new league, with leading German clubs turning down the chance to do so. However, it would also have an impact on the flow of investment into English football, particularly from overseas.

Action under competition rules
This would be based on the argument that the proposed format of the ESL – with 15 “founder” teams guaranteed permanent status and only five clubs taking part on merit each year – amounts to an anti-competitive closed shop. It would be “a theoretical argument to make - but it’s a difficult one”, according to Neil Baylis, a competition lawyer with the law firm Mishcon de Reya.

There is nothing intrinsically illegal about fixed-participant tournaments, for example the Six Nations in rugby union, meaning competition law would only be breached if it could be shown that the ESL was shutting out other teams from significant revenue.

“It’s quite a tough argument to run here,” said Baylis. “It’s not stopping the Premier League from carrying on, and with midweek games it’s deliberately trying not to compete head on with the Saturday afternoon timetable. So it’s far from obvious that everyone [is] going to only want to watch the Super League games.”

If a competition rules route was chosen, this could happen via official regulators such as the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority or its equivalent in countries where other ESL teams are based, or via the courts. With regulatory cases tending to take “months if not years”, the latter seemed more likely, Baylis said.

Complicating matters even further is the fact that ESL teams might themselves have recourse to the same laws if, as threatened, participating teams were thrown out of other competitions, or their players were barred from international tournaments, on the basis that this was an attempt to stifle competition.

The only precedent for any similar cases, Baylis said, had been in far smaller sports – ice skating and showjumping – where organising bodies were challenged for preventing sportspeople from taking part in non-affiliated events.

Removing government support
The culture secretary, Oliver Dowden, raised this idea in a Commons statement, saying the government could look at what it does “to facilitate matches, and facilitate those clubs – and looking at whether we should continue to provide that support”.
He did not specify what this might involve, but it could potentially mean, for example, being less willing to grant work permits for overseas players at UK-based ESL teams.

Restricting TV rights
Another potential lever for government could be controlling or restricting television rights, which would be the key income stream for the new league. But again this appears difficult, given the proliferation of TV and web-based streaming options now available.
One official route on televised sport is to add events to the so-called crown jewels, which under Ofcom regulation have to either be shown live or as highlights on free-to-air TV. This list, however, is rarely updated and very limited. For football, aside from the FA Cup final (and the Scottish Cup final on Scottish TV), it covers only the finals of the World Cup and the Euros.

Fan boycotts
Not under the control of government, obviously, but given the almost unanimously negative response from fans to the idea of the ESL, it is always possible that its undoing is something much less formal: a realisation among teams tempted to sign up that this could tarnish their brands for years, and shed far more money in customer boycotts than is gained via TV rights.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...per-league-what-can-boris-johnson-do-about-it
Forget all this, to me it seems taxation is the most potent weapon governments have against this, given the clubs are obviously doing it for money. Here’s a proposal, 90% income tax on all revenues a club makes from ESL, and 100% tax on all gate receipts at ESL games.

Given the huge deficit spending we’ve had due to COVID-19, this would easily fly with the public, and basically make the competition economically unviable in the long run. The beauty with this approach is that the government isn’t directly interfering or banning, just doing what a government should do by setting tax policy.
 
Watching United playing against the same teams over and over and over again year after year sound really boring. I cannot see how anyone might think, that this has some good things in it.
 
I don't want to see Uefa/ fifa get their way but at the same time the morons running the clubs came up with a dumb competition. Feck the Americans they're the ones who obviously brought in the relegation thing. A 32 team competition with Uefa's influence would have been grand.
 
"The L9 guideline: "Except with the prior written approval of the board, during the season a club shall not enter or play its senior men's first team in any competition other than:"

The key here is the not enter or play as you can say when the clubs have officially signed up for the ESL they have entered an unapproved tournament. This really do mean that the clubs are breaking the rules in a manner that them getting suspended or thrown out is possibly legitimate according to present football law. The big clubs have breached this rule in the guidelines imo but whether it is enough to kick or suspend them is another legal issue.
 
Looks like it's been pieced together by someone in 2 minutes on wordpress.

Honestly I think the website is the biggest indicator that this might not be happening. If they were ready to launch they'd surely have a more thorough website with actual content.
Do you know what I completely agree :lol:

I'm sure this is negotiating tact that's got out of hand
 
Watching United playing against the same teams over and over and over again year after year sound really boring. I cannot see how anyone might think, that this has some good things in it.

If you aren't bored of EPL, you won't be bored of ESL either.
 
I’m sure this has been raised by some already, but what ramifications would the ESL have on the youth teams?

I think they have plan for a youth level. Perhaps they even use a third party academies in similar fashion to American college level sport?

They don't already remove the restriction on homegown, non EU quota with the creation of ESL, so for youth level, they may as well as getting all the talented kids themselves (cheaper), and let the finest survive. We have seen Chelsea and City done that.
 
How can someone be so entitled and selfish??? If we can’t qualify, we are not good enough. Are you saying Southampton or Villa shouldn’t be able to play in CL because they don’t have the kind of history we do? This is against competition, fair play and so sickening I can’t even express my thoughts properly. Unless this is sarcasm, which would make more sense.
I may get slaugthered for this, but I don't care.

The seeds for that sort of attitude, with regards to the person you quoted, were planted as soon as they started to allow teams who didn't win their league or cup competition into Europe.

The Champions League is a bloody farce and has been for a long time, the outcry at this ESL, although completely right, is soo bloody ironic. Where was the outcry when teams who have done absolutely eff all in years, are getting into Europe's premier competition when all they managed was a 4th place finish?

Some may say, "But who wants to watch Anderlecht play Helsingborg in the Champions League? That's rubbish". It doesn't matter, those teams, who I used just as an example, met the criteria for qualifying for the competition by winning their league. That's sport for you. UEFA, have been going back on their principles for years to suit and accommodate TV Companies/Sponsors/Businessmen and their profits rather than clubs who have a right to be there through their sporting achievements.

Hell mend them.
 
The 12 "founders" have a permanent place is what I cannot accept. If there was any sort of relegation, a chance for top teams in each league to take the place of others, I would entertain this as I'm not against shaking things up. This however is so blatantly based around greed and nothing to do with competition and integrity. I hope the Government finds a way to nuke this shite since half the teams are from this bloody country, without them hopefully its a non-starter. The thought that Spurs and Arsenal get some forever exempt status while Ajax, Celtic, Porto, Bayern etc. aren't there is beyond a joke. The thought that WE get some special status no matter how shit we become is beyond a joke.
 
You only need to look at the people behind this, people think UEFA are bad(they are). Was done completely behind doors, the manager and players of the clubs were completely in the dark and have seemingly been thrown to the wolves.
Joel Glazer in a senior position, how anyone can be in favour of this.. utterly boggles my fecking mind.

As bad as this is, it's only the start if it was to happen, this is a league that will be milked dry. Reminds me of Trump and his antics, always managing to push the bar lower and lower than people thought possible and it will happen.

This is a league that will have 3/4 of the league as 'founding members' for seemingly 23 years. So in those years, it doesn't matter how bad some of those teams may get, they're there to stay. Financially doped beyond any Non-ESL team, regardless of how fecking bad they are. Is the merit based teams a one off or is it each year, if say a merit based team were to win the super league do they remain or do they go? If they have to finish bottom 5 to be relegated what if they share that bottom 5 with 4 founders? How the feck is that fair.

A Euro league is an interesting idea aslong as it's based on merit. Anyone that thinks this league should go ahead with 15 founding members being a permanent feature without having to do anything to quality needs to give their fecking head a wobble.
 
I disagree with this as a principle, but watching the best players playing against each other every week should be the dream for every football fan. The group stages are boring because 50% of the teams in the competition are dross. I guarantee that playing Madrid will never get boring, nor will Ronaldo Vs Messi etc. It would be the highest level of football ever showcased.

Messi v Ronaldo will both likely be retired by the time this thing gets going...or not playing in europe.

Ironic as things stand Mbappe and Haaland wouldn't be playing in this league anyway although both are near certs to be playing in teams in this in next year or two.
 
"The L9 guideline: "Except with the prior written approval of the board, during the season a club shall not enter or play its senior men's first team in any competition other than:"

The key here is the not enter or play as you can say when the clubs have officially signed up for the ESL they have entered an unapproved tournament. This really do mean that the clubs are breaking the rules in a manner that them getting suspended or thrown out is possibly legitimate according to present football law. The big clubs have breach this rule in the guidelines imo but whether it is enough to kick or suspend them is another legal issue.
Yeah I'm really sure the lawyers for the 12 biggest clubs in the world didn't miss this.
 
Has anyone been on the Super League's website

https://thesuperleague.com/

The registration of the website was transferred on the 27th October 2020.

The very next day we started getting loads of stories about a Super League.

https://www.football-espana.net/202...o-be-18-team-tournament-with-nba-style-format

https://www.skysports.com/football/...-league-plan-would-destroy-the-premier-league

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...hampions-liverpool-man-utd-bartomeu-president

Like everything corporate, they've been planning this long before it was officially announced to us plebs.
 
Forget all this, to me it seems taxation is the most potent weapon governments have against this, given the clubs are obviously doing it for money. Here’s a proposal, 90% income tax on all revenues a club makes from ESL, and 100% tax on all gate receipts at ESL games.

Given the huge deficit spending we’ve had due to COVID-19, this would easily fly with the public, and basically make the competition economically unviable in the long run. The beauty with this approach is that the government isn’t directly interfering or banning, just doing what a government should do by setting tax policy.

But they'll play the games away from OT, if all the clubs are determined to go ahead with this then it will just drive them away.
 
Was surprised to come into this thread this evening and see nearly an upbeat atmosphere. Really strange.
It’s all a big joke to a lot which to be honest doesn’t surprise me these days. People have no attention span for football or respect for leagues, they want a prime mbappe highlight and that’ll do, there’s also those that just love to see things burn and enjoy having a real life coronation street style drama to revel in
 
The registration of the website was transferred on the 27th October 2020.

The very next day we started getting loads of stories about a Super League.

https://www.football-espana.net/202...o-be-18-team-tournament-with-nba-style-format

https://www.skysports.com/football/...-league-plan-would-destroy-the-premier-league

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...hampions-liverpool-man-utd-bartomeu-president

Like everything corporate, they've been planning this long before it was officially announced to us plebs.
Good job, @Martial'sEmergingSmile this is true detective work.
 
This is an absolute joke. They can't take their European Cup/Champions League history and successes and rebrand it as Super League achievements.
 
But they'll play the games away from OT, if all the clubs are determined to go ahead with this then it will just drive them away.
Drive them away where? It would be a pan-European action by all governments, who have come out against it. Depriving clubs of the revenues from ESL really does seem to me the easiest way to attack it.
 
This is an absolute joke. They can't take their European Cup/Champions League history and successes and rebrand it as Super League achievements.

Why? They did the same thing when the CL was introduced.
 
Sevilla ruling themselves out, and a Liverpool fan group removing their flags isn't something we should be laughing at or trivialising.

They're withdrawing support in the biggest way they can. Individually it might lack impact and I'm worried there's nothing we can collectively do to stop it, but at least they're doing something.
 
This is an absolute joke. They can't take their European Cup/Champions League history and successes and rebrand it as Super League achievements.

Haha piss off. Start your tinpot glorified preseason tournament trophy count at zero. Don't steal someone else's history.

Why? They did the same thing when the CL was introduced.
That was UEFA rebranding their own competition. Not some billionaire club starting up their own and stealing the history of something not theres.
 
This is an absolute joke. They can't take their European Cup/Champions League history and successes and rebrand it as Super League achievements.

Spurs and Arsenal though... and of course the elite City.
 
Not American but I live here. I am disgusted. Football for me is about promotion/relegation and keep earning the right to be elite through the wins on the pitch. It cannot be compared to the North American version. See how useless the MLS is for example.

The MLS is useless because 99% of people here don't give a shit about soccer.
 
Haha piss off. Start your tinpot glorified preseason tournament trophy count at zero. Don't steal someone else's history.

What's wrong with that? Did we not transfer our titles to the PL? Or our European Cup to the CL?