New European Super League

Mate - you can say the owners all you like and I 100% agree with you.

But the owners of the specific clubs sign the clubs up.

John Henry wasn’t signed up to the super league. Liverpool were.

Signed for by John Henry but when you are the owner of the club what you do affects the club directly.

I am not wanting that to happen - but every fucker and his grandmother would be calling for the other teams to be deducted points / banned from Europe if we weren’t involved.

I’d be interested to know how you punish the owners without punishing the clubs.

What do you propose? A uefa style €30k fine? The only real punishment that exists in football is a points deduction / banning from a lucrative competition. That is seriously the only way that the 6 clubs can be truly punished. Anything else is just lip service (don’t get me wrong I’d take it because I don’t want a deduction or euro ban) but that’s the only punishment that is really a punishment if you understand what I am trying to say

1 Like

This is like taking a car off a man because his son took it without permission to go drive in a drag race that he chickened out of at the last minute.

1 The crime for the punishment, although planned, never actually ended up occurring.

2 The punishment punishes people not involved in the decision making process who would have stopped the action if they’d known about it.

3 The punishment doesn’t actually directly punish the guilty party.

The owners aren’t punished by the punishment you are suggesting. In our case we are run self sufficiently, if our revenues are harmed through points deduction or ban from a competition it only impacts what business we as a club do. FSG don’t put in or take money from us, it’s 100% LFC facing the consequences. LFC has dramatically increased in value and will continue to regardless of these punishments you are suggesting, that is the benefit for FSG not taking part or not in a specific competition for a particular year.

The only way to punish/reign in the owners is imposing new rules that impact their ability to run these clubs however their fancy takes them. Make them directly answerable to the fans of the club or the community when it comes to decision making and planning etc. that would hurt them more. “Sorry Roman you can’t sack that Manager we’ve voted against it”, “Sorry Henry you can’t make that business decision it’ll harm the area too much”, “sorry Sheikh you can’t bribe those UEFA officials”!

Yes but you don’t seem to be grasping that the premier league has no power to be able to punish owners of the clubs. Just the clubs themselves

Its nothing like this. Unless John Henry didn’t know we were signing up to it because his son did it behind his back.

To put it in your terms, dad signed up to a drag race without the family knowing. He was caught revving his engine on the start line but didn’t actually go ahead with race. Now the rest of the family has to get the bus because the car has been clamped. They’re the collateral damage for his poor decisions.

Disagree with that. John Henry/FSG own us but we, the players, Klopp are the users of the entity not him. It’s like him backing out and the car we all use being seized whilst he still drives around in his.

Actually something you’re not grasping is they already have to create rules to punish us by then try to retroactively punish us under rules that didn’t exist at the time of the offence. Then get that past CAS (good luck with that as we’d have City’s lawyers on our side).

It’s actually much easier to put controls and measures in place for clubs wanting to keep competing in the League in the future. Although it might not get past the votes needed (neither might your proposed rule changes either though) as the owners of the “lesser” Premier League sides are just as bad and most of their outrage is over not being invited to the party.

At the end of the day you can’t be punished unless you break rules that actually exist. We didn’t in the end. The rules that existed were ones regarding participation in a tournament not given prior approval by the PL. We never ended up participating, no game was ever actually played.

You can take it to CAS by punishing them and then trying to argue a technicality that signing up was participating but I don’t fancy your chances of making that definition of participating stick.

You can change the rules and retrospectively charge them with breaking them and yet again I don’t fancy your chances of getting that past CAS either.

Or you can change future rules that curb some of the future behaviour of owners making all this less fun for them and making things harder for them to have things all their own way in the future. This is what would be best for the sport but it’d probably never get past the required vote.

What will probably happen, if anything, is a token fine under “bringing the game into disrepute” charges or something. Which City and Chelsea will laugh at, Arsenal and Spurs may rise an eyebrow at and mutter slight annoyance at. United won’t even blink as it’ll pale into insignificance compared to what they already pay to have the Glazers as owners. And our club will grumble and moan whilst Henry and FSG aren’t even actually ever impacted by it.

Well not really because they don’t own another Premier League club to drive round in. Or something. Its a mad analogy that didn’t make sense to begin with and is now getting even further from the reality of things.

Bottom line is the PL and UEFA will punish the clubs and as the owners of the club they are also, in the eyes of those dishing out punishments, punishing the owners because they have a vested interest in those clubs. Granted, some more than others.

Like it or not the owners and the club are one entity and the PL and UEFA have zero ability to punish the individual owners for anything. Equally, we wouldn’t want the owners to solely benefit from good decisions, say signing a new commercial deal. We expect the benefit to go to the club even though fans, players and staff have no part in negotiating that deal.

Not that any of this matters now because we know the punishment from UEFA. And we know the PL will likely pass down a financial punishment rather than a points penalty or any kind of exclusion. Although I wouldn’t mind a couple seasons out the league cup if they thought that was justified.

1 Like

So the injured party, thst great innocent organisation UEFA, have chosen a punishment that should equal around £5m max. But our fans want us thrown out of competitions due to how much we hurt UEFAs feelings.

Literally no one in here is saying that. Dial down the hyperbole.

1 Like

The nine clubs have agreed to make a combined 15m euros (£13.4m) goodwill contribution to benefit children’s and grassroots football across Europe.

:rofl:

1 Like

15M ÷ 9 = 1.666M each. That’s rather peanuts; albeit **golden peanuts. :grinning:

** both gasband and 20andcounting should understand the pun behind that, but for the rest, it don’t matter. :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes

Err yeah that’s exactly what someone on here has been arguing should happen to us.

2 Likes

Should happen, but doesn’t want that to happen. And not to us, to all of them.

As has been shown by the UEFA punishment, money isn’t really that big of a penalty. About €1.5m and an estimate of somewhere between £1m and £6m to be withheld next year. Not exactly a punishment for some of the richest clubs on the planet that.

But again, it doesn’t matter because the decision has been made.

1 Like

08 MAY 2021

SHARE
STATEMENT FROM BARCELONA, JUVE AND REAL
In relation to the statement released by UEFA on the 7th May in respect of the Super League and the position taken by 9 of its founding clubs, Fútbol Club Barcelona, Juventus and Real Madrid Club de Fútbol state the following:

(i) The founding clubs have suffered, and continue to suffer, unacceptable third-party pressures, threats, and offenses to abandon the project and therefore desist from their right and duty to provide solutions to the football ecosystem via concrete proposals and constructive dialogue. This is intolerable under the rule of law and Tribunals have already ruled in favour of the Super League proposal, ordering FIFA and UEFA to, either directly or through their affiliated bodies, refrain from taking any action which may hinder this initiative in any way while court proceedings are pending.

(ii) The Super League project was designed jointly by its 12 founding clubs:

a) with the aim of providing solutions to the current unsustainable situation in the football industry. The 12 founding clubs shared the same concerns -as other stakeholders in European football do-, particularly under the current socio-economic context, that structural reforms are indispensable to ensure our sport stays appealing and survives in the long-term. To that effect, on 18th April, they announced their willingness to create the Super League and establish a channel of communication with UEFA and FIFA, in a constructive spirit of collaboration between the parties, as it was so notified to each of them on such date;

b) with the utmost respect for the current football structures and ecosystem. The founding clubs expressly agreed that the Super League would only take place if such a competition was recognised by UEFA and/or FIFA or if, in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, it was deemed to be a competition duly compatible for all purposes with the continuity of the founding clubs in their respective domestic competitions. However, despite being aware of the above terms, UEFA and FIFA have so far refused to establish any adequate channel of communication; and

c) to bring financial stability to the entire European football family, currently under the effects of a deep crisis that threatens the survival of many clubs. Testament of it, the announced commitment to establish annual solidarity payments for guaranteed annual amounts that materially multiply those distributed by UEFA, and the obligation to reinforce financial sustainability rules, through the creation of a clear, transparent and effective control system verified by experts.

(iii) The 12 founding clubs also acknowledged that the Super League was a unique opportunity to offer fans around the world the best possible show and to reinforce global interest in the sport, which is not a “given” and is challenged by new generational trends. Moreover, one of its main objectives was to promote women’s football on a global level, a tremendous, but currently underestimated, opportunity for the sector.

(iv) We are fully aware of the diversity of reactions to the Super League initiative and, consequently, of the need to reflect on the reasons for some of them. We are ready to reconsider the proposed approach, as necessary. However, we would be highly irresponsible if, being aware of the needs and systemic crisis in the football sector, which led us to announce the Super League, we abandoned such mission to provide effective and sustainable answers to the existential questions that threaten the football industry.

(v) We regret to see that our friends and founding partners of the Super League project have now found themselves in such inconsistent and contradictory position when signing a number of commitments to UEFA yesterday. However, given that the material issues that led the 12 founding clubs to announce the Super League weeks ago have not gone away, we reiterate that, to honour our history, to comply with our obligations towards our stakeholders and fans, for the good of football and for the financial sustainability of the sector, we have the duty to act in a responsible manner and persevere in the pursuit of adequate solutions, despite the unacceptable and ongoing pressures and threats received from UEFA.

(vi) Mostly, we reiterate to FIFA, UEFA and all football stakeholders, as we have done on several occasions since the announcement of the Super League, our commitment and firm will to discuss, with respect and without intolerable pressure and in accordance with the rule of law, the most appropriate solutions for the sustainability of the whole football family.

They just can’t let go, can they?

The fans don’t want it, the players don’t want it, the managers don’t want it.

It’s over, move on.

It’s not over. This is what will continue.

  1. UEFA will continue to generate fantastic sums of money off the back of the interest in a handful of clubs. They will trouser around 50% of that money.

  2. Teams like Liverpool will continue to feel aggrieved that not only are UEFA making billions from their endeavours, but they are also directly hampering their operation by trying to cram in more and more games to make more money.

  3. UEFA will continue to operate as football’s governing body, tournanent organiser and commercial avenue - three roles that are completely at odds with each other.

  4. UEFA will continue to allow Man City, Chelsea and PSG to tear through the game with their financially doped operations, meaning Liverpool, Madrid, Barca and the rest will have to deal with escalating costs trying to keep up.

In short, nothing that has led to the big clubs forming a super league has gone away. UEFA need to engage with this constructively, and address the grievances that the teams have. If they go for a punishment beating, then the next time a Super League comes up, the clubs won’t make such a fucking mess of it.

In fact, if the 12 let it lie for a few years and then come back with a proposal that has a fairer entry system, and maybe leads the comms with how much money will be cascaded down the pyramid and how it will be a better deal for fans, then I think UEFA have a big problem. I can see ESL 2.0 coming back with a pledge that all the teams are going to be playing in 100k seat stadiums with £20 tickets. Let’s see if we have protests then.

7 Likes

I’m not sure that you comment is strictly true as I’m quite certain that some of Liverpools 620 Administration, commercial and other staff might have some involvement in negotiating commercial deals. :thinking:

6 Likes

What needs to happen first, imo, is that the legitimate grievances about the existing set up need to be more widely aired. No more private lobbying by the ECA. No more tiptoeing around the issues. Start calling out UEFA and FIFA publicly. Start railing against the increasing costs that are being taken from the game at the expense of communities and match going fans. Start calling out the broadcasters and the appalling self interest of 14 clubs who between them have only a tiny fraction of the supporter base of the other 6.

8 Likes

Yes. I think this protest/dissent/resentment should come from the fans. Partly because if the clubs/owners do so, they can be punished and silenced.

I think one of the reasons behind ESL and PBP is that even the owners feel that threatened, intimidated by Sky, PL, UEFA etc. and these entities have no accountability whatsoever.

1 Like

I meant coaching staff. Obviously the business bods have a hand in business matters.

1 Like