Dirty Schwein
Has a 'Best of Britney Spears' album
They'll tell us to just put on our jerseys and sing happy birthday and it'll all go away like a bad dream.The government wont do anything
They'll tell us to just put on our jerseys and sing happy birthday and it'll all go away like a bad dream.The government wont do anything
Why? You make it sound like it’s a choice between ESL and the Tory league. The government intervening could mean a preservation of what we’ve got, I don’t see why we wouldn’t want them to intervene just because they’re cnuts?Great. So now we want this most corrupt government intervening????? Let's stop being emotional here.
You can't say the club owners are shite (which they are) and in the next breath want another corrupt set to now intervene? Like what on earth is this?
So wanting government intervention and regulation on issues stops being valid if you don't like the government? What a bizarre take.Great. So now we want this most corrupt government intervening????? Let's stop being emotional here.
You can't say the club owners are shite (which they are) and in the next breath want another corrupt set to now intervene? Like what on earth is this?
The players would then sue on grounds of unfair restrictions to the practice of trade/right to work etc, wouldn't they?I'm a lawyer, but not in this field.
Competition law may well bite here. The issue however, is the potential for clubs to become embroiled in expensive litigation which could run for years, particularly against the likes of UEFA or FIFA, with whom I assume there is some kind of agreement in order to compete in the previously sanctioned events.
The biggest practical threat here is an inability to compete in existing domestic competitions, for however long, since without that, there is no income and no club. Players will also not sit by any watch their careers ebb away, unable to play international football or (perhaps) domestic football for months or years.
I actually think the best chance of stopping this is threatening players with the inability to play at international tournaments. The top players are bigger than the clubs and without their support, this whole thing falls apart.
Isn't Marcus providing books for kids now as well.Note to all celebrities, do not raise tens of millions and work like a mad man to feed children who desperately need it. Doing so will open you up to jibes from Eddie Hughes, whoever the feck that is.
First of all I don't give a shit to Tory or Labour - I don't like politicians full stop - they are all the same..Why? You make it sound like it’s a choice between ESL and the Tory league. The government intervening could mean a preservation of what we’ve got, I don’t see why we wouldn’t want them to intervene just because they’re cnuts?
Agreed. I also think that the crunch with governments will come with the affect on future world cups.I'm a lawyer, but not in this field.
Competition law may well bite here. The issue however, is the potential for clubs to become embroiled in expensive litigation which could run for years, particularly against the likes of UEFA or FIFA, with whom I assume there is some kind of agreement in order to compete in the previously sanctioned events.
The biggest practical threat here is an inability to compete in existing domestic competitions, for however long, since without that, there is no income and no club. Players will also not sit by any watch their careers ebb away, unable to play international football or (perhaps) domestic football for months or years.
I actually think the best chance of stopping this is threatening players with the inability to play at international tournaments. The top players are bigger than the clubs and without their support, this whole thing falls apart.
To date, they have shown they don't do anything for the good of anyone but themselves. Why should I suddenly trust them with this?! It's not logical in my book.So wanting government intervention and regulation on issues stops being valid if you don't like the government? What a bizarre take.
I was thinking about competition law here. Even ignoring the super league itself should teams in a position of market dominance be allowed to collude with each other in a plan exclude other clubs from potential future earnings? Could they already have broken the law?I'm a lawyer, but not in this field.
Competition law may well bite here. The issue however, is the potential for clubs to become embroiled in expensive litigation which could run for years, particularly against the likes of UEFA or FIFA, with whom I assume there is some kind of agreement in order to compete in the previously sanctioned events.
The biggest practical threat here is an inability to compete in existing domestic competitions, for however long, since without that, there is no income and no club. Players will also not sit by any watch their careers ebb away, unable to play international football or (perhaps) domestic football for months or years.
I actually think the best chance of stopping this is threatening players with the inability to play at international tournaments. The top players are bigger than the clubs and without their support, this whole thing falls apart.
Whilst Perez has wanted something like this I'm hugely sceptical that it was him who brought JP Morgan in and structured it. These are American businessmen using a major American bank and structuring the League like an American sport. They all own other American sports teams. It's pretty clear to me who is driving this.Perez has been leading this for years, he just has in the yank owners bods who are more than happy to partner him.
Do you realise that regulators work independent from the government? They have to. That’s part of their raison d’etre.Great. So now we want this most corrupt government intervening????? Let's stop being emotional here.
You can't say the club owners are shite (which they are) and in the next breath want another corrupt set to now intervene? Like what on earth is this?
Julian Knight MP, chair of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, speaks
“This is a dark day for football – a deal done behind closed doors apparently with no regard for supporters.
“Though this idea was mooted several months ago, what’s shocking is the speed at which this breakaway league has been announced.
“What’s needed is a fan-led review of football with real teeth and here we have more evidence to strengthen the case for it.
“Football needs a reset, but this is not the way to do it. The interests of community clubs must be put at the heart of any future plans.
“We, the Committee, will be discussing this when we meet tomorrow in a private session.”
True. The world would probably be better with NO government intervention, as everything they do is a negative.First of all I don't give a shit to Tory or Labour - I don't like politicians full stop - they are all the same..
Secondly, the government is not gonna do anything for the good of the fans or the game. I can't believe you believe that. They are only going to make it worse under the guise of upholding our football values/traditions.
They just make things worse, but carry on.
Maybe. That's potentially complex. I suspect sanctioning bodies, would argue that they can decide on criteria as to who can play and who doesn't and in the short term, I suspect will act drastically. In respect of domestic competitions, it'd be the clubs I suspect who are kicked out, not the players per se, so that's a different issue.The players would then sue on grounds of unfair restrictions to the practice of trade/right to work etc, wouldn't they?
What can they do though? They arent threatening to leave English football.Theoretically government could put a stop to this thing. I mean Thatcher took us out of Europe.
I know it was going to happen anyway but she instructed the FA to do it.
Something similar perhaps? I mean torys go with the wind. Create enough smoke and they’ll cave.
JP Morgan are only financing it against future TV revenue.Whilst Perez has wanted something like this I'm hugely sceptical that it was him who brought JP Morgan in and structured it. These are American businessmen using a major American bank and structuring the League like an American sport. They all own other American sports teams. It's pretty clear to me who is driving this.
It could be argued that they are. The competitive environment will be gone. When ESL brings much more money than the domestic league then there is not point in it. Just undermines the whole thing.What can they do though? They arent threatening to leave English football.
Could players simply not be told to then go and join a club where they are eligible to play. Pretty easy way to solve a problem.Maybe. That's potentially complex. I suspect sanctioning bodies, would argue that they can decide on criteria as to who can play and who doesn't and in the short term, I suspect will act drastically. In respect of domestic competitions, it'd be the clubs I suspect who are kicked out, not the players per se, so that's a different issue.
And being a litigator, if I were a player I wouldn't want to spend millions on legal fees, or end up part of a long running class action case which might run for years, all the while I'm sitting on my arse, unable to play whilst it's all unravelled. You miss one World Cup, that may be it for you. Players won't have the appetite for that, they'll just want to play football.
People forget, the top players already earn big money. This change benefits the clubs' income but not astronomically to a point where the average "top 6" player will suddenly be taking home a £1 million a week to make the potential negatives worthwhile.
If it were his mates forming a super league he'd be on board.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I would say that's definitely arguable, although it's a very grey area.I was thinking about competition law here. Even ignoring the super league itself should teams in a position of market dominance be allowed to collude with each other in a plan exclude other clubs from potential future earnings? Could they already have broken the law?
It was gone when City and Chelsea were allowed to be taken over. In a weird case this would increase the quality of the title race if more sides have money and City are capped.It could be argued that they are. The competitive environment will be gone. When ESL brings much more money than the domestic league then there is not point in it. Just undermines the whole thing.
I imagine while the case drags on there will be interim injunctions one way or another so the players won't be compelled to decide on the basis of their present-term economic well-being.Maybe. That's potentially complex. I suspect sanctioning bodies, would argue that they can decide on criteria as to who can play and who doesn't and in the short term, I suspect will act drastically. In respect of domestic competitions, it'd be the clubs I suspect who are kicked out, not the players per se, so that's a different issue.
And being a litigator, if I were a player I wouldn't want to spend millions on legal fees, or end up part of a long running class action case which might run for years, all the while I'm sitting on my arse, unable to play whilst it's all unravelled. You miss one World Cup, that may be it for you. Players won't have the appetite for that, they'll just want to play football.
People forget, the top players already earn big money. This change benefits the clubs' income but not astronomically to a point where the average "top 6" player will suddenly be taking home a £1 million a week to make the potential negatives worthwhile.
It would be up a player, I would assume, to decide whether they want to stay or push for a move on. That creates more complexities between players and clubs, because of their respective contractual positions. Clubs won't want to see valuable assets walk away.Could players simply not be told to then go and join a club where they are eligible to play. Pretty easy way to solve a problem.
They might. In three years, when the process is resolved. The simple fact is, right now, FIFA and UEFA can do what it likes until a Court orders otherwise.I imagine while the case drags on there will be interim injunctions one way or another so the players won't be compelled to decide on the basis of their present-term economic well-being.
I also think Courts will be inclined to agree that Fifa banning players from playing for their national teams over playing in the ESL is both the exercise of an unfair bargaining position, as well as being, fundamentally, the very same conduct in character, that Fifa would be accusing the ESL clubs of.
This.If Boris stops JP Morgan then there will probably be no trade deal with the US.
Indeed. There's a race still to be run here I think.Agreed. I also think that the crunch with governments will come with the affect on future world cups.
When you have the French selling Qatar missiles in return for a vote allowing them to host the World Cup, that's a strong signal of how politically important the World Cup is to nations and a very big lever for FIFA to pull.
This is all incredibly depressing, however there's a very slight chance that the ESL group have now played their entire hand. Not sure what else they can turn to totally undermine Football.
He will piss of both the US And JP Morgan mates in financial services.This.
JP Morgan has so much influence.
They aren't going to do anything. A simple letter saying the domestic league won't be affected and the government will forget this ever happened.I think they'll try to exert political pressure at least. This is an attempted hostile American take over of a British crown jewel industry that a significant part of the electorate are vehemently against.