Players & managers react to the Super League

Zehner

Full Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2018
Messages
3,930
Location
Germany
Supports
Bayer 04 Leverkusen
I don't think it's a 'staged' action, I think the clubs involved in the Super League see it as a win/win situation. Either they stay in the CL on their terms, with more money and influence. Or they actually start the Super League they've been planning, and get more money from that. I just get the impression the clubs aren't that advanced yet with setting up this Super League, which would mean they most likely would want to reach a better agreement with UEFA for the CL for the next few years. But there's a possibility this blows up so hard they will have to proceed with their Super League, I just don't think it's very likely at the moment.

I don't think the national associations would call their bluff. Barcelona and Real Madrid bring in like 80% of the multi billion revenua for La Liga, why would the same La Liga punish them so severely? That would be financial suicide. Similar goes for the Premier Leauge and the 6 biggest clubs. It makes no logical sense at all.

So like you say yes, you get the impressions that the clubs involved don't think the associations will be so consequent.
It's hard to predict what would happen. If La Liga expels Barca and Madrid, they have to proceed with the Super League because they could as well cancel their club if they had to play in the last division. The demand for football will remain, the only question is where the attention will be directed. Will people watch the Super League or stay with the league itself?

Right now, it's clear which side has the moral high ground and at least for European fans, this will play a huge role. Football support is still heavily dependent on where you grew up. Madrid and Barca draw the biggest audiences but I guess a fair share of this actually tune in because their very own club plays the top dog. More Leicester fans will watch Leicester vs. United than Leicester vs. Brighton. I assume the big clubs have done the necessary market research but I wouldn't put it past them to a) heavily overestimate their very own attraction to fans and b) heavily underestimate the effect of the backlash they're facing.

Also, consider the fact that the players might be excluded from WC, EC and CA. Messi, Ronaldo, Mbappe and Neymar can currently choose their clubs. For the first two it'll be their last shot at WC glory.
 

duffer

Sensible and not a complete jerk like most oppo's
Scout
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
41,012
Location
Chelsea (the saviours of football) fan.
Didn't Bruno say "Football can't be bought" in his reply to that Instagram post?
Just seen that.

They're in a difficult spot. We can't really realistic to expect a player to say anything other than a vague platitude but it's better than 99% of the players who have said feck all.

I doubt anyone will say "I'm not playing in this thing".
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
100,456
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Some foreign players maybe, but academy players that have come up through grassroots should definitely see what this means and speak up.

What do you mean not 100% official ? Every club made a statement . It is official. But it may fail to materialise and that's why players need to overwhelmingly speak out now.
Exactly. Ed resigned as chairman from a football board, the club have quit the ECA. It’s all in. This is not something they are just talking about, this is something they expect will happen. Sneaky bastards
 

hungrywing

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
9,069
Location
Your Left Ventricle
The PFA can file an injunction on behalf of the players, effectively pulling all players into a general strike. It will then make the rounds in litigation and will either be successful or not.

IF the players then still refuse to adhere to the guidelines of their professional contract, the clubs have several rights up to and including termination of contract and legal lawsuits for the players transfer value. First the club will start docking players wages, and ultimately cancel contracts if arbitration does not succeed.

This very rarely happens, so we have one case in particular in recent memory that is somewhat similar in Chelsea v Mutu from 2004, in which the players contract was terminated after Mutu tested positive for Cocaine. Chelsea sued for the transfer fee from Parma, and won. The appeal process is still pending to this day.

The principle remains the same, gross professional misconduct = breach of contract = liability. There is a lot of litigation that will take place between that and then, but that is the tl;dr version.

"Gross Misconduct" shall mean serious or persistent conduct behaviour activity or omission by the Player involving one or more of the following: (a) theft or fraud; (b) deliberate and serious damage to the Club's property; (c) use or possession of or trafficking in a Prohibited Substance; (d) incapacity through alcohol affecting the Player's performance as a player; (e) breach of or failure to comply with of any of the terms of this contract

The players contracts only stipulate that the players are mandated to "Engage in matches the club is engaged when directed by a club official". The contracts has no langauge that specifies WHAT contest.

So in short, the players can't do a lot by themselves if they refuse The club will likely tighten the screws if any dissenting opinion is voiced. The execs are very friendly until you start fecking around with them, then it's night night.

For anyone, myself included, that hope the players will speak up, they might not have a chance to, following the same ramificatoins, hereunder monetary punishment for doing so:

Part of a standard PL contract stipulates that a player shall not: knowingly or recklessly do write or say anything or omit to do anything which is likely to bring the Club or the game of football into disrepute cause the Player or the Club to be in breach of the Rules or cause damage to the Club or its officers or employees or any match official. Whenever circumstances permit the Player shall give to the Club reasonable notice of his intention to make any contributions to the public media in order to allow representations to be made to him on behalf of the Club if it so desires;

I want every player of the club to speak up, but it may not be as simple as just speaking, as doing so can come with real punishment, yet great reward in the public eye.
Drat. That part about "no language specifying what contest" is along the lines of what I was thinking.

Someone should be able to argue their way past that, though. Seems like the players have zero protection against being forced to play non-stop 24/7 365 days a year as long as a club official directs them to. Is there specific language protecting against that sort of action?
 

Dec9003

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
6,345
Yes they have. Look at the proposal on the table.

The wild card spots for teams that "historically have done well" who do you think those spots are for?

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/56573883

This was the part of the proposal where UEFA pretty much gave in, however when it came to media rights, that's what caused the formation of the Super League.
Try reading the Article. The two spots would be for Wildcard card entries that take into account previous European success. Now we both know that Tottenham and Arsenal have virtually no European success. Even if they did, two spots that we don't know would go to English teams wouldn't be able to account for Liverpool, Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal potentially not reaching the top four. It seems like you have no actual idea of what the changes to the Champions league would have meant. You certainly don't understand why the Super League is being formed. The Super League is being created so that American Owners of clubs no longer have to worry about their clubs performance. The Glazers won't have to worry about United performing, because our place in the competition, and the money we get from 'competing' becomes guaranteed. It isn't just to do with media rights, thats just one small part of it.
 

SwedishFish

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
1,129
Again that has little to nothing to do with the rejection of the proposed plans. Certainly when it comes to the fans and/or players of those clubs.

By all means say that those clubs were obviously going to have the interest in forming this league but to suggest fans or players of those clubs can't oppose the completely ridiculous SL is both ridiculous and a demonstration of false equivalency.
So you say that you can be a cause and a driving factor to creating a problem and then act shocked and appalled when something like this happens?

If you bask in the glory that comes with massive amounts of money being spent on your club being used for sportswashing then you can hardly act all surprised when it all comes down to money.

Fans are very much partly responsible for this. Intervention needed to happen earlier but the fans chose to ignore it because of the shiny signings that came along.

If that makes you feel better absolutely. But we could all tell which way we were heading years in advance. Just google the super league and you'll find plenty of readings on it from years ago.
 

tjb

Full Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
1,959
I don't think it's a 'staged' action, I think the clubs involved in the Super League see it as a win/win situation. Either they stay in the CL on their terms, with more money and influence. Or they actually start the Super League they've been planning, and get more money from that. I just get the impression the clubs aren't that advanced yet with setting up this Super League, which would mean they most likely would want to reach a better agreement with UEFA for the CL for the next few years. But there's a possibility this blows up so hard they will have to proceed with their Super League, I just don't think it's very likely at the moment.

I don't think the national associations would call their bluff. Barcelona and Real Madrid bring in like 80% of the multi billion revenua for La Liga, why would the same La Liga punish them so severely? That would be financial suicide. Similar goes for the Premier Leauge and the 6 biggest clubs. It makes no logical sense at all.

So like you say yes, you get the impressions that the clubs involved don't think the associations will be so consequent.
Its a public arbitration and the truth is, UEFA was far too brazen in setting up their new Champions League format. They went public first, the clubs responded. UEFA are now colluding with local bodies to make threats, but that may only escalate the situation.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
100,456
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Eventually they'll see how ridiculous that stance is. Why the sudden collaboration to support UEFA on a matter that really is a club vs governing body matter. Essentially UEFA can ban clubs, restrict players and transfers without any pushback, yet people wonder how these governing bodies have managed to be corrupt for so long. I don't like the details for the super league, the exclusivity of it is poor form. However, I do feel the big clubs have a right to feel aggrieved and have no other way of reducing UEFA's power than threatening to break away. It's like a European Club football coup which people are so scared to see the outcome of despite acknowledging that the current landscape is not the best. I think its too soon for people to talk about the effect for fans when nothing is clear on how it would actually work...at this moment in time, it has no impact on fans.
Off course it does. Fans are passionate about the club. United as an example have gone all in on this idea. Yet Ed decided to lie and sneak about.

off course fans care, it’s not all about the bottom line. It’s about history, tradition, keeping family values, seeing their lads play a local team, seeing youngsters break through, having a connection to your team.

they’ve just been spat in the face today. Then laughed at
 

SwedishFish

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
1,129
Try reading the Article. The two spots would be for Wildcard card entries that take into account previous European success. Now we both know that Tottenham and Arsenal have virtually no European success. Even if they did, two spots that we don't know would go to English teams wouldn't be able to account for Liverpool, Chelsea, Tottenham and Arsenal potentially not reaching the top four. It seems like you have no actual idea of what the changes to the Champions league would have meant. You certainly don't understand why the Super League is being formed. The Super League is being created so that American Owners of clubs no longer have to worry about their clubs performance. The Glazers won't have to worry about United performing, because our place in the competition, and the money we get from 'competing' becomes guaranteed. It isn't just to do with media rights, thats just one small part of it.
It's not a small part of it? It's the biggest part of it. More money. More revenue. That revenue is generated by media deals for big games.

It's based on historical performance the wild card spots. So maybe it's less true for Arsenal and Spurs and more true for us and Liverpool. There are many different reasons to get involved that differ between the clubs. But the main one is TV-Money.

If you believe that stuff about American owners not having to worry then you are wrong. Just look at the American leagues, there are plenty of incentives to stay on top and strengthening the brand and generating, you guessed it, more revenue.

You are just re-hashing points that have no basis in the facts that are currently on the table.
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
9,949
Location
left wing
Has any player (from one of the 12) actually said anything? I don't mean liking an Instagram post but actually said something?

They're in a tough spot.
Tough spot, as you said. I would guess that many of them will wait to see whether this is purely brinkmanship or actually has legs and is viable. They will also presumably be waiting to find out whether continuing at United/Real/Barca/Juve etc will preclude them from playing for their country at a WC (and asking their lawyers whether this would constitute a breach of contract by their current employers).
 

Leroy The Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
14,549
Location
London
What is with this ridiculous false equivalency on this forum?
It’s in complete overdrive at the moment. Lots of people playing devils advocate when this so isn’t the time.

I don’t really care about the pl, fifa and uefa at the moment. They are the lesser of evils at the moment.
Whatever those guys have done. They expanded the World Cup and euros, expanded the CL. All their competitions have qualifiers. All their competitions at least have some semblance of merit and integrity to playing in them.

The super league is literally the Complete and polar opposite.

These people popping into these threads with their shit need to fecking wake up.
 

Dec9003

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
6,345
It's not a small part of it? It's the biggest part of it. More money. More revenue. That revenue is generated by media deals for big games.

It's based on historical performance the wild card spots. So maybe it's less true for Arsenal and Spurs and more true for us and Liverpool. There are many different reasons to get involved that differ between the clubs. But the main one is TV-Money.

If you believe that stuff about American owners not having to worry then you are wrong. Just look at the American leagues, there are plenty of incentives to stay on top and strengthening the brand and generating, you guessed it, more revenue.

You are just re-hashing points that have no basis in the facts that are currently on the table.
If all those clubs are 'founders' and are guaranteed a slice of the pie every year, then their finances are guaranteed. I'm not rehashing posts that have no truth, you just genuinely don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's not been created due to media rights when they're in the Champions League, its becasue they don't like that they have to qualify for it in the first place. Please, I beg you, take your contrarian hat off and actually read the details of what this Super League actually is. Again, it isn't clever and it isn't impressive to be contrarian when you don't even know what youre speaking about.
 

Henrik Larsson

Still logged in at RAWK (help!)
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
5,228
Location
Swashbucklington
It's hard to predict what would happen. If La Liga expels Barca and Madrid, they have to proceed with the Super League because they could as well cancel their club if they had to play in the last division. The demand for football will remain, the only question is where the attention will be directed. Will people watch the Super League or stay with the league itself?

Right now, it's clear which side has the moral high ground and at least for European fans, this will play a huge role. Football support is still heavily dependent on where you grew up. Madrid and Barca draw the biggest audiences but I guess a fair share of this actually tune in because their very own club plays the top dog. More Leicester fans will watch Leicester vs. United than Leicester vs. Brighton. I assume the big clubs have done the necessary market research but I wouldn't put it past them to a) heavily overestimate their very own attraction to fans and b) heavily underestimate the effect of the backlash they're facing.

Also, consider the fact that the players might be excluded from WC, EC and CA. Messi, Ronaldo, Mbappe and Neymar can currently choose their clubs. For the first two it'll be their last shot at WC glory.
It's all very weird and unpredictable. Personally I would almost love to see what would happen if they actually excluded the players from the big clubs for their national teams, just because of the unprecedented chaos, but in reality I just can't see something like this happening in a million years.

Just like the big clubs might be overplaying their hand and are underestimating the potential backlash of their current actions, FIFA and UEFA would be massively overplaying their hand if they'd follow through on such a threat. And they won't have the moral high ground anymore with regard to the fans, I can tell you that much.
 

tjb

Full Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
1,959
Off course it does. Fans are passionate about the club. United as an example have gone all in on this idea. Yet Ed decided to lie and sneak about.

off course fans care, it’s not all about the bottom line. It’s about history, tradition, keeping family values, seeing their lads play a local team, seeing youngsters break through, having a connection to your team.

they’ve just been spat in the face today. Then laughed at
How exactly have they been spat on outside of the lack of communication prior? There have been no statements on how games will function or matchdays. The truth is, it would be impossible to organize the billions of clubs in world football against UEFA without it taking a billion years. Having the powerful few stand together in unison achieves this. If they feel undercut by UEFA and they don't feel comfortable with UEFA's administration, due to corruption, lack of FFP regulations, heavy handed transfer bans...then they have a right to act on that. I don't like how they framed the proposals for the super league, they need to redraft,but i'm not against cutting out this middle man and creating a new one.

Btw, the teams would still be in their leagues, its their leagues that are stubbornly supporting UEFA, not the teams pulling out. Who did UEFA consult when burning out players with their nations league. Communication to their fans is the problem because now it looks sneaky, but the idea of breaking away isnt.
 

SwedishFish

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
1,129
If all those clubs are 'founders' and are guaranteed a slice of the pie every year, then their finances are guaranteed. I'm not rehashing posts that have no truth, you just genuinely don't have a clue what you're talking about. It's not been created due to media rights when they're in the Champions League, its becasue they don't like that they have to qualify for it in the first place. Please, I beg you, take your contrarian hat off and actually read the details of what this Super League actually is. Again, it isn't clever and it isn't impressive to be contrarian when you don't even know what youre speaking about.
Stop trying to make it out like I'm "trying to be clever" here when you can't really refute anything I've said.

Yes, a guaranteed income is part of it, for some more than others. But having a bigger slice of the TV deal cake is the MAIN economic incentive. There are incentives to competing and having the best talent available too in terms of the commercial side.

If you honestly believe that it will mean no further investments to any of these clubs that have signed up then you are properly confused about how finances work.

You don't just take a club/brand and gut it. Will it mean more money for the Glazers too? Most certainly.

This is all very dire and very unromantic I know. But this is what the modern game has come to. We're already in it.
 

Stocar

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
657
Thesr people popping into these threads with their shit need to fecking wake up.
It's now or never. Evertyhing that is good in this beautiful game: the heritage, the nobility, the historical moments, the glorious anthem... Everything is at stake.

We can't expect much from professional footballers, as the regularity of their reasonable and hard earned wages might be slightly compromised. But we, common people, must make a stand, and praise every ambiguous wink they leave on social media. We are waking up.
 
Last edited:

bsCallout

Full Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
3,261
So you say that you can be a cause and a driving factor to creating a problem and then act shocked and appalled when something like this happens?

If you bask in the glory that comes with massive amounts of money being spent on your club being used for sportswashing then you can hardly act all surprised when it all comes down to money.

Fans are very much partly responsible for this. Intervention needed to happen earlier but the fans chose to ignore it because of the shiny signings that came along.

If that makes you feel better absolutely. But we could all tell which way we were heading years in advance. Just google the super league and you'll find plenty of readings on it from years ago.
That is still a false equivalency, irrelevant to whether people knew that certain clubs would have wanted to do X.

There are plenty of thing businesses want to do, some they do even if you don't quite like it, it isn't then wrong to oppose them(especially extreme measures) because you work there or are a fan.

We live in a capitalist society, it always comes down to money, and it's right for people to draw their line and oppose those measures when that line is crossed.
 

Zehner

Full Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2018
Messages
3,930
Location
Germany
Supports
Bayer 04 Leverkusen
It's all very weird and unpredictable. Personally I would almost love to see what would happen if they actually excluded the players from the big clubs for their national teams, just because of the unprecedented chaos, but in reality I just can't see something like this happening in a million years.

Just like the big clubs might be overplaying their hand and are underestimating the potential backlash of their current actions, FIFA and UEFA would be massively overplaying their hand if they'd follow through on such a threat. And they won't have the moral high ground anymore with regard to the fans, I can tell you that much.
I believe they have no choice but to do so. They have to do everything possible to prevent this from happening. Imagine they proceed with their Super League - it would be a catstrophe for the remaining clubs. Even worse if they stop playing domestic games - the remaining clubs' revenues would nose dive, many would probably face bankruptcy because they can't pay the player and staff contracts they negotiated with those profits in mind anymore.

No, they pretty much have to make an example out of those 12 clubs. And even more so, they need to keep the players in the league if the clubs choose to leave. And the WC and EC are the best triggers to do so because every player dreams of winning them from a very young age. The only alternative is if they really organize an own WC - and then they face other problems because this could only be played by ESL players - not nearly enough for a world cup, let alone one that gets enough nations on board. It's the single most powerful negotiation proposition FIFA has.

If I were them, I'd also try causing friction between the clubs. Maybe treat those who facilitated this development the most - as it seems Real, Arsenal and United - the hardest but offer exit routes for the remaining teams. I'm sure they'll try everything in their power because they could as well cancel their institution if this goes through as planned.
Oh and players who join the ESL after foundation have to be excluded from playing for UEFA or FIFA ever again. That would have players thinking twice before joining them while leaving a route for players who were forced in all of this. Because in the end, few players get to retire at the very best clubs.
 

Dec9003

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
6,345
Stop trying to make it out like I'm "trying to be clever" here when you can't really refute anything I've said.

Yes, a guaranteed income is part of it, for some more than others. But having a bigger slice of the TV deal cake is the MAIN economic incentive. There are incentives to competing and having the best talent available too in terms of the commercial side.

If you honestly believe that it will mean no further investments to any of these clubs that have signed up then you are properly confused about how finances work.

You don't just take a club/brand and gut it. Will it mean more money for the Glazers too? Most certainly.

This is all very dire and very unromantic I know. But this is what the modern game has come to. We're already in it.
Can't refute anything you've said? Mate you linked an article to me and made it abundantly clear you hadn't read it. :houllier: You claimed that All the top six would be in the Champions League next season based on a set of rule changes that hadn't been finalised, weren't being put in place until 2024 and didn't even actually mean what you thought they meant.
Guaranteed income is the major part of it, that is obvious. They get more money per year, and never have to worry about going a year without that income. As for it meaning no further investments, nobody has said that, I think your contrarian hat might be on a bit too tight in this case. Again, you really don't have a clue what you're talking about, please, go and actually read up on the topic.
 

bsCallout

Full Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
3,261
It’s in complete overdrive at the moment. Lots of people playing devils advocate when this so isn’t the time.

I don’t really care about the pl, fifa and uefa at the moment. They are the lesser of evils at the moment.
Whatever those guys have done. They expanded the World Cup and euros, expanded the CL. All their competitions have qualifiers. All their competitions at least have some semblance of merit and integrity to playing in them.

The super league is literally the Complete and polar opposite.

These people popping into these threads with their shit need to fecking wake up.
There is this ridiculous idea that because you aren't in uproar about certain corrupt things, you can't be vehemently opposed to something this big and impactful on the sport.
 

SwedishFish

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
1,129
Can't refute anything you've said? Mate you linked an article to me and made it abundantly clear you hadn't read it. :houllier: You claimed that All the top six would be in the Champions League next season based on a set of rule changes that hadn't been finalised, weren't being put in place until 2024 and didn't even actually mean what you thought they meant.
Guaranteed income is the major part of it, that is obvious. They get more money per year, and never have to worry about going a year without that income. As for it meaning no further investments, nobody has said that, I think your contrarian hat might be on a bit too tight in this case. Again, you really don't have a clue what you're talking about, please, go and actually read up on the topic.
You really haven't got a clue have you since you make up complete lies to suit your own agenda.

Never did I claim such a thing. I said that Champions League already is pretty much a closed-up shop and I stand by that.
 

Random Task

WW Lynchpin
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
25,847
Location
Chester
Just seen that.

They're in a difficult spot. We can't really realistic to expect a player to say anything other than a vague platitude but it's better than 99% of the players who have said feck all.

I doubt anyone will say "I'm not playing in this thing".
Football fans, pundits and media outlets can criticise this breakaway until they're blue in the face but ultimately hold no influence. However, the players are actually in a strong enough position that their words can drastically affect proceedings. If they are unhappy with this move - and you have to assume the vast majority are with the threat of no more domestic or international football looming as a consequence - then they need to speak up as soon as possible.
 

SwedishFish

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
1,129
That is still a false equivalency, irrelevant to whether people knew that certain clubs would have wanted to do X.

There are plenty of thing businesses want to do, some they do even if you don't quite like it, it isn't then wrong to oppose them(especially extreme measures) because you work there or are a fan.

We live in a capitalist society, it always comes down to money, and it's right for people to draw their line and oppose those measures when that line is crossed.
Congratulations, you've learned a new word and now you want to apply it to everything.


That's not how the real world works. If you enable something and it backlashes against you it's ridiculous to act dignified and appalled. You knew all along what type of monster that you were feeding and NOW of all times you want to act shocked when it's already too late.

Yes, please let the fans of the oil machine draw a line in the sand when the opportunity to win the real Champions League is evaporating before their very eyes by the same owners they've been praising for years.

You can't have it both ways.
 

Henrik Larsson

Still logged in at RAWK (help!)
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
5,228
Location
Swashbucklington
I believe they have no choice but to do so. They have to do everything possible to prevent this from happening. Imagine they proceed with their Super League - it would be a catstrophe for the remaining clubs. Even worse if they stop playing domestic games - the remaining clubs' revenues would nose dive, many would probably face bankruptcy because they can't pay the player and staff contracts they negotiated with those profits in mind anymore.

No, they pretty much have to make an example out of those 12 clubs. And even more so, they need to keep the players in the league if the clubs choose to leave. And the WC and EC are the best triggers to do so because every player dreams of winning them from a very young age. The only alternative is if they really organize an own WC - and then they face other problems because this could only be played by ESL players - not nearly enough for a world cup, let alone one that gets enough nations on board. It's the single most powerful negotiation proposition FIFA has.

If I were them, I'd also try causing friction between the clubs. Maybe treat those who facilitated this development the most - as it seems Real, Arsenal and United - the hardest but offer exit routes for the remaining teams. I'm sure they'll try everything in their power because they could as well cancel their institution if this goes through as planned.
Oh and players who join the ESL after foundation have to be excluded from playing for UEFA or FIFA ever again. That would have players thinking twice before joining them while leaving a route for players who were forced in all of this. Because in the end, few players get to retire at the very best clubs.

I don't think much of that is realistic to be honest. For example, what can the UEFA do right now, starting today? Ban all players from those 12 clubs for the Euros this summer? There will be an actual chance riots would break out in countries that are heavily affected by this. Players are also under contract so it's not like that can magically switch clubs in the coming weeks in order to comply with what UEFA wants.

Same for the Champions League this season, are UEFA just going to ban Real, City and Chelsea and cancel this years edition right now? They would have to pay a shiteload of sponsorship and tv money back, and then what? They will basically force the clubs to start their Super League for sure after such a decision.

Similar for the FIFA, they want to ban players from playing in Qatar next year? There's already a huge negative public opinion towards that tournament, and a negative public opinion towards FIFA's blatant corruption. Excluding some of the biggest players in the world would only add to that, and most importantly cost them a shiteload of money due to sponsors losing interest or wanting to renegotiate the current contracts.

Most big name players are under contract at their current club as well, why would those clubs want to sell them? Another question would be, what other club would they join? All because the corrupt FIFA and UEFA don't want their clubs starting their own European leagues, someone like Messi should leave Barcelona and join Olympique Lyon?

They have some options though, like you say try to create friction between the new ESL clubs. But more logically it seems like the big clubs have a small advantage in this matter, and UEFA will just give them want they want in the end.
 

Dec9003

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
6,345
You really haven't got a clue have you since you make up complete lies to suit your own agenda.

Never did I claim such a thing. I said that Champions League already is pretty much a closed-up shop and I stand by that.
You claimed that the wild card places would be designed for the clubs mentioned that are a doubt for top four, without reading the article and understanding only two places are available and are based on European history that the clubs we're discussing don't possess. You can stand by it, but you're wrong, simple as that really. To get into the Champions League you need to reach a certain position in your league, this won't be the case for the founders of the super league.
 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
3,674
The crap Herrera is still getting for his decision to join PSG :lol: not only is it completely irrelevant to the conversation but people forget he was offered a contract at the last minute by employers who were never sure if he was really worth it anyway. In his shoes I would have told United to feck off too!

Anyway, It's nice to see players speak up, this is a really worrying time for football. If people can stop this happening though it will be a major victory and could inspire similar movements against a cynical plutocracy that's using the pandemic as an excuse to concentrate even more money in the hands of the super rich elites.
 

tjb

Full Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
1,959
I believe they have no choice but to do so. They have to do everything possible to prevent this from happening. Imagine they proceed with their Super League - it would be a catstrophe for the remaining clubs. Even worse if they stop playing domestic games - the remaining clubs' revenues would nose dive, many would probably face bankruptcy because they can't pay the player and staff contracts they negotiated with those profits in mind anymore.

No, they pretty much have to make an example out of those 12 clubs. And even more so, they need to keep the players in the league if the clubs choose to leave. And the WC and EC are the best triggers to do so because every player dreams of winning them from a very young age. The only alternative is if they really organize an own WC - and then they face other problems because this could only be played by ESL players - not nearly enough for a world cup, let alone one that gets enough nations on board. It's the single most powerful negotiation proposition FIFA has.

If I were them, I'd also try causing friction between the clubs. Maybe treat those who facilitated this development the most - as it seems Real, Arsenal and United - the hardest but offer exit routes for the remaining teams. I'm sure they'll try everything in their power because they could as well cancel their institution if this goes through as planned.
Oh and players who join the ESL after foundation have to be excluded from playing for UEFA or FIFA ever again. That would have players thinking twice before joining them while leaving a route for players who were forced in all of this. Because in the end, few players get to retire at the very best clubs.
Do any of that and they may as well call it a day. Football is made by the players and using them to assert their own power when their own greed is being complained about is a bit reductive. They've already lost the support of the clubs, but due to local media interests and fears, and the terrible ESL proposals, have come out looking like victims. Enforce those moves and the moment players start to complain, clubs start advertising UEFA corruption as the reason for their break away and the local media start reviewing that, FIFA and UEFA are done. The players are the ones with the fans, if they feel aggrieved, there's no way back. Personally, I feel UEFA were arrogant to even try to enforce the proposed 2024 format without the support of these teams. They could have negotiated during the summer instead of trying to enforce those changes.