7 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

Even though I’m not a fan of the super league I hate how FIFA and UEFA are using this as a chance to act like they for the people and the media is getting behind them despite their organisations reeking of corruption. The World Cup being hosted in Qatar is no different than this super league.

The difference is that FIFA and UEFA have been trying to include more teams/countries at the biggest tournaments while the richest clubs want to exclude everyone but their own pre-made party. The one way to help lower teams and smaller countries was always to lower the requirement, this also resulted in top 4 getting a direct CL place without a playoff.

I've jUst been having a quick looksy at other premier league teams fans forum...general consensus being "f**k them, selfish arseholes" and all that. Quite a few mentions about how the fans of the big teams must be livid.

Then I had a quick scout of the forums of the other 5 teams. I'm seeing comments pretty much identical to ours...

Except a certain scouse forum where they seem divided some are saying the same as us but the majority are saying it's great that we will be founders, atleast we get to keep up with the extra money, ffs why did they have to let city in and what did spurs do to get invited.

Typical bloody liverpool fans, and they wonder why everyone else hates them

4 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

Interesting, if not exactly concrete:

https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/politico-london-playbook-its-not-coming-home-super-spinners-olive-considers-german-model/

Not to get too political but the Tories getting involved in anything to do with money, corruption or cronyism is beyond laughable.

 

UEFA are obviously fighting for their lives right now. Understand why they are royally pissed off but they have had it coming.

It's insane that we may have played our last Champions League game in our history though.

 

14 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

The difference is that FIFA and UEFA have been trying to include more teams/countries at the biggest tournaments while the richest clubs want to exclude everyone but their own pre-made party. The one way to help lower teams and smaller countries was always to lower the requirement, this also resulted in top 4 getting a direct CL place without a playoff.

I’m not sure I agree. If fifa actually cared about smaller countries they’d actually host their tournaments in more developing nations since these tournaments are huge economic boosts for those countries. Instead they probably got a huge cheque from Qatar royals and decided to host the World Cup there. 
And about them adding teams, I honestly believe that them adding more teams and countries to tournaments is just to have more matches which gets more tv revenue. The super league I’m sure would eventually add more teams for money as well. They are both wolves but fifa and Uefa are trying to act like sheep.

Edited April 19, 20215 yr by Frankie8Lampard

We can all agree FIFA and UEFA are reprehensible organisations, and still think the concept of a Super League is horrible.

The ripple effect this will have on the sport is frightening.

It's interesting that the German and French teams have shunned this Super League. Good for them!

What won't be interesting is Bayern winning the Champions League for the next ten years in a row. This is really going to mess up professional football in the worst way, I woudn't be surprised if all of the teams involved are banished from their various leagues.

I wonder which broadcaster will be the first one to do the dirty and show it live? Please don't support it and don't give them a subscription.

I don't have a clear idea where this thing will lead top flight football but as a consumer and fan of the sport I kind of love this turmoil it has created...I am too far from making up my mind on wheter it is good or not. 

It is going to be an interesting fight between two gangs of mobsters, but those saying that the Super League will attract the highest money need to explain why. I'm not sure what will happen in Spain or Italy, but if the FA and other European federations refuse to select players from these teams for their national teams, the best players will likely end up going to PSG, Bayern and other teams that have been up there fighting for European spots lately (Leicester springs to mind). So the Super League teams will not necessarily retain the best players as they do now. We'll see what happens, but there are a lot of variables and the fight is going to be epic.

From reading Spanish sport papers, there doesn't seem to be a strong reaction against it as there's been here in England. Then again, the Spanish press is dominated by Barsa and Real Madrid, so no surprise not to read a strong opposition to this.

2 minutes ago, Luca Vialli said:

It's interesting that the German and French teams have shunned this Super League. Good for them!

What won't be interesting is Bayern winning the Champions League for the next ten years in a row. This is really going to mess up professional football in the worst way, I woudn't be surprised if all of the teams involved are banished from their various leagues.

I wonder which broadcaster will be the first one to do the dirty and show it live? Please don't support it and don't give them a subscription.

Rumours online that Bayern and PSG are two of the teams waiting in the wings to join as it begins... could all be speculation of course - Bayern being fan owned I imagine makes them less likely. PSG I think definitely will be one of them. They simply couldn’t afford Mbappe, Neymar etc if all the money goes to the Super league and they’re not involved.

4 minutes ago, Frankie8Lampard said:

I’m not sure I agree. If fifa actually cared about smaller countries they’d actually host their tournaments in more developing nations since these tournaments are huge economic boosts for those countries. Instead they probably got a huge cheque from Qatar royals and decided to host the World Cup there. 
And about them adding teams, I honestly believe that them adding more teams and countries to tournaments is just to have more matches which gets more tv revenue. The super league I’m sure would eventually add more teams for money as well. They are both wolves but fifa and Uefa are trying to act like sheep.

They hosted in Russia, Brazil, South Africa before getting paid to allow Qatar to host it. All of those were due to payments under the table and corruption, every single one even if they hosted in developing nations but that's not going away with the Super league anyway as the richest will go to the richest and simply ignore everyone else, that's not what I was saying.

We live in a capitalistic world, when Brazil and South Africa got to be the hosts tons of other companies followed in those countries and it was a corruption all the way to the government level where companies were allowed to get contracts in the most crazy ways, they got tons of money just to build stadiums that were only used for that 1 tournament and everything else that's around that like roads and infrastructure was also built so the corruption is all around FIFA not just in FIFA but they did host in smaller nations that are not known for football, Qatar is basically one of those countries just like South Africa and Russia but the corruption is still there and Brazil had huge problems because of the World Cup. Even years back when there were less than 32 teams in the World Cup when Mexico was the host they changed some laws regarding parking fees, taxes and so on and that dragged back the whole country for example... This isn't going away regardless of who's organizing as many people will just take advantage of something like the World Cup, if some clubs can just do whatever they want and make their own all exclusive league for themselves they might just raise the ticket prices and further exclude themselves from the middle class.

Yes more matches mean more tv revenue but it's the only way to involve smaller nations and smaller teams to be a part of something that they otherwise simply can't afford to compete in.

3 minutes ago, EdinburghBlue said:

Rumours online that Bayern and PSG are two of the teams waiting in the wings to join as it begins... could all be speculation of course - Bayern being fan owned I imagine makes them less likely. PSG I think definitely will be one of them. They simply couldn’t afford Mbappe, Neymar etc if all the money goes to the Super league and they’re not involved.

Real Madrid and Barcelona are also clubs owned by the supporters. Don't ask me how Florentino Perez dominates the assemblies because I haven't got a clue, but on paper they are clubs and not a S.A.D. (company).

1 minute ago, RMH said:

It is going to be an interesting fight between two gangs of mobsters, but those saying that the Super League will attract the highest money need to explain why. I'm not sure what will happen in Spain or Italy, but if the FA and other European federations refuse to select players from these teams for their national teams, the best players will likely end up going to PSG, Bayern and other teams that have been up there fighting for European spots lately (Leicester springs to mind). So the Super League teams will not necessarily retain the best players as they do now. We'll see what happens, but there are a lot of variables and the fight is going to be epic.

From reading Spanish sport papers, there doesn't seem to be a strong reaction against it as there's been here in England. Then again, the Spanish press is dominated by Barsa and Real Madrid, so no surprise not to read a strong opposition to this.

I doubt the clubs and JP Morgan etc have gone in to this without extensive research, they’ll have looked at the legality of it in detail no doubt. I don’t think they’d have made it so concrete if they weren’t sure that they had something to fall back on. 
As you say, it’s going to be some fight, about time someone bloodied FIFA/UEFA’s corrupt noses, just not the ideal way of it happening.
 

Banning the players would just be cutting off their nose to spite their face. The World Cup without the worlds best players? Wouldn’t attract nearly the same viewership or sponsorship. On the plus side, if all the best players are banned - Scotland and our sh*te players might have a chance of winning the World Cup 🥳

47 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

Who's to say that the people in charge of this Super league are not at the very least equally corrupted and just see this as an opportunity for some late stage capitalism money grab? Specially during this time while there are no fans allowed.

All big clubs involved have heavy ties with UEFA and FIFA in one way or another, FIFA was directly involved in Man City and PSG slipping through the FFP rules and from what I know one of the first people to support this idea was Florentino Perez.

There is nothing there that suggests that these guys that want to make everything their own are nice guys.

This is news from 2016 that was reported in 2018 which said about the possible activation of this Super league exactly in 2021:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/46078651

Indeed Gol. I'm not naieve enough to think for a moment that the clubs involved are motivated by anything other than money and self-interest, as are UEFA, FIFA, EPL etc. But which is the lesser of the two evils?

Similarly I have never been naieve enough to believe that Roman Abramovich has ever, at any point, given two f*cks about what Chelsea fans want.  I'm sure he cares about the club as he does any other major financial investment he makes . But he sees it not as our club. He sees it as his club brought and paid for to do with as he sees fit. Whatever PR and media spin he puts out to try and portray otherwise.

I agree with others who have already voiced the same opinion. The golden age of football for me was before global brand rights, obscene TV revenues, mega sponsorship deals, super-agents, billionaire owners and some players earning £500k a week. But that's how the world works my friend. Nothing stays the same, and the only thing you can be sure of is CHANGE.

For better, or worse.

Edited April 19, 20215 yr by just

3 minutes ago, RMH said:

Real Madrid and Barcelona are also clubs owned by the supporters. Don't ask me how Florentino Perez dominates the assemblies because I haven't got a clue, but on paper they are clubs and not a S.A.D. (company).

Are they not different in regard to electing a chairman of sorts on Laporta and Perez? Similar to you, I’m not that clued up on how this works I must admit.

Edited April 19, 20215 yr by EdinburghBlue

Just now, EdinburghBlue said:

Are they not different in regard to electing a chairman of sorts on Bartolmeu and Perez? Similar to you, I’m not that clued up on how this works I must admit.

Yes, the season ticket holders elect the president, very much like it happens in general elections, and they also hold the power to revoke the president. But the president is elected every five years (I believe). Now, it's clear as daylight that presidents have a lot of power, I just don't know how they control the assemblies of supporters (I guess bribing is the way to do it, but I haven't got a clue).

Chelsea Football Club 1905-2021 RIP.

Color me surprised it's the US-owned club that's the driving force behind this in this country.

From BBC:

Fan groups associated with all six English clubs involved in the European Super League proposal are strongly opposed.

Liverpool supporters' group Spirit of Shankly (SOS) said it was "appalled" by the decision of Fenway Sports Group, the club's US-based owner. In a social media post, SOS said: "FSG have ignored fans in their relentless and greedy pursuit of money. Football is ours, not theirs. Our football club is ours not theirs."

Chelsea Supporters' Trust called the move "unforgivable" and said its members and "football supporters across the world have experienced the ultimate betrayal".

The Arsenal Supporters' Trust called the club's agreement to join "the death of Arsenal as a sporting institution", while Manchester City's Official Supporters Club said the move showed "those involved have zero regard for the game's traditions", adding it was "determined to fight against this proposed Super League".

The Manchester United Supporters' Trust had earlier said the proposals were "completely unacceptable" and the ESL "goes against everything football, and Manchester United, should stand for".

Tottenham Hotspur Supporters' Trust said the ESL was a "concept driven by avarice and self-interest at the expense of the intrinsic values of the game we hold so dear".

 

I'm struggling to think of a bigger PR own goal in the history of sport ...

 

I suppose we have to continue to hope that this is just an extreme negotiating position. 
 

The proposed Super League format sounds like a more bent version of the new ‘Swiss Style’ CL:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/apr/16/champions-league-new-36-team-format-set-for-uefa-approval-on-monday

I am sorry and probably a total ignorant in this matter but can someone please explain how this new system will harm grassroots football and football communities in general? Only calm and collected answers. 

As I see it we already have this club-elite bunch anyway. How does this harm 5th tier English side and their communities? 

 

13 minutes ago, PloKoon13 said:

I suppose we have to continue to hope that this is just an extreme negotiating position. 
 

The proposed Super League format sounds like a more bent version of the new ‘Swiss Style’ CL:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/apr/16/champions-league-new-36-team-format-set-for-uefa-approval-on-monday

JPMorgan just confirmed they are financing the ESL, so i don't think this is extreme negotiating, i think it's already decided.

When people say 'I feel sick to my stomach' (Alan Smith) about this ESL do they even know what this means to elite football? They just react to Gary Neville's and media's gut reactions? 

As I see it there are multiple end scenarios here. 

I am genuinely surprised at the fan outcry, we are appalled at the behavior of our clubs who are acting as per the norm and the standard they have set themselves and more importantly to a standard the fans have started to measure them on. The number of times I have heard fans argue over the "Net Spend" of a club and how well they are doing financially and wasn't it last week on this forum where fans on here wanted players rested for an FA Cup Semi final so we can focus on a CL finish so the club didn't miss out on millions. Didn't we earlier this year sack a club legend and bin a project which a lot of the fans were completely sold on in order to secure a CL spot which was looking unlikely at the time.

Why the Outcry? is it because of change? is it because the media is telling us it's a bad idea who have a huge investment in the current product? UEFA have f**ked us, Arsenal & PSG in the most blatant manner in the recent past and the FA have been right up United and Liverpool's ass as far back as memory serves yet people are buying the narrative they are selling. I do oppose the idea of the Super League but this was always going to happen at some point and we the fans are to blame to allow the fabric of football to be eroded over time and now we have this Commercial Monsters who will always choose Money over Fans yet we  the fans appear like the hypocrites as the Commercial Monsters always have and always will choose money over any footballing heritage and ideology.  

The lightest scenario here as I see it is the scenario ESL itself promotes: 15 richest football brands + 5 teams on merit play ESL annually and everything else stays the same. Biggest problems comes with UCL and for the 15 teams not having to qualify. Another problem is the gulf getting between the elite and the rest in terms of money.