New Super League to Rival CL - 11 Clubs Sign Up

[Anubis]

8 hours ago, aws said:

This shit show wouldn't have been necessary if FFP had been enforced properly.   Did UEFA and the Prem really expect the established clubs whose fan bases generate most of the cash which fuels the whole filthy business to sit back while oil  states and oligarchs waltz in and sweep up the prizes? FSG are on record saying how important a factor FFP was in their decision to buy the club and now a few years later they're expected to compete with sport-washing countries and money launderers. 

Spot on, as usual Andrew. Had UEFA and the PL, and to a lesser extent FIFA, acted properly this wouldn't even be an issue. 

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

I get the naysayers but I just can’t get past the hypocrisy of the “outraged” 

Elaborate 

[Stickman]

 

[Manny]

Just now, Anubis said:

Spot on, as usual Andrew. Had UEFA and the PL, and to a lesser extent FIFA, acted properly this wouldn't even be an issue. 

Yeah, it's telling that Chelsea and Manchester City have seemingly only joined reluctantly, probably because they've realised this is the ticket to back. They fucking love the status quo, spend what you want, monopolise the success, write the losses off. Seems as though this new competition wouldn't allow that - you'd have a lot of money to start with, but you presumably can't overspend on it.

 

The PL and Uefa have had ample time to try and address the fundamental issue in football: wealth inequality. We're on the better side of it but we aren't at the top, and ultimately it's the same for a lot of the soft power in European football. The PL and Uefa believe the top table needs to share more of its wealth and think they should get a bigger cut than the rest of football. The top table believe they should share less and don't really care where it goes beyond that.

 

It's an absolute hot stinking mess but it hasn't exactly sprung up overnight. The fact is that the current system is about as rancid as this 'solution' - which is better or worse is splitting hairs.

[El Rojo]

If all this can be used as leverage for FFP to be properly enforced in a new CL model, it might serve a good purpose. 

[johnsusername]

Who would have thought letting ruthless billionaire investors with no connection to the clubs would end like this? I for one am shocked! It's the League and the FA I feel sorry for. Honest! 

[Dave D]

FFP reported as being a big reason for doing it- bit strange to then join a league that is only for the ultra wealthy- or will be there be restrictions on spend?

 

Whatever, its a shite idea. 

 

A new league will soon establish its very own "big 4" after a few seasons where all the players and money and TV gravitate towards.

 

An odd parallel but I cant help but think of the when the big players in darts did the same! They got banned from everything- I appreciate different stratosphere here       

[KevieG]

You would assume that the new league, as grotesque as it is, will say to chelsea, city and PSG, that you now have to follow the rules, whether they be wage caps or transfer fee caps. Or else you get fucked out. I can only assume thats one of the reasons they old money clubs have set it up. UEFA and FIFA have shown that they couldn't control them so they've taken it upon themselves to do it (and obviously enrich themselves in the process)

 

The alternative was to wait for more oil money and Chinese money to dope up other small clubs and squeeze them out of the champions league. 

[joe_fishfish]

8 hours ago, aws said:

This shit show wouldn't have been necessary if FFP had been enforced properly.   Did UEFA and the Prem really expect the established clubs whose fan bases generate most of the cash which fuels the whole filthy business to sit back while oil  states and oligarchs waltz in and sweep up the prizes? FSG are on record saying how important a factor FFP was in their decision to buy the club and now a few years later they're expected to compete with sport-washing countries and money launderers. 

The biggest offenders against FFP are Man City and PSG and both clubs were asked to be in the ESL.

 

Don't think this is about FFP at all.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

 

[joe_fishfish]

Just now, KevieG said:

You would assume that the new league, as grotesque as it is, will say to chelsea, city and PSG, that you now have to follow the rules, whether they be wage caps or transfer fee caps. Or else you get fucked out. I can only assume thats one of the reasons they old money clubs have set it up. UEFA and FIFA have shown that they couldn't control them so they've taken it upon themselves to do it (and obviously enrich themselves in the process)

 

The alternative was to wait for more oil money and Chinese money to dope up other small clubs and squeeze them out of the champions league. 

Yes, because City have shown they respect the spirit and letter of the law when it comes to FFP.

 

Doesn't make sense for the old money clubs to have asked City and PSG to be in this if they care about FFP.

[Captain Howdy]

18 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Elaborate 

The whole of the PL, EUFA, the FA, FIFA and Sky are all about greed, players who were on £100K a week moralising about greed, it’s hilarious stuff. The outraged , particularly the Institutions,  are only outraged because their greedy snouts won’t be in the trough. I think it’s a shit idea but it’s wonderful watching the gobshites go into meltdown. And the possibility of Everton spending 500 mill on a stadium to host the likes of West Brom frankly would make me piss my pants laughing.

[Numero Veinticinco]

17 hours ago, Iceman said:

If the cheating VAR wankers at the Premier League are against it I'm more than happy to give it my full support. 

Hahaha. Was genuinely a thought that went through my head. ‘Oh, the Premier League are against it... that’s one in the plus column’. 

[Leyton388]

This is no different from when the top clubs broke away from the football League to create the Premier League. Only thing now is the clubs can go it alone and the associations are shitting it. 

 

Don't get me wrong I'm not for this at the expense of the European Cup. 

 

As for the domestic league I've always thought that clubs promoted to the Premier league should in no way have the same voting rights as clubs that have been in it for 5 years or more or even the founding clubs such as us, United ect. 

 

 

[littletedwest]

It devalues all our past achievements. In 30 years imagine saying how we have 19 league titles to be responded to "19 what?"

[johnsusername]

3 minutes ago, PrivateParts said:

 

Ha, very good. 

 

Problem is - they're all at it. Sky, BT, the Premier League, the FA, the players, managers, agents - they're all as greedy as each other. It's just that this new group have thought of something else.

 

All the gnashing of teeth by them is pretty laughable. The fans got left behind a long time ago and they've never give a shit.

[VladimirIlyich]

57 minutes ago, Mcfaggen said:

Just because UEFA, FIFA, PL, the FA etc. are a bunch of cunts, doesn't mean this is good or right in my view. I think FSG have made a terrible mistake, and whilst last night it was posturing as a negotiation tactic, pronouncements last night & today are more than that. The damage is done. 

 

I don't actually care about the greed. Football has crossed that bridge a long time a go. I care about the game, from grass roots to the top, it should be the same game. Closed shops aren't that. 

 

I've been fairly on board with the FSG model. They're frugal, I get that, they want the club to live within it's own means, fair enough. It's a better model than Qatar. But they are also meant to be the stewards of the brand, the culture & the history of the club. They've fucked up before, but IMHO this is crossing the Rubicon. 

 

Folks talk about smaller clubs inhibiting bigger clubs from doing what they want (whilst simultaneously gurning about stopping smaller clubs from doing what they want with ticket prices when big clubs come to town). But if it wasn't for those same clubs, LFC wouldn't be what it is. We wouldn't have bought Andy Robertson from Hull. We wouldn't have won league titles, or European Cups. It's an eco system, there are synergies. 

 

I think turning your back on that, and yes, that's how I'm reading it, is abhorrent in a sporting context (yes, there are worse things in life).

 

I'd throw the book (all the books) at them. Huge point deductions this season to basically ensure none of them qualify for anything. I'd be handing the FA Cup over to Leicester, and stripping Man City of the League Cup. I'd be awarding the European Cup to Fucking PSG (of all fucking cunts) on the basis the other three are in this shit up to their oxsters. 

 

And then there is next season. I'd turf them all out of both the PL & the FA - they wouldn't qualify for the CL of course due to said points deduction. They can start their basketball roadshow early. 

 

People say that sponsors won't like that... well good. The Clubs can sit down & start cutting their own cloth to match their needs. Football has been a bubble waiting to burst for years, now the Clubs and the authorities have the chance to control it (to a degree). The chance to return the country's national sport to an even keel. 

 

Oh but all the best players will leave... they can't all go play for 16 clubs. There will still be quality about. The league will probably be more competitive and entertaining as a consequence. It'll have a breath of fresh air actually. The inevitable march of Qatar FC to the title 4 seasons in 5 gone... 

 

As for the Gov't intervening, yeah, I'm all down with that. Someone said that Gov't interference is strictly prohibited by FIFA / UEFA. I'm sure FIFA / UEFA would be happy to see these clubs lose their membership. And after that, all is fair in my book. 

 

Club Ownership rules changed would be tremendous, though can't see that happening soon. I'd withdraw police services, making it impossible for councils to licence full attendances, maybe withdraw their liquor licences, etc. loads of petty small things which make it harder, if not impossible to do business. 

 

I'd create a new tax bracket for employees of the Companies involved in "The Super League". 99% tax above average national wages. Lets see how many want to work/play for FSG FC if the wedge isn't coming home. 

 

Fuck it, this isn't in the national interest... if the Gov't said they wanted to put sanctions on the companies involved, I'd be all for that too. There is no lever I wouldn't pull to punish the cunts involved. 

 

Maybe it'd accelerate them shipping out of the country. Oh well. Fuck them. Fuck FSG. 

I agree with almost all of that but mentioning a Tory government helping in a dispute over greed is like handing control of your chicken coop to Freddie Fox and family. They dont give a shit and would be happy to allow something which matches their vision of society go ahead.

I actually was thinking about this scenario this week even before the announcement and reckon the EFL should forget about the PL and just have a three tier system and charge viewers say a fiver or tenner and let them watch any of 60 odd games on a saturday or sunday afternoon and use the proceeds to build themselves up again. The football would be a bit shit to begin with but it would be entertaining and get better quickly.

[aws]

3 minutes ago, joe_fishfish said:

Yes, because City have shown they respect the spirit and letter of the law when it comes to FFP.

 

Doesn't make sense for the old money clubs to have asked City and PSG to be in this if they care about FFP.

Because they want a successful money-spinner that they control.  They'll have power to exclude the oil clubs if they don't  follow whatever the new FFP rules are and unlike UEFA and the Prem they will enforce the rules because it's in their mutual interest to do so. 

[KevieG]

4 minutes ago, joe_fishfish said:

Yes, because City have shown they respect the spirit and letter of the law when it comes to FFP.

 

Doesn't make sense for the old money clubs to have asked City and PSG to be in this if they care about FFP.

You can only control them if they are in your league. They are here now whether we like it or not.

 

If this league has to go ahead I would much prefer if this league didn't include them and had Benfica, Porto, Steaue Bucharest, Ajax, Celtic, and so on.  But unfortunately we are dealing realpolitik here, and the 3 oil clubs will be included, before it turns into 6 or 9 oil clubs.

[TheDrowningMan]

10 minutes ago, joe_fishfish said:

Yes, because City have shown they respect the spirit and letter of the law when it comes to FFP.

 

Doesn't make sense for the old money clubs to have asked City and PSG to be in this if they care about FFP.

City are completely irrelevant without the historic big clubs. They might prefer not to have a more stringent fiscal structure, but the huge, frequent games against European royalty sell the club as a big deal globally more than any number of trophies.

 

From the other clubs’ point of view, there’s no reason to deny City a place if they’re bound by the regulations. Keep them close.

[johnsusername]

Multi millionaire players appearing on Sky to tell us greed is bad for football has got to be peak irony.

[SasaS]

6 minutes ago, Leyton388 said:

This is no different from when the top clubs broke away from the football League to create the Premier League. Only thing now is the clubs can go it alone and the associations are shitting it. 

 

Don't get me wrong I'm not for this at the expense of the European Cup. 

 

As for the domestic league I've always thought that clubs promoted to the Premier league should in no way have the same voting rights as clubs that have been in it for 5 years or more or even the founding clubs such as us, United ect. 

 

 

It is different. What people don't realize this is only step one, which will devalue national leagues and European competitions and natural step two would be completely breaking away, after the super league is expanded, as a closed competition.

[El Rojo]

Next step will be blindfolding the goaltenders to boost the spectacle for the American market. 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

18 hours ago, Freddo said:

Only saw it on twitter. Think it was attributed to the athletic that Barcelona and psg aren't backing it. Who knows. 

Knock it off with the fancy Italics mate, it's gone tits up just tell it how it is.

[joe_fishfish]

City will just find creative ways around whatever regulations are put in place. They'll pay people off the books, get Etihad to sponsor a player's shoelaces for £450m, stuff like that. And if the other clubs try and kick them out they'll tie them up in legal wrangling for years.

 

Chelsea will continue to operate their loan army, probably even expand it, and that's to the detriment of everyone involved as well.

 

PSG turning it down is probably a good thing for the ESL because they'd be worse than either.

 

I reckon the old money clubs have let the fox into the henhouse by inviting City in particular.