Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

New Super League to Rival CL - 11 Clubs Sign Up


TheDrowningMan
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Just seen the most ironic or hypocritical picture ever: city fan with a flag 'RIP mcfc 1894-2021'!

 

I think he's about 15 years late.

 

Just seen shearer on BBC saying chuck the PL 6 out of the league. Honestly, these thick cunts dont think things through, do they?

 

JB immediately put him right, do that and the PL sponsors will immediately cut back their sponsorship and you're making certain the clubs will go it alone.

 

This stuff with fans backing Government intervention, shouldnt they be asking Government what have you done to put PL football back on free to air tv when covid restrictions are lifted, fans back in stadiums and sky \ BT go back to their normal televising of games?

If conmen like Boris and Starmer really want to take on the free market they should insist on bringing back free to air games, introduce wage caps, and put caps on ticket prices.  Protecting Rupert Murdochs prize asset under the guise of sticking up for the working man is whats really going on. I haven't seen a concerted media blitz like this in my life.

 

They didn't give a shit about a global pandemic yet they spring into action on this. When thats happening you know something is not right.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KevieG said:

If conmen like Boris and Starmer really want to take on the free market they should insist on bringing back free to air games, introduce wage caps, and put caps on ticket prices.  Protecting Rupert Murdochs prize asset under the guise of sticking up for the working man is whats really going on. I haven't seen a concerted media blitz like this in my life.

 

They didn't give a shit about a global pandemic yet they spring into action on this. When thats happening you know something is not right.

 

Murdock has nothing to do with it, he sold Sky UK a few years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something the government could do to stop the greed and give the TV viewers actual choices would be to stop exclusive PL rights. Make each game available on two or three services. That way the media dickheads like Sky would actually have to compete on the quality of THEIR product, the coverage, rather than the depth of their pockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of very stupid people with platforms saying very stupid things to lots of people. Throw the clubs out? Then you have the 6 biggest and most supported clubs in the country with one option. Go it alone - most of us will walk away. We won't pitch up at Goodison - manufactured - we'll walk away. Cancel Sky, B.T. stop buying or engaging with football - and that will be millions of fans. The club you have supported all your life ceases to exist for you - you don't pitch up at another club. 

 

That affects all the league. Disgruntled, angry and bitter fans of United, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, Spurs and Arsenal - who will just fuck off. The Spanish and Italian leagues won't fuck their clubs off - and they won't want our teams playing 30 games a season, whilst they have domestic leagues. If the worst case scenario comes about - I won't be engaging with football ever again, that'll be it. It'll be akin to reality TV - something other people talk about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone noticed the changes to the Champions League by the way?

 

(From the Telegraph)

 

Quote

On Monday, Uefa delegates had been due to rubber-stamp the plans from 2024 — but it is possible a late offer may be tabled to keep the big clubs happy. As it stands, European football’s elite club competition increases from 32 teams to 36, with the total matches played from 125 to 225 from 2024/25.

 

Of the four extra places, one would go to the league rated the fifth-strongest in Europe, with another going to the highest-ranked domestic champion from one of the smaller leagues. The remaining two go to the clubs with the highest Uefa coefficient (historic ranking), meaning the likes of Liverpool could finish as low as seventh in the Premier League and still qualify.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aws said:

The hypocrisy of people who have uncomplainingly watched the likes of City and Chelsea over the last few years now talking about keeping football competitive and earning success makes me fucking puke. 

Yeah it's absolutely mind boggling that there're plenty of people out there who think that it's this that'll make football uncompetitive - like what the fuck have they been watching these last few years!?

 

"What's the point for the rest of us?" Indeed, what is the point for the rest of us when City can slap Watford 6-0 in the final of the FA Cup with their near-reserves, on their way to winning 5 out of the last 10 domestic cups and three of the last four league titles? I honestly reckon most fans are comfortable with the concept of City as it's a convenient way of writing off the league winner as "yeah well you should win it anyway" without really disturbing much else, so there's obviously some uncompetitiveness that's tolerable.

 

I'm willing to bet that a lot of the resentment to a proposal that'll see teams which qualify for the CL 9 times out of 10 getting a guaranteed place in a reformatted CL is because there's always a couple which miss out and that means there's some "Thursday nights channel 5" schadenfreude-based bantz to miss out on.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people need to move past the hypocrisy argument over this. Of course it is relevant - this is the natural conclusion of a culture of greed that was started by those who are leading the criticism. Yes, that is true. But, equally this isn't just about greed. 

 

This is also about our owners seeing us, and our culture as match going fans - our memories with parents and children, as a hindrance to them making money. It is our owners looking at us - and thinking 'yeah but if we lost those we'll gain 1 million Asian fans'. They'll take our culture and repackage it back to the Asian market. We won't be going to the game with our mates, won't be taking our kids to the game, or going with our parents. This is the first step to a franchise - and once you get that - you do get the possibility that they can simply move the franchise to someone else. The Shanghai reds sounds incredibly attractive to FSG I would bet. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jockey said:

This is also about our owners seeing us, and our culture as match going fans - our memories with parents and children, as a hindrance to them making money. It is our owners looking at us - and thinking 'yeah but if we lost those we'll gain 1 million Asian fans'. They'll take our culture and repackage it back to the Asian market. We won't be going to the game with our mates, won't be taking our kids to the game, or going with our parents. This is the first step to a franchise - and once you get that - you do get the possibility that they can simply move the franchise to someone else. The Shanghai reds sounds incredibly attractive to FSG I would bet. 

I cant see any other conclusion than this. It may be a while but it has an inevitability about it for me. We have spent the last 30 years giving these top clubs more and more power, in the way that the game was structured. This and the globalisation of the game through the advent of the internet.

 

Long term, it doesnt make sense to me to have 3 of the leagues teams in the North West of England, all within a few miles of each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Manny said:

Yeah it's absolutely mind boggling that there're plenty of people out there who think that it's this that'll make football uncompetitive - like what the fuck have they been watching these last few years!?

 

"What's the point for the rest of us?" Indeed, what is the point for the rest of us when City can slap Watford 6-0 in the final of the FA Cup with their near-reserves, on their way to winning 5 out of the last 10 domestic cups and three of the last four league titles? I honestly reckon most fans are comfortable with the concept of City as it's a convenient way of writing off the league winner as "yeah well you should win it anyway" without really disturbing much else, so there's obviously some uncompetitiveness that's tolerable.

 

I'm willing to bet that a lot of the resentment to a proposal that'll see teams which qualify for the CL 9 times out of 10 getting a guaranteed place in a reformatted CL is because there's always a couple which miss out and that means there's some "Thursday nights channel 5" schadenfreude-based bantz to miss out on.

Agree.

10 minutes ago, Jockey said:

I think people need to move past the hypocrisy argument over this. Of course it is relevant - this is the natural conclusion of a culture of greed that was started by those who are leading the criticism. Yes, that is true. But, equally this isn't just about greed. 

 

This is also about our owners seeing us, and our culture as match going fans - our memories with parents and children, as a hindrance to them making money. It is our owners looking at us - and thinking 'yeah but if we lost those we'll gain 1 million Asian fans'. They'll take our culture and repackage it back to the Asian market. We won't be going to the game with our mates, won't be taking our kids to the game, or going with our parents. This is the first step to a franchise - and once you get that - you do get the possibility that they can simply move the franchise to someone else. The Shanghai reds sounds incredibly attractive to FSG I would bet. 

You seriously think Real madrid, Barcelona, Juve, Inter, Milan and the rest are intent on a 'franchise' and uprooting their club to Shanghai or somewhere else in the world or it it just us?

 

Honestly, what fucking garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, John102 said:

I cant see any other conclusion than this. It may be a while but it has an inevitability about it for me. We have spent the last 30 years giving these top clubs more and more power, in the way that the game was structured. This and the globalisation of the game through the advent of the internet.

 

Long term, it doesnt make sense to me to have 3 of the leagues teams in the North West of England, all within a few miles of each other.

It has been a hindrance the make up of our league. We always look to Germany but they have pretty much two leagues - with a population of 80m - we have 5 leagues with a population of 60m (England). If Liverpool had one team, even if we had one team this side of the water and on the other - we'd be pulling in 60k regularly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dockers_strike said:

Agree.

You seriously think Real madrid, Barcelona, Juve, Inter, Milan and the rest are intent on a 'franchise' and uprooting their club to Shanghai or somewhere else in the world or it it just us?

 

Honestly, what fucking garbage.

 

Nope. They won't need to and they don't have American owners. We do. I did specify our owners. They are following the exact same model that led to the LA Raiders/Oakland Raiders/Las Vegas Raiders - that is their model. If you don't think that is a possibility then I think you are wrong. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jockey said:

 

Nope. They won't need to and they don't have American owners. We do. I did specify our owners. They are following the exact same model that led to the LA Raiders/Oakland Raiders/Las Vegas Raiders - that is their model. If you don't think that is a possibility then I think you are wrong. 

I support the Minneapolis Red Devil Liverbirds FC, not Liverpool FC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jockey said:

 

Nope. They won't need to and they don't have American owners. We do. I did specify our owners. They are following the exact same model that led to the LA Raiders/Oakland Raiders/Las Vegas Raiders - that is their model. If you don't think that is a possibility then I think you are wrong. 

So because 'we' and a few other clubs have US owners, we're going to go for a franchise and uproot our clubs while Real, Juve etc are going to stay put?

 

You really havent thought it through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to play devil's advocate slightly. 

 

Say this is going ahead no matter what, we'd have no choice but to get in board or fuck off. Those getting on board, what changes to what's proposed would we like to see to at least make this shitshow a tiny bit more palatable?

 

Some sort of European super league is inevitable, there's been talk about it for too long that won't go away, and there's too much money at stake. At this point the best we can do is maybe accept the super league is happening, but make our voices heard with regards to how we want it to be set up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jockey said:

 

Nope. They won't need to and they don't have American owners. We do. I did specify our owners. They are following the exact same model that led to the LA Raiders/Oakland Raiders/Las Vegas Raiders - that is their model. If you don't think that is a possibility then I think you are wrong. 

I agree, I could see it. In a couple of decades we'll be supporting the 'North-West Knights' (formerly Liverpool and Manchester clubs) in the NW European conference. Market forces are reductionist, the bigger and more successful consume the smaller and less successful. In 100 years there will only be one European club playing against globally located competitors. 

 

I'm thinking Rollerball, the 70's one not the remake.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jockey said:

 

Nope. They won't need to and they don't have American owners. We do. I did specify our owners. They are following the exact same model that led to the LA Raiders/Oakland Raiders/Las Vegas Raiders - that is their model. If you don't think that is a possibility then I think you are wrong. 

Not sure it's the same thing moving a team from one city to another in the same country, compared to moving us to China. I don't think it makes sense. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aventus said:

Just to play devil's advocate slightly. 

 

Say this is going ahead no matter what, we'd have no choice but to get in board or fuck off. Those getting on board, what changes to what's proposed would we like to see to at least make this shitshow a tiny bit more palatable?

 

Some sort of European super league is inevitable, there's been talk about it for too long that won't go away, and there's too much money at stake. At this point the best we can do is maybe accept the super league is happening, but make our voices heard with regards to how we want it to be set up. 


No turning back lads, Cortez the killer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aventus said:

Not sure it's the same thing moving a team from one city to another in the same country, compared to moving us to China. I don't think it makes sense. 

I think that these teams and owners will do whatever is the most commercially viable. They are already showing this now.

 

It seems clear that they are also more interested in new fans than these legacy fans.

 

Who knows who will move and where to, however, as i said above, i dont think it makes sense to have 3 teams all within a few miles of each other (Us, Utd and City), if there is a viable case for an American or Chinese franchise. There is already a move away from these new fans from supporting teams and supporting the best players. If this continues, they wont care if the name says Liverpool or Man Utd or whoever else. 

 

I also think that this whole episode will be a lesson to this new league (Should it go ahead). They wont want teams becoming too strong and branching off into a new organisation, with this gravy train now being the one derailed. I think they will want the power in the Super League brand, much like the UFC for example or NBA (Though for different reasons), rather than the individual teams and for this reason, i think the franchise thing will eventually happen, though maybe many decades down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...