Fuck UEFA And Fuck The French Lying Cunts

[SasaS 3,208]

2 minutes ago, Freddo said:

My point around breakaway leagues was more against how uefa run the game not against international football as such.

I think the appetite for change is there and will come to fruition as clubs are getting fed up of uefa. The super league was just the start of the process to create change.

As for the nations league, I don’t think it’s fair to say that all players feel the same way in that it means more to them playing for their countries as opposed for their clubs. For instance, does it mean more to Trent, was it more meaningful to Gerrard. It was for Owen I grant you.

The game needs change, uefa and clubs are too greedy and that is destroying the game.

 

 

OK, I may give you Trent. The rest would not even stop to think about club or country, if you are playing in a foreign club especially. 

 

UEFA/FIFA has a strong hand with internationals and would always find a way to compromise with the biggest clubs.

[Freddo 86]

3 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

OK, I may give you Trent. The rest would not even stop to think about club or country, if you are playing in a foreign club especially. 

 

UEFA/FIFA has a strong hand with internationals and would always find a way to compromise with the biggest clubs.

It seems that uefa have compromised with the big clubs by adding 2 more CL games to the calendar. That’s greed and of course is driven by clubs. Uefa though need to cut down on what amount to meaningless internationals. Those games at the end of the season were dreadful and what fatigued footy looks like.
Friendlies repackaged to trick people into something that are no more than friendlies.

July 4th and 5th I think is when super league goes to court to try and prove uefa have a monopoly on European football.

That is pivotal for the game in Europe and to what happens next.

[SasaS 3,208]

2 minutes ago, Freddo said:

It seems that uefa have compromised with the big clubs by adding 2 more CL games to the calendar. That’s greed and of course is driven by clubs. Uefa though need to cut down on what amount to meaningless internationals. Those games at the end of the season were dreadful and what fatigued footy looks like.
Friendlies repackaged to trick people into something that are no more than friendlies.

July 4th and 5th I think is when super league goes to court to try and prove uefa have a monopoly on European football.

That is pivotal for the game in Europe and to what happens next.

I agree adding internationals is stupid and unnecessary. But there is no way an international breakaway of big clubs in a meaningless competition can survive. There is no need to break away from Uefa, you need to reform it. You can break away only with the support of national associations, starting a competing world cup or a European championship. 

[Scott_M 6,740]

54 minutes ago, Carra_is_legend said:

I am not sure what is better - dealing with City in this league or dealing with Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus in the super league......

Real, Barca, Juve are proper clubs built on years and years of hard work.

 

Obviously Juve have had their issues, they’ve still come back on top.

 

City would never do that. 

[Freddo 86]

36 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I agree adding internationals is stupid and unnecessary. But there is no way an international breakaway of big clubs in a meaningless competition can survive. There is no need to break away from Uefa, you need to reform it. You can break away only with the support of national associations, starting a competing world cup or a European championship. 

Reforms or breakaways, uefa need to recognise that something needs to be done. Allowing clubs to massage their finances to continually move the goal posts should be one of their first things to tackle.

70% spend now allowed, that plays into the nations states hands. I don’t think the big clubs like Madrid. Liverpool, juventus amongst others will continue to tolerate it. We’re already seeing trouble with la liga and uefa, psg and city. Breakaway or reform is needed desperately. 
Not to mention the supposed live investigation ongoing against city. Nothing will come of that. I’d imagine the next five years could see a very desperate landscape.

[SasaS 3,208]

It will be the same as before, wrangling, corruption, compromising.

[Carra_is_legend 1,152]

24 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

Real, Barca, Juve are proper clubs built on years and years of hard work.

 

Obviously Juve have had their issues, they’ve still come back on top.

 

City would never do that. 

Juve were involved in match fixing.

 

Barcelona and Madrid have received illegal tax exemptions (in other words, cheating) and state aid in the past. Madrid have had their debt taken care of atleast once before. Proper clubs, yes. But they have always been part of cheating, corruption not to mention their cunt behaviour mostly.

[Barrington Womble 10,982]

15 hours ago, SasaS said:

I agree adding internationals is stupid and unnecessary. But there is no way an international breakaway of big clubs in a meaningless competition can survive. There is no need to break away from Uefa, you need to reform it. You can break away only with the support of national associations, starting a competing world cup or a European championship. 

The law makers and enforcers shouldn't be the people who run competitions as there are obviously conflicts of interest with other competitions. The only way UEFA should be allowed to survive is if all competitions are taken away from them, then there might be a sensible conversation around the number of games players play and how international football fits in that calendar. 

[SasaS 3,208]

58 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

The law makers and enforcers shouldn't be the people who run competitions as there are obviously conflicts of interest with other competitions. The only way UEFA should be allowed to survive is if all competitions are taken away from them, then there might be a sensible conversation around the number of games players play and how international football fits in that calendar. 

As far as I know, Uefa is a federation on national football associations, not some independent body. It does what national associations want.  If you take all competitions away from Uefa, you would just create a new Uefa. If you take club football out of Uefa, you would be creating a leagues Uefa. Or if you then what to get rid of thousands of votes from smaller clubs, an Uefa for the super rich, which was the super league attempt.

 

There will always be conflicting interest between various club categories and clubs vs. national teams / associations. 

[Barrington Womble 10,982]

3 hours ago, SasaS said:

As far as I know, Uefa is a federation on national football associations, not some independent body. It does what national associations want.  If you take all competitions away from Uefa, you would just create a new Uefa. If you take club football out of Uefa, you would be creating a leagues Uefa. Or if you then what to get rid of thousands of votes from smaller clubs, an Uefa for the super rich, which was the super league attempt.

 

There will always be conflicting interest between various club categories and clubs vs. national teams / associations. 

The point I am making is this. 

 

Uefa set the European calendar. 

Uefa want the nations league. 

Uefa want an extended euros. 

Uefa (and the clubs) want an expanded CL. 

 

However uefa don't pay any players or need to care for their welfare, the players are paid by their clubs and their clubs are responsible for this. UEFA competitions are in direct competition for other football tournaments, such as the national Leagues, the WC and even this crackpot FIFA club world cup we will end up with - as there are only so many sponsors and TV dollars to go around all these competitions and only so many days in the calendar. 

 

Uefa directly profit from these competitions and they then choose how the money is distributed through the European game, buying power and influence with that money (as do FIFA with their money and we saw how that corruption was exposed under Blatter). Which means the whole rotten circus is allowed to continue. 

 

I would not allow FIFA or uefa to dictate the footballing calendar, what rest days players can expect, how big the WC, Euros or nations league are while they're running the competitions in parallel. Because to me that is a conflict, they benefit taking players from their clubs. They benefit with the national associations playing competitive matches in the NL rather than friendlies.  The rule makers imo, should not be competition organisers. If that means uefa and FIFA have to broken up from their current structure, I think that's fine. 

[SasaS 3,208]

7 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

The point I am making is this. 

 

Uefa set the European calendar. 

Uefa want the nations league. 

Uefa want an extended euros. 

Uefa (and the clubs) want an expanded CL. 

 

However uefa don't pay any players or need to care for their welfare, the players are paid by their clubs and their clubs are responsible for this. UEFA competitions are in direct competition for other football tournaments, such as the national Leagues, the WC and even this crackpot FIFA club world cup we will end up with - as there are only so many sponsors and TV dollars to go around all these competitions and only so many days in the calendar. 

 

Uefa directly profit from these competitions and they then choose how the money is distributed through the European game, buying power and influence with that money (as do FIFA with their money and we saw how that corruption was exposed under Blatter). Which means the whole rotten circus is allowed to continue. 

 

I would not allow FIFA or uefa to dictate the footballing calendar, what rest days players can expect, how big the WC, Euros or nations league are while they're running the competitions in parallel. Because to me that is a conflict, they benefit taking players from their clubs. They benefit with the national associations playing competitive matches in the NL rather than friendlies.  The rule makers imo, should not be competition organisers. If that means uefa and FIFA have to broken up from their current structure, I think that's fine. 

Again, UEFA and FIFA are unions, federations of national associations. They do what national associations want. National associations want bigger WC, bigger EC, WC every two years, for obvious reasons. They vote on all this. They are not being corrupted by some evil officials. It's them who are behind all this, the national associations. They are corrupt on their own.

 

 

 

[Barrington Womble 10,982]

24 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Again, UEFA and FIFA are unions, federations of national associations. They do what national associations want. National associations want bigger WC, bigger EC, WC every two years, for obvious reasons. They vote on all this. They are not being corrupted by some evil officials. It's them who are behind all this, the national associations. They are corrupt on their own.

 

 

 

But that is just the same isn't it. The  associations are in conflict with the club game. FIFA and uefa run competitions for both the club and national game, while setting the rules around players attendance around that, damaging players health and their ability to play for their clubs, it doesn't matter there are more associations that the structure is built on. Uefa & fifa are the organisations that set a calendar. They also get to choose when players should turn up. They don't pay the players or have any interest in their health. The structure we have today is based around football from 150 years ago, when there was no world cup, no euros, no CL and not even a fucking league cup. It was before players left their homes to go and work all around the world and then need to travel back to play for the national sides. From an age where footballers needed another job. And the same structure is trying to service grass roots football, while at the same time trying to meet the needs of a professional game and allow themselves to massively profit without the risk of a payroll beyond pen pushers. The associations, whether that is domestic, continental or global take no risks, but get to dictate the rewards. Only the clubs are taking risks. 

[SasaS 3,208]

31 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

But that is just the same isn't it. The  associations are in conflict with the club game. FIFA and uefa run competitions for both the club and national game, while setting the rules around players attendance around that, damaging players health and their ability to play for their clubs, it doesn't matter there are more associations that the structure is built on. Uefa & fifa are the organisations that set a calendar. They also get to choose when players should turn up. They don't pay the players or have any interest in their health. The structure we have today is based around football from 150 years ago, when there was no world cup, no euros, no CL and not even a fucking league cup. It was before players left their homes to go and work all around the world and then need to travel back to play for the national sides. From an age where footballers needed another job. And the same structure is trying to service grass roots football, while at the same time trying to meet the needs of a professional game and allow themselves to massively profit without the risk of a payroll beyond pen pushers. The associations, whether that is domestic, continental or global take no risks, but get to dictate the rewards. Only the clubs are taking risks. 

I tend to agree, but clubs should then create their own association, or first breakaway as the PL in most of the countries, which isn't easy, because in many countries they may depend on . their FAs or something - very few round the continent make enough money on the open market to make a strong stand. You would again have the split, super rich on one side, many others on the other. We saw how that went.

 

Easier thing would be to have a stronger players union, which would then act as a strong pressure group with UEFA. On the other hand, many players would see bigger calendar as an opportunity.

[Barrington Womble 10,982]

16 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I tend to agree, but clubs should then create their own association, or first breakaway as the PL in most of the countries, which isn't easy, because in many countries they may depend on . their FAs or something - very few round the continent make enough money on the open market to make a strong stand. You would again have the split, super rich on one side, many others on the other. We saw how that went.

 

Easier thing would be to have a stronger players union, which would then act as a strong pressure group with UEFA. On the other hand, many players would see bigger calendar as an opportunity.

I don't know if the players union would help with that. The players like playing for their countries, which is great while they're being guaranteed wages from their clubs while they do so. I think we need a major reshaping in the running of the game. Smarter people than me are paid to think about such things, but what is absolutely clear is the model we have today is not fit for purpose. 

 

Even if you think about what has just happened with the CL final. UEFA are left to investigate themselves. Nobody trusts the process. It's pure madness. 

[Vincent Vega 5,605]

Somebody is worried about their job. What a volte face. 

 

 

[Jarvinja Ilnow 1,694]

8 hours ago, Vincent Vega said:

Somebody is worried about their job. What a volte face. 

 

 

This is what Barry Wom and I were disussing a couple of days ago: every lying shit for his/ her self, fractured unity and rowing back on their accusations. The French Senate has played a blinder - they knew that Oudea-Castera and Darmanin were full of shit and called them on it. 

 

None of this will really matter, though, if the 'independent' investigator is a UEFA shill, but it's satisfying to see their narrative unravelling.

 

 

[Carra_is_legend 1,152]

The independent report will be tainted with fake ticket stuff, even if it only gets mentioned lightly.