robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Lol. What was supposed to be a power move and something to strengthen their position has just significant weakened their positions. Their nuclear option has now proven to be futile
European breakaway league (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Phoenix5555
- Start date
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
God they're all just snakes aren't they. Even the fact that their announcements were at 10:59, 10:59, 10:58, and 10:57...just shows that they were all in agreement to announce it at 11pm but all didnt want to be the last and thought they would sneak in a minute or two early. Snakey snakey
Great_Expectations
Well-Known Member
Them pulling out, while the right thing, has almost pissed me off even more.
All that drama, hurt, emotion etc, for what? Things will now go back to normal and they’ll get away with it all. Maybe even be in a better position. There will likely be fan protests etc, but once it opens up again fans will be so desperate to watch live football it won by matter.
Joke of an idea, and I just want to see it reprimanded as such.
All that drama, hurt, emotion etc, for what? Things will now go back to normal and they’ll get away with it all. Maybe even be in a better position. There will likely be fan protests etc, but once it opens up again fans will be so desperate to watch live football it won by matter.
Joke of an idea, and I just want to see it reprimanded as such.
Paul Anthony
Well-Known Member
Let's hope it's been a lesson in humility for them (I don't think they even know the meaning of the word, but there you go)
Doesn't matter how big you think you are, no club is bigger than the sport. And there isn't a club on the planet that should be so quick to disregard their long term fans, especially with the kind of distain this lot showed.
Doesn't matter how big you think you are, no club is bigger than the sport. And there isn't a club on the planet that should be so quick to disregard their long term fans, especially with the kind of distain this lot showed.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
50+1 rule now
Frostie
Well-Known Member
If it's to be throughout English football then we can't have the Sky Blue Trust anywhere near us though.
kg82
Well-Known Member
Barnsley
Well-Known Member
Got to be honest, I’m gutted it turned out like this, I think the ESL would have been a good thing for English football, as long as the 6 were thrown out of the premier league, and that’s the way it was heading.
Now punish the bastards, £40k a week wage cap (once once current contracts are up), so basically start it in 4 years time, for the next 10 years, and any club found to be exploiting loopholes gets an extra 10 years.
Now punish the bastards, £40k a week wage cap (once once current contracts are up), so basically start it in 4 years time, for the next 10 years, and any club found to be exploiting loopholes gets an extra 10 years.
tisza
Well-Known Member
Still an exercise in greed. Most of these clubs' finances have been a mess for a while even before COVID and closed stadia.
wages out of control.
Raiola doing a tour of the Super League clubs a month ago (don't tell me he didn't know the plans) asking for nearly 800k a week wages for Haaland plus 20m a piece for him and the kid's dad. Pogba asking for 500k a week to stay at Its - he's basically done nothing for past few years.
For all the hype of massive wages the Chinese League imploded as the money just isn't there.
it does seem strange for all the talk of big money for this Super League that no media partners/deals were seemingly in place.
wages out of control.
Raiola doing a tour of the Super League clubs a month ago (don't tell me he didn't know the plans) asking for nearly 800k a week wages for Haaland plus 20m a piece for him and the kid's dad. Pogba asking for 500k a week to stay at Its - he's basically done nothing for past few years.
For all the hype of massive wages the Chinese League imploded as the money just isn't there.
it does seem strange for all the talk of big money for this Super League that no media partners/deals were seemingly in place.
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
made me wonder if they would set up their own TV company to snaffle all the income?
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Good social distancing
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
How can that work though?
mark82
Moderator
It's unrealistic to think that clubs will just give up a 51% stake. Not going to happen.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
It is a good idea money wise but unfiltered capitalism is just greed.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Bet they couldn't believe their luck at being invited.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Man Utd's seems to read they'll keep looking for ways to do something similar.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
It was only introduced in the 90s in Germany wasn't it. How did they bring it in?
kg82
Well-Known Member
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Boris Johnson says fans will be at centre of wider review of English football
UK minister Oliver Dowden promises to look at football governance after Super League fiasco
Government still looking at Football Governance
Ccfcisparks
Well-Known Member
Anyone seen John Henry's apology?
AOM
Well-Known Member
Agreed, but I'm just glad FIFA/UEFA didn't hit the panic button straight away and make compromises for the teams involved for Champions League/Europa qualifications, etc
mark82
Moderator
They were mostly not-for-profit membership associations prior to that which didn't allow private ownership, so the 51% rule was essentially a relaxation that allowed some private ownership.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
What about fan representation on the board which carries a veto on any matter. Can’t force owners to sell but can change the governance structure.
tisza
Well-Known Member
They would have been 2nd or 3rd class members of the league anyway. Likes of Utd, Real & Barca were going to get a much bigger slice of the pie.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Vetos are dangerous - fans generally (not all, obviously!) aren't the experts in running a club, after all and, if you happen to have the wrong fan at that time...
Sell player to pay off immediate debt or nope, spunk a greater fortune going for it for a season!
The German system is probably ideal but, tbh, progress on where we are would be no one board member being able to own more than 25% of the shares, with a minimum 25% of shares being distributed to the fans. It doesn't stop cockups (we had similar under Richardson, McGinnity, Robinson!) but it does at least mean that shareholders have to be in agreement to a certain extent and, at least fans are aware of what's going down!
In an ideal world we'd limit loans to clubs, but de-restrict grants too. If a wealthy owner wants to give a club £eleventy billion they're welcome, it's when they want it back or take the ground as collateral, that's the danger. So... you need to protect grounds too...
Somewhere, you don't want to take away risk, or the ability of a wealthy benefactor buying their plaything. What you want to do is limit the use of a club for one individual or group's profit, and make the investment incentive sporting, rather than financial. The main problem is it's not easy to row back, and it's been shifting since the 1980s when clubs could list on the stock exchange, and the distribution of gates shifted more in favour of the home team.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
What can the government do to prevent things like this and get ownership in line. Could they legislate that money can't be extracted from clubs? You need to stop the sort of sums being taken out of clubs like Man Utd in dividends and interest payments but also be careful not to block access to borrowing when genuinely needed.
Could they bring in some sort of fan veto, presumably would have to be via trusts, would that even stand up legally?
I worry that its easy to shout 'governance' or 'fit and proper' but a lot harder, or even impossible, to put something in place. You have to fundamentally change the way clubs operate and essentially make them non-profits but we seem a million miles away from that.
Could they bring in some sort of fan veto, presumably would have to be via trusts, would that even stand up legally?
I worry that its easy to shout 'governance' or 'fit and proper' but a lot harder, or even impossible, to put something in place. You have to fundamentally change the way clubs operate and essentially make them non-profits but we seem a million miles away from that.
