European Super League/Expanded Champions League Format Discussion

Would you favour the idea of a New European super league as reported?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 10.3%
  • No

    Votes: 138 83.6%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 10 6.1%

  • Total voters
    165

Remove this Banner Ad

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
66,364
21,162
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.

Summary

Bruce Buck was the one involved in discussions for a Super League, other conspirators were never convinced Abramovich was keen on the SL. Particularly with respect to Russian Teams and Sponsors in the CL.

Organisers of the Super League were more interested in negotiating with Levy than Spurs, he has championed the Super League idea for a while

Henry and Glazer started speaking regularly to each other when City started posing a threat, especially when City suppoesdly breached FFP. Kroenke was another willing ally

“The seeds of the blossoming of this relationship is FFP,” says one well-placed source. “Look at some of the collective angst over Man City allegedly shirking the rules. That is when United, Liverpool and Arsenal started spending more time together. They all got closer and it went from there.”

The idea that Chelsea signed up late seems untrue, Buck concluded that the elite clubs had to sign up with Real Madrid or risk being left behind, implying to me at least that he was involved in discussions

Ed Woodward supposedly acted as the person who was a realist about discussions, what Soriano (City) would call Dr No. Woodward caved the day after the Super League was announced and called Glazer to say he couldn't back the project, as Neville was talking about him Woodward had already quit.

Conversely, European sources say Woodward hadn't opposed the SL and only resigned when the plan went awry

Woodward expected the SL to succeed despite him resigning and is now wondering if he acted too hastily

City were the club Perez was talking about when they said one club had no interest an it affected all the rest

City could've aligned themselves with PSG/Bayern but those two are regarded as Qatari funded and so siding with them seemed unthinkable. FFP was also a factor, in that they still hold a grudge against UEFA

None of the organisers expected the government intervening, the UK's Envoy to the Gulf contacted the UAE to warn it could damage Abu Dhabi's relationship with the UK. Abu Dhabi decided it did not want it to become a diplomatic incident

InHouse Communications, the PR company, was brought in because it was perceived to be close to the PM, after being involved in his 2008 London Mayoral campaign

The bigger problem was that none of the Chairmen/senior board members wanted to execute the PR strategy that had been planned.

Abramovich and Mansour never spoke anyway but Levy was considered not important enough to take the lead and Kroenke was not part of the core group led by the Glazers and Perez

The Glazers did not want to go in front of cameras and Henry was not keen either, nobody wanted to be the one to do it, despite people telling them they needed to convince the public

The SL found out via the media that City/Chelsea were pulling out

The organisation was done via Zoom/Whatsapp/phone calls. One group of the owners, then a separate one for the executives. Some privates groups of certain groupings too.

When it was announced, a lot of the clubs were finding out details from the press release rather than from discussions beforehand

Chelsea started telling department heads on Friday that they were joining but the language made clear that it had been some time in planning

Chelsea is owned for reputational purposes, like City. Chelsea's directors realised that if they tried to stick it out, Abramovich's reputation could be ruined with the supporters and that could not be allowed to happen

City had nothing to lose by withdrawing as they don't really have a relation with other clubs in the PL. Soriano gets on better with Perez

The Super League was being talked about in 2016, Ed Woodward and Ivan Gazidis were invited to give their opinions on it by others in the ECA. Woodward showed little enthusiasm

Bayern were keen enough on the idea in 2016 to check if they could leave in the Bundesliga, but there was strong resistance from their supervisory board and it never went anywhere

Part of the reason the Big 6 made the leap is because the 14 dislike them more now under Masters than when Scudamore was in charge

Klopp has made his feelings clear to Gordon about the SL, FSG were warned about this beforehand and Klopp is still disappointed despite apologies

A foreign Liverpool player was confused before Leeds as to why they were being booed:

“One of the foreign players said, ‘What the fu** is this? Why are they booing us and calling us money-grabbers? Can you explain it to me? What have we done wrong?’

Henderson mobilised Liverpool opposition after the Leeds game, his leadership was amazing and the rest of the players were all behind him. All of them regard the CL as the pinnacle and did not like the closed shop

A lot of the Arsenal players dislike Kroenke, going back to the pay-cut and subsequent sacking of club staff. The players are increasingly questioning the owner

Levy was infuriated in 2016 when the other 5 of the big 6 were invited to meet an executive from the International Champions Cup (lol)

Joe Lewis, the Spurs owner, seems to have been part of the group and likely in on this. But Levy was the one involved in negotiations and was very intent on joining

The SL organisers insist they were deadly serious about financing the women's game to an extent that would make it more on a level with the mens game

The money is regarded as absolutely necessary for Madrid because of their stadium and wanting Haaland/Mbappe (Calderon quotes)

One board member from a Super League club abstained from the vote in the board on joining because he was so torn
Thanks for that bro cos I'm not subscribed to The Athletic so cant read it.
 

Zidane98

Hall of Famer
Dec 22, 2009
43,058
19,011
South End, AAMI Park
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Socceroos, LFC, MVFC, RC Strasbourg
According to news from Germany, the ESL was being funded by Saudi Arabia with JP Morgan acting as a middle man. Putin was responsible for Chelsea pulling out (Gazprom links and also why Zenit declined to join). The UAE asked Man City to withdraw because they didn't want to be associated with the KSA and wanted to build an image as a progressive country (lol). And Perez netted 6.5 billion Euros from Saudi Arabia to build a Arabian style Las Vegas (massive lol).


Most of that would sound like horse sh*t on the surface but when you dig it is believable and some of what was said has been reported elsewhere, mainly the Chelsea/Putin/Gazprom/Zenit stuff.
And some believe politics werent involved.

Also explains why PSG never got a look in.

ESL seems it could be another middle eastern sportswashing project. Saudis arent allowed to buy a club so tried to buy a whole league instead.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Established1870

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 28, 2016
8,028
16,288
Tigris River
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Baghdad Bombers
And some believe politics werent involved.

Also explains why PSG never got a look in.

ESL seems it could be another middle eastern sportswashing project. Saudis arent allowed to buy a club so tried to buy a whole league instead.
PSG were still invited so I don't think it was too politically motivated. From what I've seen and read, it's been suggested that this was Perez looking for Saudi backing (lines up with the Saud Vegas deal). Makes sense too because Perez has wanted a super league for years and the Saudi's have wanted to get heavily intertwined in the upper echelons of football for years as well. These two getting together was probably a match made in heaven.

Also should note that the newspaper in Germany responsible for this were the ones who broke the news about Dortmund being hugely in debt (and this was massive news in Germany at the time) and were lead collaborators in the Panama Papers coverage. So I'm trusting these guys 100% considering their track record.
 

RPCB

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 21, 2007
12,162
11,908
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
Let’s not forget Woodward’s link with JP Morgan. ManU were into it up to their eyeballs
So if Ed Woodward was never an accountant with JP Morgan in the 1990’s, Manchester United would never have gone into this Super League? Woodward and the Glazers are scumbags and this super league would have still been created without that link to JP Morgan. I am thrilled that Woodward has resigned from United (unfortunately it’s not effective until the end of the year) and the Glazers can fu** off, too.
 

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 20, 2007
27,678
28,165
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
So if Ed Woodward was never an accountant with JP Morgan in the 1990’s, Manchester United would never have gone into this Super League?
He was an investment banker who was directly involved with deal of Glazers purchasing ManU. I’m simply pointing out that it appears ManU and Woodward were big players in it. Certainly in regards to funding side of it
 

RPCB

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 21, 2007
12,162
11,908
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
He was an investment banker who was directly involved with deal of Glazers purchasing ManU. I’m simply pointing out that it appears ManU and Woodward were big players in it. Certainly in regards to funding side of it
I totally agree with you mate. Not that this is surprising but it does suck that they were big players in the ESL. Filthy bastards the lot of them.
 

RPCB

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 21, 2007
12,162
11,908
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Manchester United
Would have the benefit of preventing a super league repeat in the future.

An immediate 20 point deduction will be a painful lesson that wont be forgotten.

It needs to happen.
As much as people think there should be a points deduction, there won’t be. When there is money as stake, there won’t be. A 20 point deduction would effectively eliminate Chelsea, Liverpool and Spurs from Europe next season. Could you imagine how many gamers there would be amongst them and how many would not buy next seasons FIFA because their clubs aren’t in Europe next season? Why is that important? Because the Premier League and EA Sports have a long running partnership. The FA have certainly thought of that. Money is the bottom line.

Just like these clubs won’t be relegated (another sanction I have heard online). I find this suggestion particularly weird. Why punish the Championship sides? What chance have any of them got of moving out of their division and reaching the Premier League if the big 6 all drop down? You're just bringing up the drawbridge for 2 seasons. It seems that some people are less outraged at the little clubs being shafted, as much as they want to stick it to the big clubs.

If anyone is hoping for a points deduction, they will be sorely disappointed. A huge fine is the most that will happen and if we are being honest, it does feel like it’s back to business as usual with the FA and not even a fine is forthcoming.
 

imadodgyumpire

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 10, 2011
21,170
15,780
Somewhere near Rachael Neiberding
AFL Club
Carlton
If anyone is hoping for a points deduction, they will be sorely disappointed. A huge fine is the most that will happen and if we are being honest, it does feel like it’s back to business as usual with the FA and not even a fine is forthcoming.
You can't really do anything when for all the commotion that's occurred, nothing's happened.
 

Established1870

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 28, 2016
8,028
16,288
Tigris River
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Baghdad Bombers
And how do the members get the money to do thiis?
Supporters wouldn't need to fork out for this. The UK government have laws stating quite clearly that they can nationalize British businesses and institutions if it's in the best interests of the British people. This generally requires a forced sale at fair market value and has happened plenty of times under Tories and Labour. The cost for it would be a drop in the ocean for the government, they would likely get the money back anyway in due time from the money clubs owe, and it would ensure that Boris is PM for the next 20 years.

Seeing as though the UK's biggest assets for global soft power came under massive threat from foreign investors, one of whom is a citizen of a hostile country, nationalizing them keeps their key assets and institutions in British hands and gets them an ungodly election boost for god knows how long. 99% of politicians with a brain would be pushing day and night for this because if they attached their names to this legislation and it got through (and if presented to Parliament, it would), they'd never have to worry about getting voted out again.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

chef

Moderator
Oct 5, 2007
33,540
22,931
Kyabramovich
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
West London Blues
Supporters wouldn't need to fork out for this. The UK government have laws stating quite clearly that they can nationalize British businesses and institutions if it's in the best interests of the British people. This generally requires a forced sale at fair market value and has happened plenty of times under Tories and Labour. The cost for it would be a drop in the ocean for the government, they would likely get the money back anyway in due time from the money clubs owe, and it would ensure that Boris is PM for the next 20 years.

Seeing as though the UK's biggest assets for global soft power came under massive threat from foreign investors, one of whom is a citizen of a hostile country, nationalizing them keeps their key assets and institutions in British hands and gets them an ungodly election boost for god knows how long. 99% of politicians with a brain would be pushing day and night for this because if they attached their names to this legislation and it got through (and if presented to Parliament, it would), they'd never have to worry about getting voted out again.
Seems like wishful thinking.
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
16,781
26,804
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
According to news from Germany, the ESL was being funded by Saudi Arabia with JP Morgan acting as a middle man. Putin was responsible for Chelsea pulling out (Gazprom links and also why Zenit declined to join). The UAE asked Man City to withdraw because they didn't want to be associated with the KSA and wanted to build an image as a progressive country (lol). And Perez netted 6.5 billion Euros from Saudi Arabia to build a Arabian style Las Vegas (massive lol).


Most of that would sound like horse sh*t on the surface but when you dig it is believable and some of what was said has been reported elsewhere, mainly the Chelsea/Putin/Gazprom/Zenit stuff.
Putin is a busy boy
 

jd2010

#freeWelly #freeDele
Feb 1, 2010
32,458
15,858
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur
Supporters wouldn't need to fork out for this. The UK government have laws stating quite clearly that they can nationalize British businesses and institutions if it's in the best interests of the British people. This generally requires a forced sale at fair market value and has happened plenty of times under Tories and Labour. The cost for it would be a drop in the ocean for the government, they would likely get the money back anyway in due time from the money clubs owe, and it would ensure that Boris is PM for the next 20 years.

Seeing as though the UK's biggest assets for global soft power came under massive threat from foreign investors, one of whom is a citizen of a hostile country, nationalizing them keeps their key assets and institutions in British hands and gets them an ungodly election boost for god knows how long. 99% of politicians with a brain would be pushing day and night for this because if they attached their names to this legislation and it got through (and if presented to Parliament, it would), they'd never have to worry about getting voted out again.
Govt owned football clubs?

Is this the USSRPL?
 

moomba

TheBrownDog
Oct 3, 2001
56,086
18,292
Timperley
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man City ****
Supporters wouldn't need to fork out for this. The UK government have laws stating quite clearly that they can nationalize British businesses and institutions if it's in the best interests of the British people. This generally requires a forced sale at fair market value and has happened plenty of times under Tories and Labour. The cost for it would be a drop in the ocean for the government, they would likely get the money back anyway in due time from the money clubs owe, and it would ensure that Boris is PM for the next 20 years.

Seeing as though the UK's biggest assets for global soft power came under massive threat from foreign investors, one of whom is a citizen of a hostile country, nationalizing them keeps their key assets and institutions in British hands and gets them an ungodly election boost for god knows how long. 99% of politicians with a brain would be pushing day and night for this because if they attached their names to this legislation and it got through (and if presented to Parliament, it would), they'd never have to worry about getting voted out again.
Clubs would just move offshore. Man United is a Cayman Islands company already.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
65,559
121,319
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Supporters wouldn't need to fork out for this. The UK government have laws stating quite clearly that they can nationalize British businesses and institutions if it's in the best interests of the British people. This generally requires a forced sale at fair market value and has happened plenty of times under Tories and Labour. The cost for it would be a drop in the ocean for the government, they would likely get the money back anyway in due time from the money clubs owe, and it would ensure that Boris is PM for the next 20 years.

Seeing as though the UK's biggest assets for global soft power came under massive threat from foreign investors, one of whom is a citizen of a hostile country, nationalizing them keeps their key assets and institutions in British hands and gets them an ungodly election boost for god knows how long. 99% of politicians with a brain would be pushing day and night for this because if they attached their names to this legislation and it got through (and if presented to Parliament, it would), they'd never have to worry about getting voted out again.
Man U alone has a $6b price on it. Assuming the owners were happy to remain under 50+1, that means the govt is spending ballpark $15b to buy football clubs that they then have no say over how they are run (assuming the 50+1 share is gifted to membership)

Most likely, the govt will have to buy the entire thing, which doubles the bill.

I get the appeal of the move, but these clubs are too damn expensive now.


Also with Man U fans pointing out the Glazers have connections to Epstein, I doubt they will be in any mood to co-operate with the fan base any time soon (esp after today's pitch invasion protest)
 
Last edited:

jod23

TheBrownDog
Apr 2, 2000
66,364
21,162
Perth, Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
I honestly think a two or even three year ban from the CL would be a good punishment.

Sure Bayern would just win the European Cup 2-3 years in a row but it would massively hurt the big clubs financially and players would leave. That would hurt the clubs the most.
 

Remove this Banner Ad