Jump to content

European Super League


Recommended Posts

Personally I think that these clubs should be thrown out of the Premier League.

 I think they should also be thrown out of all other competitions ie domestic cups and European cups.

 And I think that the players of these clubs should also be banned from all tournaments bar their own Super League.

If I was in charge of the Premier League I would tell them this straight and I would give them up until the end of the week to reconsider, and if they don’t then they are thrown out immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

They, and PSG, have been invited. To get to the fifteen founder members, you add Bayern, Dortmund and PSG to the twelve who are confirmed.

Bayern and Dortmund have been very clear they're not interested. That doesn't *seem* (as yet) to be a negotiating tactic. They might really want to but there's no way it would clear their membership structures.

PSG - also invited, could join, I've no real idea why they haven't done so. That may be because they feel they would be stronger in UEFA with those 12 out than in the ESL as one of the founding fifteen?

PSG’s chairman also own BEIN sport broadcaster which owns the rights to broadcast the Champions League in many countries.

Possibly that’s a reason why they do not want devalue that competition.

I imagine there’s a few other reasons including the very real competition with Manchester City’s ownership group too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Robthegasman said:

Personally I think that these clubs should be thrown out of the Premier League.

 I think they should also be thrown out of all other competitions ie domestic cups and European cups.

 And I think that the players of these clubs should also be banned from all tournaments bar their own Super League.

If I was in charge of the Premier League I would tell them this straight and I would give them up until the end of the week to reconsider, and if they don’t then they are thrown out immediately.

Why would you ban the players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Why would you ban the players. 

They have professionalised themselves.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot now is going to depend on what these clubs have agreed to and how much money it will cost them to get out of it. My guess with JP Morgan it’s going to be water tight and the penalties for pulling out are going to be huge. It might just force these clubs to stick it out until the bitter end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Exiled Townie said:

Don't watch or follow football much (although you can't get away from it) but can someone confirm if it is proposed to have a completely separate, stand alone  superleague, ie only those teams play each other in their own league, or will these teams try to stay in their own national leagues and play in the superleague in midweek/spare weekends etc. I ask because  I have heard both suggestions made on tv news programs.

Also just mentioned on tv that Man Utd and Juventus shares are rocketing on their respective stock exchanges.

This is a good point. 

A lot of the outrage especially last night from the likes of Danny Murphy and Gary Neville, came at it from the angle that it was a breakaway league ie that they would be leaving the Premier League.

After the statement, and despite it being a lesser heresy of only trying to replace the Champions League, the outrage hasn't abated at all. This is mainly because it still represents a power and money grab and the feeling is that long term it would lead to the end of domestic leagues anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the logic of a proper European Super League, but don't think it is feasible. I think that the considerable backlash will also probably see them backtrack away from it. 

From a RL perspective, I've been interested by how much of the opposition has been about the purity of the competition and the taking away of the dream that lower clubs have.

This is an issue we have of course been through, and I think it demonstrates just how ingrained in our society the idea of all clubs having the potential to succeed on the field is.

Whilst on this forum, the idea was dismissed as one only held out of self-interest by parochial fans, I suspect in wider RL it lost us quite a lot of support and respect.

I'm not saying the situations are perfectly comparable, and that our decision was a power grab anything like this one, but I think it demonstrates just how disliked the idea of a closed shop is. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I can understand the logic of a proper European Super League, but don't think it is feasible. I think that the considerable backlash will also probably see them backtrack away from it. 

From a RL perspective, I've been interested by how much of the opposition has been about the purity of the competition and the taking away of the dream that lower clubs have.

This is an issue we have of course been through, and I think it demonstrates just how ingrained in our society the idea of all clubs having the potential to succeed on the field is.

Whilst on this forum, the idea was dismissed as one only held out of self-interest by parochial fans, I suspect in wider RL and amongst wider sporting fans it lost us quite a lot of support and respect.

I'm not saying the situations are perfectly comparable, and that our decision was a power grab anything like this one, but I think it demonstrates just how disliked the idea of a closed shop is. 

 

Double post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

I get that this will have been said but most aren't worthy of being in. AC Milan have been mid table for years, Spurs have won nowt of note for ages etc etc. 

No PSG, Bayern or Dortmund to start with. 

Spurs are one of the 10 biggest clubs in the world due to revenue streams... same with Arsenal and Chelsea. Performance on the pitch has nothing to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DavidM said:

God knows how Spurs get into the elite 

You can't have the Harlem Globetrotters without the Washington Generals.

Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Robthegasman said:

Personally I think that these clubs should be thrown out of the Premier League.

 I think they should also be thrown out of all other competitions ie domestic cups and European cups.

 And I think that the players of these clubs should also be banned from all tournaments bar their own Super League.

If I was in charge of the Premier League I would tell them this straight and I would give them up until the end of the week to reconsider, and if they don’t then they are thrown out immediately.

How would you have felt about the 1895 breakaway? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DavidM said:

I haven’t been following every detail of this ...are  the Germans not interested or not invited ?

The German football league is very different to most of the others , with massive fan ownership 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Premier League can bluster all they want about throwing the six out, but Man Utd and Liverpool are their biggest cash cows and two of the main reasons the league is as globally popular as it is and sponsors and broadcasters won’t be as interested in a Premier League without them. 

A European Super League has been talked about for years and is now going to happen regardless of feeling. Everyone at the 12 clubs who had positions at UEFA have quit them and the clubs have left the body that allows them to play in UEFA competitons.

Lastly why are Spurs in it? There is a long list of clubs I would choose before Spurs. I would choose Rangers and Celtic before Spurs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Robthegasman said:

Personally I think that these clubs should be thrown out of the Premier League.

 I think they should also be thrown out of all other competitions ie domestic cups and European cups.

 And I think that the players of these clubs should also be banned from all tournaments bar their own Super League.

If I was in charge of the Premier League I would tell them this straight and I would give them up until the end of the week to reconsider, and if they don’t then they are thrown out immediately.

That would bankrupt the Premier League as it would lose heavily in court with huge damages in compensation. Your understandable response does sound like the RFUs actions against the formation of the Northern Union. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Johnoco said:

 But it’s different horses for courses.

This proposed SL breakaway is purely driven by making yet more money.
 

The changes to RL during the licensing period was based, however misguided or poorly executed they might have been, on the idea of growing RL and getting clubs into better shape. It might not have worked out that well but the premise behind it was quite noble really. 
I’m not an NRL worshipper but it’s a clear cut example that sports leagues can be exciting and competitive without P&R, despite how much TalkSport listeners might trash the idea. 

That's why I mentioned that it wasn't a perfect comparison. RL also has/had the issue of sustainability for relegated clubs and protecting the game from strong clubs being replaced by weak ones. I agree that there have been some illogical arguments put forward about a closed shop being necessarily stale: I think a standalone top 20 of Euro clubs would be fine in isolation. I do think this has demonstrated how pervasive an idea it is in British sport though. 

I also think that there are parallels. From the advent of SL through to the advent of licensing, RL gradually moved away from the principle that through success on the field clubs could progress. Another similarity is the feeling that some clubs were in the closed shop and others were out based on temporary circumstances. 

Whether or not it was justified isn't that relevant. The opposition was essentially the same as a lot of the opposition to last night's announcement. It also wasn't an opinion that was respected very much by many in the RL community. There are plenty of people today outraged about the actions of these 12 clubs, who used to happily ridicule the fans of Fev/Leigh/Fax/Widnes/Barrow etc when they were outraged at being told that could no longer make it on the field when Wakey/Salford/Hull KR and Cas were guaranteed a place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Liverpool Rover said:

Lastly why are Spurs in it?

They are 9th biggest club in the world based on revenue.

And it’s all about the money.

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

They are 9th biggest club in the world based on revenue.

And it’s all about the money.

Much the same reason that Dortmund are the invited team from German (other than Bayern).

Dortmund are currently 5th and haven't won the title in a decade.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.