Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

European Super League - clubs withdrawing p42 onwards.

1232426282958

Comments

  • Is there no way the Premier League and EFL could effectively re-structure itself kicking out the top six regardless what happens with this Super League? - Would never happen but be great to see those who go chasing the money ending up with nothing
  • WSS said:
    Am I right in thinking we haven’t put out anything about this yet?

    Not even the EFL’s statement?

    Thats interesting isn’t it? 🤔
    How many EFL clubs have?

    That being said, with an American owner who probably “gets” what the others are doing and maybe even agrees with the format, he’s aware enough of sentiment to say nothing for now.
    A lot more than I expected tbh.

    Your answer is the exact reason I was worried about the silence.
  • WSS said:
    Am I right in thinking we haven’t put out anything about this yet?

    Not even the EFL’s statement?

    Thats interesting isn’t it? 🤔
    How many EFL clubs have?

    That being said, with an American owner who probably “gets” what the others are doing and maybe even agrees with the format, he’s aware enough of sentiment to say nothing for now.
    A lot more than I expected tbh.

    Your answer is the exact reason I was worried about the silence.
    Hull - no statement on website
    Peterborough - no statement on website
    Sunderland - no statement on website
    Blackpool - EFL statement on website https://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Lincoln - EFL statement on website https://www.weareimps.com/news/2021/april/210419-efl/
    Portsmouth - EFL statement on website https://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Oxford - no statement on website
    Charlton - no statement on website
    Ipswich - EFL statement on website https://www.itfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Doncaster - no statement on website

    Looks like every team that has a statement on their website has the "standard" EFL website build whereas other clubs that don't, don't have the statement up. No club has provided their own statement.
  • https://twitter.com/fanboy82/status/1384085008017629189

    This is a fun thread. We had a good run...
  • edited April 2021
    It's a very bold move, I almost can't believe they have the balls to do it, but it seems legit. From The Guardian:

    "Real Madrid, Manchester City and Chelsea will likely be banned from this season’s Champions League semi-finals, UEFA executive committee member Jesper Moller told broadcaster DR on Monday.

    “The clubs must go, and I expect that to happen on Friday. Then we have to find out how to finish (this season’s) Champions League tournament,” said Moller, who is the head of the Danish FA. “There is an extraordinary executive committee meeting on Friday.”


  • He's easily the worst one on that show, otherwise it's quite an enjoyable listen.
    Never seen it, but from a short clip he seems like a James O'Brien type character - everyone that doesn't agree with him is simply thick (oh, and it was Thatcher's fault)...
  • edited April 2021
    Chunes said:
    So tired of this argument. "Oh well sky and the premier league was about greed and they're rich so why complain about this kind of greed now." Errr.. Because they are seeking to permanently close the doors on competition and completely undermine everything everyone in English football competes for, thus rendering our own leagues and competitions void and feckless?

    "Oh well Gary Neville you made money through greed in football and now you're piping up about this, what a hypocrite." The guy got his market worth, what was he supposed to do? And what has that got to do with clubs closing off competition, and ruining football, permanently? Was he supposed to put out a statement in 1999 warning us all 'this will come to a head,' like some right-back Nostradamus? Fck me.
    I don’t think that’s the point he was making. This was also recorded months ago before we knew the full details of the breakaway. 

    I think he’s highlighting that both sides of the aisle are corrupt and greedy. Sky, BT, Premier League, UEFA, FIFA will all try and position themselves as if they care about the integrity of the sport, when in reality they only care about losing power and influence. All of these institutions have immeasurably impacted football negatively. 

    Both sides only care about money and power, whereas there’s only one side who’s being up front about it. Either way it’s ultimately the football fan who suffers.
  • edited April 2021
    Seen some say to award the UCL to PSG and have a Roma v Villarreal final for the Europa but UEFA won't want to decommit on their contract with broadcasters - remember the desperation to complete this behind closed doors last year?


    I would imagine if all these clubs are expelled, we'll see Granada and Slavia Prague in the semi finals of the Europa. The teams directly eliminated by those who are kicked out.

    Granada v Roma
    Villarreal v Slavia Prague


    The Champions League is a bit harder to unpick. Losing quarter finalists at this stage were Dortmund (beaten by Man City), Porto (beaten by Chelsea) and finally Bayern Munich (beaten by PSG). PSG may oppose the inclusion of Bayern since they were the ones to beat them. That would leave us with this semi final line-up:

    PSG v Dortmund
    SF3 v Porto

    Semi finalist three should have been Real Madrid. Real Madrid beat Liverpool who could have benefitted but both teams are kicked out due to their involvement in the Super League. If you take a step back to the round of 16, Real Madrid beat Atalanta while Liverpool beat Leipzig.

    We could see a one-off playoff game between Atalanta and Leipzig to determine the last remaining place in the semi finals.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Chunes said:
    It's a very bold move, I almost can't believe they have the balls to do it, but it seems legit. From The Guardian:

    "Real Madrid, Manchester City and Chelsea will likely be banned from this season’s Champions League semi-finals, UEFA executive committee member Jesper Moller told broadcaster DR on Monday.

    “The clubs must go, and I expect that to happen on Friday. Then we have to find out how to finish (this season’s) Champions League tournament,” said Moller, who is the head of the Danish FA. “There is an extraordinary executive committee meeting on Friday.”


    Champions leagues a joke cup anyway.

    How many in the last 16 are actually champions??
  • So if this goes ahead and they have the 15 'founding clubs' and 5 others and there is no relegation for the founding clubs: what happens in the situation where the 5 teams that have 'earned' their right to be there finish in the top 5 spots and the founding clubs finish below them? Do you then have a situation where the the teams in 4th and 5th are relegated?

    I am sure they would then try to skew it to say founding teams get 6 points for a win, 4 for a draw and 3 for a loss.
  • WSS said:
    Am I right in thinking we haven’t put out anything about this yet?

    Not even the EFL’s statement?

    Thats interesting isn’t it? 🤔
    How many EFL clubs have?

    That being said, with an American owner who probably “gets” what the others are doing and maybe even agrees with the format, he’s aware enough of sentiment to say nothing for now.
    A lot more than I expected tbh.

    Your answer is the exact reason I was worried about the silence.
    Hull - no statement on website
    Peterborough - no statement on website
    Sunderland - no statement on website
    Blackpool - EFL statement on website https://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Lincoln - EFL statement on website https://www.weareimps.com/news/2021/april/210419-efl/
    Portsmouth - EFL statement on website https://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Oxford - no statement on website
    Charlton - no statement on website
    Ipswich - EFL statement on website https://www.itfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Doncaster - no statement on website

    Looks like every team that has a statement on their website has the "standard" EFL website build whereas other clubs that don't, don't have the statement up. No club has provided their own statement.

  • edited April 2021
    Chunes said:
    So tired of this argument. "Oh well sky and the premier league was about greed and they're rich so why complain about this kind of greed now." Errr.. Because they are seeking to permanently close the doors on competition and completely undermine everything everyone in English football competes for, thus rendering our own leagues and competitions void and feckless?

    "Oh well Gary Neville you made money through greed in football and now you're piping up about this, what a hypocrite." The guy got his market worth, what was he supposed to do? And what has that got to do with clubs closing off competition, and ruining football, permanently? Was he supposed to put out a statement in 1999 warning us all 'this will come to a head,' like some right-back Nostradamus? Fck me.
    I don’t think that’s the point he was making. This was also recorded months ago before we knew the full details of the breakaway. 

    I think he’s highlighting that both sides of the aisle are corrupt and greedy. Sky, BT, Premier League, UEFA, FIFA will all try and position themselves as if they care about the integrity of the sport, when in reality they only care about losing power and influence. All of these institutions have immeasurably impacted football negatively. 

    Both sides only care about money and power, whereas there’s only one side who’s being up front about it. Either way it’s ultimately the football fan who suffers.
    I understand the nuance in the difference you've pointed out, but fundamentally it's the same argument. 'Don't complain about A being greedy when B, C, D and E are greedy, too. Even when A is actively seeking to ruin football.' It's nonsensical. 
  • bobmunro said:
    24 Red said:
    Sorry if this is covered elsewhere in the thread, but can someone clarify why this proposal is so terrible?

    I mean, I get that it is all about income generation rather than sporting principles but that’s been the way of things for a long time now.

    The way I read it this is an attack on UEFA. These clubs want to replace the existing European competitions with one that gives them greater income and greater certainty over that income. In return they promise to redistribute more income into domestic leagues and will still participate in those leagues with the (admittedly very hypothetical) threat of relegation.

    I suppose they may subsequently call for a reduction in the size of the premiership to accommodate fixtures but that’s a battle for the future.

     I’m not saying it’s a brilliant day for the game, but I can’t get worked up about a bunch of clubs deciding to screw UEFA.
    Yep - you've convinced me.

    "Don't worry Daniel - Spurs will make 50 zillion a year even if you finish bottom - and the same every year because you can't be relegated, unlike the whipping boys we'll get in every season to produce goals, goals, goals and therefore games you may, in exceptional circumstances, have a chance of winning". 

    "We also need to rework the old Corinthian spirit - something like 'Sport is not about taking part or even winning - it's about money', Daniel"
    I’m not trying to convince anyone that it’s a good thing, I just don’t see why everyone other than UEFA is so antagonised by it. The 20 teams will still compete (with each other) and it will likely be a more competitive league/cup. 

    I totally understand the ‘closed shop’ criticism, but Charlton have never been in European completion, ever, apart from that odd one they used to have in the 90’s. Speaking as a Charlton fan, if I invested my hopes in the prospect of one day reaching those heights I would probably have given up by now. So although I don’t think it is a good thing in principle I just can’t get very exercised by it in practice.
  • WSS said:
    Am I right in thinking we haven’t put out anything about this yet?

    Not even the EFL’s statement?

    Thats interesting isn’t it? 🤔
    How many EFL clubs have?

    That being said, with an American owner who probably “gets” what the others are doing and maybe even agrees with the format, he’s aware enough of sentiment to say nothing for now.
    A lot more than I expected tbh.

    Your answer is the exact reason I was worried about the silence.
    Hull - no statement on website
    Peterborough - no statement on website
    Sunderland - no statement on website
    Blackpool - EFL statement on website https://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Lincoln - EFL statement on website https://www.weareimps.com/news/2021/april/210419-efl/
    Portsmouth - EFL statement on website https://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Oxford - no statement on website
    Charlton - no statement on website
    Ipswich - EFL statement on website https://www.itfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/efl-statement-european-super-league/
    Doncaster - no statement on website

    Looks like every team that has a statement on their website has the "standard" EFL website build whereas other clubs that don't, don't have the statement up. No club has provided their own statement.

    Fair play to the Burton chairman. I only checked the top eight or nine teams since those are the most directly comparable to ourselves at this moment in time.
  • Sponsored links:


  • seth plum said:
    I await a Grapevine49 monologue, should be very interesting.
    I see them more as meditations than monologues.
    Each one a gem.
    'Monologue' comes from the Greek 'monologus' which means 'SPEAKING alone.'


  • edited April 2021
    24 Red said:
    bobmunro said:
    24 Red said:
    Sorry if this is covered elsewhere in the thread, but can someone clarify why this proposal is so terrible?

    I mean, I get that it is all about income generation rather than sporting principles but that’s been the way of things for a long time now.

    The way I read it this is an attack on UEFA. These clubs want to replace the existing European competitions with one that gives them greater income and greater certainty over that income. In return they promise to redistribute more income into domestic leagues and will still participate in those leagues with the (admittedly very hypothetical) threat of relegation.

    I suppose they may subsequently call for a reduction in the size of the premiership to accommodate fixtures but that’s a battle for the future.

     I’m not saying it’s a brilliant day for the game, but I can’t get worked up about a bunch of clubs deciding to screw UEFA.
    Yep - you've convinced me.

    "Don't worry Daniel - Spurs will make 50 zillion a year even if you finish bottom - and the same every year because you can't be relegated, unlike the whipping boys we'll get in every season to produce goals, goals, goals and therefore games you may, in exceptional circumstances, have a chance of winning". 

    "We also need to rework the old Corinthian spirit - something like 'Sport is not about taking part or even winning - it's about money', Daniel"
    I’m not trying to convince anyone that it’s a good thing, I just don’t see why everyone other than UEFA is so antagonised by it. The 20 teams will still compete (with each other) and it will likely be a more competitive league/cup. 

    I totally understand the ‘closed shop’ criticism, but Charlton have never been in European completion, ever, apart from that odd one they used to have in the 90’s. Speaking as a Charlton fan, if I invested my hopes in the prospect of one day reaching those heights I would probably have given up by now. So although I don’t think it is a good thing in principle I just can’t get very exercised by it in practice.
    How dare you call the Anglo-Italian Cup odd, great times! 😉
  • Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    So tired of this argument. "Oh well sky and the premier league was about greed and they're rich so why complain about this kind of greed now." Errr.. Because they are seeking to permanently close the doors on competition and completely undermine everything everyone in English football competes for, thus rendering our own leagues and competitions void and feckless?

    "Oh well Gary Neville you made money through greed in football and now you're piping up about this, what a hypocrite." The guy got his market worth, what was he supposed to do? And what has that got to do with clubs closing off competition, and ruining football, permanently? Was he supposed to put out a statement in 1999 warning us all 'this will come to a head,' like some right-back Nostradamus? Fck me.
    I don’t think that’s the point he was making. This was also recorded months ago before we knew the full details of the breakaway. 

    I think he’s highlighting that both sides of the aisle are corrupt and greedy. Sky, BT, Premier League, UEFA, FIFA will all try and position themselves as if they care about the integrity of the sport, when in reality they only care about losing power and influence. All of these institutions have immeasurably impacted football negatively. 

    Both sides only care about money and power, whereas there’s only one side who’s being up front about it. Either way it’s ultimately the football fan who suffers.
    I understand the nuance in the difference you've pointed out, but fundamentally it's the same argument. 'Don't complain about A being greedy when B, C, D and E are greedy, too. Even when A is actively seeking to ruin football.' It's nonsensical. 
    Respectfully, I read it the way Elliot did. And that's "Complain about A and complain about B, C, D and E too. Complain until football prioritises clubs and supporters.
  • UEFA President sticking boot into Ed Woodward from Man Utd! This is going to be nasty incredibly entertaining to watch, with popcorn and a suitable beverage, without a doubt.
    Fixed that for you...
  • LoOkOuT said:
    Chunes said:
    Chunes said:
    So tired of this argument. "Oh well sky and the premier league was about greed and they're rich so why complain about this kind of greed now." Errr.. Because they are seeking to permanently close the doors on competition and completely undermine everything everyone in English football competes for, thus rendering our own leagues and competitions void and feckless?

    "Oh well Gary Neville you made money through greed in football and now you're piping up about this, what a hypocrite." The guy got his market worth, what was he supposed to do? And what has that got to do with clubs closing off competition, and ruining football, permanently? Was he supposed to put out a statement in 1999 warning us all 'this will come to a head,' like some right-back Nostradamus? Fck me.
    I don’t think that’s the point he was making. This was also recorded months ago before we knew the full details of the breakaway. 

    I think he’s highlighting that both sides of the aisle are corrupt and greedy. Sky, BT, Premier League, UEFA, FIFA will all try and position themselves as if they care about the integrity of the sport, when in reality they only care about losing power and influence. All of these institutions have immeasurably impacted football negatively. 

    Both sides only care about money and power, whereas there’s only one side who’s being up front about it. Either way it’s ultimately the football fan who suffers.
    I understand the nuance in the difference you've pointed out, but fundamentally it's the same argument. 'Don't complain about A being greedy when B, C, D and E are greedy, too. Even when A is actively seeking to ruin football.' It's nonsensical. 
    Respectfully, I read it the way Elliot did. And that's "Complain about A and complain about B, C, D and E too. Complain until football prioritises clubs and supporters.
    All Greed Matters?
  • edited April 2021
    clive said:
    Well said William, send the bastards to the tower for treason :smile:
    Ps Leeds v Liverpool is 8pm KO.
    I'm gonna only half watch it, that'll learn 'em.
  • bobmunro said:

    PSG president Nasser Al-Khelaifi has turned down the chance to replace Andrea Agnelli as chairman of the European Clubs’ Association.

    The ECA is reeling from the resignation of all 12 clubs involved in the planned European Super League.

    BBC Sport understands Al-Khelaifi was the first choice to take over from Juventus chairman Agnelli, who was condemned for his behaviour in joining the planned breakaway by UEFA president.

    However, Al Khelaifi is reluctant to add to his workload.

    BBC Sport has been told this is not the prelude to a move by PSG to join the 12 clubs, as they hoped, and that Al Khelaifi has been speaking with the ECA and Uefa today as the row that has engulfed them continues.


    Hmmm - nothing to do with the probability that the Kuwaiti owned PSG will almost certainly join the ESL AFTER the World Cup in Kuwait!

    #engulfed 

    Top work
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!