European Super League

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
United fans blocked off the training ground with banners saying '51% we decide when you play. Glazer's out' fair play to them.

A points deduction and a European ban would send the billionaire parasites scuttling I think.

Another good reason to actually enforce some rules.

The entire ESL idea is Perez realising that the Spanish clubs are now too skint to compete with the Premier League
 
Last edited:
Perez continues to talk bollocks
Does anyone know what the fans reaction has been in Spain & Italy?

“Financial health of the game” = Pay off the ludicrous debts incurred by the biggest clubs due to their hyper-inflationary, unsustainable behaviour

“Save Football” = Kill competition and create a closed shop monopoly (I.e. Kill Football)

Like this ...
The US millionaires investing in lower-league clubs https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56674024
 
Perez continues to talk bollocks
Does anyone know what the fans reaction has been in Spain & Italy?

“Financial health of the game” = Pay off the ludicrous debts incurred by the biggest clubs due to their hyper-inflationary, unsustainable behaviour

“Save Football” = Kill competition and create a closed shop monopoly (I.e. Kill Football)

Like this ...
The US millionaires investing in lower-league clubs https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56674024

Perez is appalling, and needs to be put out to pasture.
 
‘Hi guys, We are so so sorry for attempting to join the closed shop ESL, we will never attempt anything like this again. Oh btw please see our proposal for an 18 Team British Super League, thanks’.

Apparently:

Reduction to 18 teams
Rangers and Celtic join
End of season play offs

Why do they even attempt this ****, they need 8/14 non ‘Big 6’ sides to support increasing their chances of relegation and decreasing their match day income + reducing their chances of qualifying for Europe. Meanwhile allowing one of the dirtiest, most disgusting and bigoted combos in world football into the League?

They honestly have no idea, what a worthless proposal.
 
‘Hi guys, We are so so sorry for attempting to join the closed shop ESL, we will never attempt anything like this again. Oh btw please see our proposal for an 18 Team British Super League, thanks’.

Apparently:

Reduction to 18 teams
Rangers and Celtic join
End of season play offs

Why do they even attempt this ****, they need 8/14 non ‘Big 6’ sides to support increasing their chances of relegation and decreasing their match day income + reducing their chances of qualifying for Europe. Meanwhile allowing one of the dirtiest, most disgusting and bigoted combos in world football into the League?

They honestly have no idea, what a worthless proposal.
Why would a club like, say, Southampton, want to have the ugly sisters brought into the British league ? It would be like turkeys voting for Xmas. What would happen if they get relegated - does that mean Hibs and Aberdeen for example get promoted ? No of course not, so it has some of the same exclusivity that the ESL did.
 
Why would a club like, say, Southampton, want to have the ugly sisters brought into the British league ? It would be like turkeys voting for Xmas. What would happen if they get relegated - does that mean Hibs and Aberdeen for example get promoted ? No of course not, so it has some of the same exclusivity that the ESL did.

Indeed, this is based on the covert premise that they won’t ever get relegated so this issue won’t ever come up, but you can’t set it up without an answer and there isn’t an acceptable one

Every time this is mooted this is the question that kills it
 
We could keep things as they are and let them join League 2.

They should work their way up to Championship pretty quickly I imagine.

Not sure they would come straight up though.
 
The problem with the argument against the dominance of the big clubs is that the smaller clubs need them. If there is parity amongst the clubs, then there will be no giant-killing and I think that the game will become boring. Where is the entertainment if you time never has the opportunity to occasionally spank a team like Man Utd? I can see that the debts of the Spanish clubs has driven the whole Super League scenario but the proposed structure is no less boring than an alternative where there is parity. The whole scenario is something of a self fulfilling prophecy which has it's origins in the creation of the Premier League with the rich clubs outspending themselves and needing to become even richer.

I think that the super league will eventually emerge from the re-organised European Cup which already has an league element before the knockout rounds. There will come a point where the financial incentives will become too great to ignore. The question that really needs to be answered is" Who is football for?" In the Uk, we would argue that it is for the fans and we immediately discount the foreign supporter who only watch matches on TV without any proper connection nor identity as superficial. The problem is that the American owners of clubs cannot recognise why fans identify with clubs in the UK as the whole concept is alien to a country where American football clubs move all around the States chasing the money. The issue with the likes of Kroenke, . the Glazers and Henry is that they are looking to exploit their clubs purely for commercial gain and they realise that the global market will far outweigh the UK market for these teams. This is why "original" fans will surely get shunted aside and you can envisage a situation where tickets to watch the best live matches would ultimately be corporate affairs with tickets open to who is more willing to pay over the odds for a seat. The "value" of these seats will be such that ordinary fans will ultimately get priced out..

I think that there should be a degree of romance within the game and the moment it became more about money that as a sporting spectacle, something like the Super League would always have been on the cards. I am not convinced by politicians arguing against it will ever come to any genuine legislation preventing the future creation of a super league..

Surprised to see the old chestnut about Celtic and Rangers becoming part of the Premier League being mooted on her. By the time that is possible, Scotland will be an independent country and playing in England will probably be rejected by UEFA. We don't want Scottish sectarianism in the English game.
 
I knew Klopp was a fraud.

Pretended to be about the fans etc. but when push comes to shove, he backed the owners and told the fans to calm down protecting the sport.

Lost all respect for him tbh
 
  • Like
Reactions: AberdeenSaint
“The problem with the argument against the dominance of the big clubs is that the smaller clubs need them. If there is parity amongst the clubs, then there will be no giant-killing and I think that the game will become boring. Where is the entertainment if you time never has the opportunity to occasionally spank a team like Man Utd?”

Sorry, I don’t get this
You are trying to advance a football argument for the dominance of a few teams

There is a financial argument for those teams and would be for the rest of football if it grew audience and income AND spread the loot. But this is all about increasing and assuring the profits of the few and trickle down of as little as is necessary to the many

If the big six went then the next level would become the big six or whatever. There would be less money but not less football

Giant killing exists at all levels, I’ve seen Basingstoke beat Northampton and Norwich would still be hoping to beat West Ham
 
“The problem with the argument against the dominance of the big clubs is that the smaller clubs need them. If there is parity amongst the clubs, then there will be no giant-killing and I think that the game will become boring. Where is the entertainment if you time never has the opportunity to occasionally spank a team like Man Utd?”

Sorry, I don’t get this
You are trying to advance a football argument for the dominance of a few teams

There is a financial argument for those teams and would be for the rest of football if it grew audience and income AND spread the loot. But this is all about increasing and assuring the profits of the few and trickle down of as little as is necessary to the many

If the big six went then the next level would become the big six or whatever. There would be less money but not less football

Giant killing exists at all levels, I’ve seen Basingstoke beat Northampton and Norwich would still be hoping to beat West Ham

Spiderman

This argument is actually presented by Simon Kuper in the books "Why England always lose and other football statistics explained" which I recommend reading if it is still in print. For football leagues to be entertaining, they need large clubs to generate the interest, either for their supporters or as the "bogey man" for the supporters of other teams. Far more people would have an interest in watching Southampton beat Man Utd than say WBA.. Beating Man Utd has more prestige. Everyone can remember beating them but beating WBA becomes a blur that gets mixed up with beating Crystal Palace, Brighton and Newcastle. This interest will create income. If you like, the Utd match is a more desirable product than the WBA match. I agree that giant killing exists at all levels but this is part of the reason why people watch football. I understand why you might think that parity amongst clubs would be more appealing and every team would, theoretically have an equal chance at winning the title. In fact, what it would produce is more games which have a similar result ( mathematically a draw) as opposed to a variety and range of results which is more exciting. It would therefore not be so interesting - a bit like the proposed super league. That is the theory, anyway!

Wonder if anyone read the article about Sheffield FC in todays HM Sunday Telegraph? A very good piece that also looked at how the proposed European super league contrasts ethically with the more idealistic, Victorian attitude of England's oldest club. I thought that this was a very good article.
 
Spiderman

This argument is actually presented by Simon Kuper in the books "Why England always lose and other football statistics explained" which I recommend reading if it is still in print. For football leagues to be entertaining, they need large clubs to generate the interest, either for their supporters or as the "bogey man" for the supporters of other teams. Far more people would have an interest in watching Southampton beat Man Utd than say WBA.. Beating Man Utd has more prestige. Everyone can remember beating them but beating WBA becomes a blur that gets mixed up with beating Crystal Palace, Brighton and Newcastle. This interest will create income. If you like, the Utd match is a more desirable product than the WBA match. I agree that giant killing exists at all levels but this is part of the reason why people watch football. I understand why you might think that parity amongst clubs would be more appealing and every team would, theoretically have an equal chance at winning the title. In fact, what it would produce is more games which have a similar result ( mathematically a draw) as opposed to a variety and range of results which is more exciting. It would therefore not be so interesting - a bit like the proposed super league. That is the theory, anyway!

Wonder if anyone read the article about Sheffield FC in todays HM Sunday Telegraph? A very good piece that also looked at how the proposed European super league contrasts ethically with the more idealistic, Victorian attitude of England's oldest club. I thought that this was a very good article.

I’ve highlighted some words to mention

Any statements calling football a product are aimed at a customer, not me

Parity is impossible there are, always have been and always will be, bigger and smaller teams which is fine, but some chance of a smaller team becoming a bigger team is healthy

It may be a mathematical theory but it doesn’t work in the real world as parity isn’t going to happen

It sounds like the Classic old argument against Socialism that says we can never all be equal, which misunderstands that Socialism is about equality of opportunity

In football, as in life, if the greedy six buggered off, Weymouth would still never win the Champions League, Everton would still never play in the National League


The Sheffield article sounds interesting
Don’t suppose you can post it on here or even some highlights?