Man Utd will be annoyed that this has come out whilst they were playing. Neville laying into his own club is not good.
LOL: He's now saying strip them of their titles. I support that.
Just heard this nonsense reportedly backed with 6 billion funding
This is wrong on so many levels
It is £5bn borrowed against future cashflow from the Superleague
But what if it flops? Will people really want to watch Juventus v Arsenal five times a year, year in year out, with no threat of relegation? None of the buzz of fast English football with home and away fans in loud voice?
Half the games will be meaningless. It is possible Barca or Real will win it every year
Total turn off. Then the money falls away as the TV rights dwindle
Could easily happen. Even on a basic financial level it seems insanely risky and foolish. So maybe it is just a bluff to bully UEFA
To be honest it would be a disaster for everyone who loves football and I am not paying any more for football tv
Seems to me like it was only a matter of time before football was sold to the highest bidder. No doubt we’ll soon be watching franchise clubs playing in Riyadh. It was good while it lasted. RIP
Well of course. Once the closed shop has been instigated then the clubs will just become "brands" that can be picked up and moved to another location for commercial purposes.
And even better for Starmer is that we all know "Boris" has no clue or feel for the game. If he tries to fake it - pretend he has a single clue or gives a single care about anything to do with football - the shrewdies in the Red Wall will laugh him out of town.
Gary Lineker @GaryLineker · 43m Sense this Super League plot will die on its preposterous and avaricious arse.
It's got the air of a threat, rather than a plan, which leads to the question of what the clubs and bankers are after from UEFA.
The other thing (which I don't know, following Portsmouth makes it kinda irrelevant)- what's the balance of local to global revenue like for top soccer clubs these days? We might care if they become avaricious nowheresville franchises, but those watching on a screen halfway across the world won't.
Does anyone know what the actual purpose of some of these farcical "pilot" sporting events actually is? Don't get me wrong, it's better to have crowds that not, but what are the authorities actually expecting to learn from having 4,000 people within 90,000 capacity Wembley stadium?
We've been in this pandemic for over a year. Surely we know enough about this virus by now to know that there really aren't significant risks from such an event. Or certainly no significant risks compared to what currently happens on the tube every day, let alone within large shopping centres or high streets.
To understand what happens getting to and from the match.
For a lot of stadia the only way to get to them is via public transport.
60,000 fans leaving the Emirates via the tube might have issues which the authorities want to understand.
Fair enough.... but colour me sceptical. 4,000 local Brent residents travelling to Wembley is hardly 60,000 travelling to the Emirates from all over London/the country.
And even better for Starmer is that we all know "Boris" has no clue or feel for the game. If he tries to fake it - pretend he has a single clue or gives a single care about anything to do with football - the shrewdies in the Red Wall will laugh him out of town.
Confusing West Ham and Aston Villa didn't do Dave (pbuh) any harm.
Does anyone know what the actual purpose of some of these farcical "pilot" sporting events actually is? Don't get me wrong, it's better to have crowds that not, but what are the authorities actually expecting to learn from having 4,000 people within 90,000 capacity Wembley stadium?
We've been in this pandemic for over a year. Surely we know enough about this virus by now to know that there really aren't significant risks from such an event. Or certainly no significant risks compared to what currently happens on the tube every day, let alone within large shopping centres or high streets.
To understand what happens getting to and from the match.
For a lot of stadia the only way to get to them is via public transport.
60,000 fans leaving the Emirates via the tube might have issues which the authorities want to understand.
Fair enough.... but colour me sceptical. 4,000 local Brent residents travelling to Wembley is hardly 60,000 travelling to the Emirates from all over London/the country.
It isn't the only issue.
It is things like going through the turnstiles, and the few entrance points to your seat.
Also what happens if 4,000 people go for a piss at half time?
Seems to me like it was only a matter of time before football was sold to the highest bidder. No doubt we’ll soon be watching franchise clubs playing in Riyadh. It was good while it lasted. RIP
A group of the world’s richest and most storied soccer clubs has agreed in principle on a plan to create a breakaway European club competition that would, if it comes to fruition, upend the structures, economics and relationships that have bound global soccer for nearly a century.
After months of secret talks, the breakaway teams — which include Real Madrid and Barcelona in Spain, Manchester United and Liverpool in England, and Juventus and A.C. Milan in Italy — could make an announcement as early as Sunday, according to multiple people familiar with the plans.
The timing of the announcement appears designed to overshadow Monday’s plan by European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, to ratify a newly designed Champions League, a competition which would be decimated by the departure of its biggest teams.
At least 12 teams have either signed up as founding members or expressed interest in joining the breakaway group, including six prominent teams from England’s Premier League, three from Spain and three from Italy, according to the people with knowledge of the plans.
The group has been trying to get other top teams, like Germany’s Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund, to commit, but to date those clubs — and others — have declined to turn their backs on the decades-old domestic structures and Continental competitions that have underpinned European soccer for generations.
The French champion Paris Saint-Germain, for example, has been invited to join but has so far resisted the overtures. Its president, Nasser al-Khelaifi, sits on the UEFA board and also heads beIN Media Group, the Qatar-based television network that has paid millions of dollars to UEFA for the right to broadcast Champions League games.
The teams committed to the super league plan are, for the moment, limited to almost a dozen clubs from Spain, Italy and England. A cohort of six teams from the Premier League — United, Liverpool, Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham — represents the biggest grouping from a single country. Atlético Madrid is the other team from Spain that is said to have endorsed the project, while the Milan rivals Internazionale and A.C. Milan would join Juventus as Italy’s representatives.
The New York Times contacted a number of clubs involved in the breakaway plans but all declined to comment or did not respond. A UEFA spokesman did not immediately return a request for comment.
The way it currently is works, in general. I get big clubs are greedy and arrogant, but I don't think I've ever seen one of these European or Premier League revamp proposals, and sadly they usually involve Liverpool, that would seem to benefit fans at all. They cannot even come up with something that even looks like it is not for their own benefit alone, and when people don't even hide their self interested avarice it is a bad sign.
We're European Royalty, we always get invited to stuff like this.
Remember we've won more European Cups/CLs than United, City, Arsenal, Tottenham, Everton, Chelsea, and Leicester.
In fact we've won more than the entire current PL combined.
I'm not sure everyone in Liverpool will be as delighted as you. Kiss goodbye to the Merseyside derby. All that Liverpool-Everton history, trashed
I imagine Newcastle United aren't overly chuffed, either. All these big historic clubs excluded. Aston Villa? And so on
Newcastle haven't won England's top title since 1927 (when HM The Queen was a year old), their last major honour was 52 years ago.
Newcastle United aren't a big club.
They are the Tottenham of the North East.
I know you're trolling, but this is a serious point
Newcastle are English football royalty. Their fans are amazing, loyal and funny, despite all that disappointment. The day of a big match in Newcastle - eg Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal - has an intense atmosphere, I've experienced it
Now all that will go. It is tremendously sad
Yes. It is special. Mostly because it is possibly the only ground still slap bang in the middle of a major city centre.
Bramall Lane?
Perhaps. I've never been to Sheffield...
Oh boy, you have really missed out.
Once the plague is over, you should come to Sheffield.
I quite like Sheffield.
I noticed that the Italian restaurant there has adapted its offering to local tastes; asking whether you want chips with whatever you order. Lasagna and chips; close your eyes and you could be in Tuscany....
Wouldn't it be funny if people suddenly got fed up with football and all the money in the game disappeared overnight.
What would be funnier is if the project flopped and the breakaway clubs had to come crawling back again.
Let them back in, but make them start somewhere close to the bottom of the pyramid. Not League 2, Isthmian League Division One North, or some such thing.
Seems to me like it was only a matter of time before football was sold to the highest bidder. No doubt we’ll soon be watching franchise clubs playing in Riyadh. It was good while it lasted. RIP
Seems to me like it was only a matter of time before football was sold to the highest bidder. No doubt we’ll soon be watching franchise clubs playing in Riyadh. It was good while it lasted. RIP
Well of course. Once the closed shop has been instigated then the clubs will just become "brands" that can be picked up and moved to another location for commercial purposes.
Goodbye Liverpool, hello Riyadh Reds, as you say.
They can try it, but... it feels as if a lot of the clubs driving this have either American owners brought up on the Franchise models of US sport, or places like Spain where there has long been a clear split between the top 2 clubs and the rest. What is successful in some places/sports is not automatically going to translate elsewhere. And if they all move to Asia, well great. It'll just be an Asian league.
To be successful it's got to kill off everything else - and of all sports, not so sure that is likely in football. It's just too big. And there aren't guarantees that the best players massed in the best teams will generate the most attractive products.
Seems to me like it was only a matter of time before football was sold to the highest bidder. No doubt we’ll soon be watching franchise clubs playing in Riyadh. It was good while it lasted. RIP
Well of course. Once the closed shop has been instigated then the clubs will just become "brands" that can be picked up and moved to another location for commercial purposes.
Goodbye Liverpool, hello Riyadh Reds, as you say.
They can try it, but... it feels as if a lot of the clubs driving this have either American owners brought up on the Franchise models of US sport, or places like Spain where there has long been a clear split between the top 2 clubs and the rest. What is successful in some places/sports is not automatically going to translate elsewhere. And if they all move to Asia, well great. It'll just be an Asian league.
To be successful it's got to kill off everything else - and of all sports, not so sure that is likely in football. It's just too big. And there aren't guarantees that the best players massed in the best teams will generate the most attractive products.
Especially if it means the end of an international career for the players, which is quite possible
And the social media hatred of the players will be something to witness
Wouldn't it be funny if people suddenly got fed up with football and all the money in the game disappeared overnight.
Isn’t that the whole point of the Hundred?
(Autocorrect made that the ‘hindred,’ which works for me too.)
Already happening, to an extent, with Rugby. So, of course, the prices in Rugby have gone through the roof, the big money has come in and created various scandals....
Sure, just as Cisco is an arm of the US surveillance state.
(Yes, yes, China is worse. I agree! But lets not pretend the US/five eyes hegemony is some innocent player in all this.)
The bigger problem is that European telcos have outsourced pretty much every technical capability and are simply no longer capable of delivering a modern telecoms network on their own. All they are is a brand, a board & a bunch of financial derivatives used to pay for the subcontractors who do the actual work.
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Does anyone know what the actual purpose of some of these farcical "pilot" sporting events actually is? Don't get me wrong, it's better to have crowds that not, but what are the authorities actually expecting to learn from having 4,000 people within 90,000 capacity Wembley stadium?
We've been in this pandemic for over a year. Surely we know enough about this virus by now to know that there really aren't significant risks from such an event. Or certainly no significant risks compared to what currently happens on the tube every day, let alone within large shopping centres or high streets.
To understand what happens getting to and from the match.
For a lot of stadia the only way to get to them is via public transport.
60,000 fans leaving the Emirates via the tube might have issues which the authorities want to understand.
Fair enough.... but colour me sceptical. 4,000 local Brent residents travelling to Wembley is hardly 60,000 travelling to the Emirates from all over London/the country.
It isn't the only issue.
It is things like going through the turnstiles, and the few entrance points to your seat.
Also what happens if 4,000 people go for a piss at half time?
On the other hand, official Govt policy is to work towards all restrictions ending in mid June. If all restrictions are lifted then the turnstiles will work in exactly the same way as they ever did. The sort of things you are talking about are planning for a world in which 2m social distancing is a permanent feature of activities, and finding ways to ensure that it can be enforced. Which seems to be to be just pointless, if the intention is for social distancing requirements to disappear. And as i say, frankly, there's no enforced social distancing on the tube, so why at outdoor football pilot matches?
I have absolutely no idea what any of you are talking about.
It's a controversy about football. As you are doubtless aware, this is an obsession for a great many men, often to the exclusion of all else, yet which doesn't really matter at all in the great scheme of things.
Therefore, if you know nothing about it and can't follow any of this then I wouldn't be unduly concerned. I only know as much as I do because (a) I'm a kind of sponge for useless and irrelevant information and (b) I spent some years working with some other men who were obsessed and talked about it endlessly.
I'd screen it out and move on. It's been a lovely day here. Has it been likewise around your way?
I have absolutely no idea what any of you are talking about.
It's a controversy about football. As you are doubtless aware, this is an obsession for a great many men, often to the exclusion of all else, yet which doesn't really matter at all in the great scheme of things.
Therefore, if you know nothing about it and can't follow any of this then I wouldn't be unduly concerned. I only know as much as I do because (a) I'm a kind of sponge for useless and irrelevant information and (b) I spent some years working with some other men who were obsessed and talked about it endlessly.
I'd screen it out and move on. It's been a lovely day here. Has it been likewise around your way?
My former season ticket holding daughter says hello
As does my late sister who had a season tickets with Hibs
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
With no legal basis, I doubt banning players from International Football constitutes "restraint of trade". International appearances for footballers are effectively pro-bono work.
Some people are making comparisons with Packer in cricket, but that was completely different - and was in large part motivated and motivating, by the appalling pay that International cricketers got for their efforts.
On the break away league I am fractionally torn because EUFA are a deeply corrupt bunch of tossers who wouldn't understand the spirit of the game if you hit them over the head with it. But the EPL is the best product in the footballing world and only a lunatic would think it was economically smart to leave it.
The Glazers are a lot of things, many of them not particularly good, but they are not lunatics. If the price of the new league is leaving the EPL its a non starter.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Then you're entering constructive dismissal territory as well restraint of trade.
It will be messy, because every country has their own laws and legal system.
Mo Salah, who has a four year contract with Liverpool, and he loves playing for Egypt, what does he say to Liverpool if they insist he plays in the Super League?
What's the remedy (and jurisdiction) for an Egyptian national playing in England?
I suspect some countries will say the UEFA/FIFA/National Association decision is a restraint of trade, whilst some other countries back UEFA/FIFA/National associations.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
Remember when World Series Cricket started in the 1970s the English cricket authorities banned anyone who played World Series Cricket from test cricket.
It was deemed by the courts as a restraint of trade.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
Is it that much of a deterrent? It's not a deterrent to the clubs (in fact some would see it as a bonus). It isn't something that would hit players in the pocket either, so ultimately they would have to live with it. There are players who give up their entire footballing careers to go and warm the bench at large clubs for huge paychecks.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
They banned every one who played (or even attended) a Rugby League game for Life. My Dad had his letter framed. He dug it out when he became Honorary Life President of his RU club.
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
Is it that much of a deterrent? It's not a deterrent to the clubs (in fact some would see it as a bonus). It isn't something that would hit players in the pocket either, so ultimately they would have to live with it.
You would not believe how much it hurts Lionel Messi that he doesn't have a world cup winners medal.
The rugby situation is even greater than the footy... playing for England rugby is extremely lucrative compared to regular rugby salary. Football, they donate the match fees and their club contracts are obviously mega.
Remember when World Series Cricket started in the 1970s the English cricket authorities banned anyone who played World Series Cricket from test cricket.
It was deemed by the courts as a restraint of trade.
Didn’t do English or, for that matter, Australian cricket much good either.
The ICL is another example, I suppose, although that was ultimately crushed by the IPL.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
Because they never made it a legal rule, just a "selection policy"? A coach is entitled to select who he/she likes, for whatever reason
The national coach will be given a policy not to select Superleague players. That ends the international career of anyone in Barca, Real, Man U, Chelsea. A pretty high price to pay, especially when these players are already earning squillions and don't really need more, so money is less of an inducement (unlike the owners)
Remember when World Series Cricket started in the 1970s the English cricket authorities banned anyone who played World Series Cricket from test cricket.
It was deemed by the courts as a restraint of trade.
Didn’t do English or, for that matter, Australian cricket much good either.
The ICL is another example, I suppose, although that was ultimately crushed by the IPL.
But WSC had a point. Top cricketers were underpaid. You can't say that about top footballers today.
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Are you sure about that? How would that even work? It's not like English cricket where players are employed on central contracts.
On the break away league I am fractionally torn because EUFA are a deeply corrupt bunch of tossers who wouldn't understand the spirit of the game if you hit them over the head with it. But the EPL is the best product in the footballing world and only a lunatic would think it was economically smart to leave it.
The Glazers are a lot of things, many of them not particularly good, but they are not lunatics. If the price of the new league is leaving the EPL its a non starter.
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
As @Leon says, you can't make a national association select someone.
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
As @Leon says, you can't make a national association select someone.
Dwain Chambers, 100m sprinter.....he took British Athletics to court when they said they don't ever select somebody who has failed a drug test and they were forced to change their policy.
Remember when World Series Cricket started in the 1970s the English cricket authorities banned anyone who played World Series Cricket from test cricket.
It was deemed by the courts as a restraint of trade.
Didn’t do English or, for that matter, Australian cricket much good either.
The ICL is another example, I suppose, although that was ultimately crushed by the IPL.
But WSC had a point. Top cricketers were underpaid. You can't say that about top footballers today.
Test cricket was THE money earner for cricketers in the 70s. No footballer plays international football for the money. And is suspect that no footballer taking legal action would have the support of their employers, who would see them not playing international football as a benefit. Clubs don't like the idea of their expensive assets putting themselves at risk in international football, and often playing against the medical advice of their clubs.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
Because they never made it a legal rule, just a "selection policy"? A coach is entitled to select who he/she likes, for whatever reason
The national coach will be given a policy not to select Superleague players. That ends the international career of anyone in Barca, Real, Man U, Chelsea. A pretty high price to pay, especially when these players are already earning squillions and don't really need more, so money is less of an inducement (unlike the owners)
I can see players as well as fans rebelling
Especially the younger ones. Forget internationals. Consider a promising teenager at one of these clubs. Most never break the first team properly. But they do go on to have long, lucrative careers lower down the pyramid. Except, a single game in this league and they won't. I'd be off if I were them. Double quick if this comes to pass.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Are you sure about that? How would that even work? It's not like English cricket where players are employed on central contracts.
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
As @Leon says, you can't make a national association select someone.
The issue in Olympics is that most countries run automatic qualification competitions where selectors have no discretion. So much harder to block people from competing.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Are you sure about that? How would that even work? It's not like English cricket where players are employed on central contracts.
I get that it happens with minor countries (in an international sense, often who cannot afford to stand up to their star players). It's almost certainly not the case for the big European nations though.
This is the Dwain Chambers case.. wasn't British Athletics was British Olympic committee, but same difference, they had a selection policy against selecting those who had failed drugs tests. Was ruled it wasn't legal to do so.
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
Is it that much of a deterrent? It's not a deterrent to the clubs (in fact some would see it as a bonus). It isn't something that would hit players in the pocket either, so ultimately they would have to live with it. There are players who give up their entire footballing careers to go and warm the bench at large clubs for huge paychecks.
Massive deterrent, I reckon
If you play for Barca, Real or Juve you win cups and leagues all the time. You will also win this Superleague a lot. Club glory is a given
Winning the European Championship or, especially, the World Cup is the absolute pinnacle of any great footballer's career. Look how the English worship that winning side in 1966. Still! See how much this annoys the Scots
Win the World Cup and you have the unalloyed adoration of your nation for the rest of your life. You don't get that with a club, no matter how illustrious
For a new Zidane or a Messi, the next Maradona or Beckham - world class players who can seriously dream of a World Cup - giving up that ultimate prize forever would be pretty painful
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
Because they never made it a legal rule, just a "selection policy"? A coach is entitled to select who he/she likes, for whatever reason
The national coach will be given a policy not to select Superleague players. That ends the international career of anyone in Barca, Real, Man U, Chelsea. A pretty high price to pay, especially when these players are already earning squillions and don't really need more, so money is less of an inducement (unlike the owners)
I can see players as well as fans rebelling
Especially the younger ones. Forget internationals. Consider a promising teenager at one of these clubs. Most never break the first team properly. But they do go on to have long, lucrative careers lower down the pyramid. Except, a single game in this league and they won't. I'd be off if I were them. Double quick if this comes to pass.
I don't think lifetime bans are realistic. I certainly don't think that would stand up legally. But i can well see non-selection at International level for current players of relevant clubs. But i don't think that would matter.
Basically if the thing flops it will be because those pushing it have totally overestimated the demand for the product.
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
As @Leon says, you can't make a national association select someone.
Dwain Chambers, 100m sprinter.....he took British Athletics to court when they said they don't ever select somebody who has failed a drug test and they were forced to change their policy.
All the England coach has to do is say "My team is better if the players know each other blah blah" - then he can exclude Superleague players on the ground they undermine his team and make it worse
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Are you sure about that? How would that even work? It's not like English cricket where players are employed on central contracts.
I get that it happens with minor countries (in an international sense, often who cannot afford to stand up to their star players). It's almost certainly not the case for the big European nations though.
Nope, from this weekend.
England men's football team set for row with the FA over who will stump up the tax on their image rights - with the ENTIRE Three Lions squad under investigation by HMRC
The HMRC probe relates to image rights payments made to England by the FA
Players are digging their heels in and feel the governing body should pay the tax
Regular England players can earn £150,000 a year from commercial agreements
Somebody here a little while ago suggested that the politicians should bcome involved on this issue.
Well, one of them at least has.
Ed Davey on European Super League: This is greed personified
Ed Davey MP, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, has criticised the reported new European Super League proposals:
“This is greed personified, ripping the heart out of the English game, leaving clubs up and down the country to suffer after an awful year.
“The Premier League is one of this country’s greatest exports. It helps fund grassroots football across the nation. The consequences of these plans reach far and wide. The Government must step in to prevent a small number of greedy, rich owners destroying the game we all love.”
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
Is it that much of a deterrent? It's not a deterrent to the clubs (in fact some would see it as a bonus). It isn't something that would hit players in the pocket either, so ultimately they would have to live with it. There are players who give up their entire footballing careers to go and warm the bench at large clubs for huge paychecks.
Massive deterrent, I reckon
If you play for Barca, Real or Juve you win cups and leagues all the time. You will also win this Superleague a lot. Club glory is a given
Winning the European Championship or, especially, the World Cup is the absolute pinnacle of any great footballer's career. Look how the English worship that winning side in 1966. Still! See how much this annoys the Scots
Win the World Cup and you have the unalloyed adoration of your nation for the rest of your life. You don't get that with a club, no matter how illustrious
For a new Zidane or a Messi, the next Maradona or Beckham - world class players who can seriously dream of a World Cup - giving up that ultimate prize forever would be pretty painful
I think you're a naive romantic. Players will follow the money. As i mentioned above, i could give you hundreds of players who have effectively given up their careers for the money. True some have exaggerated ideas of what they can achieve after their "big money transfer". The trophies are nice, but first and foremost it is the money that pays.
I saw my first anti-lockdown protest today. I was at Petersfield Heath Pond with my family- beautiful day - and I couldn't work out why there were 30-40 people grouped together standing around. I thought, hmm.. rambler's meet? Big birthday party? Sports?
Anyway, there were still there after 90 minutes (seemingly not doing much) and my curiosity got the better of me. So, I ambled by and saw they were all congregated around a sign saying "Stand In The Park - Petersfield".
I had to look it up on my phone. Turns out this is a worldwide anti-lockdown movement, started in Australia, that encourages people to congregate in their local park every Sunday morning between 10am and 11am on the basis that people power is the only thing that will make governments stop their bullsh*t. It's spread here in recent weeks.
This was easily the most middle-class and gentile protest I'd ever seen. They could have been having cheese and wine or a picnic, for all I knew. They were doing nothing other than chatting or laughing. But, after about a few hours the rozzers turned up (whereupon half of them swiftly strolled away) and had a long word with them. Then, they left after 10 minutes - no arrests - and the rest of them simply carried on.
Whilst I had sympathy with their aims, I can't see that many other parents and families did from my eavesdropping in the kids playground. "They'll put us all in lockdown again" or "I hope they stay over there and give it to each other, but no-one else" was a typical reaction.
Conclusion: most people don't like the restrictions much, but they hate flagrant rulebreakers even more.
I've always thought that combining the Scottish and English leagues would do wonders for both leagues, as well as national cohesion.
I often thought that about the EU. With proper promotion and relegation though.
I take it you mean the EU leagues, not the EU itself?
Although the latter idea is interesting. ‘Hungary, you lose four points because Orban’s had five judges locked up. Turkey is promoted to full membership in your place.’
Just thinking about what @TheScreamingEagles said about restraint of trade regarding banning players from international football - you wouldn't actually need to ban them, you just make sure you employ a coach that won't pick them.
Quite. Also, I'm not sure the law is a problem. eg England Rugby have - or had - a policy of not picking players who went abroad.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
Is it that much of a deterrent? It's not a deterrent to the clubs (in fact some would see it as a bonus). It isn't something that would hit players in the pocket either, so ultimately they would have to live with it. There are players who give up their entire footballing careers to go and warm the bench at large clubs for huge paychecks.
Massive deterrent, I reckon
If you play for Barca, Real or Juve you win cups and leagues all the time. You will also win this Superleague a lot. Club glory is a given
Winning the European Championship or, especially, the World Cup is the absolute pinnacle of any great footballer's career. Look how the English worship that winning side in 1966. Still! See how much this annoys the Scots
Win the World Cup and you have the unalloyed adoration of your nation for the rest of your life. You don't get that with a club, no matter how illustrious
For a new Zidane or a Messi, the next Maradona or Beckham - world class players who can seriously dream of a World Cup - giving up that ultimate prize forever would be pretty painful
I think you're a naive romantic. Players will follow the money. As i mentioned above, i could give you hundreds of players who have effectively given up their careers for the money. The trophies are nice, but first and foremost it is the money that pays.
All those players who wwnt to China and now being asked to take a pay cut and all leaving....
I have absolutely no idea what any of you are talking about.
That’s ironic, because the JP Morgan investment is a classic example of bankers being fuckwits. So very close to your day job!
The fuckwittery, greed and corruption I can understand.
It's this "football" you keep mentioning ..... I suppose I should think of it as some sort of CDO. Started as a good idea. Spiralled out of control because of the greed of everyone involved. About to destroy the reputation of all involved and splatter shite all over the ordinary people involved.
This banned from international football...how is it any different from English Rugby saying they won't select anybody who doesn't play in Premiership or New Zealand rugby the same with those not based in NZ / Australia.
I never understood how that is legal.
I guess international sport isn't employment in the traditional sense. I think players get match fees, but it's not really important in the grand scheme of things.
It is, they get certain percentages of the merchandise/sponsorship deals.
Are you sure about that? How would that even work? It's not like English cricket where players are employed on central contracts.
I get that it happens with minor countries (in an international sense, often who cannot afford to stand up to their star players). It's almost certainly not the case for the big European nations though.
Nope, from this weekend.
England men's football team set for row with the FA over who will stump up the tax on their image rights - with the ENTIRE Three Lions squad under investigation by HMRC
The HMRC probe relates to image rights payments made to England by the FA
Players are digging their heels in and feel the governing body should pay the tax
Regular England players can earn £150,000 a year from commercial agreements
Didn't the Olympics lose their legal battles against life time bans for drug cheats on basis of restraint of trade, but English rugby can openly discriminate, scratches head....how does that work?
As @Leon says, you can't make a national association select someone.
Dwain Chambers, 100m sprinter.....he took British Athletics to court when they said they don't ever select somebody who has failed a drug test and they were forced to change their policy.
All the England coach has to do is say "My team is better if the players know each other blah blah" - then he can exclude Superleague players on the ground they undermine his team and make it worse
I don't see how you can litigate against that
My argument was England rugby don't do that, they have an explicit overt policy of no selection. BOC had a similar one and it was ruled illegal.
In rugby situation it is easy, basically no players who would be selected for England play in France. Now the footy, be a brave coach not to select all the best English players from the best 6 teams, that is literally the current England starting 11.
It's just stuck on that and has been stuck for hours. It won't even switch off if I press the off button hard and long
If it won't switch off on a 4-second press of the power button then you have a hardware fault serious enough to have nuked the power management system. Phone the manufacturer if it's under warranty, or find a repair place if it's not.
Although in this case hard and long might only be 3 inches seconds
Comments
Goodbye Liverpool, hello Riyadh Reds, as you say.
The other thing (which I don't know, following Portsmouth makes it kinda irrelevant)- what's the balance of local to global revenue like for top soccer clubs these days? We might care if they become avaricious nowheresville franchises, but those watching on a screen halfway across the world won't.
It is things like going through the turnstiles, and the few entrance points to your seat.
Also what happens if 4,000 people go for a piss at half time?
I noticed that the Italian restaurant there has adapted its offering to local tastes; asking whether you want chips with whatever you order. Lasagna and chips; close your eyes and you could be in Tuscany....
Let them back in, but make them start somewhere close to the bottom of the pyramid. Not League 2, Isthmian League Division One North, or some such thing.
"Fucking legend that Boris...."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWIUp19bBoA&ab_channel=Ellisaacson
To be successful it's got to kill off everything else - and of all sports, not so sure that is likely in football. It's just too big. And there aren't guarantees that the best players massed in the best teams will generate the most attractive products.
And the social media hatred of the players will be something to witness
Hmm
The linked Boeing paper is also a good read;
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/69746/hart-smith-on-outsourcing.pdf
Makes me think twice before buying an index tracker.
Can anyone recommend an active fund that focusses on companies-that-actually-make-stuff?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56793127
The first line says it all.
Therefore, if you know nothing about it and can't follow any of this then I wouldn't be unduly concerned. I only know as much as I do because (a) I'm a kind of sponge for useless and irrelevant information and (b) I spent some years working with some other men who were obsessed and talked about it endlessly.
I'd screen it out and move on. It's been a lovely day here. Has it been likewise around your way?
As does my late sister who had a season tickets with Hibs
Some people are making comparisons with Packer in cricket, but that was completely different - and was in large part motivated and motivating, by the appalling pay that International cricketers got for their efforts.
The Glazers are a lot of things, many of them not particularly good, but they are not lunatics. If the price of the new league is leaving the EPL its a non starter.
I never understood how that is legal.
I don't remember any lawsuits from the excluded players?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/32626996
So it is perfectly feasible that England the national squad will not choose players from the Superleague. Ditto Italy, Spain
That is a huge deterrent
This idea is not going to float
It will be messy, because every country has their own laws and legal system.
Mo Salah, who has a four year contract with Liverpool, and he loves playing for Egypt, what does he say to Liverpool if they insist he plays in the Super League?
What's the remedy (and jurisdiction) for an Egyptian national playing in England?
I suspect some countries will say the UEFA/FIFA/National Association decision is a restraint of trade, whilst some other countries back UEFA/FIFA/National associations.
It was deemed by the courts as a restraint of trade.
From hospital admissions
My Dad had his letter framed. He dug it out when he became Honorary Life President of his RU club.
The ICL is another example, I suppose, although that was ultimately crushed by the IPL.
The national coach will be given a policy not to select Superleague players. That ends the international career of anyone in Barca, Real, Man U, Chelsea. A pretty high price to pay, especially when these players are already earning squillions and don't really need more, so money is less of an inducement (unlike the owners)
I can see players as well as fans rebelling
Forget internationals. Consider a promising teenager at one of these clubs.
Most never break the first team properly. But they do go on to have long, lucrative careers lower down the pyramid.
Except, a single game in this league and they won't.
I'd be off if I were them. Double quick if this comes to pass.
See Salah's dispute with the Egyptian FA.
https://www.espn.co.uk/football/egypt/story/3477900/mohamed-salahs-egypt-image-rights-dispute-resolved-after-major-insult
https://twitter.com/MarcusRashford/status/1383839304728780806
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/17853070
With proper promotion and relegation though.
If you play for Barca, Real or Juve you win cups and leagues all the time. You will also win this Superleague a lot. Club glory is a given
Winning the European Championship or, especially, the World Cup is the absolute pinnacle of any great footballer's career. Look how the English worship that winning side in 1966. Still! See how much this annoys the Scots
Win the World Cup and you have the unalloyed adoration of your nation for the rest of your life. You don't get that with a club, no matter how illustrious
For a new Zidane or a Messi, the next Maradona or Beckham - world class players who can seriously dream of a World Cup - giving up that ultimate prize forever would be pretty painful
I think the replies are a result of young uns using Twitter more than their elders.
The same thing happened to me recently. Frozen blue screen on Win 10. Eventually it restarted and was back to normal.
Basically if the thing flops it will be because those pushing it have totally overestimated the demand for the product.
I don't see how you can litigate against that
England men's football team set for row with the FA over who will stump up the tax on their image rights - with the ENTIRE Three Lions squad under investigation by HMRC
The HMRC probe relates to image rights payments made to England by the FA
Players are digging their heels in and feel the governing body should pay the tax
Regular England players can earn £150,000 a year from commercial agreements
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9482705/England-players-tax-row-FA-image-rights-payments.html
Well, one of them at least has.
Ed Davey on European Super League: This is greed personified
Ed Davey MP, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, has criticised the reported new European Super League proposals:
“This is greed personified, ripping the heart out of the English game, leaving clubs up and down the country to suffer after an awful year.
“The Premier League is one of this country’s greatest exports. It helps fund grassroots football across the nation. The consequences of these plans reach far and wide. The Government must step in to prevent a small number of greedy, rich owners destroying the game we all love.”
Anyway, there were still there after 90 minutes (seemingly not doing much) and my curiosity got the better of me. So, I ambled by and saw they were all congregated around a sign saying "Stand In The Park - Petersfield".
I had to look it up on my phone. Turns out this is a worldwide anti-lockdown movement, started in Australia, that encourages people to congregate in their local park every Sunday morning between 10am and 11am on the basis that people power is the only thing that will make governments stop their bullsh*t. It's spread here in recent weeks.
This was easily the most middle-class and gentile protest I'd ever seen. They could have been having cheese and wine or a picnic, for all I knew. They were doing nothing other than chatting or laughing. But, after about a few hours the rozzers turned up (whereupon half of them swiftly strolled away) and had a long word with them. Then, they left after 10 minutes - no arrests - and the rest of them simply carried on.
Whilst I had sympathy with their aims, I can't see that many other parents and families did from my eavesdropping in the kids playground. "They'll put us all in lockdown again" or "I hope they stay over there and give it to each other, but no-one else" was a typical reaction.
Conclusion: most people don't like the restrictions much, but they hate flagrant rulebreakers even more.
Although the latter idea is interesting. ‘Hungary, you lose four points because Orban’s had five judges locked up. Turkey is promoted to full membership in your place.’
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/never-before-seen-images-one-14667382
It's this "football" you keep mentioning ..... I suppose I should think of it as some sort of CDO. Started as a good idea. Spiralled out of control because of the greed of everyone involved. About to destroy the reputation of all involved and splatter shite all over the ordinary people involved.
Would that more or less sum it up?
In rugby situation it is easy, basically no players who would be selected for England play in France. Now the footy, be a brave coach not to select all the best English players from the best 6 teams, that is literally the current England starting 11.