Now the shots have been fired with the European Super League, and those shots turned into blanks, it's time to move on from this dead concept and ask ourselves how a superleague can have a chance. We can have in here discussions centering on how that sl should look like. Obviously not the greed monger's parasite incarnation, but a true Supe League, faithfull to the European values. Second point of discussion is the financial value of it. It was obvious the dead ESL wasnot enough to pay for the bills, as the clubs involved were eager to stay within the leagues. So how is the financial set up going to look like and what can be done to prevent participating clubs get such an advantage financially, that the regular leagues become irrelevant. Feel free to add points of special attention.
There are so many things I'd like to change about the sport (off-sides, pk tiebreakers, VAR, competitive parity, time wasting, etc.). But on the topic of the SL, here's how I'd set it up: The SL would consist of 5-7 League champions from the Top ranked leagues and the 12 group champions from a prelim group stage. This makes it a real "Champions League". Later years would include the reigning SL champ as well as the SL Cup champion (Europa Cup winner) for a 19-Team League. The prelim group stage has 12 groups of 5 teams each seeded by their coefficient rankings. Each team in a group plays the others just once however (2 Home and 2 Away) to lessen fixture congestion. I'd modify the points system as follows: 3-Point AWAY Wins | 2-Point HOME Wins | 1-Point Advantaged DRAW. An Advantaged Draw is based on an in-game stat that favors the team with the most effective attacking movements short of a Goal. This stat IMO is the Dropped Save. A Dropped Save is when you force the keeper to make a save that knocks the ball to the ground or out of bounds. If two teams have the same amount then the team that forced the game's 1st dropped save gets the Advantage Draw point. If no dropped saves in the game, then the away team gets advantage. The 12 group winners go on to the SL Champions League while the #2 and #3 teams in the group proceed to the SL Cup qualifiers (Europa). The SL Cup will start with Home-Away matches for the paired teams. A round of 24, then a round of 12, and then a round of 6 until we have 3 finalists left. These 3 finalists will then be merged back in with the mid-table SL teams to create the SL Cup's final runoff of matches. This may seem overly complicated but I feel it keeps the SL mid-table games competitive and interesting. Now in the SL Champions League, the 19 teams will play each other just once (9 Home, 9 Away) using the modified points systems described earlier. 18 games total. Teams that finish in the Bottom 4 Spots (#16 to #19) suffer a huge drop to their ranking coefficient, thus group seeding gets more difficult for them in the future. This makes it like a relegation battle at the bottom of the table. The #1 team secures home field advantage and their spot in the SL Final game. The #2 team plays a single home match against the #5 team while the #3 plays a home match against the #4 team. Those winners then play each other at the higher ranked team's home in the Semi-Final. Then the winner plays the #1 team in the Final to crown the overall champion. This makes for better TV than simply crowning the #1 team as champion. Mid-table SL teams would essentially be competing for an advantaged position in the SL Cup Final Runoffs in order to keep the mid-table league games competitive. The #10, #11, #12 SL teams play AWAY to the 3 SL Cup finalists mentioned earlier. This is a single game with the Advantaged Draw rule applying as mentioned earlier. Those 3 match winners then play AWAY against the #7, #8, #9 SL Teams at their home. The #6 SL team then joins those 3 match winners to form the SL Cup QF teams. The #6 gets home field advantage while the other matches' home advantage is based on ranking. Semi-Finals and Cup Final then follow with the same rules applying. Potential Issues: Fixture Congestion: The SL teams in this system play an exhausting 18 games in the regular campaign, not to mention the 4 prelim group games and potential extra Cup/Finals runoff games. I used the points system, home advantage runoffs and other tricks to reduce the quantity of matches while ensuring that every team in the Champions SL still plays the others at least once. I'd like to see this modified points system get used in the domestic league campaigns along with a similar reduction in the number of domestic league fixtures. This would allow less congestion for these SL/SLC games to be played. These are just ideas and I know the purists will object to a lot of my approaches to the problems anyway.
When it comes to financial and competitive fairness, I'm actually against the use of salary caps and other money-based tactics to control the unfair advantage some clubs have over others. I feel that rich clubs (and people) always have an army of lawyers and accountants that would give them many ways to get around such regulations. Instead, I'd favor a more football-related strategy by establishing a Player Tier system to maintain fairness. Professional Footballers would be ranked into 3 Tiers based on their positional stats and rankings over the course of a full season. They would rise or fall in levels only after a full season of stats have been assessed. The top 10 players in each position in a league would be Tier-1 while the next 10 ranked for each position would be Tier-2. Tier-3 would include all u-21 players and the remaining lower-ranked positional players in the league. International Transfers would carry over their previous Tier ranking to their new league for their 1st season. A team can only have two T-1 players, four T-2 players and an unlimited number of T-3 players for any single domestic game roster. These limits can be raised for European competitions however, or simply changed around a bit if people feel they're too restrictive. The main thing is that it establishes competitive results through fair football merits rather than money. If a team has too many T-1 players on its full roster, they'll simply have to loan them out to other teams OR spread them out effectively throughout the various games. Not only would it make the matches more competitive, but then it helps us see how good these players and managers really are when they're working with a more even playing field.
For me the system they were proposing wasn't too outlandish, save for there should be no permanent members. If I were running a Super League I'd mirror what they do in Euroleague Basketball and offer medium term "A licenses" for a period of 5-10 years. The license would be reviewed the year before expiry, to be renewed a club would have to show it had won X number of domestic titles and placed in the top 3 of it's domestic league X number of times. This eliminates the argument that the teams competing wouldn't compete properly in the domestic league as they would have to do so to ensure their continued Super League status. There would also be some sort of financial requirement for the A license to be renewed, eg not carrying toxic levels of debt and not breaching FFP. The league wouldn't be a completely closed shop with shorter term "B licenses" issued to teams who win certain domestic leagues (based on the highest UEFA country ranking), and the winner of the Champions league. These shorter licenses might be for two seasons or one. Controversial perhaps, but I would also have an annual "wildcard" slot which could be given to a team who perhaps has had it's prospects transformed overnight by being bought by billionaires and could thus reasonably complete in the transfer market with the Super League sides, or perhaps a team that has simply performed well over the past few seasons in domestic and European competition. This is what more or less what they do in Euroleague Basketball and to be honest that works quite well.
Suggestions have to fit within the framework of European laws. So rules that interfere with the freedom of contract, like the suggested player tiers arenot realistic.
https://www.politico.eu/article/hold-football-super-league-court-hearing-set-for-july/ Football Super League court hearing set for July The legal dispute could shape the organization of football in Europe for decades to come. By Ali Walker June 3, 2022 6:27 pm The EU’s top court will hear football's would-be Super League battle against the sport's governing bodies on July 11-12, four football officials with direct knowledge told POLITICO. The European Court of Justice will hear the challenge from three of Europe’s wealthy top clubs against rules set by UEFA that they claim unfairly restrict them from setting up a rival competition. The dispute could shape the organization of football on the Continent for decades to come. European champions Real Madrid, Barcelona and Italy’s Juventus are still fighting for the Super League project — which launched and immediately collapsed after a massive fan and political backlash during a tumultuous two-day period in April 2021. The clubs claim that UEFA and FIFA have a monopoly on the organization and authorization of international competitions. At least 15 EU countries have lined up to support UEFA’s position in their observations to the court. Many of their submissions cite protection for the European Model of Sport — a bulwark against American-style closed sports league. Following the initial wave of outrage against the football rebels, the EU took steps to fortify the sports model with the Council adopting a resolution and Parliament backing a report in opposition to Super League-style projects. Super League backers wrote in a letter to MEPs last November that “there is no other market in the European Union in which a regulator would also be allowed to be the sole, dominant operator and gatekeeper.” The case is C-333/21 European Superleague Company. The Court of Justice was asked to rule on points of EU law by a Madrid tribunal. Its judgment will guide a final decision from the Spanish court.
Meanwhile: https://www.marca.com/en/football/2022/04/21/62616f2a268e3e270d8b458f.html Super League Super League: Judge gives UEFA green light to sanction Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus UEFA's opposition to injunctions was upheld on Thursday EFE ADAPTED BY SAM 21/04/2022 - 10:09 CDT The judge of Madrid's 17th Commercial Court, Sofia Gil Garcia, has upheld UEFA's opposition to the injunction granted in April 2021 regarding the Super League case and has agreed to lift the restraining measures, according to the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM). The judge made her ruling after the hearing on April 1 with the various parties to decide whether to maintain the precautionary measure, which forced UEFA to suspend its disciplinary proceedings against Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, who continue to be involved in the Super League project. The court ruling states that "there is not the slightest evidence that the threat and imposition of sanctions on the three remaining clubs entails the necessary impossibility of executing the project, the financing of which is independent," as compared to the argument that these would frustrate the execution of the project defended by the plaintiffs - A22 Sports Management S.L. and European Super League Company S.L. "It is insisted that the financing would be jeopardised, but the fact is that the partners and the plaintiff companies are independent legal persons and in any case, at the time of the development of the project, the intervening parties - including the financial institutions - were perfectly aware of the possible consequences, which did not prevent the adoption of financing commitments, which cannot be assumed or presumed to be frustrated by the possible sanctions," it adds. "Sporting merit and equal opportunities must be guaranteed." The judge considers the system of prior permission for alternative competitions by UEFA and FIFA to be "reasonable and justified" and "in the interests of preserving equal opportunities for the clubs involved in the sports industry," as the economic capacity of the clubs is "very unequal" and this influences the real possibilities of developing a competition, be it funded by the individual clubs or by third parties, as is the case in this instance. It adds that "sporting merit and equal opportunities must be guaranteed, which could be undermined by the obvious economic inequalities between participants." "The huge economic interests that football matches provide to clubs, players and managers pose an obvious risk to the maintenance and protection of the basic principles of any sport; it is necessary to preserve them in order to prevent the aforementioned economic interest from prevailing over all of them," she states. In view of this, the judge maintains that "a mechanism of control of the competitions that may be organised is justified, whether by means of prior authorisation by the governing bodies or by means of other systems", so that "as a precautionary measure, it cannot be considered that the system of prior authorisation by UEFA, which has not been followed in the present case, is not acceptable." The order dismisses complaint against UEFA's and FIFA's abuse of power The order rejects that UEFA and FIFA have abused their power by combining commercial and regulatory functions, as the plaintiffs claim, and by organising competitions. "It cannot be accepted as a precautionary measure that the defendants have an unjustified and arbitrary cover to prevent the entry of new competitors in the internal football market, which by its object and effect is a restriction of competition". Among her arguments for upholding UEFA's opposition to the maintenance of the injunctions, the judge considers justified "the need for institutions of control, management and organisation that must ensure a system in accordance with sporting principles". "It cannot be inferred that the existing system and control would produce anti-competitive effects, as claimed, without the plaintiffs having tried to act in accordance with the established channels. On this basis, it has already been stated that not every regulation that imposes requirements or compliance with conditions can be considered an obstacle to free competition", he insists. The order, against which an appeal can be lodged before the Madrid Provincial Court, was made public 20 days after the hearing to oppose the injunctions issued by the court itself a year ago, in which UEFA ratified its opposition, the co-defendants LaLiga and the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) made allegations and the plaintiffs ESLC and A22 requested that the injunctions be maintained. Among the precautionary measures, adopted by the former head of the court, Manuel Ruiz de Lara, UEFA and FIFA were ordered during the main trial to refrain from taking any action that would directly or indirectly hinder or obstruct the development of the Super League and prohibited the threat or adoption of any disciplinary or sanctioning measures. Last July, Ruiz de Lara ordered UEFA to close the disciplinary proceedings against Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus, and to drop the "disguised sanctions" against the other nine clubs that resigned from the project - Arsenal, AC Milan, Chelsea, Atletico Madrid, Inter, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur. In the case of the latter, it referred to the reduction of five percent of revenues and the contribution to the Solidarity Fund with 15 million euros and the penalty of 100 million euros in case of non-compliance if they seek to participate in the European Super League. The pre-trial hearing will be held on 14 June, according to the judge on 12 April, in which she declared FIFA in contempt of court for failing to appear as a co-defendant within the deadline to answer the lawsuit. Super League will appeal The Super League organisers will appeal to the Provincial Court of Madrid against the decision of the 17th Commercial Court of Madrid. Super League sources confirmed to EFE that they will appeal to the corresponding instance, in this case the Provincial Court of Madrid, the decision of the judge Sofia Gil Garcia known on Thursday. "If they play other competitions, they won't play ours". Aleksander Ceferin has repeatedly threatened to expel teams playing in the European Super League from UEFA competitions. "Clubs are free to create their own tournament, but don't expect to compete in UEFA competitions. I am tired of this football project," he declared.
Sports Minister Conny Helder speaks out against the Super League: 'Not good for Dutch football' https://www.ad.nl/nederlands-voetba...-niet-goed-voor-nederlands-voetbal~ad205fd61/
Looks like they will try again https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/20159704/european-super-league-ceo-start-date/
The big problem they have isnot off the table. The first projections were a superleague with the clubs being able to outshine financially the rest of football on their own. That turned out not possible, so they tried the version of a superleague with the clubs still in their domestic leagues. That's not going to happen, as you can't be part of something and at the same time part of an entire other organisation that has as a goal to take money from the first one=killing the Champions League.. There already has been a case like that in the highest European court (problem is I can't find it anymore) in which a company was part of a business organisation and profited from it's activities, but joined a competing business organisation, while staying in the first one. The first organisation kicked them out (akin to what the FA's/UEFA threaten to do) and that company sued them, as they wanted to profit from both organisations. They lost their case. Anyway, a SL without English clubs is a DOA and both the EU and the UK have the tools to prevent it from becoming a real thing. It was impossible to stop clubs from forming a new organisation, but after Brexit such organisations need the approval of both the EU and the UK.
One thing that is overlooked by A22 Sports Management is the fact that the ones with deep pockets, American billionairs, can't compete with the ones having control over for instance PSG and Newcastle United. When you talk about people with deep pockets=American billionairs, those other guys are in the canyon deep league. Superstars are their targets and what they can pay no club A22 represents can afford
The three last standing supporters of the esl,Juve, Barca and Real really need a wake up call. Juve's claim as belonging in that elusive exclusive superclubs isnot very much supported by their performance the last few years. They've been destroyed by clubs, Ajax and Benfica for instance, from leagues with far less standing and power as the Serie A. Barca hardly does better then Juve. But we know the esl isnot about merit.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/64536218 Football regulator: UK government confirms new independent body By Jonathan JurejkoBBC Sport Blocking clubs from joining a breakaway European Super League will be among the powers held by English football's new independent regulator. The plan for a regulator, recommended by a fan-led review last year, has been confirmed by the UK government. Preventing historic clubs going out of business is one of the aims, as well as giving fans greater input and a new owners' and directors' test. The significant move aims to protect English football's cultural heritage. The main purposes of the proposed new regulator will be: Stopping English clubs from joining closed-shop competitions, which are judged to harm the domestic game Preventing a repeat of financial failings seen at numerous clubs, notably the collapses of Bury and Macclesfield Introducing a more stringent owners' and directors' test to protect clubs and fans Giving fans power to stop owners changing a club's name, badge and traditional kit colours Ensuring a fair distribution of money filters down the English football pyramid from the Premier League "The English game remains one of the UK's greatest cultural exports, with clubs and leagues around the world modelling themselves on its success," the government said before its white paper on football governance - a policy document which outlines the proposed legislation - is released on Thursday.
It's a good thing these guys didnot submit this as a thesis, because the Supreme Court has other ideas: https://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl...per-league-opening-floodgates-competition-law Funny they didnot do a follow up with the Supreme Court advice out.
league only format = clubs take part fans boycott it. knockout only format = fans take part clubs boycott it. league and knock out format = fans and clubs take part. so only the compromise of a league and knock out format works. like we have in the Uefa champions League group stage format and knockout rounds. simple as that.
Dortmund doing their level best atm to make the case for the need for a Super League , Bayern about to win the Bundesliga for the 11th consecutive time with a pitiful return of 71 points from 34.
What do you think about the plan that rose two decades ago for a combined league of the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Scotland? It could be that Norway and Ireland were in it too.
I feel the European Super League (ESL) is a good idea. The principle that the best play the best regularly is not new and has seized all sports past, present and probably future. And, without grandstanding and any holier-than-thou statements, that is essentially what all fans want – the best entertainment for their valuable time.