Well, if that's against the ruling, it's easy to test it. Make a start ready a full fledged competition with clubs contracted, sound financial backing of that competition (to last longer than 2 years) and agreements with all the governments of the countries in which the clubs will play their competition (remember, this esl concept is a business model, so permits and cost of policing will have to be agreed on) and submit it to UEFA and when one thinks the time to decide is too long, take it to court. The Spanish court has made it very clear they didnot (want to) make a verdict on the esl, as they don't rule on fictitious cases, only real ones. This goes for any court in Europe. So to take UEFA to court you will have to have the goods ready, which given the billions needed for getting it started with the risk it can be torpedoed and those billions lost, is a hard task to complete. I like to learn about the economic sense of it. So please elaborate on that assertion.
What you've just written is the sort of thing I believe the court intended UEFA to create, some sort of parameters for creating a competition. Instead all UEFA has done has said apply 12 months in advance and then we can say no. There's no point in trying to create anything if you don't know what grounds it can be accepted or rejected on. The Spanish court made it very clear that being a regulator/administrator and organiser of a for profit competition is a conflict of interest. UEFA can continue as regulator and administrator but when it comes to organising the big cups it has to be open to competition. That's the way EU competition law works, there is currently no exception for sport.
UEFA is as corrupt as FIFA. Maybe more so now that Blatter is gone from FIFA: https://football-italia.net/boban-slams-uefa-think-bigger-than-football/
That format is NOT a Super League. But you knew that already. Will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Nearly every post you make you twist the ruling to make it sound like UEFA somehow "won". They didn't. The ruling is pretty clear that they abused their monopolistic position. If they continue to do so, they will be sued and lose again.
If ESL intended to proceed, the next step is to submit something to UEFA and see what happens, then go down a legal road. I haven't seen anything indicating they're even planning to do that.
Gsus, UEFA has to submit to the Swiss authorities their financial activities and all their revenues and expenditures has to be in the books. Boban slams egotrippers, not frauds. When people go the path of accusing corruption, it's simply a matter to report it to the authorities to take it on. It's quite easy to slur without putting proof on the table. Do you have proof of your accusation of corruption?
Well there's no point in spending say €1 million Euros in creating and organising something if you don't know what the parameters are for acceptance or rejection.
These seem problematic to me: --- Where relevant, the Organiser shall provide confirmation that the clubs concerned can always comply with their obligation to: a. field their strongest team throughout UEFA club competitions and national club competitions and any other International Club Competition authorised by UEFA; --- 4 In order to protect the sporting merit of UEFA Champion Club Competitions, the good functioning of the international calendar as well as the health and safety of players, authorisation of an International Club Competition shall be subject to the following cumulative conditions so that it shall not adversely affect the good functioning of UEFA Champion Club Competitions with respect to: a. the participation of the following qualified clubs for determination of a champion club of Europe in each respective category: (i) the club is qualified to play as the winner of the top domestic league championship; or 8 (ii) the club is qualified to play as runner-up or qualified through the top domestic league championship in accordance with UEFA’s association coefficient ranking; or (iii) the club is qualified to play as the titleholder of the UEFA Champion Club Competition; or (iv) the club is qualified to play as the titleholder of the UEFA Europa League; b. the commitment by and duties of all qualified clubs participating in the UEFA Champion Club Competition to field their strongest team throughout the competition; c. the commitment by and duties of all qualified clubs participating in the UEFA Champion Club Competition to play only in such competition: (i) until their elimination up to the completion of qualifying rounds and/or play-offs; and/or (ii) for the duration of the UEFA Champion Club Competition for all successive rounds until its completion. So you can compete with us as long as you don't affect our competitions.
Mmm, I think it's in your framework of how you look at the esl, uefa and don't like comments that are deviant from that. It's a matter of fact UEFA lost the case. Much to my surprise, because there is a ruling/law by the EU that has put UEFA as the monopolist of football in the EU. That was also the base on which the provisional ruling by the AG of the court was based, in which he adviced uefa as the party that was right. So it was a huge surprise the ECJ decided the opposite and the reason was, as one legal analyst put it, the ECJ concluded that the EU had made that ruling, but without teeth. So basically, because of that, the monopoly given by the EU de facto didnot exist and thus uefa has to comply to the rules of competition. Within the context of uefa itself, the ECJ has explicitly ruled uefa has the right to judge within transparent rules, whether it allows a competition or not. Put simply, an esl completely unattached to uefa has no need for approval of uefa. That means participating clubs are outside uefa. When clubs stay within uefa, the need of approval from uefa kicks in. If you don't like this, tough luck, but that's the verdict in short. When the very first idea of a superleague was published, a league of the superclubs going rogue, leaving their FA's, I already claimed that was a sure way to default for the clubs concerned. That became clear to those behind that idea, so they dumped that and came up with the alternative, staying in their leagues, but competing with the CL. That idea lasted 24 hours and met the reaction of uefa, which got contested in court. So the esl has two options. First to go rogue completely and have nothing to do with uefa at all, or start something, while member clubs stay part of uefa,in which case you have to submit your plan to uefa. UEFA has lost on two important issues. The ECJ has nullified their monopolistic grip within the EU by ruling the EU law giving them that was insufficient. The EJC has reduced uefa's internal power by ruling that competing initiatives have to be judged by transparent rules (these rules must meet EU rules
These have to be in the rules as ordered by the ECJ. If you don't know from those rules what criteria you have to meet, these obviously arenot transparent.
They're not currently as far as I can tell. But I'm not a lawyer. I think in an ECJ/Spanish court world, Real Madrid could compete in La Liga but choose to compete in the ESL rather than the UCL without sanctions. UEFA obviously still forbids that.
Dunno if that (UEFA obviously still forbids that) is the case. About ten years ago there was a verdict by the ECJ about a company that was member of a business association. That association found out they joined a business association competing with them on the same markets. They kicked that company out. It went to court up to the ECJ. The ECJ ruled you can't benefit from the perks of one club and at the same time be member of another club, profiting benefits at the cost of members of the first one. (I can't find that verdict anymore, so if you find something interesting on the internet, copy it and at least the internet address of that item, because when you need it again, it can be very hard to find it back). In the Real case you suggested I think you're right, unless Real wants to compete in both the esl AND the CL. The key to that I think is the question whether that form of esl competes with the CL, or that it addresses a different market.
They've spent many millions just litigating it so far. Plus the cost to prepare that rollout video, it must have been ... at least 10 euro. Madrid's players are registered under the auspices of the RSFF, which is a UEFA member. That's why the teeth that came out against SL in the first place were related to player bans.
It seems like UEFA is opposed to governments stepping in to protect football. "In a letter sent to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, which has been leaked to The Times, European football’s governing body UEFA outlined concerns that an independent regulator could constitute government interference in sport. UEFA general secretary Theodore Theodoridis wrote there should be “no government interference in the running of football”, according to the newspaper, and that an independent regulator could lead to England being excluded from UEFA in the worst-case scenario." - ITV