NASL Files Federal Antitrust Lawsuit Against US Soccer

I wonder how much the threat of the NISA going forward in 2018 prompted USSF to drop NASL's status.

I imagine they were ok with NASL just evaporating, but starting up a doomed pro league is not good for soccer at all. Now NISL has nowhere to promote to.

 

I love this from the NASL Statement:

The complaint alleges that the USSF has selectively applied and waived its divisional criteria to suppress competition from the NASL, both against MLS and against United Soccer League (USL). For example, under the USSF’s divisional criteria, there are European clubs that have successfully operated for decades that would be considered ineligible for “Division I” or even “Division II” status due to arbitrary requirements like stadium capacity and market size.

Hmmmmm..... I seem to remember Serie A requiring smaller teams to play in OTHER stadiums, due to their home stadiums NOT meeting certain criteria....

Also, didn't Blackpool have to add seats to their stadium in order to play in the EPL?

I'm calling Shenanigans on this "Lawsuit."

 

Isn't this the type of thing FIFA generally sanctions other (smaller) leagues for, for getting the courts involved in governing soccer?

 

Another odd thing...this lawsuit mentions time and again how things are done around the world yet...how many countries have multiple top tier leagues?

 

The irony is that they asked for standards which allowed the nasl to become div ii and pushed the USL to div iii.

 

The first citation is to Bleacher Report?

********ING BLEACHER REPORT?

 

Safe to assume we're looking at their death throes?
Basically just doing anything in an attempt to still exist next season or to get something for their efforts?

 

As if that was going to happen anyway.

 

They have been known to threaten that, yes.

 

He has, actually. And it is exactly what you'd expect it to be.

 

I was actually pretty impressed by his willingness to point out some of the basic mistakes neo-NASL made and more especially, their central role in determining D2 standards. The NASL founders wanted to make sure what was left of USL could never challenge them and encouraged USSF to set requirements which would favor them forever. (Or half a dozen years, whichever comes first.)

 

In theory, of course. But it really would underscore the hot mess they are getting into.

 

Just thinking about this a bit more.

So the NASL is asking the court should issue an injunction maintaining their Division II status. Presumably, to do that, they'll have to show irreparable harm if their Division II status is revoked.

But the NASL is simultaneously arguing that the entire sanctioning regime is illegal and should be permanently enjoined. Which would presumably result in them losing their Division II status, because there would be no more division sanctioning.

Actual question: Can they even do that?

Edit:

Also, anyone know if USSF can ask for security for costs?

 

If memory serves one of the big stumbling blocks last year was the exit fee. Thry had to give notice in the summer to either avoid a fee or pay a really small one. Also i think that their contract expired this year so they, or others, could leave on a free so to speak.

Or something along those lines.

 

Does that mean Rocco Commisso gets to be POTUS some day?

 

Way ahead of you! And by that I mean, I just sat down.

 

And in reality. They were planning to try to institute once they were "built out" at 24 teams (in year three, which was a stretch for starters). At which point they would still have the not-insignificant problem of convincing the NASL that it was in their best interests to swap, say, Orange County for Omaha because Omaha won whatever 14-game season or playoffs or whatever and Orange County finished a point behind Jacksonville.

Beyond ideology, which is neither here nor there, it makes no sense.

And if that is their differentiator, and they end up with no league above them that is not named USL, they're just another D3 league. Which, at this moment, has applicants and no actual teams and no sanctioning.

 

Also, comparing market sizes in European countries to market sizes in the US is seriously flawed. The US has way more large markets and in Europe soccer is king so a smaller market isn't a big deal. When soccer is the number 1 sport it is much more likely succeed in a smaller market.
This is a very silly comparison and anyone with a brain can see that.

 

Bitcoin.

 

Yeah, they can. If the court sides with them, it would just accept one argument and not the other.

 

I prefer SchruteBucks.

 

I wonder what kind of team would vote each way...