The [Horribly Unpopular] Soccer Thread

[Birrofilo]

Oh the collapse is glorious.

Sounds like Woodward and Agnelli have resigned over it. Hopefully Levy does the same.

Andrea Agnelli resigned from his post at UEFA and at ECA before the announcement of the Superleague. He did not resign from his post at Juventus!

Barcelona confirms they remain. All Italian and Spanish teams so far stand their ground. We'll see what happens in the UK.

The menace by Boris Johnson to deny visas to play the matches could be an idea taken from Stalin. Don't you have freedom of movement in the UK? Do you need a permission to expatriate?

Interference of politics into sport matters is worrying from a freedom point of view.

Manchester City might have made this "decision" due to the bullying by the UEFA. They still have to play the semifinals of Champions League and they fear the (illegal) sanctions by UEFA with immediate expulsion from the competition. We will know only this summer who is in, and who is out.

Chelsea is also said to be considering withdrawing, possibly for the same reasons as Manchester City.

At 22:50 Italian time, the meeting of the Superleague teams is over. Only Manchester City is officially out. All other 5 British teams are in. Chelsea will probably withdraw if UEFA menaces continue, but the door remains open.

Club Olimpia (Paraguay), Boca Juniors (Argentina) and River Plate (Argentina) seem to have posed a candidature to participate.

Perez says that PSG and Bayern will enter the league, when the time is mature (he might be right).

 

[Qhrumphf]

And that's it. All English clubs out. It's dead.

 

[soccerdad]

Has Boris Johnson upstaged Donald Trump? It took Trump 2 seasons to kill the US (American) Football League.

 

[Qhrumphf]

AC Milan is out as well.

 

[Qhrumphf]

BoJo is a **** in his own right but let's keep politics out of the thread.

 

[Qhrumphf]

I hope that this leads in England to the implementation of the German 50%+1 system.

 

[Birrofilo]

The project will probably fail.
I suppose it will be resuscitated, in one or two years time, possibly not contacting the clubs which withdrew today.

I would not entirely rule out that the clubs want to end the season, get the money from UEFA, and reconsider, although I don't consider it very likely. I consider the attitude of the British clubs perfidious (as in treacherous).

UEFA as it is now is a disaster in any case: too many matches, most matches totally uninteresting for the Chinese viewers (yes, that's where the money comes from), too little money produced. This is business, is not only sport. Agnelli is right: those who put the money, and those who put the legs, have no part in decisions. UEFA decides all, and does nothing.

Euroleague in basket was a success, and I think it doesn't end here.

The final solution might be a new federation, with several layers of competition (to have promotions and retrocessions) but managed by clubs and players, not by "bureaucrats".

 

[Birrofilo]

According to a news published by Mundo Deportivo, the reason why the British clubs withdrew is that the UEFA offered them money to remain. This is very questionable legally, and if true, although we don't know the exact amount, we can count them as thirty dinar.

 

[Qhrumphf]

That's it. FIFA and UEFA are corrupt no doubt. Any change has to come in cooperation with clubs and their supporters, not rich owners (as the THST said in a statement to ENIC about this "you're merely caretakers of 139 years of history").

It's telling that players and managers knew nothing about this, let alone supporters.

 

[Qhrumphf]

The reason British clubs pulled is because there are already protests by their own supporters as well as their opponents as even their own players.

 

[Birrofilo]

That's it. FIFA and UEFA are corrupt no doubt. Any change has to come in cooperation with clubs and their supporters, not rich owners (as the THST said in a statement to ENIC about this "you're merely caretakers of 139 years of history").

It's telling that players and managers knew nothing about this, let alone supporters.

Supporters don't seem to be glad to put the money. Screaming and drinking beer is not enough. A system like they have in Barcelona, where supporters put the money, gives them the right to make decisions, else the supporters have no place in making decisions, and they never had one. The attitude by the teams is political posturing. The British clubs withdrew IMHO for very different reasons than a few hundreds supporters not liking the decision, but they played the "democratic football club" once the decision to withdraw was taken.
This happens any time a club sells a valuable player, some people will go in front of the seat of the club and "demonstrate". Who cares.

Players and financiers are the stakeholders to be taken into consideration. If you manage a theatre, you don't ask the public how do you want to organize the season.

This is serious business, also for the 5 British clubs. They have the same problems that the other great teams have. Problems which could be have been solved by a salary cap, if UEFA was not so corrupted as to allow some to break the rules and some not.

Participation in the Champions League brings the level of investment to "another level", and can be nullified by a bad day.

In Italy, Inter Milan and Juventus have 70% of the audience, and bring 70% of the money to the FIGC. The reason why the FIGC is so opposed to these three teams leaving (the same for Britain) is that the Italian Championship, without them, would lose 70% of its value, actually much more, as the foreign audience mostly only cares for these three teams. The teams wanted to play the national championships though, and the menace by FIGC to ban them was never credible.

The Champions League, which is becoming more and more absurd, together with the Europa League and the third league which is going to start next year, would lose a lot of money in TV contracts if the Superleague is born. That's why UEFA is pissed. Sport values have nothing to do with UEFA "indignation".

Regarding the financing of the "pyramid" (amateurs clubs, local stadions, schools, in short "the movement") the Superleague would have generated 4x the money the Champions League generates for the "pyramid", so it's not solidarity at all the problem.

 

[soccerdad]

That's it. FIFA and UEFA are corrupt no doubt. Any change has to come in cooperation with clubs and their supporters, not rich owners (as the THST said in a statement to ENIC about this "you're merely caretakers of 139 years of history").

It's telling that players and managers knew nothing about this, let alone supporters.

Hey - - you said to keep politics out.

 

[Birrofilo]

The process which begun in this day is, in reality, irreversible.

The NFL has 300 millions supporters in the world and is worth in rights twice what the entire world football generates, with 3 billions supporters.

The traditional formulas, which were born when the "movement" was immensely smaller, do not hold any more. We are just multiplying matches with little spectacular interest (they can be exceptionally good for the fan, but boring for the foreign viewer who sees the match because it is spectacular) and this multiplication appears to be unending. National Championships have more and more matches, teams engaged in the UEFA competitions are more and more.

When the Champions League was born, it deserved its name. It was a competition between Championship winners. Now it's a salad with most games which are interesting only for the fans.

UEFA and FIFA do not "valorize" the "show" side of the sport. This is the big problem. The big guys make great investments and take great risks. The players are overstressed and we see a continuous list of unavailable players for various injuries. UEFA is pursuing a direction which is 100 years old. World change. He who hesitates is lost. High-level Football must change.

 

[soccerdad]

In many ways, the stupor league tried to emulate the US pro sports system where the ridiculously rich own teams and get ridiculously richer from all revenues including gate receipts and broadcast rights. No one is ever relegated. It works for bigger cities and regional hubs like Green Bay, but smaller cities are left out entirely. There are no B leagues to move into or back out of with hopes for glory. Even the minor league system in baseball is constantly on shaky ground. Better for EPL, Serie A and La Liga to work on improvements to their systems than throw out the proverbial bathwater. And when the Americans who own 3% of the club start preaching how to fix it .....

 

[Birrofilo]

The model for the Superleague was the Euroleague in basket.

I don't follow basket but for what I know there are already three layers. It takes time.

Anyway if this is show, you don't need retrocessions necessarily. Take Formula 1. Each stable is in the competition without retrocession. Even after awful seasons, a stable is not excluded from the competition. Formula 1 is overall to be correctly defined as a sport competition. This is true for many sport disciplines. Football is the exception, not the normality.

In Formula 1, is not the FIE who decides the rules and who gets the money. It's the team themselves through some organs. All economic and regulatory aspect are decided by the teams, not by some federation deciding "from above".

The second most practised sport in Italy is cycling. There is no such a thing as "retrocession" in professional cycling. For instance in the Giro d'Italia, the most important cycling race in Italy, the organizer invites the teams at its own discretion. It works since more than a century, and I suppose the Tour de France and the Vuelta work the same. The judges themselves are nominated by the organizers, not by the federation.

Those private tournaments coexist peacefully with the competitions organized by the federation belonging to the Italian Olympic Committee.

Wherever you look at, you find competitions without retrocessions and organized by invitation, and nobody thinks they are not sports. And the federations belonging to the Olympic Committee never place exclusivity clauses.

I see no reason for this fuss, besides the arrogance of UEFA and their fear to lose the money.

 

[toadie]

I don't have an educated opinion to counter with but from a distance the various leagues don't seem to be on an equal footing. If I were a PSG or a Juve I would be interested in a bigger money more eyeballs scenario. At the moment this doesn't seem to be true for atleast the top half of the Premiership. The slight majority ownership by the fans in the Bundesliga has always struck me as a better business model but the horse is out of the barn.

 

[Birrofilo]

@toadie

The 50+1 rule in the Bundesliga simply means that a Football Club, which is a firm at all effect, can not sell (for instance by selling shares) more than half (less one) share of the capital. That prevents a club from being acquired in the financial market. This has nothing to do with fans' ownership though.
A club can be owned 100% by a single individual, and that single individual, if he sells shares of the Club, must retain 50% + 1 share.

The only club that I am aware of in the Bundesliga to be owned by fans is Schalke 04 but I could be wrong. It's a sad day for them today, they were relegated mathematically to the second division.

 

[Qhrumphf]

RB Leipzig have certainly tested the limits of Germany's ownership rules.

 

[bkboiler]

I think this kind of elitist breakout was inevitable when some clubs have so much depth that their second string players can field a squad that is still competitive for the top 4...
Clubs like MUFC can play 1st team in prem games and 2nd team in super league...
When that much financial disparity is present between some premier league clubs and others, they'll be collusion to figure out how to game the system...
Glad the fans stood up to this and let the clubs know it wasn't the league or it's president they're screwing, or even UEFA or FIFA...it truly would be the fans...
And moreover, the fans are the BOSS! just like any publicly owned corporation...the customer is always right and so is the shareholder.

 

[Birrofilo]

And moreover, the fans are the BOSS! just like any publicly owned corporation...the customer is always right and so is the shareholder.

The customer never decides which product to produce, at which price to sell etc. The customer never was the boss. Nor the fan. The shareholder is he who puts the money. He should be the boss, but isn't. The boss is UEFA. UEFA doesn't put the capital, doesn't make the work, but makes all decisions.

 

[Birrofilo]

Official announcement of the suspension of the Superleague project, with the intent of reworking it.
In Italian.
https://www.tuttonapoli.net/in-prim...i-passaggi-per-rimodellare-il-progetto-466606

 

[bkboiler]

The customer never decides which product to produce, at which price to sell etc. The customer never was the boss. Nor the fan. The shareholder is he who puts the money. He should be the boss, but isn't. The boss is UEFA. UEFA doesn't put the capital, doesn't make the work, but makes all decisions.

agreed, clubs were very out of touch to think the customer wanted this...or knew what the customer wanted but didn't care.
Knew that UEFA or FIFA wouldn't approve, but didn't care.
Reminds me of a quote from the movie Judge Dredd, "I AM THE LAW!"

 

[soccerdad]

The customer never decides which product to produce, at which price to sell etc. The customer never was the boss. Nor the fan. The shareholder is he who puts the money. He should be the boss, but isn't. The boss is UEFA. UEFA doesn't put the capital, doesn't make the work, but makes all decisions.

I learned business differently Birro...
The first responsibility of a business is to its shareholders (or owners). If no one owns the business, there is no business. If my $1000 in the bank earns 2.75%, maybe I'll buy a share of X Corp that might bring 4.75%. If it brings me 0, I will dump it. If I think it will bring me 15% in both good times and bad, I have probably been drinking too much of my own beer,
The second responsibility of a business is to its customers. Give them a good product at the right price or shutter the place. If there is no revenue, there is no business.
The third responsibility is to employees and staff. Get the best you can at the price you can afford. Don't hire Modric if you can't afford Modric. But hire the right marketing person and maybe next year revenue will increase.

My point is that your customers maybe sort of kind of would buy or not buy Super League, but they do indeed buy a chance at the league championship and Champions league entry. So thats' what you sell to honor your first and third obligations. Without fans, you have nothing.

 

[Birrofilo]

@soccerdad

A firm produces a product because they think there is a market for the product. There is no responsibility for customers whatsoever. You can build bicycles, and then you decide to move into cars. You can ditch the bicycle business and concentrate on cars. The fact that your customers say "hey I liked your bicycles" doesn't matter to the business. The Scuderia Ferrari might abandon Formula 1 tomorrow and concentrate on endurance races and the fans would have no part in this. (Both are not "sports" if we have to believe the recent ideas expressed by many, not to mention Formula E). Or could create, with other teams, a separate championship and it would be normal. Fans wouldn't object.

Remember all those football clubs were born without fans. When they became businesses, the thing that matter is selling the product, overall. Fans are not special, in this respect, they give no more than distant Chinese TV viewers. They are all customers. If they want to see the show, they pay. If they don't want, they don't pay. It's easy and it has always been this way. You get no right of vote because you go to the stadium.

A firm does what is in their interest. Good post-sale service is in the interest of the firm because it builds reputation, not for moral reasons. Fidelity to a style of beer is in the interest of the brewery because it exploits the reputation of the beer, not because beer enthusiasts like it. The bottom line is what matters.

A few hundreds fans, probably belonging to the scum of the bleachers (the "Vikings" in the case of Juventus), never had the possibility to change clubs' decisions. Those clubs are in troubled waters, Covid created huge holes in their accounts. Fans don't realize that Clubs do go bankrupt. Money made them change decisions much more likely. Tottenham was among the firmest supporters of the project, and changed their mind in half an hour.

In any case, truth be told, it's not important for those Clubs if they lose 10% of the supporters, who wake up one morning and discover that this is professional sport. For the Clubs the important is that they get the money by selling the product all over the world.

@bkboiler

What FIFA and UEFA think has nothing to do with Clubs decisions. FIFA and UEFA do not own Clubs.

 

[Qhrumphf]

Business owners matter in the same sense that money matters- only because we think they do and an authority that tries to enforce it. Its not who "puts the money" who really matters. It's who puts the *labor*. As with all businesses, what the owner wants means f*** all the instant the employees withhold labor. The club owner is nothing without the players and staff. And then the fans/customers secondary to that. Those two factors are perfectly capable of running the club without the owner. Owners power is solely by fiat (just as money is). They're fundamentally parasites.

And then, in the case of football, players ultimately come and go. Owners can just go. Let the fans dictate the direction of the clubs, 100%.

I don't care at all for what some billionaire thinks he can make off of a club older than his grandfather. Football belongs to the people.

In my ideal world, at least.

(Perhaps at this point you've got me sussed as a St. Pauli supporter as well lol)

 

[Birrofilo]

@Qhrumphf

I don't want to enter into this economic-political-philosophical discussion of the relationship between capital and labour. Many wars have been fought for that.

Let's say that what you call the "parasites" risk the billions, and what you call the "employees", in this football world, earn scandalous salaries and bear no risk (if we except the bankruptcy of the "parasite", but they will find another contract).

In all this, I don't see how the fans should decide anything.

Football doesn't belong to people at all.

As a Juventus fan, I understand I have no weight in any decision, nor should I have it. I love the colours. I trust the captain of the ship, which is not my ship just because I love it.

 

[Qhrumphf]

Back to matters of substance, it's nice to see the lads play with freedom. Even if only for the second half.

Great result. #ENICout

 

[Nubiwan]

Whats made me laugh in all this ESL hyperbole, is that football, in its present state, was somehow worth defending. What a crock. My immediate reaction to the ESL announcement was, "who really gives a toss?" Game is so far removed from your average joe, its not funny.

I mean, i was born in Liverpool, and lived there till the 80s. Even while living there, it was pretty extravagant to go to the match, in terms of ticket cost, but it was affordable. My club was essentially made up of British lads, with a smattering of foreign talent, maybe 2-3 non Brits in the squad. All league games kicked off at 3 every saturday. Might have been a midweek european match, or cup replay. 42 games a season, and up to 50-60 if you remained in decent cup runs. FA cup was a prestigious trophy, and if you won it, youd be heralded as one of the best teams in the land. Rightly or wrongly.

Today, liverpool might kick off on saturday just 3-4 times a year. Hardly ever at 3 pm. No one gives a crap about the fa cup and league cup. Liverpool have 3-4 brits in their squad, a foreign manager, and ownership. Television rights demand they play at a unique hour, so that their commericial worldwide support can be optimized. You cant get into matches simply by walking up to the ground. You have to be a registered fan. Sit in your seat. Take selfies all day with out of town fans, who can afford executive class ticket packages, buy one of 4 team shirts that change each month, and essentially soften much of the boisterous atmosphere in the ground.

The perception of many footy fans today, that of the media covering it, and the EPL promotes, is that football actually started in 1992. Everything we talk about is EPL records this that and the other. As if Jimmy Greaves never existed with his 350 plus league goals. Alan Shearer holds the scoring record in many young kids eyes.

How has the EPL been good for developing even British football, when it is more a showcase for foreign lads who taught us all to cheat and dive around? Today, cheating is an accepted component of the game. There is no respect, sportsmanship, despite what the armbands say. It is not that it is wrong to have foreign content grace the game either, but what other country has allowed it to overtake their game, to such an extent. "English" premier league - a supposed national sport - is only that because of geography. Not content.

Im pretty sure my club has been no beacon of light for English football, and the truth is, most local Liverpool fans have little in common with the club they support, despite their fervour for the club, and how the recent ESL debacle transpired. Football is money is football. Been that way for 30 years. Its up for sale to the highest bidder. Chelsea bough some of it, and now its Man City's turn. PSG? I mean, the french may have won the world cup, but their league is a joke. Spanish league? 2 horsed race with both front runners mired in massive debt. FIFA, EUFa etc, are a bunch of corrupt brown baggers, that see fit to run world cups in Dubai, and ignore obvious fair play shenanigans of money clubs like city and psg. Liverpool are not better than many.

The point of all the rambling is that football has already become a financial farce, and that we probably needed this sort of fan reaction when some joker came along and suggested the premier league in 1992, Instead, the game as we knew it was sold. In a nutshell, English football exists outside the premier league, in lower and local leagues. The top division is hollywood dross,

 

[Birrofilo]

The point of all the rambling is that football has already become a financial farce, and that we probably needed this sort of fan reaction when some joker came along and suggested the premier league in 1992, Instead, the game as we knew it was sold.

Actually, I think "this sort of reaction" happened exactly because the fans do not understand that football "has already become a financial farce". People reacted as if we were in the 1970'.

I don't think it's a farce, it is sport-businss, not unlike cyclism, or Formula 1, which underwent this kind of evolution many years ago. Teams are not "natonal", and in the case of Formula 1 seats are mostly very expensive (unless you stay 2 hours standing in muddy grass under the rain).

It is not any more the football of when I was a child, either. Times change, but all change is driven by demand, there is no conspiracy. When I was a child, all teams played at the same time. We listened the matches at the radio, and we might have bet with the Totocalcio, the only allowed footbal betting game of the time.

But people wanted to see the matches at the TV, and they wanted to see all important matches. And a lot of people like to make small bets on football matches. One of the consequences is that the horse-racing industry nearly died in Italy. Times change, but it's the result of demand.

 

[Nubiwan]

Actually, I think "this sort of reaction" happened exactly because the fans do not understand that football "has already become a financial farce". People reacted as if we were in the 1970'.

I don't think it's a farce, it is sport-businss, not unlike cyclism, or Formula 1, which underwent this kind of evolution many years ago. Teams are not "natonal", and in the case of Formula 1 seats are mostly very expensive (unless you stay 2 hours standing in muddy grass under the rain).

It is not any more the football of when I was a child, either. Times change, but all change is driven by demand, there is no conspiracy. When I was a child, all teams played at the same time. We listened the matches at the radio, and we might have bet with the Totocalcio, the only allowed footbal betting game of the time.

But people wanted to see the matches at the TV, and they wanted to see all important matches. And a lot of people like to make small bets on football matches. One of the consequences is that the horse-racing industry nearly died in Italy. Times change, but it's the result of demand.

Not takling about F1 or cyclng which few people care about compared to football. Those sports lend themselves to the remote viewer. Football is very much more local. The local fan has been squeezed out of football. All in the name of this demand your seem to think exists, or makes it somehow better. The demand comes from people not even associated with clubs they support. Armchair fans. This football era hasnt improved the sport.

Football is a farce among world sports. People laugh at the antics of football players and sporting bodies alike. Yeah, sure it commands financial respect, but demand has not made it better to watch. Cheating players acting like fairies when they get a knock, playing for financial cheating clubs. Corrupt organizations that run the sporting bodies.

Football it there to be bought by the highest bidder. Chelsea - PSG - Man City - Real - Barcelona? None of thees clubs able to bank role their players through normal avenues, yet allowed to do as they please. A world cup hosted in Dubai! Pleases. Its a joke. Show me the improvement above and beyond a wider televison audience, and more money? More corruption.

Nothing good about the state of football. I frankly do not care. I have nothing in common with my home town team, and watch mor out of fleeting interest. I actually pay closer attention to F1 ironically.