Official :6 English teams agree to Super League

[Rogers]

6 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

Would seem like a logical end point - cities bid for the "right" tohave the franchise established in their city

 

Wouldn't surprise me

The American NFL model, with JP Morgan and Glaziers involved 

[Bluesteel]

2 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

Yes and no.. but as I posted earlier in this thread, pre premier league days the big 6 plus Leeds and Everton (who were big 6 type clubs at the time) won 24 out of 28 between 1964-92. That’s not hugely different to the 26 out of 28 since the PL was formed. You have to go back to the 1950s and earlier to find a time where anyone could win it on a regular basis really 

There will always be dominant clubs but even in the early 90s there would often be new faces getting toward the top end of the league and into Europe. Even ourselves and Ipswich briefly. Man U absolutley dominant because they did things right and had money and support.

 

But now it feels like it’s the businessmen behind clubs that make decisions rather than what happens on the pitch. Newcastle takeover for example disappears and outvoted. It’s been about closing the shop so they don’t need to get it right on the pitch.

[Musn't Grumble]

42 minutes ago, room0035 said:

There is only one way to deal with this the same way that Cricket dealt with it back in the 80's with their world league.

 

All team that take part are banned from any competition that UEFA or FIFA manage that included all domestic games. all internationals an all European competitions.

 

So if a player takes part in any of these teams they have a lifetime ban from every playing domestic football or representing their country.

 

Also all the broadcasters connected with football so Sky, BT Sports, Amazon etc are also prohibited from showing the games, if they decide to ignore this then they will be removed from ever being able to tender for future UEFA or FIFA competitions.

 

I would also push for the record books to be updated and the past achievements of these 6 teams be expunged from the records and them to be classed the same way the Globetrotters in basketball or Barbarians are in rugby.

 

The only way you prevent this GREED league being form is you make it blatantly clear to the players - not the clubs as we all know it is the players that have all the power you will be playing 22 games a year but you will never be able to play an official game in England or anywhere else in the world again and you will never represent your country again.

 

Cricket is a great example.

 

The Indian Premier League attracts the best players who can earn huge sums of money if selected. This impacts other competitions (e.g. Jonny Bairstow is playing in India at the moment whilst the County Championship is underway in England and Wales) but it only takes out six weeks of the year, including some of the England/Wales close season.

 

On the other hand, the new "franchised" cricket edition, The Hundred, is looking ever more like a huge disaster. Last time I looked, you could pick up a ticket for a fiver. The "serious" cricket fan is openly hostile to The Hundred which is a gerrymandered, plastic competition which holds zero attraction for the avid follower. I took this "Disney Does Cricket" subject up with the administrators and, basically, it's not about current fans and members at all. They are aiming for new markets, and stuff the current fans, which is why The Hundred will be subsidised to the hilt until it succeeds.

 

I have literally yet to meet a cricket lover who is looking forward to The Hundred. They argue that they already have the abridged version (T20), one day, county and test cricket; they do not want another form of the sport, especially one which ignores current fans and members and misses an opportunity to extend the sport from the grassroots up. Even the clubs are distancing themselves from The Hundred by admitting that their own involvement is basically renting the grounds to the franchise.

 

The expectation from some quarters is that it will lose money and mercifully wither on the vine within a few short years.

 

I expect that the proposed European football league might suffer the same fate once the pyramid falls beneath it and franchise football is shown up for what it is; just a moneyspinning adventure that cruelly exploits the fans' love of the game. Football is all about the badge, the brand, tribalism. That is the only valuable asset and the club owners are temporary. Clubs will still be here long after the current owners have perished. This is a blatant effort to use the goodwill of the product built by the fans to steal the very game from the same custodians of the game.

[shez owl]

Global Franchise football has been coming,  it’s just an inevitability, I’m hoping that this will mean that the domestic competition gets back to a level playing field, where money dreams of premier league riches are gone and players salaries are more realistic. Bring in salary caps, bring in rules of number of English/young players per teams. Let’s have a proper competition!

[room0035]

2 minutes ago, Musn't Grumble said:

 

Cricket is a great example.

 

The Indian Premier League attracts the best players who can earn huge sums of money if selected. This impacts other competitions (e.g. Jonny Bairstow is playing in India at the moment whilst the County Championship is underway in England and Wales) but it only takes out six weeks of the year, including some of the England/Wales close season.

 

On the other hand, the new "franchised" cricket edition, The Hundred, is looking ever more like a huge disaster. Last time I looked, you could pick up a ticket for a fiver. The "serious" cricket fan is openly hostile to The Hundred which is a gerrymandered, plastic competition which holds zero attraction for the avid follower. I took this "Disney Does Cricket" subject up with the administrators and, basically, it's not about current fans and members at all. They are aiming for new markets, and stuff the current fans, which is why The Hundred will be subsidised to the hilt until it succeeds.

 

I have literally yet to meet a cricket lover who is looking forward to The Hundred. They argue that they already have the abridged version (T20), one day, county and test cricket; they do not want another form of the sport, especially one which ignores current fans and members and misses an opportunity to extend the sport from the grassroots up. Even the clubs are distancing themselves from The Hundred by admitting that their own involvement is basically renting the grounds to the franchise.

 

The expectation from some quarters is that it will lose money and mercifully wither on the vine within a few short years.

 

I expect that the proposed European football league might suffer the same fate once the pyramid falls beneath it and franchise football is shown up for what it is; just a moneyspinning adventure that cruelly exploits the fans' love of the game. Football is all about the badge, the brand, tribalism. That is the only valuable asset and the club owners are temporary. Clubs will still be here long after the current owners have perished. This is a blatant effort to use the goodwill of the product built by the fans to steal the very game from the same custodians of the game.

The thing with the 20 20 games is there have not lead to say the test arena being cancelled.

 

If this new elite league is allow how many weeks before Klopp and Oli or Pep are moaning because their players have too many games to play.

[TheGaffer]

13 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

and the best players will follow the money - as they always have done in the main.

Not if banned from international and domestic competition. Every single player has said as much.

 

Its not like 100k per week versus 200k per is going to make that much of a difference. Realise that sounds ludicrous in a way 

[sheffield_dave]

2 minutes ago, Musn't Grumble said:

 

Cricket is a great example.

 

The Indian Premier League attracts the best players who can earn huge sums of money if selected. This impacts other competitions (e.g. Jonny Bairstow is playing in India at the moment whilst the County Championship is underway in England and Wales) but it only takes out six weeks of the year, including some of the England/Wales close season.

 

I'm playing devils advocate here based on almost zero knowledge of cricket, but is there a stronger case for individual cricketers being entitled to follow the money moreso than in football? As an example, would playing in India vs county be the difference between being a full time cricketer who can retire based on their sporting career, or still needing to work after their cricket career ends?

 

Nobody involved in this ESL needs more money. Some of the might argue they need more money to pay the wages to the players they want to attract, but that's a symptom of a problem they've backed themselves into. Kevin De Bruyne does not need £400k per week and Manchester City do not need to break away from the rest of the game to afford to pay it. 

[beswetherick]

Really hope the authorities do the right thing and come out swinging here, don’t give the greedy fùckers an inch

[Groundhopping Owl]

Delighted that Bayern and Dortmund have come out against this. Two very powerful clubs in opposition to this bloody abomination.

[Dronfield Blue]

1 minute ago, beswetherick said:

Really hope the authorities do the right thing and come out swinging here, don’t give the greedy fùckers an inch

 

This will be sorted in court.

 

I fear I know who will win.

[Utah Owl]

1 minute ago, beswetherick said:

Really hope the authorities do the right thing and come out swinging here, don’t give the greedy fùckers an inch

If they don't, then the game just becomes totally controlled by those with the most money and loses what little integrity it has left.

[mcmigo]

37 minutes ago, Rogers said:

It’s not about right or wrong. Football history is a fact, it happened, it’s real history.  Families supporting their local team through generations is history, dreaming of winning something for local pride. 
 

A Chinese or Yemeni kid supporting Man City all of a sudden, then supporting Real Madrid the season after; it means nothing, apart from shirt sales and TV rights. This is new phenomenon or order in football; 10 years old. 

 

yesterday is also history.

 

 

[Utah Owl]

2 minutes ago, Dronfield Blue said:

 

This will be sorted in court.

 

I fear I know who will win.

What makes you say that?

 

The 12 have broken all the rules of the game, so FIFA etc. have every right to kick them out. It isn't an actionable court matter (or at least it shouldn't be).

 

The 12 aren't being banned from having a league and selling their product, just being banned from any FIFA sanctioned competition.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Utah Owl

[Dronfield Blue]

1 minute ago, Utah Owl said:

What makes you say that?

 

The 12 have broken all the rules of the game, so FIFA etc. have every right to kick them out. It isn't an actionable court matter (or at least it shouldn't be).

 

Watch this space.

 

Legal action already underway by ESL.

[Musn't Grumble]

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

The thing with the 20 20 games is there have not lead to say the test arena being cancelled.

 

If this new elite league is allow how many weeks before Klopp and Oli or Pep are moaning because their players have too many games to play.

 

When T20 was brought in quite a few years ago, it required some adjustment to the County Championship calendar and, over the years, this has been tweaked to make everyone (mainly) happy.

 

County Championship games have always gone on at the same time as test matches, too, whether a county has England players or not. This is also happening with the IPL as a few England players (maybe half a dozen) get leave of absence from their club to miss a few games at home.

 

The big difference here is that a county like Derbyshire will make enough money in one sell-out match (T20 versus Yorkshire at Queen's Park, Chesterfield) to keep them going for the year. This is one good thing that came out of the introduction of T20 about 20 years ago. In my view, this could go further to take first class cricket into other counties like Berkshire, Norfolk, Suffolk, Cheshire, North Wales, etc. Imagine the local interest in a Lincolnshire v Yorkshire List A T20 fixture, for instance, where the "home" club could be "professional" for a month whilst the competition is on.

 

It strikes me that the EPL will do exactly the opposite of this by closing the shop and pulling up the drawbridge thereby denying the "rank and file"/middle order clubs from hosting attractive fixtures.

[Utah Owl]

Just now, Dronfield Blue said:

 

Watch this space.

 

Legal action already underway by ESL.

See my edit

[Guest whowantstoberich]

Well I for one won’t be watching the ESL, I have zero interest in foreign football I don’t even like watching the champions league 

[Dronfield Blue]

1 minute ago, Dronfield Blue said:

 

Watch this space.

 

Legal action already underway by ESL.

 

https://www.football-italia.net/169381/esl-asks-co-operation-uefa-and-fifa

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, TheGaffer said:

Not if banned from international and domestic competition. Every single player has said as much.

 

Its not like 100k per week versus 200k per is going to make that much of a difference. Realise that sounds ludicrous in a way 

 

 

Which players have said this? 

 

They are a long way from being banned from these competitions. That is the threat and it would be great to see it happen but the reality is that the PL know that their product (itself a money making tool) makes far less money without these 6. 

[TheGaffer]

Just now, hirstyboywonder said:

 

 

Which players have said this? 

 

They are a long way from being banned from these competitions. That is the threat and it would be great to see it happen but the reality is that the PL know that their product (itself a money making tool) makes far less money without these 6. 

Apologies I should have said former player.