European Super League: Uefa furious at 12 major clubs

I can't see this happening - it is ludicrous

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/56794673

Article on Toffeeweb: (including swear words).

https://www.toffeeweb.com/season/20-21/comment/general/40683.html

Heathen,
What do you dislike about Gary Neville's and the other peoples' comments in the video?

Bloody crazy Idea.

Kick those six teams out of the Premier League starting next season.
No messing about.

Six owners who think they know better than the man or woman who pay to go to the games.

Did the owners of those teams ask their fans first?

European Super League: 'I'm disappointed and disgusted' - Danny Murphy

By Danny MurphyMOTD2 pundit and former Liverpool midfielder

Last updated on18 April 202118 April 2021.From the sectionEuropean Football


As a boy, I watched Liverpool winning the league title and European Cup and dreamed of doing the same myself.

When I became a Liverpool player, I wanted to win the things those teams had done, to show I was as good as they were.

That history, that tradition - all of those things that have grown since Liverpool Football Club formed in 1892 - would disappear if they joined this proposed breakaway European Super League and were banned from the Premier League.

Everything that makes Liverpool the institution it is would be lost. If they leave domestic competition for this, what happens to the decades-long rivalry with Manchester United over who has won the most titles?

Do the things that mattered when I put on that red shirt suddenly not matter any more? Where do they go?

Dion Dublin & Danny Murphy discuss the plans for a European Super League
'From a players' point of view, I don't see the appeal'
I am retired now, but it will be the same for current Liverpool players, and all those at the other English clubs involved - United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City and Tottenham.

They have been dreaming of winning the titles and trophies they grew up with, that they are competing for right now, because they mean so much.

They won't wake up tomorrow and think 'well all I want to do is win a stagnated European Super League'.

The plans, which were officially announced on Sunday night, sound soulless.

It is beyond belief, actually, that they can think they can put this idea forward with the thought it will just be brought in smoothly and have everyone accept it.

That is just a complete lack of understanding about our game, our traditions, what we love about football and what is in our hearts when we watch it and play the game.

We've already seen strong opposition from leagues and federations who would be affected, and fans as well. Next, I think we will see a backlash from managers and players too.

When I look at the proposals, and also the consequences if you are part of them, then from a players' point of view, I just don't see the appeal at all.

Part of the joy of being a player is the rewards you get for your success on the pitch - you earn it, individually and collectively. This way, you don't get any of that. You would just get a closed shop every season, playing the same clubs every time.

It sounds sterile and boring. Players don't want that, they want to be tested. If there are no incentives, there will be no intensity. What is left for you to play for?

You're also being told you can no longer play for your country if you are part of this. Again, that's what you dream of doing as a kid, so I just don't see many footballers agreeing to that, which actually gives me hope that this whole idea will quickly fall apart.

A European Super League: The future of football?
'The more I think about it, the more nonsensical it gets'
When news of the breakaway plans came through on Sunday, my reaction was the same as I'd expect from most people who love football - disappointment and disgust at the greed that is behind the idea.

The intention here has nothing to do with the love of football or progressing the game, it is just about money.

By signing up for this, you are changing everything. If the big six go down this road and leave the Premier League, it dismantles the whole pyramid which makes English football brilliant, and has been the bedrock of our game for generations.

That's what has shocked me. Not the idea itself, because it has been talked about for years, but that there are actually people within the hierarchies at the big clubs who aren't intelligent enough to understand how damaging this could be.

I'm open-minded enough to look at any ideas for football's future and consider the pros and cons of any changes, but I simply don't see any positives here.

As well as being guaranteed involvement every season, the clubs involved must think they will be able to sell the broadcast rights for these big games and get more money than they do now out of the Champions League and domestic competitions.

But I think they are naive, because I don't think there is an appetite to see the same fixtures every season, whoever is involved.

Some of the clubs involved who have got owners from the United States might like that model, which works in sports over there. That doesn't matter, though, because it doesn't work for English football.

Fans don't want to see that, they want excitement. They want to see their team respond to disappointment, and fight to reach the next level, and get the rewards that follow that success.

So to make it a closed shop, with no ins and outs unless the member clubs decide it, goes against the whole nature of football. It's not beneficial, and it's not sustainable.

If these plans go through, they will have huge repercussions for football in this country and beyond, but my hope is that they are dealt with properly, and in unison, by everyone who does have the game's best interests at heart.

I just hope this is not allowed to escalate, because the more I think about it, the more nonsensical it gets.

Danny Murphy was speaking to BBC Sport's Chris Bevan.

Thing is, it's all very well saying kick out the clubs, ban their players etc. But for the game to still be lucrative to UEFA/FIFA, they *need* Man Utd and Barcelona. A World Cup without Messi, Ronaldo etc is seriously devalued. International football is already at 2nd place to club football. Personally, I make zero effort to make sure I'm free to watch a bloody England vs Austria qualifying match, and would probably change channel if highlights for Scotland vs Turkey came on. Few will be interested in watching effectively Spain B vs Brazil B in the World Cup final.

If you kick out the Big 6 (and that won't happen overnight.......that will be an ongoing legal nightmare which would make the Home Office blush) that could just entrench them further.

And it's all very well for GNev and Rio Ferdy to criticise the plans on Sky Sports and BT Sport. However, this league will only be viable with big broadcasting revenue. Will Sky and BT join in the boycott? Will they let some Middle East broadcaster buy the rights and get a massive foot in the door in the UK market? The viewers in China, India, USA etc are all well and good, but it's the domestic broadcasting revenue in UK and Europe which is the bread and butter.

I'm not opposed in principle for some clubs to have grandfather rights and automatic entry to the Champions League. The branding and exposure is so important to the clubs today, and the clubs *do* have the power. Have a performance requirement to be reviewed on a 10 yearly basis. That would probably mean Arsenal, maybe Milan, lose their automatic privileges, but they are clearly not the forces they once were.

It's a difficult situation for UEFA, but one which they must have seen coming for the past decade. You cannot close the door on new clubs like Leicester, Atalanta, Leipzig etc to emerge as European contenders. Man City was only as recent as the last decade so it seems odd that they would now want to shut up shop. You cannot have a Premier League without Man Utd, Liverpool etc, and you cannot have a Champions League without Real Madrid and Juventus. We all know FIFA and UEFA are rotten, corrupt and bent organisations. Do we trust these 12 clubs (and I find it hard to believe that PSG and Bayern are opposed in principle to the plan!) to establish a new tournament and fairly invite the other top performing teams from European leagues to compete, or do we trust UEFA?

Let's keep it simple, PorkAdobo.
Are you for this European Super League or not?

Today at Anfield:

I was waiting for Simon Jordan's thoughts on Talksport this morning:

https://talksport.com/radio/listen-again/1618822800/

Depends. A tournament of exclusively the same 12-20 teams each year. No. Boring as hell. Throwing in banana skins like Galatasaray, Zenit, Ajax, Porto etc are what makes European football exciting.

The clubs obviously want more guaranteed European fixtures to increase/maintain revenue.

I would broadly support the idea of 16 or so teams having grandfather rights to Champions League football (reviewed every 10 years so duffers like Arsenal get excluded). Instead of having 36 teams in the Champions League group stages, I could support this increasing to 40, with 4 groups of 10 teams. The clubs get 9 guaranteed matches, and the top 4 in each group go into a traditional last 16 knock out stage.

This would potentially keep the grumpy clubs happy and leave the door open for other clubs in Europe to compete for the remaining 24 spots and still allow Leicester, West Ham and (in your dreams) Everton to qualify should they finish in the Premier League top 4.

I think it's clear that these 12 clubs don't want to create this split. Even if the owners are American, Chinese or Arab, they would know the massive cost implications of damaging relations with their home markets. They are looking to use their muscle to force UEFA into agreeing a format more of the clubs' choosing and they will succeed in doing so.

Let's keep it simple, PorkAdobo.
Are you for this European Super League or not?
A simple "yes" or "no" will do

Depends! The same, exclusive 12 teams year after year, no!

A massively revamped tournament weighted in favour of those teams to ensure their participation, yes!

I give up