Topic: Not quite so 'Super' League

[Dave McCoy]

Every proposal to reform the game just means more and more games of football when there's already too much football.

Project Big Picture actually didn't in that it got rid of the League Cup for PL teams.

[Lynx the saucy mynx]

https://football-italia.net/european-parliament-against-super-league-project/

Any legal experts know what this means? Does this mean the ECJ case is thrown out?

[CraigDS]

https://football-italia.net/european-parliament-against-super-league-project/

Any legal experts know what this means? Does this mean the ECJ case is thrown out?

The irony of UEFA's comment on this decision is clearly lost on them...

“The European Parliament’s message on behalf of EU citizens is clear: Europe and Europeans fundamentally oppose breakaway projects like the failed European super league that threaten the values of European sport,” said UEFA President Aleksandar Ceferin.

“European football is not a market meant to serve only elite interests and financial gains – it is a European success story that serves all of society. We will continue to work with the EU to strengthen and protect the European sports model in European football.”

[rob1966]

The irony of UEFA's comment on this decision is clearly lost on them...

Financial gains he says?

[Zeb]

The English reform proposals are slowly starting to take some shape under Tracey Crouch. Daniel Finkelstein is on the panel for it and has written in The Times about it. Just want to highlight what I think is the most important bit out of what he writes.

The other noteworthy thing was the consistency of the evidence. Early on it became apparent that there was a high degree of agreement among fans, and the panel was comfortable with their proposals. A regulator to prevent another Bury, a golden share to ensure the European Super League fiasco cannot happen again, proposals to improve the financial sustainability of the whole pyramid, each of these policies began to seem obvious.

No club colours to it, just wanting things to be fairer, more sustainable, and to prevent clubs going bust because of shit owners. Thought too the downsides to a regulator are well put. It will mean an independent regulator for the game telling the next Geordies or Blue Mancs that their owners are unsuitable and there'll be no billion pound splurge to take them to the top of the table. It will be about creating that virtuous circle of some investment and some success and building over years.

On to the politicians to make it happen.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/crouch-review-panel-our-radical-proposals-are-what-fan-groups-want-and-deserve-9966vgnm9

Spoiler

Every member of the Crouch review panel will have their own view of the most impactful moment during our collection of evidence. But for me there were two.

The first was talking to Gary Neville and his mother, Jill, the former club secretary of Bury FC. The story of how Bury foundered was a scandal, but just as much, it was a tragedy. It was moving to see what it meant to the family. And I do not get the impression that the Nevilles are overly sentimental.

The other was talking to supporters of Blackpool FC. Perhaps I should have been aware that the Premier League told the club in 2010 it would have to get a new owner, because it was owned by a rapist. And that it had then failed to enforce the decision before the club was relegated. Maybe I once knew but forgot. In any case, it hit me with great force. How could such a regulatory failure have been allowed?

Not all the evidence we gathered was like this, but there was enough of it to make the point. We need a new system of regulation. We have an amazing national game and the Premier League is one of Britain’s most successful businesses. But change is needed.

The panel was determined that the review would be what had been promised: fan led. We conducted hours and hours of meetings with fan groups. Holding the sessions online meant we could have individual meetings with dozens of individual club supporter groups. We all worked hard at it, but Clarke Carlisle in particular showed as much stamina on Zoom as he used to on the pitch.

The sessions demonstrated something very encouraging. Naturally supporters are passionate, but what was impressive was that every club had fans who were articulate, intelligent and creative. We very rarely endured rambling or pointless contributions. Frankly, in a lifetime of political meetings that is fairly rare and I began to think it quite remarkable.

The other noteworthy thing was the consistency of the evidence. Early on it became apparent that there was a high degree of agreement among fans, and the panel was comfortable with their proposals. A regulator to prevent another Bury, a golden share to ensure the European Super League fiasco cannot happen again, proposals to improve the financial sustainability of the whole pyramid, each of these policies began to seem obvious.

Tracey Crouch, as it turns out, is a very skilled politician. A combination of rigour, charm and diligence led to a very good working atmosphere and a strong consensus. But we all know we have proposed something quite tough and quite radical. We are ready to defend it.

The Independent Regulator for English Football will stop things that fans may think they want — an unsustainable transfer splurge, an unsuitable owner — and may sometimes be unpopular. Again and again we put this to fan groups. Again and again they said they understood it. And it is what they wanted. It is what they should get.


Members of the review panel

Tracey Crouch Chairwoman
Kevin Miles Chief executive, Football Supporters’ Association
Roy Hodgson Former Crystal Palace and England manager
Professor Denise Barrett-Baxendale Chief executive, Everton FC
Clarke Carlisle Former Burnley player and former chairman of PFA
Dan Jones Partner, Football Finance
Dawn Airey Chairwoman, FA Women’s Super League
David Mahoney Chief operating officer, England & Wales Cricket Board
James Tedford Former Secretary, Southport FC
Godric Smith Director, Cambridge Utd
Daniel Finkelstein Independent member, Times columnist

[close]

]

Oh forgot to link to the recommendations they've made: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fan-led-review-of-football-governance-securing-the-games-future

[Lynx the saucy mynx]

The English reform proposals are slowly starting to take some shape under Tracey Crouch. Daniel Finkelstein is on the panel for it and has written in The Times about it. Just want to highlight what I think is the most important bit out of what he writes.

No club colours to it, just wanting things to be fairer, more sustainable, and to prevent clubs going bust because of shit owners. Thought too the downsides to a regulator are well put. It will mean an independent regulator for the game telling the next Geordies or Blue Mancs that their owners are unsuitable and there'll be no billion pound splurge to take them to the top of the table. It will be about creating that virtuous circle of some investment and some success and building over years.

On to the politicians to make it happen.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/crouch-review-panel-our-radical-proposals-are-what-fan-groups-want-and-deserve-9966vgnm9

Spoiler

[close]

]

Oh forgot to link to the recommendations they've made: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fan-led-review-of-football-governance-securing-the-games-future

The thing is though, these regulations only prevent a closed shop Super League, and rightfully so, because it’s abhorrent and wrong.

Can they really prevent creating an alternative to the Champions League? The Napoli owner I remember said he’s working on one that would be fair to all.

I think if it’s great these regulations stop a closed shop. But to stop an alternative league is wrong. I love the Champions League, but the idea that UEFA can do what they want, and the EU and Tracey Crouch are implementing rules to tighten their grip, doesn’t sit well with me.

I’m not saying an alternative Champions League is the answer, but the freedom to do so shouldn’t be taken away. But the freedom to make a closed shop league should be taken away.

[Eeyore]

The thing is though, these regulations only prevent a closed shop Super League, and rightfully so, because it’s abhorrent and wrong.

Can they really prevent creating an alternative to the Champions League? The Napoli owner I remember said he’s working on one that would be fair to all.

I think if it’s great these regulations stop a closed shop. But to stop an alternative league is wrong. I love the Champions League, but the idea that UEFA can do what they want, and the EU and Tracey Crouch are implementing rules to tighten their grip, doesn’t sit well with me.

I’m not saying an alternative Champions League is the answer, but the freedom to do so shouldn’t be taken away. But the freedom to make a closed shop league should be taken away.

The review is about the English game though.

[CraigDS]

The review is about the English game though.

Yet mentions a "golden share" to prevent another ESL.

[Samie]

Some of these things would have to be put in place on other major leagues and not just in England because then the PL would become a second rate league.. Half of these are non starters the others don't even need the government.

[Zeb]

Yet mentions a "golden share" to prevent another ESL.

It doesn't prevent it. It prevents it happening in the way it did with some English clubs secretly heading off to form a nice little closed group. It may be that some supporters (in whatever way that consent is granted) would back it, might be that there's a point where it's a reasonable thing to do and is seen that way. Just won't happen as it did last time.

----


FSA and FSE are both behind the changes.

Commenting on the recommendations, the Chief Executive of the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) and Football Supporters Europe (FSE) Board member Kevin Miles said:

“This is potentially a huge step forward for football governance—the Government committed to a fan-led review which has listened to the voice of fans. It’s now up to the Government to deliver upon the recommendations.

“The review’s proposals to strengthen the voice of supporters in the game, protect football’s heritage and the pyramid, and provide genuine independent regulation, lay the basis for a prosperous and sustainable future for football at all levels.”

Reflecting on the review’s implications for the rest of European Football, FSE Executive Director, Ronan Evain, said:

“Tracey Crouch and the fan-led review panel have thoroughly investigated the problems afflicting English and Welsh football—not to mention the rest of Europe. Their recommendations represent a practical, effective, and long-term blueprint to make the national game more sustainable at every level, safeguarding clubs and their communities in the process.

“We look forward to their implementation, as well as their impact on the wider debate about governance across the continent.”

https://www.fanseurope.org/news/fan-led-review-represents-a-huge-step-forward/

[afc tukrish]

Yet mentions a "golden share" to prevent another ESL.

Always ready for another golden shower, the Premier League...

[Morgana]

Financial gains he says?

Those notes are out of circulation, mind 

[RedSince86]

Kevin Miles the mouthpiece for all football supporters is a season ticket holder at St James Park and still hasn't said a word on the Saudi takeover of his club.

[Wullie160975]

Is there not some UEFA or FIFA stipulation that governments should not meddle in football affairs and that countries have been punished in the past for doing so?

[Morgana]

Is there not some UEFA or FIFA stipulation that governments should not meddle in football affairs and that countries have been punished in the past for doing so?

Since when do UEFA and FIFA follow their own rules? FFP anyone?

[Zeb]

Is there not some UEFA or FIFA stipulation that governments should not meddle in football affairs and that countries have been punished in the past for doing so?

It's not the government running football. It's the government (well technically Parliament cos this would be cross-party) legislating for an independent regulator. It effectively puts back in many of the powers the FA used to have before they ceded control to the clubs deciding for themselves through the league structure. Ultimate aim is that the regulator works while the FA reforms itself and then hands the powers back to an FA which isn't just blazers and old toffs happy to nod things through.

(Or it would be if it does happen!)

[4pool]

The English reform proposals are slowly starting to take some shape under Tracey Crouch. Daniel Finkelstein is on the panel for it and has written in The Times about it. Just want to highlight what I think is the most important bit out of what he writes.

No club colours to it, just wanting things to be fairer, more sustainable, and to prevent clubs going bust because of shit owners. Thought too the downsides to a regulator are well put. It will mean an independent regulator for the game telling the next Geordies or Blue Mancs that their owners are unsuitable and there'll be no billion pound splurge to take them to the top of the table. It will be about creating that virtuous circle of some investment and some success and building over years.

On to the politicians to make it happen.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/crouch-review-panel-our-radical-proposals-are-what-fan-groups-want-and-deserve-9966vgnm9

Spoiler

[close]

]

Oh forgot to link to the recommendations they've made: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fan-led-review-of-football-governance-securing-the-games-future

Simon Jordan v Christian Purslow discuss this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86ylYk3UC-E

[JRed]

If this regulator does stop further purchasing of clubs by countries, doesn’t that just help the current state owned clubs? Meaning no other clubs can ever compete with them financially? If it is the case that they would stop any future purchases then surely something has to be done about the current state owned clubs too?

[Zeb]

If this regulator does stop further purchasing of clubs by countries, doesn’t that just help the current state owned clubs? Meaning no other clubs can ever compete with them financially? If it is the case that they would stop any future purchases then surely something has to be done about the current state owned clubs too?

The recommendation is that the replacement for the 'fit and proper owner' test be reviewed every three years. This would happen with existing owners as well as future ones.

[SinceSixtyFive]

The recommendation is that the replacement for the 'fit and proper owner' test be reviewed every three years. This would happen with existing owners as well as future ones.

  Language.

Its about as malleable as plasticine/playdoh just a bit less permanent.

For what its worth - bring it on. The status quo is corrupt as feck and getting worse rather than better.

Change. Its overdue. Shake the bastards up for a while until its time to shake those bastards up too.

Should give us maybe about ten years. Tops 

[Eeyore]

Yet mentions a "golden share" to prevent another ESL.

In theory the FA's golden share in the Premier league should have prevented a ESL anyway. The big difference with a regulator backed by parliament would be that in theory it could refuse to license Clubs that joined an ESL.

[Eeyore]

Kevin Miles the mouthpiece for all football supporters is a season ticket holder at St James Park and still hasn't said a word on the Saudi takeover of his club.

The FSA released a statement regarding the Saudi takeover of Newcastle.

Posted on 8th October 2021

FSA statement regarding yesterday’s Newcastle United takeover:

The Premier League’s decision to approve the PIF takeover has reopened the debate about who owns our football clubs. While Newcastle United fans are understandably ecstatic to see the back of Mike Ashley, many supporters throughout the game, including some Newcastle fans, have expressed concerns about the role of nation states in the ownership structures of clubs and the impact of their human rights violations.

Ultimately supporters have been put in an impossible position as billionaire owners pass clubs from one to another with no input from fans, meaning clubs at an elite level have become the playthings of individuals or regimes with shocking human rights records.

Alan Shearer sums that up in The Athletic today saying ‘it seems to me that ethical issues have not played a huge part in Newcastle’s takeover. Or, to put that a different way, they have been part of the discussion, but not in the decision-making process. Should they be a fundamental strand of the owners’ and directors’ test? Perhaps they should, and perhaps the whole system of governance and ownership needs reform to reflect that. These are the rules that clubs have decided for themselves.’

Football Supporters Europe (FSE) also raises important questions at a continental level, asking why the game as a whole has become so attractive to authoritarian regimes? And we too ask should moral judgements on overseas regimes be part of football’s Owners and Directors Test? Probably. Are those rules around moral relativism easy to draft? Definitely not. Is it possible to apply them retrospectively? We don’t know. But the FSA backs FSE’s demand of football’s governing bodies to work with supporters’ organisations in order to embed and enforce human rights protections within the game.

We meet regularly with the Premier League and we will be questioning them, in great detail, about the exact nature of the ‘legally binding assurances’ they received before approving the takeover. We absolutely believe that any entity which owns a club in our league system should be UK-registered with total transparency in relation to overseas influences.

The ongoing Fan-Led Review of Football Governance also provides an opportunity for the Government to look at the current Owners and Directors Test in relation to human rights. The review’s interim report was very good and its final report is due soon. We will discuss recent events, and the challenges they bring, with the Fan-Led Review panel as well as the Government, the football authorities and FSA members at our upcoming Annual General Meeting.

[RedSince86]

The FSA released a statement regarding the Saudi takeover of Newcastle.

Posted on 8th October 2021

FSA statement regarding yesterday’s Newcastle United takeover:

The Premier League’s decision to approve the PIF takeover has reopened the debate about who owns our football clubs. While Newcastle United fans are understandably ecstatic to see the back of Mike Ashley, many supporters throughout the game, including some Newcastle fans, have expressed concerns about the role of nation states in the ownership structures of clubs and the impact of their human rights violations.

Ultimately supporters have been put in an impossible position as billionaire owners pass clubs from one to another with no input from fans, meaning clubs at an elite level have become the playthings of individuals or regimes with shocking human rights records.

Alan Shearer sums that up in The Athletic today saying ‘it seems to me that ethical issues have not played a huge part in Newcastle’s takeover. Or, to put that a different way, they have been part of the discussion, but not in the decision-making process. Should they be a fundamental strand of the owners’ and directors’ test? Perhaps they should, and perhaps the whole system of governance and ownership needs reform to reflect that. These are the rules that clubs have decided for themselves.’

Football Supporters Europe (FSE) also raises important questions at a continental level, asking why the game as a whole has become so attractive to authoritarian regimes? And we too ask should moral judgements on overseas regimes be part of football’s Owners and Directors Test? Probably. Are those rules around moral relativism easy to draft? Definitely not. Is it possible to apply them retrospectively? We don’t know. But the FSA backs FSE’s demand of football’s governing bodies to work with supporters’ organisations in order to embed and enforce human rights protections within the game.

We meet regularly with the Premier League and we will be questioning them, in great detail, about the exact nature of the ‘legally binding assurances’ they received before approving the takeover. We absolutely believe that any entity which owns a club in our league system should be UK-registered with total transparency in relation to overseas influences.

The ongoing Fan-Led Review of Football Governance also provides an opportunity for the Government to look at the current Owners and Directors Test in relation to human rights. The review’s interim report was very good and its final report is due soon. We will discuss recent events, and the challenges they bring, with the Fan-Led Review panel as well as the Government, the football authorities and FSA members at our upcoming Annual General Meeting.

Good on him, didn't know that.

[Raaphael]

What are people`s thougts on Simon Jordan? I would maybe expect that some people dislike him for some reasons, but I`ve liked him when I`ve heard him make arguments for different things.

[RedSince86]

What are people`s thougts on Simon Jordan? I would maybe expect that some people dislike him for some reasons, but I`ve liked him when I`ve heard him make arguments for different things.

Best thing on Talkshite, only show i listen to on there unless its the phone in show when United lose.

Says it like it is and doesn't hold back which is rare in any media today.

[Raaphael]

That`s my impression as well. Find him interesting to listen to. On the other hand, Danny Murphy- I don`t think I`ve ever listened to a guy I`ve had as different opinions on basically everything. Whenever he says something, I find myself thinking the exact opposite. I think his opinions are constantly shit and on some level I`m quietly impressed how prolific he is.

[JRed]

What are people`s thougts on Simon Jordan? I would maybe expect that some people dislike him for some reasons, but I`ve liked him when I`ve heard him make arguments for different things.

I don’t listen to talk sport , or any radio for matter, all that much , but as far as I remember he is the only one that actually has any kind of intelligent, independent thought on there.

[JRed]

The recommendation is that the replacement for the 'fit and proper owner' test be reviewed every three years. This would happen with existing owners as well as future ones.

Hopefully it is all leading to Atleast curtailing what these cheating sportswashers can get away with. I saw today that aswell as the PL extending the ban on related sponsorships they are also looking at banning players being paid by other clubs, which is part of what Man City do through the City Sportswashing Group clubs.

[cissesbeard]

I don’t listen to talk sport , or any radio for matter, all that much , but as far as I remember he is the only one that actually has any kind of intelligent, independent thought on there.

I like simon jordan, I don't agree with everything he says but his opinion is usually based on evidence or experience, doesn't go along with the usual cliches that the rest of the station do

[JRed]

I like simon jordan, I don't agree with everything he says but his opinion is usually based on evidence or experience, doesn't go along with the usual cliches that the rest of the station do

Exactly. He actually backs up his opinions with intelligent reasoning, not like the constant conveyor line of brainless morons they have on there.

[Suareznumber7]

In theory the FA's golden share in the Premier league should have prevented a ESL anyway. The big difference with a regulator backed by parliament would be that in theory it could refuse to license Clubs that joined an ESL.

Refuse to license clubs so they can no longer play in England? 

[Dench57]

If this regulator does stop further purchasing of clubs by countries, doesn’t that just help the current state owned clubs? Meaning no other clubs can ever compete with them financially? If it is the case that they would stop any future purchases then surely something has to be done about the current state owned clubs too?

The recommendation is that the replacement for the 'fit and proper owner' test be reviewed every three years. This would happen with existing owners as well as future ones.

Bolded bit - does sound good but even if the will was there, surely there's no body powerful enough to go up against the people that just bought Newcastle, so you'd think the proposed test would just wave through the ownership of the current/established oil clubs.

[BarryCrocker]

Progress?

Liverpool fans close to 'ground-breaking' FSG deal that could change football
Liverpool fans group Spirit of Shankly and club owners FSG have reached a landmark agreement

Any future involvement of Liverpool in another version of the European Super League would have to have the agreement of supporters after a 'ground-breaking' deal was reached with club owners Fenway Sports Group.

Spirit of Shankly, the recognised Liverpool supporters union, had a motion passed at their AGM on Saturday morning that recommended the approval of a proposal that would make it a legal requirement for FSG to gain consent from fans should they ever wish to embark on another ESL plot or make moves to take the club away from Anfield.

SOS met with FSG local representatives including Liverpool CEO Billy Hogan in May, weeks after the Reds had played a significant role in the failed attempt to launch a breakaway league with 11 other of Europe's biggest clubs, a move that mobilised fans to display their opposition to the proposals.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/liverpool-fans-fsg-deal-football-22295833

[Samie]

https://twitter.com/TeleFootball/status/1497263416301473792

The Super League proposal is returning this week. [@SamWallaceTel]

[Dave McCoy]

It made minimal sense for the PL teams then and it makes even less sense now. Less meaning no in this case. I'm guessing this will just be Juve, Barca and Real Madrid coming up with more ideas that would try to get them back to the top of the roost which should be a non-starter for PL teams.

Might be a bit early now that the next 3 years of TV deals have been secured but I'm actually somewhat surprised that feelers haven't been put out in regards to expanding the PL with a view to the future TV deals. In hindsight Project Big Picture was probably dead on arrival due to needing teams to vote to basically relegate themselves with the reduction to 18 teams. Going the opposite way and expanding it, getting buy-in from the FL by adding more teams there and then the continental teams could be pretty appealing. Probably too radical but you have to keep in mind the PL is competing for TV dollars with UEFA and FIFA to a degree so nothing would be all that surprising if history is anything to go by.

[Suareznumber7]

A European league, similar to CL that you have to qualify for, but not run by UEFA sounds like a great idea to me. 

[RainbowFlick]

The problem is, anyone with sense knows that UEFA needs to go and the CL needs to be reformed, badly, but those same people also have the sense to realise Perez et al aren't doing it out of love for the game or to push for progressive change.

I also think it's pretty transparent that Real, Barca and Juve want to use this to dig themselves out of a hole. I actually think beyond the obvious want for a bigger slice of the pie that FSG actually thought this would be a way to level the playing field with some actually enforceable financial fair play rules.

[BarryCrocker]

I do wish this would just fck off.

Hopefully, we're no where near this, and having the 'agreement' between FSG & SoS means fans would have to be sold on this.

We're in the running to win two of the biggest football competitions again this season. We've got one of the most storied histories in both. Leaving either or both is all about money and not about football. There are historical rivalries that would be broken just the rush for more funds.  We complain about the stupid money some players demand in the current competitions, that would probably skyrocket under such a scheme.

[CraigDS]

I do wish this would just fck off.

Hopefully, we're no where near this, and having the 'agreement' between FSG & SoS means fans would have to be sold on this.

We're in the running to win two of the biggest football competitions again this season. We've got one of the most storied histories in both. Leaving either or both is all about money and not about football. There are historical rivalries that would be broken just the rush for more funds.  We complain about the stupid money some players demand in the current competitions, that would probably skyrocket under such a scheme.

Yet under UEFA and their toothless FFP fees and wages have been allowed to skyrocket without any control, in part because they are corrupt and allow despot lead countries to buy clubs to use as sportswashing machines with unlimited budgets.

[vblfc]

Yet under UEFA and their toothless FFP fees and wages have been allowed to skyrocket without any control, in part because they are corrupt and allow despot lead countries to buy clubs to use as sportswashing machines with unlimited budgets.

We are at a point where we can see FFP has been totally undermined by money/power and “complemented” by what looks like deliberate turning a blind eye now by the controlling bodies. If an alternative has to be proposed (and I believe it does) it would feel much more credible if originated from what are maybe recognized as more self sustaining clubs such as Liverpool (I’m biased), Munchen, United, Ajax etc. The current cheerleaders (Real, Barca, Juve) look more fragile or desperate and stuck too long with their failed and now tarnished ESL bid. The whole approach needs a rethink and resold with robust and more inclusive ideas. I feel if a future model was open to anyone who could play within the rules rather than a mostly elite group, then it would get a broader support it needs. I hope a structure can be developed that firmly and fairly balances the financially overdosed side of the ownership model and is also clearly open or really as “fair” as can be robustly achieved.