European super league

[KFleming]

I’ll start by saying I am not a football fan so there could easily be a really good reason I’ve missed.

Anyway, I think I understand the issue with the ESL, but admittedly haven’t followed it that closely. What I don’t understand is why the government is getting involved? Why do they give a shit? And enough of a shit to actually consider doing something about it rather than just generally agreeing with the outrage. Why say they’ll do everything they can to stop it rather than a vague “oh yes we don’t think that’s very sporting, we agree it’s outrageous, we hope they reconsider”.
I mean, they don’t run football, do they. Is it just a “stop talking about Tory corruption and lobbying and look at what we’re doing with the football!!!” type of distraction?

Money I guess.

Because it has a massive impact on the pyramid of English football. It's wrong and pure greedy from the owners.

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4223212-Why-is-the-new-football-ESL-so-controversial

People explain it really well in this thread.

Am loving professional footballers criticising club owners for being greedy

Football is an institution inextricably linked with British culture. What the fat cat owners of the clubs and their gross private equity backers are proposing is an absolute disgrace. Not to mention the fact that managers and players (and fans!) weren’t even consulted. Arrogance at the highest level.

Because it has a massive impact on the pyramid of English football. It's wrong and pure greedy from the owners.

I understand why fans don’t like it, I just don’t understand why the government thinks it requires their intervention. Plenty of industries have greed, or do things morally questionable. Perhaps the government should always intervene, but they don’t, so I’m wondering why this.

The government / civil service DO have bodies that intervene - such as the competitions and market authority, the health / financial etc regulators to name just a few.

Plus politics is simply ‘issues that people care about’. And a LOT of people care about this, so it’s party politics.

I also don't get why the government is wading in and threatening all sorts.

Don't they have actual problems to address?

I can understand why other football clubs are upset and perhaps fans.
But I can't see how it is any of the government's business. The fact they would have to change the law suggests that it really isn't.

Unless it breaks current competition laws I suppose? But threatening visa issues and travel bans seems very authoritarian.

Well you could look at it as the government keeping their 2019 manifesto pledge as I believe there was something in there about reviewing the governance of English football (or something like that) but it all got put on hold because of Covid.

I don’t believe for a single second that the government actually give a damn, they are doing it to make people think they are on their side. Pure vote winning.

Anyway, FIFA rules are very clear that Governments cannot get involved in football. So there is nothing that can do under FIFA rules. The irony of them suggesting they are going to breach FIFA rules to enforce FIFA rules.

This is not to say I am for it at all. And I don’t blame fans for being pissed off. But the hypocrisy of Sky commentators and the current government banging on about it when they (Sky) were responsible for driving the money focus of the game in the first place, and are (the Government) completely committed to capitalism (and are as corrupt as hell) is painful!

Money trickles down the football pyramid. So Premiership clubs have been able to stay afloat during the pandemic because their owners have deep pockets and because to the TV rights money they get.

My family support Colchester, who are a small team in league 2. During the pandemic they haven't received any gate receipts, limited funding through ifollow (on line match streaming, where they would sell 4 £25 tickets to a family for a game in person, they will only sell 1 £10 ifollow ticket as they all watch the same telly). They are struggling. They let half the first team leave in the summer as they wouldn't be able to afford the wages.

They, and all league clubs, have been supported by the premiership clubs through grants.

At an even more local team, grassroots also receives funding that trickles down from the top. Not a lot, but some.

If you dilute the quality of the premiership, the big TV deals will be significantly smaller, therefore clubs will have less money to trickle down. The big 6 will never play their first team in the league as they'll be saving them for the ESL.

This will impact the funding the rest of the pyramid receives and more clubs go bust, more local jobs lost and more fans without their team to go and watch. Some kids football clubs, particularly in poor areas may not be able to afford to continue

@Shamoo don't get me wrong, sky are awful and BT are awful. UEFA and FIFA are seriously corrupt but this ESL would ruin football as we know it.

It's about money. The billionaires want more. UEFA and such will get shut out so they are annoyed. Fans can rage all they want. Buy the club if they are so incensed. Govt was/is happy to let oligarchs and sheiks buy clubs, swathes of London or the Home Counties. Doubt Boris can do anything. It's an American model. Owners could move Liverpool or Chelsea to Europe if they wished.

@Pedallleur clearly you aren't a football fan I presume?

Is it just a “stop talking about Tory corruption and lobbying and look at what we’re doing with the football!!!” type of distraction?

I tend to think this is true. If the government (and previous ones) is really so concerned about football fans and clubs' ties to local communities - as Johnson and Dowden suggested today - this concern hasn't been much in evidence before now. For example, why aren't potential new owners of clubs subject to some kind of assessment as to whether they are 'fit and proper' to take over these clubs? (I know that's getting in to an area you didn't ask about, OP, but it does suggest to me government's complete lack of actual interest in football fans and communities.)

@PrincessFiorimonde there is a ‘fit and proper’ test already

How much ‘teeth’ it has is debatable!

Purely looking at this from a political point of view, the government have to be seen to be doing all they can to stop this simply because 90% of football fans are against it. That's a hell of a lot of people. Given that many fans of Liverpool, Man Utd and Man City probably care more about their club than their family, millions of voters will potentially be swayed one way or the other based on the response of the various parties. That's why all parties are opposing it.

It's highly convenient for the government too, every minute of news coverage about this is a minute not being spent on attacking them. That's always been the way of course, remember Labour seeing the 9/11 attacks being "a good day to bury bad news."

"Am loving professional footballers criticising club owners for being greedy"

Football clubs make a lot of money. Why shouldn't those who put the bums on seats and make the fans want the merchandise, get their share? If they don't someone else will. Out of the already rich club shareholders or the working class lad who has the skills, I know who I'd pick.

Like it or not, football is our national game, as said it's ruled and regulated by laws and the other thread explains things well. It brings in a lot of revenue and having a active stadium in an area boosts the businesses and in many cases, ensures survival. This is not only a massive blow to football, but potentially to our economy and could cause further hardship to a lot of people which after this year, we just can't manage.

I am wondering if Boris has a fetish for a hard hat and hi-vis, he always manages to be wearing one lately, when interviewed.
I would like to have seen more coverage of the latest Hillsborough court case, this is very much a first.

@BoredatHome321
No I'm not but big money rules be it football/sports or music via tickets etc. These clubs are assets to be sold/used as the owners see fit. Players are commodities. If the owners so decide they can move their club anywhere and sell the existing ground on. Its been done in the US - Oakland Raiders being an example. The Govt can try to introduce whatever law but the club is owned by someone and that someone can do whatever they wish.

They don’t really care (nor do I) and there’s not much they can do about it but it plays well with ‘red wall’ voters and takes the heat off the corruption allegations is my guess.

I wish the public were more concerned about whether our government is corrupt than whether there’s another football league.

Another one who isn't a football fan. But I am puzzled. I thought the super league clubs were absolutely rolling in cash yet I read on the BBC news today that the President of Real Madrid says "we are all ruined". Are they really on the verge of bankruptcy? Liverpool, Manchester United et cetera?

Taken from another commentator on the guardian website.

‘Absolute romantic tosh of the highest order.

NI in flames - no action taken
Grieving Covid families : no time to meet
Wholesale takeover of UK firms by foreign interests : no action taken

But football? Everything must stop for some daft populist electioneering.
Johnson as the defender of the working man's game? Laughable.

The super league s the logical development of the Amercanzaton and Globalization of football that's been going on for 30 + years.’

It's to distract us from everything else going on and and the next extremist law they try to pass without scrutiny.

This quote from 1984 says it all:

"So long as they (the Proles) continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance........Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbors, films, football, beer and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult.”

Owners could move Liverpool or Chelsea to Europe if they wished.

No they couldn't. They still want to play in premier League too