Was thinking this myself, but apparently Al-Khelaifa and Ceferin are very good mates and it could be as simple as that. Either way it's nothing to do with sporting integrity, family or community.
Printable View
There is absolutely no way the Super League announcement would have been made without a major broadcaster on-board. Ad we're not talking Sky, Fox Sport etc - we're talking a global subscription player like Netflix or Amazon, or a heavily financed new entry who wants to use this content to drive their platform. There is a slight possibility the latter could be a bespoke platform just to sell the SuperLeague and run by it, but I suspect that would be seen as less beneficial than just hawking the rights to an existing or aspiring global platform. Sky's entire success was built on football. It's what drove adoption of its services throughout the 1990s (with the old adage of it being sold to blokes, who then justified it to their wife on the basis of the movies package for the both of them and Disney for the kids). Football remains Sky's crown jewels - even in a more competitive rights environment these days. If they lose the rights to the apex of club football in Europe - which they would, because they don't have a presence in every market - then the whole rationale for having it starts to crumble a bit. It's already very expensive as it is (€30-40 for a fairly basic package)
So there is zero principle involved here for Sky. This is them fighting for their very survival.
What do people think of the potential of a player-based response? Some stories going round of a few big names - Henderson at Liverpool, Maguire at Man Utd, etc - expressing negative opinions and trying to rally support. Would enough players be willing to take a stand, and have the balls to back it up by walking? I suppose I'm basically asking if there would be any possibility of a players strike occurring. Is that wishful thinking?
Yeah, the Tories have always been interested in letting business make lots of cash and pretty much nothing else.
Another question on this is - what makes Liverpool FC Liverpool FC? Is Anfield necessary? Is it a bunch of players in red kits and a liver bird crest? (Did the Harlem Globetrotters have a home venue?)
I don't think the Harlem Globetrotters are a reasonable comparison. They were always more of a circus act than anything resembling competition. They typically aren't even playing local opposition, they bring their own opponents (the Washington Generals with them). Their games are more like WWE or the likes where the results are basically scripted/choreographed.
Not to say that something like that isn't an eventual possibility down the road but its not what is being proposed here.
But theres nothing to say these teams couldn't become permanent traveling teams playing a series of games in different parts of the world. Though several of them have spent a lot of money on their facilities in recent years so I can't see that being their plan in the short to medium term.
Yeah, take out the fake nature of it alright (which admittedly is a lot of what they are). Maybe a better way of putting it is whether Liverpool could relocate to Beijing (say)?
I'd be surprised if something like that didn't happen eventually, once the league is established. I don't know if it would be Liverppol, but even a European league of about 20 teams with 3 in London?Or 3 in Liverpool/Manchester? the NFL is far more widespread with a max of two teams per city.
Liverpool and Man Utd are brands just like Doc Martens, the football brands don't need a home stadium just like Doc Marten doesn't have and in fact never had a factory, they are made in S.E Asia now and despite the shoes being garbage they are are going public with a $5 bio dollah American offering.
N.B Legacy DM fans can buy shoes sold under the Solovair brand made by NPS who used to make DMs when they were manufactured in the UK, a much, much better shoe than DM have made since the 80s.
I don't think that's a fair analogy though as club's home grounds have a certain resonance. Big nights at Anfield/Old Trafford/Camp Nou, etc. It's a locus for the team. There's merchandise money to be made off it too I'd say.
US sports have shown that relocation can work, although it ****es a lot of people off (although increasingly those people - the "legacy" fans, to use the earlier quote, are irrelevant), and it comes at the cost of a name change which I don't think would work here.
It may happen at some stage in the future - hence wondering if a Dublin Dons could be Ireland's football team at a lower level - but (and this is answering my own question I guess) I'm not sure if football's ready for it yet.
(I think this is still all a giant game of chicken btw, but the topic is going to keep coming up, so may as well chat away about it in the meantime!)
Yeah I really think there is too much money at stake for there not to be a resolution of some sort. It might involve the associations and even UEFA capitulating, but the national leagues involved absolutely can not expel the teams involved. The EPL is a non-runner without those six teams.
I'd also be surprised if one of these clubs were ever relocated. I think long term you'll probably get a few home games touring around like the NFL, but the 'brands' are all to tied to specific place for them to actually permanently move.
It would be great if UEFA actually managed to clip these guys wings rather than do a deal which means that by guaranteeing access based on history (as currently floated but for only two teams) they effectively just create a ESL with the only difference being its run by UEFA instead.
Only way that happens is if Governments step up,
Chance for Boris to nail down the Working class vote in the UK maybe??
On one hand, the big boys are not happy with the money. On the other hand, UEFA is/was a deeply corrupt organisation. In theory, I support any kind of rebelion against UEFA as long as it's properly done. But the current idea of the Super League is not OK.
If the big boys go on with it, we'll have UEFA retaliate. And I do have two tickets for the EURO, will not be happy to see Portugal without CR. But let's say this happens. We will surely have a lot of legal actions for years between clubs, UEFA, FIFA, players and so on. A total mess.
The Times is reporting that one of the six English teams is having emergency discussions at executive level about backing out after the fan backlash. Clickbait or signs of hope?
You'd imagine it's probably Liverpool.
BBC reporting that Chelsea are pulling out. This idea might be sunk.
Edit - Confirmed that City are gone too.
Edit #2 - All happening fast, reports that all 12 clubs are considering disbanding the whole idea. Some turn around from this morning!
UEFA should now ram it up their arses by throwing out changes to cl
Ed Woodward resigns. Was apparently going to leave at the end of the season anyway, but I assume this means Man Utd are also abandoning the project.
After all the drama this is going to end up as a victory for the barstoolers as they will continue to think they are indispensable to the English sides.