Ultra Super Turbo League

[Gavin]

Is anyone in favour? Seems players, managers, pundits and fans all hate the idea.

I know we don't all follow football, I am not a huge fan, but it is an interesting debate.

The whole "We may not let the players who play in it, play for their countries" is very interesting. I noticed the wording and wondered if lawyers were being consulted as to whether that is actually a ban that could be enforced.

[mik]

I have no idea what is being proposed or how it differs from today.

[NGRhodes]

I have no idea what is being proposed or how it differs from today.

I used to kickaround as a kid, but now I'm very much:

[V8Granite]

My understanding is that some big teams would leave the premier league and other similar leagues across the world.

It would be like Mckaren, Ferrari and Red Bull leaving F1.

Dave!

[DaveE]

I don't know anything about football, nor what's going on with this super-dooper league idea

But I did read a quote that appeared to try and make that point that if the richest teams in the world could earn even more money, it would somehow benefit everyone

Which just reminded me of the old "trickle down economics" myth - that if you reduce taxes on very high earners, you somehow encourage them to achieve more, which results in more people being employed, which means the tax cuts are more than paid for by the tax increases from all these wonderful, newly created jobs

Which of course is bullshit

[dinny_g]

We're a football family - Not so much me (I prefer Rugby) but my lad is a big Arsenal fan so, as any parent knows, we're all Arsenal fans...

From his perspective, yes this does suck - ripping the soul out of the game etc. but in reality, the die was cast back in 1992 with the formation of the Premier League. Football went from Jumpers for Goalposts to a global media Juggernaut, driven my money. Sky pay the Premier League £6m for EVERY game they broadcast. 6 fucking million quid per game. That's what brought in the foreign money.

and that's the nub. Take my son's club Arsenal - they have, lets say 1 million fans in the UK but possibly 10 million, 15 million, 20 million fans or more around the world. The owner has on the one side, history and tradition, bla bla bla but on the other side, he has a fan of his club, in Melbourne who'd love to see their club play live. Is that Melbourne fan going to pay to come to the Emirates to watch Arsenal V Sheffield United - No but against Barcelona or Inter Milan then yes, possibly.

There is a slight hypocrisy in fans who gorged on the success that foreign money brought (Not arsenal though obviously - Chelsea and City - I'm looking at you ) now complaining that that foreign money wants to do something different with that money. You reap what you sow.

It's all greed and it's fucking awful.

[Rich B]

Yeah, I haven't quite got to the bottom of what the proposal is, other than it's awful for some reason.

[Mito Man]

I think the most odd thing about this is Boris and the Royal family objecting to it!

[ZedLeg]

Dinny is correct

Football fans were happy to go along with it when their teams were getting rich on shady money.

This is the bed they’ve made for themselves.

[GG.]

Clearly it isn't an idea that anyone other than those clubs and their players like, however, I'm a bit concerned to see the government threatening windfall taxes and removal of travel permits. If these clubs want to burn their bridges and set up an unaccountable European superleague then I can't see why it is the place of government to stop them.

[Beany]

Clearly it isn't an idea that anyone other than those clubs and their players like, however, I'm a bit concerned to see the government threatening windfall taxes and removal of travel permits. If these clubs want to burn their bridges and set up an unaccountable European superleague then I can't see why it is the place of government to stop them.

They just want to get the footie vote.

Literally nothing more.

[dinny_g]

I can't see why it is the place of government to stop them.

The government has a responsibility to represent the people and if 10%, 15%, whatever of the population are outraged by this then they have a responsibility to do try to something.

[Rich B]

I can't see why it is the place of government to stop them.

The government has a responsibility to represent the people and if 10%, 15%, whatever of the population are outraged by this then they have a responsibility to do try to something.

100% could be outraged, but it's a private business, not up to the government to get involved.

[Beany]

I can't see why it is the place of government to stop them.

The government has a responsibility to represent the people and if 10%, 15%, whatever of the population are outraged by this then they have a responsibility to do try to something.

100% could be outraged, but it's a private business, not up to the government to get involved.

Especially not a conservative, free market of ideas, freedom of private business government.

Not that they're a bunch of fucking hypocrites!

[dinny_g]

Not sure I agree Rich - these are publicly traded companies with a significant presence in the UK and if they are engaged in practices, no matter how "legal" that are contrary to the national interest, then the government should get involved.

[Maurice]

It’s football, not pharmaceuticals or defence. Government shouldn’t be touching it.

[duncs500]

I think it's pretty terrible, and there is an argument in business terms that they are effectively preventing competition in business as well as in football by creating a closed shop.

It's not as simple as them being companies and therefore they do as they wish, they still have a governance system which they are shunning to become self governing. Although I appreciate the differences it's a bit like the twelve biggest banks deciding they're too big and rich to be regulated anymore and are going to do what the hell they want.

It's completely anti-competition and they are just trying to insulate themselves against the risk of their own mismanagement.

Part of me hopes they do it, all the domestic fans shun it and go and watch the remaining teams, it becomes a bit like an uncompetitive friendly tournament, there's no atmosphere at the games and the standards slide, the top players leave, and eventually putting these so called big clubs out of business. Not beyond my imagination at least.

[mik]

@dinny_g How is it contrary to the public interest? Genuine question - I don’t know.

From an outsider perspective football is a lot closer to WWE than other sports for me. All the play acting, diving and other sneaky pish that goes unpunished. When you look at the tech involved in rugby or tennis etc etc to drive towards fair play... football looks way behind. It’s far more about the spectacle, and a few crap or unfair decisions just add to the show and the fans seem to lap up and get frothy about the controversy - ergo it is considered good business. Bag o shite.

[Mito Man]

You mean it’s anti-competition in terms of the gameplay of the sport itself right? As an outsider the fact some teams can’t set up their own league is pretty anti-competition and the definition of a monopoly.

[duncs500]

It's quite amusing that Man City are getting into it even though it wasn't that many years ago they were in the third tier! If this had been formed a decade earlier they certainly wouldn't be getting an invite.