European Super League

[yellowcard]

Apart from the corruption, sportswashing and greed, professional football isn't too bad! Add in the removal of any spontaneous emotion through the introduction of VAR, the constant diving and cheating and the totally soulless experience of watching football this season in front of empty seats and I often wonder why Irish fans get so worked up over English premier league teams. See it for what it is, a billionaires plaything where every fan is a 'customer' and everything is measured in monetary terms. When entire nations are using football as a way of projecting soft power and sportswashing you know there is something filthy.

What sport do you follow?

I would follow almost any sport, not sure where you're going with this. 

[north_antrim_hound]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I thought premiership money filtered down through to championship clubs so it's not the thing at all.

[Milltown Row2]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I thought premiership money filtered down through to championship clubs so it's not the thing at all.

Ah but what about 1992? That's when football really started .....

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I thought premiership money filtered down through to championship clubs so it's not the thing at all.

In terms of competition it's different, in terms of rebranding a competition to make more money out of football as we saw in 1992, it's the same.

[Taylor]

UEFA president Ceferin has just confirmed that all players in the new Super League will be banned from playing in the World Cup.

This is absolutely bonkers 

[GetOverTheBar]

UEFA president Ceferin has just confirmed that all players in the new Super League will be banned from playing in the World Cup.

This is absolutely bonkers 

UEFA going all in very early. Still a few cards to come....

[north_antrim_hound]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I thought premiership money filtered down through to championship clubs so it's not the thing at all.

In terms of competition it's different, in terms of rebranding a competition to make more money out of football as we saw in 1992, it's the same.

So if it's  the same will the new Euro league put 400 mil into the EFL I don't think so, for what it's worth the smaller clubs I think should get more bit to suggest it's the same is wrong.

[quit yo jibbajabba]

This is gona be like when the PDC went away from the BDO in the darts

2 world cups. The wemen are gona love this

[J70]

This is football heading down the road of American professional franchise sports. Clubs belonging to cities and fan bases? f**k that. That's so 20th century.

No relegation, nothing to play for except the main title.

Then, if your team is shit or support fades away, let's up and move the whole kit and kaboodle to another city.

Remember the Seattle SuperSonics? Now OKC Thunder. Baseball started in California because of a stalemate between the owners of the Brooklyn Dodgers and Robert Moses, longtime infrastructure emperor of NYC. LA said they'd build them a beautiful stadium. SF the same for the Giants, formerly of the Polo Grounds in Harlem. NYC loses two long standing baseball teams in the blink of an eye. May not happen with football, but the possibility is there, with clubs the business possessions of corporations, not entities with roots in a community.

Thing totally f**king stinks.

[shark]

This is great:

https://www.grimsby-townfc.co.uk/news/2021/april/big-six-shirt-amnesty-launched/

[Baile Brigín 2]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Nonsense. The EPL replaced the first division with the full agreement of the clubs and association.

[Baile Brigín 2]

Apart from the corruption, sportswashing and greed, professional football isn't too bad! Add in the removal of any spontaneous emotion through the introduction of VAR, the constant diving and cheating and the totally soulless experience of watching football this season in front of empty seats and I often wonder why Irish fans get so worked up over English premier league teams. See it for what it is, a billionaires plaything where every fan is a 'customer' and everything is measured in monetary terms. When entire nations are using football as a way of projecting soft power and sportswashing you know there is something filthy.

What sport do you follow?

I would follow almost any sport, not sure where you're going with this.

Soccer has many levels. If you object to the circus that is English top flight stuff pick a lower level, or heaven forbid a local club.

None of the above happens in Ireland

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Have to laugh at the fake hysteria. The same people making excuses for the premier league being the exact same thing as it was pre 1992 but only being rebranded, are the same people that claim Liverpool have only won the league once.
You couldn't make it up. Hypocrites. According to them, the "Premier League" is fine, but a big no no to the European super league.
The games gone

It's not really the same thing. Until 1991, all 92 clubs had equal voting rights and in effect a group of the weakest clubs could dictate terms to the largest clubs.

What the PL did was maintain almost identical structures to before, but while ensuring that the biggest clubs could pursue financial arrangements that would allow them to match Italian clubs.

The change was oddly enough an implementation of equality: basically "we all started with an equal chance of getting ahead, but that doesn't mean we have to be equal in all things forever"

As Leicester and Man City have shown, progress through the ranks has always been possible

——

What we are facing now isn't the same thing. It's an attempted corporate takeover of football.

This is no different to the formation of the premier league, it is the same thing.
You confirm that the formation of the premier league put power into the bigger clubs hands, this is exactly the same with the ESL. So it was anything but equality.
City progressed through oil money, Leicester did it more in the proper way, by buying and selling smartly.
My point is that the people who are outraged are the same people who only recognise football post 1992. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I thought premiership money filtered down through to championship clubs so it's not the thing at all.

In terms of competition it's different, in terms of rebranding a competition to make more money out of football as we saw in 1992, it's the same.

So if it's  the same will the new Euro league put 400 mil into the EFL I don't think so, for what it's worth the smaller clubs I think should get more bit to suggest it's the same is wrong.

It's not about money to smaller clubs
They're rebranding a new competition to make more money out of football, which is exactly what we saw in 1992.

[BennyHarp]

Have i got this right then? The 12 (or 15) original clubs can't get relegated and 5 new clubs can get promoted / relegated each year - so Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea could finish in the bottom 3 of the new Super League but Ajax, for example, could finish 4th from bottom and get relegated? Sounds class. 

[BennyCake]

There was a time I'd rarely miss a CL game or highlights. Nowadays I rarely even watch the semis/final. There are too many teams (who aren't even their league winners), too many meaningless games. It's boring watching the same teams playing over and over again.

But fans are fickle. They will buy tickets to any old shite. Blind loyalty, while money is sucked from their wallets.

Yes the PL is full of money men but it's still the results that matter.

Been going that way myself, the lack of fans also highlights how much atmosphere matters and actually masks the muck that's on offer a lot of the time.

Are you two related? 

Aye, we're brothers