Euro Super League Anyone ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hopelesslyoptimistic

Until the clubs see economic sense then there will always be problems.

Whilst some clubs like MAn City and PSG are heavily funded by rich sovereign states then other clubs are likely to have to take crazy gambles to succeed.

I suspect salary caps are the only logical way forward.

---

This recent episode shows that "economic sense" is very much open to interpretation.

IMHO, its not economics that need to be explicit, it's the structures that all clubs MUST adhere to, the sanctions that WILL be applied (No "interpretation. You transgress, this is what WILL happen to you and your club), transparency of all to the outside world, no "behind closed doors" negotiations, acknowledgement that modern day football is a business, that profits need to be made and that in doing so, the pyramid will feed all concerned, but that (across the board) the obscene amounts of money paid to footballers, and the profits made by clubs and those to who rights are sold, need to strike a balance, which is very much NOT the case as it is.

No player, and I mean, NO player, is worth paying £100k/week for kicking a ball about, the pendulum has gone from one extreme where players were paid a pittance to one where obscene amounts of money distort what the game should be (I'd say the same about the money-grabbing ***** who heads up Betfred and pays herself 450m/year, but that's another issue!). As HO says, salary caps may well be the only way forward, but they need the same global structure as I referred to, no easy thing to achieve, given our "friends" in the east.

It's not going to be easy to sort out, and wont be quick either, (hence why the oversight is soooooo important and hard to maintain), but if it doesn't get done, another "ESL" will come along in the none too distant future.

A salary cap won’t work as it would need to be global... and you have the varying costs of living in each country... Then say it was last season capped at 300k.... Messi takes a pay cut to be on the same as Ozil? To have the safety of the club at heart it should be similar to going for a house mortgage... a team wage ratio based solely on gate receipts it can maybe x4 or whatever... discard advertising revenue, tv money from the formulae as Citeh abused that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whitestomper45

A salary cap won’t work as it would need to be global... and you have the varying costs of living in each country... Then say it was last season capped at 300k.... Messi takes a pay cut to be on the same as Ozil? To have the safety of the club at heart it should be similar to going for a house mortgage... a team wage ratio based solely on gate receipts it can maybe x4 or whatever... discard advertising revenue, tv money from the formulae as Citeh abused that

---

Agree with you as to it being difficult to achieve a global salary cap, but the alternative is more of the same, and another "ESL" at some time soon. The cost of living issue is already a factor, hence why so many players from 3rd world countries (can you still say that?) are scooped up by 1st world clubs. The cap needs to be a maximum, not applied to each country, and frankly the economics will work themselves out as the do now. Can't agree with the house mortgage idea. That implies an assessment of affordability on the part of the club, and affordability varies greatly as it is, and shows no signs of levelling out, so the less well off clubs will still be disadvantaged in terms of paying attractive salaries, and the contra applies to the better off clubs, the imbalance continues, until affordability erodes, by which time the better off clubs are obliged to pay salaries they can no longer afford (As per where we are at the moment and why the ESL was dreamt up!).

Some form of capping is essential. How that's achieved will be a hard nut to crack, but why are the folks at FIFA etc paid the big bucks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF11

Agree with you as to it being difficult to achieve a global salary cap, but the alternative is more of the same, and another "ESL" at some time soon. The cost of living issue is already a factor, hence why so many players from 3rd world countries (can you still say that?) are scooped up by 1st world clubs. The cap needs to be a maximum, not applied to each country, and frankly the economics will work themselves out as the do now. Can't agree with the house mortgage idea. That implies an assessment of affordability on the part of the club, and affordability varies greatly as it is, and shows no signs of levelling out, so the less well off clubs will still be disadvantaged in terms of paying attractive salaries, and the contra applies to the better off clubs, the imbalance continues, until affordability erodes, by which time the better off clubs are obliged to pay salaries they can no longer afford (As per where we are at the moment and why the ESL was dreamt up!).

Some form of capping is essential. How that's achieved will be a hard nut to crack, but why are the folks at FIFA etc paid the big bucks?

---

I guess the other solution is to make sure the insolvency rules are properly enforced.

Real Madrid according to many commentators is insolvent but continuously gets bailed out by the Spanish government or the banks don’t enforce against them.

I tend to think of salary cap as a fixed limit on the amount you can by an individual I.e. the most they could earn is 100k a week.

Playing on words now but a fixed wage budget might be an alternative solution. No club is allowed to pay more the 100 million (or something) per annum on wages for the 1st team squad. Its then up to the club how the wages are divided up, (a bit like fantasy football). Each league/division could have its own specific wage ceiling.

With that you could introduce another rule rule that for every club generating X amount of profit, 5% or something has to go into the pot to help fund the other divisions by way of subsidies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF11

Agree with you as to it being difficult to achieve a global salary cap, but the alternative is more of the same, and another "ESL" at some time soon. The cost of living issue is already a factor, hence why so many players from 3rd world countries (can you still say that?) are scooped up by 1st world clubs. The cap needs to be a maximum, not applied to each country, and frankly the economics will work themselves out as the do now. Can't agree with the house mortgage idea. That implies an assessment of affordability on the part of the club, and affordability varies greatly as it is, and shows no signs of levelling out, so the less well off clubs will still be disadvantaged in terms of paying attractive salaries, and the contra applies to the better off clubs, the imbalance continues, until affordability erodes, by which time the better off clubs are obliged to pay salaries they can no longer afford (As per where we are at the moment and why the ESL was dreamt up!).

Some form of capping is essential. How that's achieved will be a hard nut to crack, but why are the folks at FIFA etc paid the big bucks?

---

The basic idea of a mortgage is, can you afford to pay for it ( in this case gate receipts x whatever ratio) It’s the problem at the moment that “bigger clubs” via OTT mismanaged transfer/agent fees and wages have created inflated unsustainable costs... You need to bring these costs inline with earnings. Affordability would be better based on the clubs gate receipts/team merchandise.. with the ratio taking into account tv money etc.. rather than some chancer who comes in and spends money she/he can’t afford at the clubs long term peril. The incentive for the owner being to get more fans in the ground. Players can still make additional monies from their own image rights..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whitestomper45

The basic idea of a mortgage is, can you afford to pay for it ( in this case gate receipts x whatever ratio) It’s the problem at the moment that “bigger clubs” via OTT mismanaged transfer/agent fees and wages have created inflated unsustainable costs... You need to bring these costs inline with earnings. Affordability would be better based on the clubs gate receipts/team merchandise.. with the ratio taking into account tv money etc.. rather than some chancer who comes in and spends money she/he can’t afford at the clubs long term peril. The incentive for the owner being to get more fans in the ground. Players can still make additional monies from their own image rights..

---

But that would still mean that you have a chasm in "affordability" between rich and no-so-rich clubs, (not against differential, just the degree of difference), and unless (as HO says in post #74), unless the financial restrictions are rigorously policed (and they haven't been), as long as there is "wriggle room", some clubs/owners will exploit it.

I suspect we're all saying the same thing (fans, pundits, footballing authorities (PLEASE!), governments , "If the rules are clear, and you abide by them, and the rules are fair, and all can see they are, then things will be better (not perfect, that's not possible, but better!), and punishment for infringement will be clear, unequivocal, swift and without mercy"

Done some serious stuff campaigning for Mental Health rights in the past so I can understand problems that need addressing have to start somewhere.

Football for sure needs an independent regulator to protect the wider picture of the game particularly for community clubs in the lower leagues and to further develop grassroots facilities. The regulator should have the powers to distribute funds in the interests of the wider game of football,full power to introduce a comprehensive licensing system for professional clubs and able to work with club supporters to advance causes that matter to them.

Football differs from all other sectors of economy as It’s not just about business.Clubs are also social assets making a huge contribution to the culture and identity of a city and indeed a country.

But of course any proposal for a regulator raises a number of interesting legal questions concerning the powers a regulator will require over corporate and legal structures and whether its regulatory functions would be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts through judicial review I've been reading.

I've read presently the courts of England and Wales have clear jurisdiction to consider only the actions of sporting bodies for issues relating to breach of contract,the restraint of trade doctrine,statutory competition law provisions and civil causes of action. However,for challenges that relate more to the propriety of decisions that are made by sporting bodies and concerning whether such decisions should be reviewed by the courts in a judicial review context the approach of the courts in England and Wales has been far more restricted.

So legally challenges to improve footballs situation will require big changes to reflect the role of sport in society and that requires some serious negotiation involving all parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monaco_Totty

Done some serious stuff campaigning for Mental Health rights in the past so I can understand problems that need addressing have to start somewhere.

Football for sure needs an independent regulator to protect the wider picture of the game particularly for community clubs in the lower leagues and to further develop grassroots facilities. The regulator should have the powers to distribute funds in the interests of the wider game of football,full power to introduce a comprehensive licensing system for professional clubs and able to work with club supporters to advance causes that matter to them.

Football differs from all other sectors of economy as It’s not just about business.Clubs are also social assets making a huge contribution to the culture and identity of a city and indeed a country.

But of course any proposal for a regulator raises a number of interesting legal questions concerning the powers a regulator will require over corporate and legal structures and whether its regulatory functions would be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts through judicial review I've been reading.

I've read presently the courts of England and Wales have clear jurisdiction to consider only the actions of sporting bodies for issues relating to breach of contract,the restraint of trade doctrine,statutory competition law provisions and civil causes of action. However,for challenges that relate more to the propriety of decisions that are made by sporting bodies and concerning whether such decisions should be reviewed by the courts in a judicial review context the approach of the courts in England and Wales has been far more restricted.

So legally challenges to improve footballs situation will require big changes to reflect the role of sport in society and that requires some serious negotiation involving all parties.

---

Hence why I said it requires global action from global football authorities (FIFA?), and national governments and (where possible/appropriate), the regional footballing authorities, such as UEFA.

Will it happen?

Tough calls in what to do.

In Germany, there is the “50 + 1” rule.
Meaning the association or club has to have a controlling stake so commercial interests can’t gain control. At Bayern Munich Audi and Adidas each own 9% but the rest is controlled by the members via the club. There are only two exceptions with Wolfsburg (owned by Volkswagen) and Bayer Leverkusen (owned by the chemical company Bayer).So in general a club in Germany is a true club for the members.

This unique rule in Germany has allowed fans to ensure the football club they support is ran in a way which is approved by them. With owners able to purchase 49% of a stake in a club they could still inject and influence a football club.So German fans could enjoy the best of both worlds in owning their own football club alongside a rich owner.

But with massive money comes massive egos. Would a football owner be happy only owning only 49% ?They wouldn’t want to answer to football fans of the club who will not look at business decision in the same light as a pure business person would they in truth.

Not easy but the picture below shows the way it's gone and the desk logo of 'Euro next' points the way it was going up until this week.£800 million the clowns raised by loans to buy that shower of a club that stakeholders now want payback on.Not so smug and smiling now though are they.

https://i.postimg.cc/FHPrtkct/image.jpg