TeaCider
Well-known member
The 6 clubs joined up to another competition without the awareness or consent of the Premier League.
That by itself is against the rules.
John W Henry’s Response to Liverpool Supporters
- Thread starter Fat_Dragon
- Start date
The 6 clubs joined up to another competition without the awareness or consent of the Premier League.
That by itself is against the rules.
FartingGnome
Well-known member
Wonder if the fans have actually clocked the meaning of the phrase legacy fans. In the world of software development certainly a legacy system is something left over from the old days that'll be replaced by a shiny new version starting immediately and ending as soon as possible, with a maintenance cut-off.
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Seems Henry can’t win now the damage has been done
as someone else has said at least he’s got in front of the camera and gave an explanation. He should be given some credit for doing that. I think you can see some Nativity with being American owners, they used to seeing sport a different way and probably didn’t expect the fall out.
don’t get me wrong they stepped out of line and punishment should be given out, but at least there’s an attempt to show remorse
as someone else has said at least he’s got in front of the camera and gave an explanation. He should be given some credit for doing that. I think you can see some Nativity with being American owners, they used to seeing sport a different way and probably didn’t expect the fall out.
don’t get me wrong they stepped out of line and punishment should be given out, but at least there’s an attempt to show remorse
I think the premier league would have difficulty punishing the teams for it given that there was no direct impact on the league/ games/ structure and it was ended before it started. There wasn't even clarity on what the final product was with the free spaces and the potential for others teams to participate.
I don't agree with it, but I am not sure how far they would legally stand with punishments.
Colgates_shaving_foam
Well-known member
The current government with their massive majority can legislate to do whatever they want at the moment.
They could introduce a law to stop clubs playing in a new competition and that's it, game over. The clubs are over a barrel.
As are we all by the way but let's not get into politics.
zaphod
Active member
I find it amazing that (presumably successful) businessmen completely misunderstand their market (ie the fans) and don't realise how important it is to any business to listen to customers. If they view their clubs as "products" (which I'm sure they do), they have to make their "product" attractive to potential customers. The die-hard fans can perhaps be taken for granted, but selling TV rights for high prices depends on subscriptions or pay-per-view from a much wider customer base (ie general football fans) than the die-hard fans.
dooderooni
Well-known member
Having slept on it since this morning, I think the best way to punish them is to effectively neuter their sway in the game going forward.
Get this governance review going now and have the real power in the English game, public opinion, push for reforms that will help actually support the entire pyramid.
Start with removing prize money for finishing places in the PL, the prize should be winning the league or qualifying for Europe.
Increase the percentage of the TV deal that is paid as solidarity to the lower leagues.
Ensure that fans are represented at board level and have voting rights.
Give an equitable split of the TV deal to every PL club regardless of how many times you appear and split attendance revenue 50/50 to home and away sides.
Ban leveraging of debt against club assets.
Ban the 6 from having a vote for 5 years so that they can't object to any reforms and if they don't like it they can sell the clubs.
Yes, that'll impact the clubs and fans to some extent, but it'll put safeguards in place to remind shysters that it is a sport first and foremost and not a licence to print money.
Get this governance review going now and have the real power in the English game, public opinion, push for reforms that will help actually support the entire pyramid.
Start with removing prize money for finishing places in the PL, the prize should be winning the league or qualifying for Europe.
Increase the percentage of the TV deal that is paid as solidarity to the lower leagues.
Ensure that fans are represented at board level and have voting rights.
Give an equitable split of the TV deal to every PL club regardless of how many times you appear and split attendance revenue 50/50 to home and away sides.
Ban leveraging of debt against club assets.
Ban the 6 from having a vote for 5 years so that they can't object to any reforms and if they don't like it they can sell the clubs.
Yes, that'll impact the clubs and fans to some extent, but it'll put safeguards in place to remind shysters that it is a sport first and foremost and not a licence to print money.
BoroMart
Well-known member
Don't mean to be rude but I think you miss every key fact on your post sorry.
1 - They broke a Premier League Rule
2 - They broke contractual obligations to the premier league
3 - The Premier League have imposed financial and league penalty points in the past, so do have authority
4 - During our case case in 96/97, you can't sue an organisation that you are a member of and have signed up to the rules.
I'm not saying with will punish them, but they have every ability to
Last edited:
BoroMart
Well-known member
It's imperative and has been needed for a long time, these clubs have bullied their way into control for too long
I've advocated this for probably 10 years now. If every team is playing 38 league games, then every team is providing the same input into the product and should be recompensed equally. The drive for finishing top should be for sporting achievement NOT for greater income.
The game in its entirety is important, and I totally agree with this. For too long we have seen the gap between prem and championship and down the tiers has grown for too long.
Agreed, every Man U game pretty much being live regardless how well or poorly they play is not meritocracy and is emoldening their wealth.
Agreed, the whole financial aspect of clubs needs reviewing
Maybe, or change the rules so it's 12 clubs required to swing a vote, reduce their power
By allowing the rich 6 to continue the wealth and power appropriation, it effects the fans of 86 other clubs and they should always come above 6 rich clubs.
I dont think it's rude. Always useful for clarity.
I'm not massively up to date with the premier league rules- which one was broken? and what part of the contract? (Genuinely don't know)
I dont doubt they could impose financial/ or penalty points- I dont think they will but I know they are able. The grounding would be on the rule breaking.
BoroMart
Well-known member
@Cambsred
Rule L9 states that:
“Except with the prior written approval of the board, during the season a club shall not enter or play its senior men’s first team in any competition other than
L.9.1 – The UEFA Champions League
L.9.2 – The UEFA Europa League
L.9.3 – The FA Cup
L.9.4 – The FA Community Shield
L.9.5 – The Football League Cup or
L.9.6 – Competitions sanctioned by the County Association of which it is a member.”
The key part is highlighted, there was no prior written approval.
They have clearly broken this rule, the question is what is 'fair' punishment? As far as I understand it is up to and including expulsion. They won't and shouldn't do that, but any punishment should include a suspended expulsion for the next 5 years, so that even more minor breaches can lead to expulsion.
Rule L9 states that:
“Except with the prior written approval of the board, during the season a club shall not enter or play its senior men’s first team in any competition other than
L.9.1 – The UEFA Champions League
L.9.2 – The UEFA Europa League
L.9.3 – The FA Cup
L.9.4 – The FA Community Shield
L.9.5 – The Football League Cup or
L.9.6 – Competitions sanctioned by the County Association of which it is a member.”
The key part is highlighted, there was no prior written approval.
They have clearly broken this rule, the question is what is 'fair' punishment? As far as I understand it is up to and including expulsion. They won't and shouldn't do that, but any punishment should include a suspended expulsion for the next 5 years, so that even more minor breaches can lead to expulsion.
I'm all for punishment.
I wondered how far that rule could be interpreted with regards to the entering into a competition. As there was nothing formalised to the point of existence could it be argued there was never a breech of the rules. I perhaps haven't read enough to understand the agreements/ contracts for the ESL but it was hypothetical with a future start date which I thought may therefore not impact that rule.
There was intent to do so, and they would have I am sure if the reaction was different.
I wondered how far that rule could be interpreted with regards to the entering into a competition. As there was nothing formalised to the point of existence could it be argued there was never a breech of the rules. I perhaps haven't read enough to understand the agreements/ contracts for the ESL but it was hypothetical with a future start date which I thought may therefore not impact that rule.
There was intent to do so, and they would have I am sure if the reaction was different.
BoroMart
Well-known member
I'm sure those clubs will argue that the agreement was just to explore it.....but that will be difficult to argue when they had agreed a 6billion financial package with JP Morgan and also declared they were joining it on social media. Plus they had to send a letter of intent to withdraw from the ESL, therefore they had committed. I doubt that just because the league had yet started, that would be a get out clause legally.
I dunno, I'm no lawyer, but rules are rules, and remembering that having signed up to the prem rules in 96 we were unable to stop them taking points of us, so precedence exists.
Malaguena
Well-known member
When you've got Agnelli coming out this morning and saying football isn't a sport, it's a business, nothing amazes me any more
Jedi boro
Well-known member
I think that’s the issue it wasn’t a rumour it was an official announcement they had left.
plus any formal letters sent but the shots had been fired this was not a testing the waters scenario they had gone.
it won’t be cheap for them now.
brain_in_a_jar
Well-known member
I guess the problem with any punishment is these clubs are so rich they get the most expensive law teams together and drig it through the courts for years and years. I wonder if the EPL are willing to take that on or if they're just happy enough that it looks dead in the water.
Personally I'd like to see tough punishments given to all parties involved, the argument that it wouldn't be fair because players and fans had nothing to do with it doesn't really wash with me - didn't see anybody giving two hoots about our players and us fans when we got 3 points taken off us.
Won't hold my breath though...
Personally I'd like to see tough punishments given to all parties involved, the argument that it wouldn't be fair because players and fans had nothing to do with it doesn't really wash with me - didn't see anybody giving two hoots about our players and us fans when we got 3 points taken off us.
Won't hold my breath though...
I don't think what they where wanting to do could ever work as they were trying to combine elements of two incompatible systems by cherry picking the bits of both that made most profit regardless of sporting integrity.
The US franchise system only works with the draft sytem for young players and salary cap to prevent financial mismanagement to achieve dominance, which is totally anathema to the European mindset. The European pyramid system works (or does it?) because it enables teams to rise and fall on merit, and in theory punish financial mismanagement. The reason these teams are doing this is to mitigate this punishment for their overspending. It could be achieved by copying parts of the US system but not the bits they chose.
The US franchise system only works with the draft sytem for young players and salary cap to prevent financial mismanagement to achieve dominance, which is totally anathema to the European mindset. The European pyramid system works (or does it?) because it enables teams to rise and fall on merit, and in theory punish financial mismanagement. The reason these teams are doing this is to mitigate this punishment for their overspending. It could be achieved by copying parts of the US system but not the bits they chose.
I don't think they've clearly broken the rule. The absence of prior written approval of the board is clear-cut but during the season gives a lot of wriggle room for lawyers. They appear to have entered into an agreement to enter a competition at an unspecified future date. We're unlikely to see the paperwork but I suspect it will involve trebles all round for m'learned friends.