|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 20, 2021 14:55:53 GMT
Ha ha - all you non-footballists here thought you'd escape this kind of conversation but just like its appearance in the news, it pops up.
Some of the reactions make it look like these clubs are changing the rules of the actual game when all they're saying is that FC Trasbonsor away isn't a money spinner, regardless of the result. I can understand the fan point of view - a league for the clubs that have a lot already but from a business point of view I understand it from the boardroom point of view as well. Where’s the money or kudos in these energy-sapping away games where often the squad is unrecognisable to those that are used to watching EPL weak in week out? However, Spurs joining such a league is like me arriving at the Crucible and putting 50p on the side of the table as Ronnie O’Sullivan looks on. Current Arsenal not much better but they still collect FA Cups every other year or so. People also forget the European Cup was despised by the Football League and they never wanted to have anything to do with it (stopped Chelsea going in ‘55) and refused to alter fixture schedules for Man Utd, culminating in a charter plane crash in Munich as Busby tried to avoid travel fatigue following experience in the previous round.
So football, the business, will move on. The game is the same (apart from VAR 😖) but you can’t tell a modern business that they won’t know whether next year’s budget starting in August will be £100M or £200M until the middle of May. Provided it’s clear the big teams will play in the national leagues but not the UCL or UEFA I can’t see it being stopped. The founding members controlling it is the biggest problem for FIFA, UEFA and the local FAs as it’s too much of a closed shop but the only way this will be stopped is if UEFA come up with a super league above the UCL which appeases this group (which apart from Arsenal and Spuds always plays in that league anyway). So they may as well sanction this, go for a 20 team league and fill the 8 spaces with German, French, Belgian, Portuguese, Dutch, Austrian, Russian and Swiss champions. Or they could have an August pre-Super League Knock-out for four/six of the 8 places from a group that includes the champions from England, Italy and Spain if it’s not one of the 12. Endless possibilities but the 12 cannot stand alone without clubs like 1.FC Bayern, PSG (spit), Ajax, PSV, Dortmund, Porto having an opportunity - it would become the most meaningless tournament outside of the Yanks calling the race for the pennant a “world title”.
Bit long winded but this will happen in some form: these 12 are just forcing UEFA’s hand and it will ultimately be sanctioned - it's who controls it that the current argument is about.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 20, 2021 15:14:50 GMT
I just don't care. I read the collection of words you've put together above but they don't make any sense to me in that arrangement.
Why is this a problem? Doesn't competition and innovation make things better for everyone?
What leverage have those opposed to it (which for some reason appears to include the government) got against this sanctions-wise?
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 20, 2021 15:24:31 GMT
I just don't care. I read the collection of words you've put together above but they don't make any sense to me in that arrangement. Why is this a problem? Doesn't competition and innovation make things better for everyone? What leverage have those opposed to it (which for some reason appears to include the government) got against this sanctions-wise? This is what W2.1 said. I explained to her why the 12 wanted to move away from the current model then started to compare the control the competition by the clubs with the FISA/FOCA wars of the late '70s early '80s. She switched off after 2 hours.......  Anyway, I agree with the last point: no one can do anything if the clubs with the money, fanbase and overall history of long term success (not sure how Citeh, Spurs and Chelsea fit in there  ) decide to buy a new ball and play on that shiny new pitch in the next village. The whole thing is only a problem because the fans think they own their clubs, the competitions, the players and the board owes them something undefinable and which cannot be physically manifested - when the board have a load of bills to pay. Liken it to the political mentality where entire villages / towns have voted one way for three generations because they always have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2021 15:35:46 GMT
I think a lot of fans still believe their tickets are a major part of the income of a big club and their loyalty should mean something. A very long time since fans have had any more than a marginal impact on major clubs seeing as the biggest income route is sponsors and THAT is why ticket prices are up.
With the next thing (Remember what was said when the premiership was mooted?) being so europe wide, the ability of fans to go to away matches will likely drop anyway so that tells what fans are in the scheme of things.
That being said, if the bigger (They think) clubs are out of the premiership, more chance for the rest to achieve something and keep costs realistic, we shall see. No, Fulham will not manage to stay up either way, doh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Apr 20, 2021 15:39:02 GMT
I think someone on the radio this morning was talking about it in terms of revenue generation and that the big clubs actually need it to make themselves viable but all I can imagine is that the, once again, the huge amount of money being injected will simply result in a bunch of 20 year olds being traded for, and being paid, ever larger sums while the owners continue their money-laundering activities.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 20, 2021 15:52:42 GMT
I seem to recall that Real Madrid’s financial model is always based on 150 years of continued following and therefore associated revenue and advertising sales.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 20, 2021 17:15:51 GMT
Oh the hypocracy has been turned a notch with this row hasn't it? The Sun are crying foul in a way they never managed back in the early 90's when Rupert Murdoch's Sky Sports were the main beneficiary of the breakaway league that was the Premiership. Now it's Amazon and Disney+ coming in with more money than him he gets his paper to climb up on it's high horse!
Then we have the fans who demand their clubs spend more money then moan when their clubs find a way to do so! Go back 10 years and Arsenal were struggling to spend on players because of their £300m bill for the Emirates Stadium. Fast forward to today and the club have over the last 5 years invested half a billion on players (factoring in transfer fees, super agent fees and wages). Yet every week Arsenal Fan TV demands the owners invest more in the squad. Where do they think the money will come from? The owner may be a billionaire but he didn't become one by throwing cash into a giant money pit!
The fans of the other 14 clubs are up in arms at the big six taking money from JP Morgan whilst wearing a shirt emblazoned with the name of a Chinese betting firm. They talk about football belonging to the fans when it ceased to do so decades ago.
Now the players have started biting the hand that feeds them too. The top Premier League stars are commanding £300k+ a week wages whilst often still hitting the woodwork week in week out. The real superstars of world football are not too far off being able to command £1m+ a week. Where do they think the money's coming from? It ain't coming from the TV revenue for their trip to the arse end of Azerbaijan or their away trip to West Brom. If they want to keep getting wages of several 100k a week and transfer fees or £75m or more their clubs need a guaranteed two games a season against Barca and Real Madrid.
Then we have UEFA and FIFA threatening to chuck out the breakaway clubs from the current Champions League, a competition devised in order to help keep these big clubs playing each other each season, but which they've manage to dilute so much that even the knockout stages have teams would struggle against your average English Championship side. And FIFA are criticising the big six from taking foreign money when in a years time they'll be hosting the world cup in Qatar! Sorry that's not fair. Qatar was chosen purely on merit and to help bring football to a new continent. My mistake.
Moan all they like but money talks and this will happen. Wenger predicted it 12 years ago and he ain't called Le Professeur for nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 20, 2021 18:57:45 GMT
Doubt it will happen now Chelsea and City have pulled out. Spurs and Arsenal were only invited to give the big clubs some easy victories.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 20, 2021 19:17:45 GMT
Woodward has resigned (nowt to do with Super League - yeah right).
Football's gone mad and it won't be coming home.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 20, 2021 19:19:53 GMT
I understand why these clubs want, or wanted, it to happen but in my opinion it would be an extremely foolhardy and hubristic thing to do.
If this Super League or any such similar 'competition' comes to pass, the clubs should be prohibited from entering their own National league competition. I don't agree with the threatened sanction of the players of these clubs becoming unable to represent their country, though. That's just unfair.
Most, if not all, of football's apparent financial woes could be solved simply be resetting the players' wage bill and then imposing a salary cap. Especially at these clubs. There's more than enough money being paid by broadcasters, sponsors and other stakeholders (including fans) to generate significant profits for most owners, but they choose to spunk it all on the players.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 20, 2021 19:32:13 GMT
Totally agree with all that and it has been obvious for years that money is ruining football and I totally understand the opposition to the idea of a Super League.
What annoys me though is seeing the gross hypocracy of fans like those from Liverpool or Man City talking about earning a place at the top table when they've only earned it by being bankrolled by a billionaire to buy the best players and steamroller the rest of the Premier League. Even the Leicester fans who like to remind us of their Fairytale league championship are only able to do so because their rich Thai owners bought them the players capable to do it.
You've also got pundits like Jamie Carragher ranting about it on a show only viewable behind the Sky Sports paywall before a match that because it's on Monday, so not on Match of The Day, could only be watched by fans who have paid for Sky. He really is a man of the people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Apr 20, 2021 19:35:42 GMT
Frankly as an Arsenal fan I've very disappointed at the club.
I hope this doesn't happen and the whole thing just collapses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 20, 2021 19:38:32 GMT
^^ But the difference between the post-1991 Premier League and Sky TV and this proposed Super League is that the Premier League was effectively just a rebranding of an existing product and competition (being the top division of English football) with minor tinkering about the number of clubs in tiers 1 and 2 of the league structure. The fact that you then needed to pay a subscription to watch it on TV is just a consequence of opening broadcasting deals to tender. Same with say cricket, rugby union, rugby league etc.
There was still full, transparent and meritocratic promotion and relegation across all tiers of English football (let's not mention the 2019-20 season too much in the lower tiers..). So in theory a Liverpool or a Man Utd could fall down the tiers if they ran out of talent/money/passion/heart. And their proper fans would still support them regardless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 20, 2021 20:21:05 GMT
Not quite: the Premier League wrested control the top tier from the Football League, putting the top levels of football in England in the hands of the FA. This is why the FA Cup is now relatively small an occasion - because the FA can crow about the EPL instead. The EPL was also always a precursor for this meeting of the larger clubs more frequently as the FA's relationship with UEFA is different to the Football League's, hence the large number of English sides into the UCL. At that time David Dein of Arsenal had a lot of muscle in the League, at the FA and was one of the Architects of the EPL - since then he's lobbied on various FIFA and UEFA issues. He also made sure Sven Goren Ericsson was made England Manager to keep Wenger at Arsenal.
This super league will happen but as I said in the OP it's currently about who controls it. UEFA will be forced down the route which looks a bit like I've written above or the big clubs will just start not arriving at FC Minions, the champions of Moravia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 20, 2021 21:23:28 GMT
Not quite: the Premier League wrested control the top tier from the Football League, putting the top levels of football in England in the hands of the FA. This is why the FA Cup is now relatively small an occasion - because the FA can crow about the EPL instead. The EPL was also always a precursor for this meeting of the larger clubs more frequently as the FA's relationship with UEFA is different to the Football League's, hence the large number of English sides into the UCL. At that time David Dein of Arsenal had a lot of muscle in the League, at the FA and was one of the Architects of the EPL - since then he's lobbied on various FIFA and UEFA issues. He also made sure Sven Goren Ericsson was made England Manager to keep Wenger at Arsenal. This super league will happen but as I said in the OP it's currently about who controls it. UEFA will be forced down the route which looks a bit like I've written above or the big clubs will just start not arriving at FC Minions, the champions of Moravia. It was a completely stupid idea and the fact that they thought they could still compete in their domestic leagues was Pie in the sky. Good riddance. |
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Apr 20, 2021 21:23:33 GMT
Agree, Jeff, about the changes in who controlled what - but effectively the underlying structure of English league football did not change significantly. And neither did the structure of the FA Cup competition, although some of the bigger clubs have de-prioritised doing well in it.
It's similar to F1 in some ways still: a change of control, operations and management structure, but still essentially the same proposition for the fans.
The Super League may or may not happen but I sincerely hope that the Super League clubs cannot also compete in their own National Leagues. For example, Man City could conceivably win both competitions, even if they had to name two entirely separate squads.
Regarding the National Cup competitions I don't think the answer is quite as clear cut, but I suspect that if the club is not registered as a member of the National association then they won't be allowed to compete. If the National association wants to bar them from being a member, that's fair enough, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Apr 21, 2021 3:56:43 GMT
Doesn't seem like it's happening, as all six English clubs have pulled out.
This whole thing is an exercise in greed really. And frankly a lot of it is self-inflicted. Real Madrid and Barca are especially culpable as they've been spending way beyond their means for years and now want this to be their easy way out.
I hope this sparks a period of self-reflection and soul-searching for all involved (including UEFA and FIFA, who aren't completely innocent too), but the likelihood of that is slim. It'll just be business as usual until this nonsense crops up again in a few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 21, 2021 5:53:33 GMT
All the clubs involved have been spending beyond the means of their business. All have billionaire owners who have thrown money in and are actually looking for some sort of return. As I said earlier, Arsenal have spent half a billion on players and have a massive wage bill with several players on 200k+ a week. That is not sustainable when you're mid table in the league and struggling to get back into the Europa League let alone the Champions League. I think the owners of these clubs saw the money being offered up and jumped on it without really thinking about what the fans would think, because to them fans are just customers who will moan for a bit, as customers always do when a product changes, but will soon be back again.
|
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on Apr 21, 2021 7:02:33 GMT
Good to see it’s fallen on its Arse for now. I can’t see how any football fan can support the Super League, unless of course your an Arsenal or Spurs fan and you’ve found yourself sitting in the first class lounge with your economy ticket.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Apr 21, 2021 8:10:42 GMT
I think someone on the radio this morning was talking about it in terms of revenue generation and that the big clubs actually need it to make themselves viable but all I can imagine is that the, once again, the huge amount of money being injected will simply result in a bunch of 20 year olds being traded for, and being paid, ever larger sums while the owners continue their money-laundering activities. Oh how that is so true. I am pleased the ESL now appears to have collapsed but the root cause is the huge wage bill. I know that sportsmen and women at their peak command a premium and also have a relatively short career but someone needs to get some perspective here: it can't be right that a spotty 20 yr old can get paid the same for kicking a ball about for a week, as a surgeon does for working long hours for a whole year. Some of the top players receive salaries that are multiples of that again. For football to thrive and survive, the clubs have to be relatively financially stable and strong and the only way they can do that is by keeping more of the money. A one year hiccup in the revenue stream has seen many top clubs in serious financial peril, with debt that they will be lucky to service. I would like to see salary and transfer fee caps so that the money doesn't all get paid out in salaries. The top players would still be mega wealthy but maybe that sense of proportionality would return. Player's agents also need reeling in big time. I have had a good bit of experience dealing with them and the amounts of money they make are obscene. 3 or 4 phone calls, a dozen e-mails, a few meetings and they trouser anything from £10K to £1m. I know a lot of it is who you know but these guys can make huge amounts of money which just gets sucked out of the game. I know the Premiership is stuffed full of the best players because of the huge salaries but after a few years with salary caps everything would settle down and the best leagues would still be there. There might also be a bit more money in the clubs to develop young talent and there would be a real incentive to bring on the youth and have a good structure for their career advancement. We need strong clubs and the rest of the game will be taken care of. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 21, 2021 8:21:59 GMT
The problem with salary and transfer caps is that there are lots of ways round them - as we've seen in the case of rugby. If you look at financially doped clubs like Manchester City and PSG where they are owned by countries they find all sorts of ingenious ways to get round Financial Fair Play and salary caps. City boost their income by having their owners funnel money to them through dubious sponsorship deals and often will get round salary caps by paying their stars to open events in Abu Dhabi, do tours, image rights, etc etc. UEFA and FIFA must be also getting backhanders as they show no great desire to tackle the problem. The idea that Manchester City, a club that a few years ago was playing in the old 3rd division, getting crowds of 10K are now worth $3 billion and all their income basically comes from one wealthy owner's pocket is farcical.
The reason the City and Chelsea didn't want to go in the ESL and were late entrants (and therefore first out) was because they could see the project was aimed at reining in their spending as salaries were to capped at 55% of income.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 21, 2021 8:57:09 GMT
From the monetised point of view, the Premier League financial rules definitely need a look at. Considering how often Arsenal finished in a top 4 place and achieved UCL status in 2008-2017 (19 successive seasons from ‘98-‘99) these financial figures show it can be done without some money gimp pumping in laundered cash:
Premier League source of funds from 2008-2017:
Manchester City: 90% owner financed
Chelsea: 86% owner financed
Liverpool: 40% owner financed
Manchester United: 20% owner financed
Spurs: 1% owner financed
Arsenal: 0% owner financed.
Arsenal’s source of funds in this time-frame was 100% from operations - the only club at this level in English football to operate in this way. Liverpool (7%) and Spurs (18%) also received funding through external loans.
Kroenke is a tight bastard but he wasn’t going to miss a commercial boat like the Super League, something most Arsenal Twitterati don’t understand. Liverpool and Utd are, like the Arsenal, traditionally big clubs with lots of wins over a long period, massive worldwide fan bases and branding that is instantly recognisable. In the decade before the huge TV money these three clubs were the three big clubs. When the “Financial Doping” started (Wengerism) I remember shouting at Blackburn fans and the team “you’ll never buy the title” but alas they did and set the benchmark for the SKY era. Chelsea and City were for decades yo-yo teams, bouncing between the divisions, playing some nice football but achieving nothing. Tottenham are famed for the depth of the dust on the shelves in their trophy room.
So with that back drop who can blame any of those clubs for the stance on a Super League? Two of them for financial desperation, two because they actually deserve to be there, one because they can’t believe their luck to be included and Arsenal because they have a bit of all three.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Apr 21, 2021 9:59:24 GMT
The problem with salary and transfer caps is that there are lots of ways round them - as we've seen in the case of rugby. If you look at financially doped clubs like Manchester City and PSG where they are owned by countries they find all sorts of ingenious ways to get round Financial Fair Play and salary caps. City boost their income by having their owners funnel money to them through dubious sponsorship deals and often will get round salary caps by paying their stars to open events in Abu Dhabi, do tours, image rights, etc etc. UEFA and FIFA must be also getting backhanders as they show no great desire to tackle the problem. The idea that Manchester City, a club that a few years ago was playing in the old 3rd division, getting crowds of 10K are now worth $3 billion and all their income basically comes from one wealthy owner's pocket is farcical. The reason the City and Chelsea didn't want to go in the ESL and were late entrants (and therefore first out) was because they could see the project was aimed at reining in their spending as salaries were to capped at 55% of income. That's all very well but it still astounds me that a bunch of 'spotty 20 year olds' who have a bit of ability to kick a ball are effectively dictating terms to massively successful businessman (however it is they've managed to earn their wealth). Years ago there was some player that threatened to leave Rangers unless he got a massive payrise. David Murray agreed. Imagine an employee in one of Murray's normal businesses trying that, he'd get told where the door was. The thing is the level of skill that the players demonstrate, while maybe comfortably in excess of anything I achieved, could be replicated by hundreds of thousands of others who, for a variety of reasons, didn't quite make the grade. 20 years ago I played 5 a side with a colleague who showed far more skill at a lunchtime kickabout than was seen in the whole of the then current World Cup and yet he hadn't been picked for any advancement despite playing for one of the Dundee United junior teams. The current crop certainly don't give the impression that they realise how lucky they are. All that would happen in the ESL is that the prices paid for and to the 'top' stars would rise to reflect the extra money. The teams would still find themselves in a financial hole. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 21, 2021 10:25:34 GMT
The problem with salary and transfer caps is that there are lots of ways round them - as we've seen in the case of rugby. If you look at financially doped clubs like Manchester City and PSG where they are owned by countries they find all sorts of ingenious ways to get round Financial Fair Play and salary caps. City boost their income by having their owners funnel money to them through dubious sponsorship deals and often will get round salary caps by paying their stars to open events in Abu Dhabi, do tours, image rights, etc etc. UEFA and FIFA must be also getting backhanders as they show no great desire to tackle the problem. The idea that Manchester City, a club that a few years ago was playing in the old 3rd division, getting crowds of 10K are now worth $3 billion and all their income basically comes from one wealthy owner's pocket is farcical. The reason the City and Chelsea didn't want to go in the ESL and were late entrants (and therefore first out) was because they could see the project was aimed at reining in their spending as salaries were to capped at 55% of income. The thing is the level of skill that the players demonstrate, while maybe comfortably in excess of anything I achieved, could be replicated by hundreds of thousands of others who, for a variety of reasons, didn't quite make the grade. You've answered your own question there - the tiny percentage of spotty 20 year olds that earn these huge sums are the ones who, from the age of 8 (or younger) have competed with their team mates every year, dedicated themselves to the game, and watched as one by one the rest fell by the wayside or were culled in the most brutal fashion - usually a letter at the end of a season saying "thanks, but no thanks", devastating them and ending their hopes and dreams. It can be a very cruel game and a career can be ended by one mistimed tackle before it's even started. I live next door to the NUFC Academy and there are hundreds of kids who go in there, of all ages - how many come out and play for the first team? |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Apr 21, 2021 10:29:31 GMT
Agreed but the ones who do make it appear to very quickly forget just how lucky they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 21, 2021 10:37:01 GMT
Are they “lucky” or exceptional? I might consider myself lucky compared to most of those I grew up with but that’s not going to make me tell my clients to pay me less. If I were exceptional (I’m definitely not) I’d expect my clients to be throwing benefits at me to keep me on board. The fact that agents (for its them not the players) know how much is washing around is what drives the remuneration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Apr 21, 2021 10:43:04 GMT
Agreed but the ones who do make it appear to very quickly forget just how lucky they are. Perhaps some do. When she worked for NUFC Mrs Sacamano spent quite a bit of time with players and while, pretty much to a man, the French ones were sulky pains in the arse, most were just ordinary lads who only wanted to play football for the love of the game. We have Sean and Matty Longstaff at our golf club and they are just nice lads doing what they enjoy. The fact that they are earning very good money is a nice side benefit but if they weren't playing for Newcastle they'd be playing for North Shields or Blyth Spartans and be just as happy. |
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Apr 21, 2021 11:34:04 GMT
Much of the issue here stems directly from the fact that football fans are totally non-understanding or non-accepting that the clubs they love for whatever emotive / family / regional / glory-hunting reasons are actually businesses and fans are merely consumers of the product. The main difference is in other industries if the product is shit we go and consume a better / different one but with football we keep on consuming the same shit until we either can’t take any more or die. The Super League, then, is like New Coke: it’s made us want Coke Classic a bit more.
These football businesses will still look for a way to increase the profitability of their product.
|
|
|
|
Post by franki68 on Apr 21, 2021 12:06:59 GMT
I think football is not just like any other business and it cannot be treated as such.If Tesco have a crap weekend sales wise millions of people are not affected by it.
The clubs are right in that the current system is broken,the transfer fees,wages and the monies taken out of the game by agents are insane,the governing bodies are corrupt (the FA has a few million pound paintings hanging on their hq walls apparently ) and forget covid,the premier league teams between them in a normal season are losing 600 million ,players who are not getting selected are still earning their 200k a week,Mourihno has earned 77m in compensation from being sacked ,77m from being crap at his job ,it is insane.It is not sustainable in the current format.
The big spanish and italian clubs have it even worse as the premier league has become the league and they cannot keep up and are falling into huge debt (barca owe 1.3 billion) in trying to keep up,so you have the insane scenario of barca sacking cleaning staff in order to keep paying Messi his 1m a week or whatever it is.
The big clubs are the draw,UNited and liverpool can increase a tv audience by 100% if they play team x,arsenal by 45% and city and chelsea around 20% .Had these teams left the premier league the premier league as it is would collapse ,there is little commercial appeal beyond the big clubs.
Anyway the result for United has been the end of woodward ,which is great,now for the glazers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Apr 21, 2021 12:51:27 GMT
The Glazers, and some of other American owners, may just sell up if they cant make the money they wanted to from ESL. The FA, the fans and the government think they've won but they've not really. The proposed ESL would have bought huge riches so I'd be amazed if these clubs have completely given up on it. For many of them they were already playing these matches but just as pre season friendly tournaments over in America or the far east. The ESL was a way of trying to make it more formal and better sell it to a global audience. Currently when CL or Prem games are broadcast overseas, the teams involved get a cut of the revenue but not the lions share. This was them looking at that system and saying "we're the product and we want the money to come to us not the broadcaster or the football associations".
UK fans might be moaning about this further reducing their access to these huge games but for the majority of season ticket holders they were already unable to access the games because they're held on the other side of the world.
|
|
) decide to buy a new ball and play on that shiny new pitch in the next village. The whole thing is only a problem because the fans think they own their clubs, the competitions, the players and the board owes them something undefinable and which cannot be physically manifested - when the board have a load of bills to pay. Liken it to the political mentality where entire villages / towns have voted one way for three generations because they always have.
