[Football] Liverpool and Manchester United lead ‘European League’ breakout league idea

[Weststander]

Not quite sure I agree. The vast majority of 'fans' of utd don't live within 1000 miles of Old Trafford and never go. Man Utd have a reported social media fan base of 142m. That's who the sponsors are interested in selling to. They are the subscribers that the ESL were trying to attract.

I doubt the Glazers will be concerned with a couple hundred, what they refer to as, legacy fans getting on the pitch. All they will do is find out who left the gate open and beef up security.

Our cause back in the day was when the fans that went to games and a few more locally were pretty much universally against a man that was seeking to destroy the club to benefit financially. In Utd case, I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of those 142m don't give two hoots about who owns Utd as long as they seem them more on the box and see them competing.

Personally, I'd love to see Kroenke, Henry and the Glazers bugger off back to the states but not if it is at the expense of us losing Tony Bloom.

The 142m won’t be angry with ownership.

Does the average Manu fan in Toronto, Kuala Lumpar or Beijing get hot under the collar about such things?

My guess is that they’re far more excited about Europa League glory against Villareal or Arsenal, Pogba’s latest fashion statement and another slug spent on signings this summer.

 

[Weststander]

They can do a bit more than the equivalent of 'marching' from The Hove Park Tavern at 14:45 to The Goldstone, while wearing replica kit and having a pie and pint at half time.

Pints (plural), then punch a police horse.

 

[Stat Brother]

There's quite a lot of supposition surrounding the 'global fans'.

The EPL conducted a survey in the Far East, basically asking 'would you like us to play League games here?'


The answer was a resounding NO.


The global audience doesn't want English football to come to them, they want to come to it.
They want the fans, the occasion, the noise and atmosphere.

Not a diluted version on their doorstep.

 

[Weststander]

There's quite a lot of supposition surrounding the 'global fans'.

The EPL conducted a survey in the Far East, basically asking 'would you like us to play League games here?'


The answer was a resounding NO.


The global audience doesn't want English football to come to them, they want to come to it.
They want the fans, the occasion, the noise and atmosphere.

Not a diluted version on their doorstep.

The atmosphere and The Emirates.

 

[Stat Brother]

The atmosphere and The Emirates.

I did see a tweet from an Arsenal fans site bemoaning the ownership for their lack of spending (they didn't mention the £70m on Pepe).
Demanding they left the club.
&
Imploring new owners to spend hundreds of millions in order to return Arsenal (to 4th) top.


Self aware wasn't high on their list of personal traits.

 

[drew]

That assumes that 142m will be angry with ownership.

Does the average Manu fan in Toronto, Kuala Lumpar or Beijing get hot under the collar about such things?

My guess is that they’re far more excited about Europa League glory against Villareal or Arsenal, Pogba’s latest fashion statement and another slug spent on signings this summer.

That's my point.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

How many of the 92 clubs are run by greedy owners? For that matter, how many of the 20 EPL clubs have fans who want to see the back of their owners? I'd hazard a guess that there are three in the EPL who vociferously want to get rid of their owners and the common denominator is the three are owned by Americans.

The football authorities need to bring in rules that will prevent this happening again however, bearing in mind the EPL had no contingency plans for any situation where a season may get curtailed, I'm not hopeful they'll have much success.

Greedy owners aren't the only issue, there are also owners who drive their clubs into administration by overspending who are as much of an issue.

Without making any attempt to look into it, in recent years I can immediately think of:
Bury have gone into administration,
Macclesfield have been wound up,
Coventry have been playing their games in Birmingham because of a dispute between the owners, council and other people involved in their stadium,
Blackpool's former owners had an array of legal issues that I'm not going to go into in case I accidentally say they were found guilty of the wrong thing,
The football ground part of Feethams is now a housing estate and Darlington share a ground with a union side,
Sheffield Wednesday are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses
Derby are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses

I'm not particularly bothered by the current PL clubs (Newcastle or West Ham for example) since they're highly unlikely to be going bust any time soon. I'd prefer the Man U and Arsenal owners to not be taking money out but they're not facing an existential crisis. Clearly I'm against the owners proposing the ESL but I think that goes without saying. It's still 6 PL owners who shouldn't be anywhere near control of a club.

Do you have an issue with a 50% + 1 rule, other than the cost and practical difficulties of bringing it in, and that we at Brighton are currently blessed with an eminently well meaning and competent owner?

 

[Weststander]

That's my point.

I was agreeing, sorry if unclear.

 

[drew]

I was agreeing, sorry if unclear.

 

[b.w.2.]

Greedy owners aren't the only issue, there are also owners who drive their clubs into administration by overspending who are as much of an issue.

Without making any attempt to look into it, in recent years I can immediately think of:
Bury have gone into administration,
Macclesfield have been wound up,
Coventry have been playing their games in Birmingham because of a dispute between the owners, council and other people involved in their stadium,
Blackpool's former owners had an array of legal issues that I'm not going to go into in case I accidentally say they were found guilty of the wrong thing,
The football ground part of Feethams is now a housing estate and Darlington share a ground with a union side,
Sheffield Wednesday are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses
Derby are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses

I'm not particularly bothered by the current PL clubs (Newcastle or West Ham for example) since they're highly unlikely to be going bust any time soon. I'd prefer the Man U and Arsenal owners to not be taking money out but they're not facing an existential crisis. Clearly I'm against the owners proposing the ESL but I think that goes without saying. It's still 6 PL owners who shouldn't be anywhere near control of a club.

Do you have an issue with a 50% + 1 rule, other than the cost and practical difficulties of bringing it in, and that we at Brighton are currently blessed with an eminently well meaning and competent owner?

This is the only way. And we need to think of the game, not just Brighton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[drew]

Greedy owners aren't the only issue, there are also owners who drive their clubs into administration by overspending who are as much of an issue.

Without making any attempt to look into it, in recent years I can immediately think of:
Bury have gone into administration,
Macclesfield have been wound up,
Coventry have been playing their games in Birmingham because of a dispute between the owners, council and other people involved in their stadium,
Blackpool's former owners had an array of legal issues that I'm not going to go into in case I accidentally say they were found guilty of the wrong thing,
The football ground part of Feethams is now a housing estate and Darlington share a ground with a union side,
Sheffield Wednesday are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses
Derby are currently for sale and have had issues paying their players over the last year, ground sold to the owner to cover their losses

I'm not particularly bothered by the current PL clubs (Newcastle or West Ham for example) since they're highly unlikely to be going bust any time soon. I'd prefer the Man U and Arsenal owners to not be taking money out but they're not facing an existential crisis. Clearly I'm against the owners proposing the ESL but I think that goes without saying. It's still 6 PL owners who shouldn't be anywhere near control of a club.

Do you have an issue with a 50% + 1 rule, other than the cost and practical difficulties of bringing it in, and that we at Brighton are currently blessed with an eminently well meaning and competent owner?

With regard to the 50 + 1 rule, which fans will have that control and how will you stop the majority of those fans clamouring for the club to break the bank and buy that elusive 20 goal a season striker? Barcelona, as I understand it, are 100% owned by fans. How much debt are they in? Same for Real Madrid.

My view is better regulation. More scrutiny of accounts, don't let owners 'lend' clubs money (convert all loans in to shares), more penalties for late submission of accounts, and a host of others. What's wrong with Utd is that the Glazers effectively bought the club with the clubs own money (I believe similar has now happened at Burnley). Apply points penalties for transgressions etc etc.

 

[drew]

This is the only way. And we need to think of the game, not just Brighton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

An article, albeit from 2012, showing that not all Germans are happy with the 50 +1 rule. Bayern obviously are as they are the dominant force in the Bundesliga.

In the early 2000s despite the 50 + 1 rule, Dortmund had massive debt.

The financial controls in Germany hasn't prevented German clubs going insolvent.

https://www.soccernomics-agency.com.../uploads/2019/01/insolvency_Germany_final.pdf

The conclusion suggests that insolvency in German football is not dissimilar to that in England.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You're on a Brighton & Hove Albion messageboard and you're questioning the actions of fans who helped saved the club in our darkest hour... while you did?

Wow.

What an absurd and precious comment. Read again the simple question I asked.

I can only assume that you think the York pitch invasion single handedly saved the club (and also that you take some special pride in being on the pitch while I sat in the West stand shaking my head sadly, on the day, which is what I did, not that you would know).

Why you persist in snarling at me (and this is not the first time) is beyond me. It seems peciliar to have to put someone I have (sort of) known, well enough for a chat at least, for 20 years, on ignore, but there you are.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yeah, they've just packed up and gone.

Or, alternatively, the European Super League was defeated in about a day and cannot reasonably be brought back with English clubs involved, and the exit strategy of the Glazers who have got rich on Man United debt is basically scuppered.

I expect that would still have happened had everyone sat around on their sofas clapping like seals and not offending anyone though.

Anything for a quiet life.

The ESL was defeated without any pitch invasion. Much as we may sneer, social media and the talking heads of Shearer and Neville set the scene, and the fan involvement in the ESL retreat was entirely peaceful.

I'll go back to my original question, before it is swept away in a tide of scorn and patronising comments from a minority of the 1990s activists. How did the York pitch invasion persuade Archer to sell the club to Knight?

There is a massive gulf of activity and action between sitting on a sofa clapping like a seal, and breaking into a stadium and charging around like a toddler who has eaten too many sweets.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

The 142m won’t be angry with ownership.

Does the average Manu fan in Toronto, Kuala Lumpar or Beijing get hot under the collar about such things?

My guess is that they’re far more excited about Europa League glory against Villareal or Arsenal, Pogba’s latest fashion statement and another slug spent on signings this summer.

Wel, yes because they are fans in the same way I am a fan of Line of Duty. I enjoyed it for a while but after last nights crap ending I won’t bother again. I used to live in Singapore and actually knew people who became Man City ‘fans’ when they became good. Of course they are free to do that but if the interests of real fans and these tourists diverge then a side can be picked. Glazier picks the tourists because they are recyclable and they can make him a lot of money. I pick the actual fans because they are associated with the cultural institution because of something more important.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The ESL was defeated without any pitch invasion. Much as we may sneer, social media and the talking heads of Shearer and Neville set the scene, and the fan involvement in the ESL retreat was entirely peaceful.

I'll go back to my original question, before it is swept away in a tide of scorn and patronising comments from a minority of the 1990s activists. How did the York pitch invasion persuade Archer to sell the club to Knight?

There is a massive gulf of activity and action between sitting on a sofa clapping like a seal, and breaking into a stadium and charging around like a toddler who has eaten too many sweets.

Chelsea fans protesting outside the ground before our game with them forced Chelsea to be the first club to draft a letter of withdrawal. The rest fell like a house of cards.

York turned the eyes of the world on to us, rather than the eyes of Sussex. I've heard it was live on Grandstand but I can't be sure because I was charging round the pitch like a toddler rather than sat on my sofa.

EDIT - I see you were actually in the West Stand being sad. Which is just as bad.

 

[drew]

Wel, yes because they are fans in the same way I am a fan of Line of Duty. I enjoyed it for a while but after last nights crap ending I won’t bother again. I used to live in Singapore and actually knew people who became Man City ‘fans’ when they became good. Of course they are free to do that but if the interests of real fans and these tourists diverge then a side can be picked. Glazier picks the tourists because they are recyclable and they can make him a lot of money. I pick the actual fans because they are associated with the cultural institution because of something more important.

I think on this board we pretty much all side with the fans that go to games but back in the real world we have to acknowledge that the businessmen running some teams are looking at the where the big bucks are. The question is whether that is resolved by a business model or by better regulation.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I can only assume that you think the York pitch invasion single handedly saved the club

I don't think anyone is suggesting that's the case.

Everything we did in those times played an important part. The pitch invasions would've been nothing without the leaders like Samrah, Attila and DK. (amongst many others) But the protests are what gave those leaders a platform. It wasn't just one pitch invasion, there was Bournemouth away on TV, the midweek game after York, Fans Utd, Hull at home whistle protest, boycott v Mansfield and 2nd half in the directors box, the march to speakers corner before Fulham A, turning up at ar*her's house after Wigan A, Darlo H chasing bel*otti out, many sit ins after matches.

 

[*Gullsworth*]

Wow.

What an absurd and precious comment. Read again the simple question I asked.

I can only assume that you think the York pitch invasion single handedly saved the club (and also that you take some special pride in being on the pitch while I sat in the West stand shaking my head sadly, on the day, which is what I did, not that you would know).

Why you persist in snarling at me (and this is not the first time) is beyond me. It seems peciliar to have to put someone I have (sort of) known, well enough for a chat at least, for 20 years, on ignore, but there you are.

You may be correct in your assumption that the York invasion alone did not change Archers perception of his "acquisition ' . The United invasion will not influence the Glaziers as a single action but both disruptions highlighted the fans disgruntled views on the way their clubs are run. Now you & i may disagree with the unlawful side of these protests, no one deserves to be hurt like the policeman did at United but the protest albeit wrong made the headlines and contributes at a high level to the campaign to change the way the clubs are run. Without yesterday's actions The Glaziers would simply (they have for 15 years) ploughed on ignoring true fans concerns. Anyone who thinks yesterday actions will be ignored by the Glaziers stating they only care about the global customers is living in cloud cuckoo land. The bad press is bad for the brand, look how Glazier apologised to the Man U fans because he knew the ESl was a bad idea collectively for the supporters of the club.....not a bad idea for his worldwide empire of paying customers but the anger of the grass root supporters achieved this.

 

[Guinness Boy]

You may be correct in your assumption that the York invasion alone did not change Archers perception of his "acquisition ' . The United invasion will not influence the Glaziers as a single action but both disruptions highlighted the fans disgruntled views on the way their clubs are run. Now you & i may disagree with the unlawful side of these protests, no one deserves to be hurt like the policeman did at United but the protest albeit wrong made the headlines and contributes at a high level to the campaign to change the way the clubs are run. Without yesterday's actions The Glaziers would simply (they have for 15 years) ploughed on ignoring true fans concerns. Anyone who thinks yesterday actions will be ignored by the Glaziers stating they only care about the global customers is living in cloud cuckoo land. The bad press is bad for the brand, look how Glazier apologised to the Man U fans because he knew the ESl was a bad idea collectively for the supporters of the club.....not a bad idea for his worldwide empire of paying customers but the anger of the grass root supporters achieved this.

Exactly. Asking what these protests achieve is not the correct question. The correct question is "what would happen without them?".