Where is football heading and where do City fit in?

[Herb]

I do not believe that because someone or something appears more or even too powerful, that nothing can be done to change it. Though unlikely to happen in football terms, should you choose to, you don't have to buy into it. Without support, the whole thing collapses.

And please don't malign schools to an extreme. I agree that they mostly tend to serve the the establishment but there are plenty on here who, judging by their posts, have a marvellous ability to think for themselves.

John,

I can see it from your very ethical angle but I still hold that original thinking is something that we do despite our schooling and not because of it (state schooling is a control mechanism not a means of liberation) and I also doubt that the the opinions of local supporters, organised or otherwise, will override the desires of the global audience and all it's many dollars.

[Blue Since 76]

. Which then brings me to a very large irony, that City's gravest potential threat may come from Islamic revolutionaries, politics could impact us greatly if the UAE saw the sort of ructions we have seen in other countries in that region.

There's always the risk of an Islamic revolution as per Iran etc, but I imagine the Royal family could afford to live overseas. There's little chance of an Arab spring bringing democracy, as it'd be pretty brutally put down and as the UAE provides oil to the west and finances a big proportion of the banks, stock markets etc, I doubt anyone would say anything.

The real ironic thing is, even if it did happen and the sheikh lost everything, we'd be safe due to FFP. Without it, we would have been a rich man's toy, reliant on him for survival. FFP means we have to work towards financial independence, so if he had to sell, we'd be a going concern. Granted, profits may be a couple of quid, but the income would be such we could pay the bills.

Thank you Mr Platini

[dazby]

Allow me to throw something into the mix. The owners are setting up NYCFC. I'm sure they already own an Abu Dhabi team. They also enquired about buying a team in Sydney. I'm sure they've investigated buying sides all over the world.

What if the idea was to start the global league themselves? All franchises owned by Abu Dhabi. There'd be no opposition that way. Established clubs in established markets breaking away to form the global league, with the final in Abu Dhabi.

[gary james]

Firstly, great thread. Always worth looking at this sort of thing and highlighting possibilities and so on. If nothing else it allows us all to be a little cautious and be on our guard ready for when the game does change.

My own 'gut' feel is that at some point in the future (and I don't want to pick a time because I know how silly those 1950s statements of a European Super League by 1970 were) there will be a fully functioning European League based not on merit but on a general catch-all of History, Finance and Success (to allow MUFC, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, Bayern Munich for example a definite place). That League may have 2 divisions with some form of relegation between them but entry into the 2nd tier will be by invitation or some form of franchise based system, to enable those clubs that make up the top 32 clubs (assuming its 2 lots of 16) to have a guaranteed income for a set period (so, the franchise system may buy you a place for a period of ten years or more). This will obviously mean that those clubs will grow and develop and become mega rich.

For the leading nations there will then be a streamlined top flight consisting of say 16 clubs (to then bring total games played in Leagues to 60 for each club competing in both Euro and PL). I don't believe, in the short term that any of the Euro Super League teams would drop out of the domestic League, but those Leagues would have to reduce in size to accomodate the newer League. In England the FA Cup would continue as before but the League Cup could be remodelled to exclude all Euro competing teams. The PL may introduce a secondary tournament to make up for loss of fixtures - maybe a PL cup with XX guaranteed games on a regional League basis and then national knockout final stages.

Whatever happens I am certain there will be a closed shop/franchise based Euro League at some point during most of our lives.

Allow me to throw something into the mix. The owners are setting up NYCFC. I'm sure they already own an Abu Dhabi team. They also enquired about buying a team in Sydney. I'm sure they've investigated buying sides all over the world.

What if the idea was to start the global league themselves? All franchises owned by Abu Dhabi. There'd be no opposition that way. Established clubs in established markets breaking away to form the global league, with the final in Abu Dhabi.

I agree that there will be 'CITY' football clubs around the world but I think the strategy will be to have one in each continent. That will enable each to promote the other and there'll be no issues with sides owned by the same person facing each other in competition, however I also feel that a Abu Dhabi competition will happen and that all the Cities will form part of that.

Pretty certain that NYCity will face MCFC in Manchester at some point.

[gary james]

I meant to add... Although City may appear friendless in the Euro game the new owner, Khaldoon & the hands-on leaders, have been doing all they can to build relations with the power brokers. When there was all the original rubbish being spoken about financial fair play City deliberately met with UEFA's powerbrokers to show them their plans and to explain why City's investment was good investment and why the Blues' long term plan would be to make the business a fully sustainable one.

UEFA were very supportive of what City presented to them and, although publicly the media still slagged City off, the authorities were beginning to see that City were not the enemy they thought they were. Things change of course and it may be that a Euro Super League comes from the clubs rather than UEFA (like the formation of the PL was) and the new Super League could bypass UEFA anyway and set up its own body or become affiliated to FIFA direct (like the PL did with the FA instead of the FL).

Ultimately, money talks and if nothing else Abu Dhabi could always sponsor the Euro League if it ever happened and insist on a certain team being founder members of course;-)

One thing City will want, certainly in the short term, is for Utd to also be there. The all-Manchester rivalry will be a major selling point (as will RM V Barca).

[Cocacolajojo1]

Thought I'd pick this quote up to get the discussion going again:

Personally, I am now of the view that the Elite are moving towards the next stage and clubs like the rags and Arsenal are ensuring their blokes are in the right places...to defend their gains and ensure they control the future. The next stage being the control of the Global game. - See more at: viewtopic.php?f=119&t=46784#sthash.PrFxNYBZ.dpuf

Couldn't the fact that former board members and such are moving into the committes and administative bodies of the UEFA and the FIFA just mean that they're doing what seems to be the dream of all politicias and CEO:s alike? I.E. after having done a stressful and hard job as a politician or CEO, all they want to do is to kick back in a job where they get to wine and dine a lot, travel the globe, watch a good deal of quality football and also get paid in salaries and bribes to do it. Every country has these positions that are well paid, are mostly representative and are often handed out to people as gratitude for long an faithful service. In Sweden it's the position of county governor. I bet you have something similar in the UK.

Of course it's beneficial for the elite clubs to have their people inside the UEFA. At least it's not damaging. But it doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially not when the UEFA has stacked up at least two decades of proof of being very obliging towards the elite clubs anyways.

Right now there's no point in breaking away because everyone is getting what they want in domestic leagues where they are comfortable in their seats and in the Champions League where UEFA has made sure there's little or no friction between the clubs.

We shouldn't underestimate the difficulties that might arise between the clubs if they would start a league of their own. We often talk about them as a gang, the E14 or whatever their called, that has one will and one will only but that's because most of the clubs aren't competetitors domestically. The English clubs' powerbase is based in England, the German clubs' in Germany and etc. THey all have their different TV-deals. If they were to start a league together they would have to compete and argue about the basic incomes from TV_rights and such. As far as I know, the UK, Spain, Italy and Germany have more or less different structures for the TV-money, for how they discuss stuff that happens in their leagues. Bayern for example are used to being the one that gets to dominate the agenda of German football. In a European league that wouldn't be the case. Madrid and Barca are used to getting the bulk of the TV-money and have kick-off times adapted to their needs. Etc.

All of these clubs know that there's a lot of hassle and adjustment to be made if a European club is to be launched. And that's not counting the legal and political ramifications that'll probably follow. A factor that is rarely mentioned when we talk about the doomed global future of football.

And then there was this:

The pre season fixture list this year was also rather revealing. We are all use to the idea of tours of Asia and America to help boost 'brand awareness' but the itinerary for the major English clubs this year was to the eye rather odd. City vrs Arsenal in Helskinki, A eight team super cup in LA. Man United and Liverpool flying all the way over to Australia for one game. Liverpool going to Norway for one game. It probably went well under the radar in the UK but Real Madrid and PSG played friendlies in Gothenburg. The above mentioned markets have already been long since been conquered in the 70/80's and they certainly are not emerging markets financially or from a football sense. This was probably best explained by NQDP who summarized this pattern as 'continuing to tour the countries with a massive emerging middle class but paying lip service to the countries who can afford to pay now'. - See more at: posting.php?mode=reply&f=119&t=46784#sthash.C6gEwCkd.dpuf

Yeah I don't see the logic of this. THe last few years have seen an increase in pre-season games played by elite clubs at Swedish grounds. They wouldn't come here to pay lip-service, because no lip-service has ever been required. Swedes have watched English football since the late sixties and have never ever demanded that English teams, or Spanish or Italian for that matter, come and play in our country to satisfy us.

As for saying that the marked was cornered in Sweden (as an example of a the European market) in the seventies and eightis is just not true. In the eighties the Swedish national team never made it to the World Cup. The domestic league was plagued by something called hooliganism (with scary men who had shaved their heads) and football was big, but it wasn't even close to Ice-Hockey. Then came the world cup of 94 coupled with Gothenburgs successes in the Champions League and then, probably most importantly, football evolved into a massive global business. I think it was in... 08 or 09, in march, when the Swedish football league started and it started (as it always does) at the same time as our hockey league moves into the final phases of the playoffs. And the newspapers were only focused on the start of the Allsvenska. That would never have happened in the eighties.

And I think that this is a general trend as well. Regardless of whether football was the biggest or the second biggest or third biggest, the popularity and media coverage of football is second to none nowadays. And the hype and interest from basically all social layers of society is massive. And the top clubs in Europe are catcing up with that and they are doing these trips to Helsinki or to Stockholm, two nations that have been relatively spared by the crisis, to solidify and perhaps even strengthen the ties and brand-awareness that already exists in these countries. That's my take on it anyway.

[Cocacolajojo1]

First, the big clubs have been planning breakaway league for a good two decades. It has been brought up in about every five years or so just to provoke conversation and for them to see whether people were ready. I always thought Champion's League was just watered down version of what G14 had as an ultimate plan. People who have been around for a while can still remember what sort of reception this idea got when it was tossed around by some G14 owners (this was decade before the actual organisation was set up) early-90's. It was equally ridiculed and hammered. The whole idea seemed insane and it was said that domestic leagues were ALWAYS going to be number one. Fast forward twenty years and new generation of football fans. The future "consumers". Kids, and basically young adults, of these were brought up with Champions League and FIFA video games where you can create your custom leagues. For them this idea doesn't seem so alien after all. And who gives a shit about some disgruntled middle aged and older people? I mean what are they going to do? Stop going altogether and give up lifelong tradition. Some will but most will just keep folowing through tradition and/or because of their kids who are already used to this.

I noticed something when we met Real Madrid. I was sat in a local sportsbar together with some Real fans and none of them were white. Or rather, none of them were of Scandinavian descent. Compare that with watching a game against Liverpool or MAnchester United and it's like all the inbred Swedes have gathered in one place to breed the most scandinavian looking, degenerated, stupid white men ever seen on earth.

There's a site called Svenskafans.com, which is basically big fan-site run by a company. All the written material is created by volounteers and devouts and then there's some tv-production on top of that. Anyway, if you look at the people writing for the different clubs you find this:

People writing about Liverpool:
Mattias Herner
Björn Grafström
Per Bengtsson
Carl-Martin Landquist
Erik Bornhammar
Erik Hedenvind
Jens Edvardsson
Fredrik Johansson
Max Gummeson

Very Swedish names.

And here are the names of the people writing for Real Madrid:
Drilon Pollozhani
Semir Fific
Jesper Welander
Leo Gonzalez
Jesper Blomquist
Armin Nagi

And here are the names of the people writing for Inter
Daniel Hamilton
Fredy Camilo Espitia Giraldo
Olof Svensson
David Svensson
Jonas Brink
Siavoush Fallahi
Erik Hedborg
Marcus Halling
Ramazan Bazencir
Sadek Al-haddad
Mahyar Ghorbani

A lot of names that until recently weren't considered Swedish but have now become so.

THe world globalization often gets thrown around without real meaning or content, like a buzzword. Working in academia I see that all the time. But here you really have an effect of globalization at one its most crystallized moments: the people who were born in Sweden of foreign parents or immigrated here themselves have no reason to support the Swedish teams at offer. THe football's shite compared to what's at offer in the CL or the PL etc, and amongst the local fans there's a hell of a lot of racism and if not that, just a geneeral element of Swedishness that I guess is a bit of a turn of if you live in a society that's plagued with structural racism. So they go for the leagues that aren't so Swedish, like the Italian or Spanish who were considered lesser leagues than the English by football interested Swedes up until recently.

Or it might just be that they come from countries where you traditionally have had coverage of the Italian and the Spanish league or at least, where these leagues were the natural discussion point if you were interested in what was happening in the footballing world.

I don't know where I'm headed with this but I guess one has to ask oneself if these people are a temporary effect of immigration or if they are forerunners for a more globalized football world?

My own 'gut' feel is that at some point in the future (and I don't want to pick a time because I know how silly those 1950s statements of a European Super League by 1970 were) there will be a fully functioning European League- See more at: posting.php?mode=quote&f=119&p=570301#sthash.rlNobbdZ.dpuf

Indeed it might be silly but at the same time, we're facing a moment of economic stagnation at the moment while as in the fifties, everything was growing, increasing, flourishing. There seems to be a general agreement that this super league of Europe will take place for purely economic reasons. Then it's more than likely that the impetus that makes it reality will also be economic. A protracted recession in Europe (which seems the likelies) will have repercussions for the European clubs.

[ross.mcfc]

The pre season fixture list this year was also rather revealing. We are all use to the idea of tours of Asia and America to help boost 'brand awareness' but the itinerary for the major English clubs this year was to the eye rather odd. City vrs Arsenal in Helskinki, A eight team super cup in LA. Man United and Liverpool flying all the way over to Australia for one game. Liverpool going to Norway for one game. It probably went well under the radar in the UK but Real Madrid and PSG played friendlies in Gothenburg. The above mentioned markets have already been long since been conquered in the 70/80's and they certainly are not emerging markets financially or from a football sense. This was probably best explained by NQDP who summarized this pattern as 'continuing to tour the countries with a massive emerging middle class but paying lip service to the countries who can afford to pay now'. - See more at: posting.php?mode=reply&f=119&t=46784#sthash.C6gEwCkd.dpuf

Yeah I don't see the logic of this. THe last few years have seen an increase in pre-season games played by elite clubs at Swedish grounds. They wouldn't come here to pay lip-service, because no lip-service has ever been required. Swedes have watched English football since the late sixties and have never ever demanded that English teams, or Spanish or Italian for that matter, come and play in our country to satisfy us.

As for saying that the marked was cornered in Sweden (as an example of a the European market) in the seventies and eightis is just not true. In the eighties the Swedish national team never made it to the World Cup. The domestic league was plagued by something called hooliganism (with scary men who had shaved their heads) and football was big, but it wasn't even close to Ice-Hockey. Then came the world cup of 94 coupled with Gothenburgs successes in the Champions League and then, probably most importantly, football evolved into a massive global business. I think it was in... 08 or 09, in march, when the Swedish football league started and it started (as it always does) at the same time as our hockey league moves into the final phases of the playoffs. And the newspapers were only focused on the start of the Allsvenska. That would never have happened in the eighties.

And I think that this is a general trend as well. Regardless of whether football was the biggest or the second biggest or third biggest, the popularity and media coverage of football is second to none nowadays. And the hype and interest from basically all social layers of society is massive. And the top clubs in Europe are catcing up with that and they are doing these trips to Helsinki or to Stockholm, two nations that have been relatively spared by the crisis, to solidify and perhaps even strengthen the ties and brand-awareness that already exists in these countries. That's my take on it anyway.

Just to clarify my comments, as you have mentioned English football has been on tv since the 70's in Sweden and the British leagues were littered with Scandinavian players in the 80's as the Swedish league also had alot of English coaches/players. When I say cornering the market, I meant tapping into to those who are interested. One of the things I do like about Sweden is that it does not treat football/sport like a religion nor is it more important than global affairs. I sometimes wonder what I could have achieved earlier in life if I had not grown up in central belt Scotland obsessed with football.

My observations were based on occasional trips to sports bars to watch City games. Typically it is full of middle aged fat white men wearing United or Liverpool strips. If I was to walk around town (Helsinborg) today and count football strips on youngsters I would say they are more likely to be wearing Barca/Real strips than English sides. Of course, then there is also the Zlatan factor.

[ross.mcfc]

THe world globalization often gets thrown around without real meaning or content, like a buzzword. Working in academia I see that all the time. But here you really have an effect of globalization at one its most crystallized moments: the people who were born in Sweden of foreign parents or immigrated here themselves have no reason to support the Swedish teams at offer. THe football's shite compared to what's at offer in the CL or the PL etc, and amongst the local fans there's a hell of a lot of racism and if not that, just a geneeral element of Swedishness that I guess is a bit of a turn of if you live in a society that's plagued with structural racism. So they go for the leagues that aren't so Swedish, like the Italian or Spanish who were considered lesser leagues than the English by football interested Swedes up until recently.

Interesting stuff.

I am currently studying migration in Sweden and you have just hit on something that may make it a tad more interesting to write about it. I was sitting in a sauna at the gym yesterday and it was just me and a bunch of Turkish Swedes all talking in Swedish about the appointment of Mancini. My Swedish is getting good enough to understand the conversation but not contribute to the conversation in detail. Han är en negativ skitstövel is about as much as I could contribute.

[ross.mcfc]

I was close enough

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

What a post! Among top 10 ever here and I fully agree with the content (annd of John's post within).

This is a subject I could chit chat about for hours in a pub with someone but couple of things.

First, the big clubs have been planning breakaway league for a good two decades. It has been brought up in about every five years or so just to provoke conversation and for them to see whether people were ready. I always thought Champion's League was just watered down version of what G14 had as an ultimate plan. People who have been around for a while can still remember what sort of reception this idea got when it was tossed around by some G14 owners (this was decade before the actual organisation was set up) early-90's. It was equally ridiculed and hammered. The whole idea seemed insane and it was said that domestic leagues were ALWAYS going to be number one. Fast forward twenty years and new generation of football fans. The future "consumers". Kids, and basically young adults, of these were brought up with Champions League and FIFA video games where you can create your custom leagues. For them this idea doesn't seem so alien after all. And who gives a shit about some disgruntled middle aged and older people? I mean what are they going to do? Stop going altogether and give up lifelong tradition. Some will but most will just keep folowing through tradition and/or because of their kids who are already used to this.

Second, situation in France made me instantly think that this is closer than ever. And our own owners and Americans with rags, Chelsea and Liverpool. People love to make fun of the Americans but these are no mugs either. I think the plans are well underway.

Third, it will be very much modelled after NFL. They are well ahead with tv rights and especially with their NFL Internet game pass (quite expensive "season ticket" to watch the games over Internet). Cook's constant references to NFL were not just about his big mouth either. Funny that we are talking about this few hours before another sold out NFL game in London.

Are we in or out by default? I'm not sure either way. I don't think it's as straightforward as either us or rags and I do think it comes down to money. These local derbies will bring in interest even in a global/European league. Manchester has BY FAR the most people attending games in all of Europe compared to population. And we are both interesting brands in our own rights even if for different reasons. NFL have two teams in New York and used to have two in Los Angeles. There's also five teams geographically quite close to each othernthere in Redskins, Eagles, Jets, Giants and Patriots. They could easily have us, rags and Scousers in world league.

I have to say that I don't disagree with "8 years back" version of myself.

[Dameerto]

It's probably worth highlighting Gary James' contribution too, which was spookily accurate in many ways:

Firstly, great thread. Always worth looking at this sort of thing and highlighting possibilities and so on. If nothing else it allows us all to be a little cautious and be on our guard ready for when the game does change.

My own 'gut' feel is that at some point in the future (and I don't want to pick a time because I know how silly those 1950s statements of a European Super League by 1970 were) there will be a fully functioning European League based not on merit but on a general catch-all of History, Finance and Success (to allow MUFC, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Milan, Bayern Munich for example a definite place). That League may have 2 divisions with some form of relegation between them but entry into the 2nd tier will be by invitation or some form of franchise based system, to enable those clubs that make up the top 32 clubs (assuming its 2 lots of 16) to have a guaranteed income for a set period (so, the franchise system may buy you a place for a period of ten years or more). This will obviously mean that those clubs will grow and develop and become mega rich.

For the leading nations there will then be a streamlined top flight consisting of say 16 clubs (to then bring total games played in Leagues to 60 for each club competing in both Euro and PL). I don't believe, in the short term that any of the Euro Super League teams would drop out of the domestic League, but those Leagues would have to reduce in size to accomodate the newer League. In England the FA Cup would continue as before but the League Cup could be remodelled to exclude all Euro competing teams. The PL may introduce a secondary tournament to make up for loss of fixtures - maybe a PL cup with XX guaranteed games on a regional League basis and then national knockout final stages.

Whatever happens I am certain there will be a closed shop/franchise based Euro League at some point during most of our lives.

I meant to add... Although City may appear friendless in the Euro game the new owner, Khaldoon & the hands-on leaders, have been doing all they can to build relations with the power brokers. When there was all the original rubbish being spoken about financial fair play City deliberately met with UEFA's powerbrokers to show them their plans and to explain why City's investment was good investment and why the Blues' long term plan would be to make the business a fully sustainable one.

UEFA were very supportive of what City presented to them and, although publicly the media still slagged City off, the authorities were beginning to see that City were not the enemy they thought they were. Things change of course and it may be that a Euro Super League comes from the clubs rather than UEFA (like the formation of the PL was) and the new Super League could bypass UEFA anyway and set up its own body or become affiliated to FIFA direct (like the PL did with the FA instead of the FL).

Ultimately, money talks and if nothing else Abu Dhabi could always sponsor the Euro League if it ever happened and insist on a certain team being founder members of course;-)

One thing City will want, certainly in the short term, is for Utd to also be there. The all-Manchester rivalry will be a major selling point (as will RM V Barca).

[ross.mcfc]

The thing 2013 me failed to identity was broadcasters and the changing demographics in America.

In 2015, the WWE launched its own network. Removed themselves from the PPV business and put everything they owned in one place which you could watch for a tiny subscription fee. It's an entertainment industry but the regular live TV aspect of it applies to football. Everyone in sport was watching to wait to see how it went.

Earlier this year it leased out (not sold) its Network to the USA Network's steaming service for 1bn over five years. They could never make another TV program ever again and remain massively profitable. As a product, it's never been less popular. As a company, it's never been more profitable.

The money to be made from US TV makes the money Sky and BT look like small change. Another wrestling example - Tony Khan the Fulham owner set up his own company with his own money. After 3 months of doing decent ratings in the m18-30 demographic. TNT gave him 400m for three more years. He made $350m in three months. Why does this matter to football? TNT also owns the rights to CL and it does tremendous numbers because not only is there a demographic shift in the US but it is massively popular with younger people - the holy grail for TV.

It's unopposed by any other sports. It's hours upon hours of content (cheaper and more reliable than making TV). Kids come home from school and watch it. Parents put it on at the weekend over breakfast and watch it as a family. It's a license to print money. Just imagine the interest if LA Galaxy or NYRB are introduced.

[john68]

I will suggest that "WE HAVE WON THIS BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF FOOTBALL, BUT THE WAR HAS REALLY ONLY JUST BEGUN"

We must understand and never erver forget that;-
1) Those who own the clubs are international and their only objective is maximising profit. They will try again, though I believe they will have learned from this and try a completely different approach.
2) It was only the extremely rich owners and clubs that sought to go it alone on this occasion. There will be plenty of club owners that will see and agree with the profitable merits of a breakaway but vehemently opposed it this time because they were on the outside and not included. Givensomeform of inclusion, I am sure the bandwagon will quickly fill up. I know that clubs of the size and financial rank of Galatasary wanted and were part of discussions as early as 2012 (maybe before) and were excited at the prospect.
3) The idea of a Super League began (with the G14) to be discussed in the mid 1980s and the early thought out prototype was used as a weapon and lever against UeFA in the changing format of the old European Cup to the current Champions League. So we are aware that the concept has been alive for over 40 years.
4) We know that there were continuing discussions from that time until the present day as the Super League concept will have evolved to this recent failedattempt.
5) Current statements by Real Madrid's Perez are right...This attempt may have died but the idea is still very much alive. It is only the method and the lack of inclusivity that caused such a backlash.

IT HAS NOT GONE AWAY. THOSE THAT PLANNED IT STILL BELIEVE IN IT. THEY WILL BE WIPING THEIR BLOODY NOSES, STUDYING WHERE THEY WENT WRONG THIS TIME, ADJUSTING THEIR PLANS ACCORDINGLY, BIDING THEIR TIME AND MAKING THEMSELVES READY TO GO AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.

[Harry Dowd scored]

Having read these posts with interest, I wonder if my learned friends have given consideration to the ownership model. There is one doing the rounds called the 51 percent rule of ownership.
From what I can gather it is based on the German model whereby 51 percent is allegedly owned by the fans. I do not for a minute have the foggiest how this works, perhaps some of our more knowledgeable posters could help, but the present model we have is being questioned by politicians, what the fuck they know about football could probably be written on the back of a stamp.
I do however believe our current ownership rules will be scrutinised to stop the greedy elite from royally fucking everything up.

This is off the beeb football page -:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56852632

[City64]

Having read these posts with interest, I wonder if my learned friends have given consideration to the ownership model. There is one doing the rounds called the 51 percent rule of ownership.
From what I can gather it is based on the German model whereby 51 percent is allegedly owned by the fans. I do not for a minute have the foggiest how this works, perhaps some of our more knowledgeable posters could help, but the present model we have is being questioned by politicians, what the fuck they know about football could probably be written on the back of a stamp.
I do however believe our current ownership rules will be scrutinised to stop the greedy elite from royally fucking everything up.

This is off the beeb football page -:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56852632

I think Sky stopped this happening in England a few years ago and now Sky are seeking the moral high ground in this blood bath ?
I may be wrong ?

[Hazy2]

Wolves were playing European giants in the 60s was that a with a view to bring the best teams to Molyneux my uncle tells me they payed appearance money to teams, and the games were slipped into free midweeks. Was that he first attempt to break away. Televised on a much watch basis, everyone lapped it up.

[BlueinBosnia]

Wolves were playing European giants in the 60s was that a with a view to bring the best teams to Molyneux my uncle tells me they payed appearance money to teams, and the games were slipped into free midweeks. Was that he first attempt to break away. Televised on a much watch basis, everyone lapped it up.

That was 1954, the season before the European Cup started, and almost all midweeks were free anyway (as no League Cup in those days, either). Only one of the games was televised (at a time when televised games were a complete novelty), against Budapest Honved, with Puskas playing for them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolverham ... %C3%A9d_FC

[Harry Dowd scored]

Wolves were playing European giants in the 60s was that a with a view to bring the best teams to Molyneux my uncle tells me they payed appearance money to teams, and the games were slipped into free midweeks. Was that he first attempt to break away. Televised on a much watch basis, everyone lapped it up.

That was 1954, the season before the European Cup started, and almost all midweeks were free anyway (as no League Cup in those days, either). Only one of the games was televised (at a time when televised games were a complete novelty), against Budapest Honved, with Puskas playing for them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolverham ... %C3%A9d_FC

Correct, and, it was Busby who pushed the European cups against the wishes of the establishment of the day, he wanted the rags to be pioneers in the Europe project, little did he know it would end in tragedy.

[mr_nool]

This is a fantastic thread. Wish we could reach this kind of standard on this board again...

By the way, where is the outrage against the new CL format, who h will also allow a few select teams to qualify based on "history" rather than merit?