So if a billionaire starts a London League - Best Club in London Area - BLA - games played once a month midweek; no bar from other contests; huge sums to the clubs. Would fans, players, everyone howl with hatred? It's destroying football. Why? Just another league, another contest, more fun. As long as it's AS WELL AS and not INSTEAD OF - what's wrong with it?

No interest to me (not a big football fan anyway). But it does puzzle me. Except it is further evidence that people now get hysterically involved in superficial, simplistic stories. No thinking in depth; huge amounts of Righteous Indignation. Brexit. Covid. Harry&Meghan. Superleague.

Who gives a fuck?

JK2006 wrote:
So if a billionaire starts a London League - Best Club in London Area - BLA - games played once a month midweek; no bar from other contests; huge sums to the clubs. Would fans, players, everyone howl with hatred? It's destroying football. Why? Just another league, another contest, more fun. As long as it's AS WELL AS and not INSTEAD OF - what's wrong with it?

No interest to me (not a big football fan anyway). But it does puzzle me. Except it is further evidence that people now get hysterically involved in superficial, simplistic stories. No thinking in depth; huge amounts of Righteous Indignation. Brexit. Covid. Harry&Meghan. Superleague.

Who gives a fuck?

Exactly.

Fans will still attend to the stadiums that are convenient for them. It’s going to make more from broadcast rights than tickets. Football sports in general is/ are carrying on without fans now.

A billionaire starting a best clubs in London league is not analogous to what is happening JK and that to me is a major point; the closed anti-competetive nature of the proposed league.

If the super league was based on merit this year then Leicester & West Ham would be members (positioned higher in the league) than Tottenham or Arsenal.

So it will be a league based not on merit but money and geographical position only. Yes we have a league built on wealth differentials that has brought some great players to these shores; but you still have to win games to stay at the top.

It will make a spectacle (a rather uninteresting one for me as league position will mean nothing with no relegation or movement) but is inimical to the meritricious nature of competetive sport.

The meretricuous leagues (inc Premiership & Champions League) will be increasingly diminished in terms of talent - the best players can't play Weds & Sat week in week out so will feature always in the super league as a priority - and investment.

Grass roots clubs get a lot of money from a meretricious and competetive sport structure - gates for FA cup ties etc - and as the money follows the superleague this will diminish too.

Local football clubs are a vital part of communities; this could well be lost in time unless safeguards are put in place and enforced. Not impossible I grant, but we have to be careful when greed is the only motivator of these 6 clubs.

FIFA & UEFA though are total hypocrites in that they have already allowed the club level competetive nature of football to largely die through Champions League & Sky money. This super league just takes it a step further by excluding any club playing better than the 6; rather than just being able to buy the best players and compete using them.

Southampton won the FA cup in 1976 (when they were then in league two) against Manchester United. Couldn't happen now. A pesky Leicster will no longer be able to upset the apple cart and deprive a "top" 6 super team of lucrative European action by doing too well in the domestic league.

Of course I agree the media are now having a field day; but the first I learned the 6 intended to join was while watching Match of the Day 2 last weekend. Two ex pros of the highest level - Danny Mills and Dion Dublin - could not hide their hurt and anger. They get that football will become entertainment only and the sportwill be lost if this goes through.

Government 'legislative bomb' now seems likely to twart the ESL, although legal action is probable (JP Morgan, the financial backers, will have planned for all possibilities).

English clubs, and players, won't want to jeopardise their Premier League futures by competing in a competition deemed unfair on the majority of clubs, by most in football.

Wyot wrote:
A billionaire starting a best clubs in London league is not analogous to what is happening JK and that to me is a major point; the closed anti-competetive nature of the proposed league.

If the super league was based on merit this year then Leicester & West Ham would be members (positioned higher in the league) than Tottenham or Arsenal.

So it will be a league based not on merit but money and geographical position only. Yes we have a league built on wealth differentials that has brought some great players to these shores; but you still have to win games to stay at the top.

It will make a spectacle (a rather uninteresting one for me as league position will mean nothing with no relegation or movement) but is inimical to the meritricious nature of competetive sport.

The meretricuous leagues (inc Premiership & Champions League) will be increasingly diminished in terms of talent - the best players can't play Weds & Sat week in week out so will feature always in the super league as a priority - and investment.

Grass roots clubs get a lot of money from a meretricious and competetive sport structure - gates for FA cup ties etc - and as the money follows the superleague this will diminish too.

Local football clubs are a vital part of communities; this could well be lost in time unless safeguards are put in place and enforced. Not impossible I grant, but we have to be careful when greed is the only motivator of these 6 clubs.

FIFA & UEFA though are total hypocrites in that they have already allowed the club level competetive nature of football to largely die through Champions League & Sky money. This super league just takes it a step further by excluding any club playing better than the 6; rather than just being able to buy the best players and compete using them.

Southampton won the FA cup in 1976 (when they were then in league two) against Manchester United. Couldn't happen now. A pesky Leicster will no longer be able to upset the apple cart and deprive a "top" 6 super team of lucrative European action by doing too well in the domestic league.

Of course I agree the media are now having a field day; but the first I learned the 6 intended to join was while watching Match of the Day 2 last weekend. Two ex pros of the highest level - Danny Mills and Dion Dublin - could not hide their hurt and anger. They get that football will become entertainment only and the sportwill be lost if this goes through.


No longer are football clubs central to modern communities; ManU claim to have 1 billion fans - probably just hundreds of millions.

Few of these have been to Old Trafford or Manchester. Most will never miss a match on their devices. Something else the internet has changed, like shopping and banking.

Nowadays the fan in his seat is less important. Because the income from commercial products, internet and tours is much greater.

And income is king; it sets the clubs' value. Several clubs have increased over 20 times in value, since the EPL, satellite TV and the internet changed everything.

Cary wrote:
Wyot wrote:
A billionaire starting a best clubs in London league is not analogous to what is happening JK and that to me is a major point; the closed anti-competetive nature of the proposed league.

If the super league was based on merit this year then Leicester & West Ham would be members (positioned higher in the league) than Tottenham or Arsenal.

So it will be a league based not on merit but money and geographical position only. Yes we have a league built on wealth differentials that has brought some great players to these shores; but you still have to win games to stay at the top.

It will make a spectacle (a rather uninteresting one for me as league position will mean nothing with no relegation or movement) but is inimical to the meritricious nature of competetive sport.

The meretricuous leagues (inc Premiership & Champions League) will be increasingly diminished in terms of talent - the best players can't play Weds & Sat week in week out so will feature always in the super league as a priority - and investment.

Grass roots clubs get a lot of money from a meretricious and competetive sport structure - gates for FA cup ties etc - and as the money follows the superleague this will diminish too.

Local football clubs are a vital part of communities; this could well be lost in time unless safeguards are put in place and enforced. Not impossible I grant, but we have to be careful when greed is the only motivator of these 6 clubs.

FIFA & UEFA though are total hypocrites in that they have already allowed the club level competetive nature of football to largely die through Champions League & Sky money. This super league just takes it a step further by excluding any club playing better than the 6; rather than just being able to buy the best players and compete using them.

Southampton won the FA cup in 1976 (when they were then in league two) against Manchester United. Couldn't happen now. A pesky Leicster will no longer be able to upset the apple cart and deprive a "top" 6 super team of lucrative European action by doing too well in the domestic league.

Of course I agree the media are now having a field day; but the first I learned the 6 intended to join was while watching Match of the Day 2 last weekend. Two ex pros of the highest level - Danny Mills and Dion Dublin - could not hide their hurt and anger. They get that football will become entertainment only and the sportwill be lost if this goes through.


No longer are football clubs central to modern communities; ManU claim to have 1 billion fans - probably just hundreds of millions.

Few of these have been to Old Trafford or Manchester. Most will never miss a match on their devices. Something else the internet has changed, like shopping and banking.

Nowadays the fan in his seat is less important. Because the income from commercial products, internet and tours is much greater.

And income is king; it sets the clubs' value. Several clubs have increased over 20 times in value, since the EPL, satellite TV and the internet changed everything.

I never understood why people support teams that are miles away from their birthplace. A lot of Bristolians support London and northern teams but not Bristol City or Rovers.

Cary wrote:
Government 'legislative bomb' now seems likely to twart the ESL


Just the threat of one saw the six capitulating and apologising.

Well handled by the government, after the anguish of football supporters.

I don't see why this league is any different to clubs doing pre-season tours, playing friendly matches with other teams. The only difference is that this is more formal. The teams, I assume would still have played in the EPL and FA cup. The idea that football is for the local community went out decades ago. The big clubs are owned by foreign billionaires and the players are bought for millions from around the world. Only about 4 or 5 clubs have a realistic chance of winning the premier league (apart from the freak year when Leicester won). The big 6 haven't been relegated for decades and are not likely too anytime soon. The idea the EPL is a level playing field is ridiculous with one Man City likely to be earning more than the whole of Sheffield United or Crystal Palace put together. This is just typical football fans knee jerk reaction, who are still deluded that the clubs belong to them.

robbiex wrote:
I don't see why this league is any different to clubs doing pre-season tours, playing friendly matches with other teams. The only difference is that this is more formal. The teams, I assume would still have played in the EPL and FA cup. The idea that football is for the local community went out decades ago. The big clubs are owned by foreign billionaires and the players are bought for millions from around the world. Only about 4 or 5 clubs have a realistic chance of winning the premier league (apart from the freak year when Leicester won). The big 6 haven't been relegated for decades and are not likely too anytime soon. The idea the EPL is a level playing field is ridiculous with one Man City likely to be earning more than the whole of Sheffield United or Crystal Palace put together. This is just typical football fans knee jerk reaction, who are still deluded that the clubs belong to them.

Agreed Robbie but my point was that the so called "super league" would have just spread the rot you accurately describe even further; to no advantage to anyone but a few club owners. Just because rot exists doesn't make an argument for more rot.

Wyot wrote:
robbiex wrote:
I don't see why this league is any different to clubs doing pre-season tours, playing friendly matches with other teams. The only difference is that this is more formal. The teams, I assume would still have played in the EPL and FA cup. The idea that football is for the local community went out decades ago. The big clubs are owned by foreign billionaires and the players are bought for millions from around the world. Only about 4 or 5 clubs have a realistic chance of winning the premier league (apart from the freak year when Leicester won). The big 6 haven't been relegated for decades and are not likely too anytime soon. The idea the EPL is a level playing field is ridiculous with one Man City likely to be earning more than the whole of Sheffield United or Crystal Palace put together. This is just typical football fans knee jerk reaction, who are still deluded that the clubs belong to them.

Agreed Robbie but my point was that the so called "super league" would have just spread the rot you accurately describe even further; to no advantage to anyone but a few club owners. Just because rot exists doesn't make an argument for more rot.

Agreed it is more rot. The only solution I think could be a FIFA enforced worldwide pay cap and transfer fee cap. I think that in the NFL each team has the same fixed amount to spend on players, so it is a proper test of management. Mourinho has won trophies with every team that he has managed (except spurs), but he has always managed teams that already won lots of trophies (except Porto).

Cary wrote:
Cary wrote:
Government 'legislative bomb' now seems likely to twart the ESL


Just the threat of one saw the six capitulating and apologising.

Well handled by the government, after the anguish of football supporters.



The apologies are becoming deafening, from everywhere. A dozen famous and prestigious clubs took the advice of Wall Street, on how to improve the most popular (and one of the oldest) sports on earth. Without exception, all these got it astoundingly wrong.

What killed the idea was the abhorrence to it, from the game's country of origin. England, where fans, politicians and the the media expressed sentiments of amazement and disbelief. One thing is sure, it'll be a while before such avarice is attempted on our national game.