UAE behind rival to CL?

[hawkhurst]

So you haven't read the articles.

Well I'd be very surprised if a Chinese investment firm is interested in funding a competition that doesn't guarantee the participation of the world's largest clubs irrespective of where they finish in their domestic leagues. The cynic in me would imagine this will be an attempt to get Real, Barca, Bayern, United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, PSG et al to play some form of semi-competitive tournament outside of Europe. I doubt they're particularly interested in seeing Leicester, Monaco, Nice etc. I can't read the FT article, but the NYT article doesn't state there will be a qualification process for it on the back of league positions.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Presumably this would be a closed shop and only X number of 'elite' clubs would be selected to participate. If that's the case then it's a big no from me. This sounds like the beginning of that European Super League that's been talked about for a while as a threat to UEFA to pay clubs more.

This would be as "extreme" a restriction as a FIFA/UEFA ban on clubs and players taking part and would fall foul of competition law. It would be ironic, however, if UEFA had to resort to the courts to ensure that a multi-billion dollar tournament is open and competitive. I don't think the "new" competition would be at all dodgy, though - it's point is to make sure that the governing bodies of football realise that there are new interests which demand fair play consideration and respect and that governing bodies had better learn to stop shafting them in the interests of crooked Italian media magnates, dodgy American shopping mall tycoons and any number of German ex-cons.

 

[Andrew___K]

Well I'd be very surprised if a Chinese investment firm is interested in funding a competition that doesn't guarantee the participation of the world's largest clubs irrespective of where they finish in their domestic leagues. The cynic in me would imagine this will be an attempt to get Real, Barca, Bayern, United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, City, PSG et al to play some form of semi-competitive tournament outside of Europe. I doubt they're particularly interested in seeing Leicester, Monaco, Nice etc. I can't read the FT article, but the NYT article doesn't state there will be a qualification process for it on the back of league positions.

Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but paying 25 billion for the right to organise 'semi-competitive' tournament for elite clubs doesn't sound logical for me. Looks more like an attempt to gradually introduce an alternative to UEFA tournaments using FIFA's hand. City, like some other clubs, are partially owned by Chinese investors, so their interest is hardly surprising.

 

[hawkhurst]

This would be as "extreme" a restriction as a FIFA/UEFA ban on clubs and players taking part and would fall foul of competition law. It would be ironic, however, if UEFA had to resort to the courts to ensure that a multi-billion dollar tournament is open and competitive. I don't think the "new" competition would be at all dodgy, though - it's point is to make sure that the governing bodies of football realise that there are new interests which demand fair play consideration and respect and that governing bodies had better learn to stop shafting them in the interests of crooked Italian media magnates, dodgy American shopping mall tycoons and any number of German ex-cons.

I have no doubt that UEFA are driven by money, but to think any investment firm is doing it for altruistic reasons is also naive. With UEFA, participation is dictated by domestic league positions. I would imagine a private investor won't care where the clubs finish in their own league so long as they get access to the ones that will bring in the most TV money. You can make a valid argument that UEFA already try homogenize the CL through things like FFP and their decision to now go back 10 years for ranking purposes, but there is still a chance anyone can get in if they do well in their own league.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Some nice away days in Argentina and Brazil.

The cost though. I dread to think.

I'm assuming you're comment is facetious, but you raise a serious point. I do not think that any mention has been made of the real import of this proposed tournament. I remember at the time of our takeover arguing that until the 1980s-90s clubs had depended very much gate receipts whereas United and Bayern were the first to exploit the introduction of sponsorship and television. Others have caught them up. My argument is that City will be the first to realise the full potential of the whole communications revolution. This new tournament will value spectators at the grounds and there will be those/many who indulge in football tourism but this is a tournament for the "distance fan". CMC are a media/communications giant and there interest is obvious. We are fortunate in Britain that we are all in the same time zone, but Russia, China, the USA and many showing real interest in this project are not. They are used to watching top class football in far away places at very strange times. City's owners have already shown interest in virtual reality and the opportunities for innovation in profitable ways of bringing these games to a worldwide audience are immense and completely out of the restricting hands of FIFA/UEFA and its faded cartel.

 

[hawkhurst]

Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but paying 25 billion for the right to organise 'semi-competitive' tournament for elite clubs doesn't sound logical for me. Looks more like an attempt to gradually introduce an alternative to UEFA tournaments using FIFA's hand. City, like some other clubs, are partially owned by Chinese investors, so their interest is hardly surprising.

And we're "fortunate" as City fans that we're likely to be selected for that competition given we're one of the best teams in Europe. But if in 2007 this had happened and United, Liverpool Chelsea and Arsenal were going to participate in competitions that would make them richer than we could have ever dreamed of being, without an opportunity to ever participate in that tournament ourselves because people in China would rather watch those teams, you'd be beyond pissed. Personally, I'm conscious of where we've come from and things like Leicester winning the league are the reasons why people watch football to begin with, that hope that anything can happen. Remove that jeopardy and hope and it's all a bit meh for me.

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

For our more mature posters and to be totally irreverent to UEFA, I give you:

The Ying Tong song.

iddle eye po.

 

[Blue Til Death]

Unamed investors ;-) it will be no different than UEFA aside from the fact that they can only fuck us over every 4 years instead of annually...

 

[cptaidan88]

This was said to be happening a few months back.

Essentially it would replace the Confederations Cup, so would take place in the World Cup host country the year before the World Cup. Something like 24/32 teams would take part with half coming from Europe, and you would imagine the majority of the rest coming from South America. The European teams would be the winners of the Champions League and Europa League in the four years prior and the rest determined by UEFA rankings.

I'd take more interest in that than the Confederations cup, and I'd probably travel to Qatar to watch City play in it (if we were there).

I think there could be a danger that it would become more commercially successful than the actual World Cup.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It’s about time South America we’re given some proper money for the services they provide to European club football. Without South Americans where would we be?