European Super League | ECJ rule that UEFA and FIFA acted unlawfully in blocking Super League (p 29)

[mancboy]

I know. Personally I am off looking for a thread where everyone is calling each other cunts

try the sheffield united matchday threat after four minutes if we aint 3 0 up

 

[halfcenturyup]

Can UEFA stop the ESL being independently setup outside of it's governance?

No.

But I can imagine FIFA, UEFA and the national associations will punish clubs who do with expulsion from their tournaments if they set up outside the UEFA umbrella. That would have to be tested in the courts, and as far as I know, there is no precedent for that, although there is a great deal of precedent for support of the ESM at the ECJ, with support also from the EC itself as well as from FIFA, UEFA, national governments, national associations and from fans across Europe. I think it unlikely an ESL could be set up outside UEFA's governance whilst also taking part in FIFA, UEFA and domestic tournaments. It would make the whole process of obtaining UEFA approving for the good of the game, for which there is precedent at the ECJ, and most recently last week, obsolete.

All, again, imh(non-lawyer)o.

 

[Dribble]

No.

But I can imagine FIFA, UEFA and the national associations will punish clubs who do with expulsion from their tournaments if they set up outside the UEFA umbrella. That would have to be tested in the courts, and as far as I know, there is no precedent for that, although there is a great deal of precedent for support of the ESM at the ECJ, with support also from the EC itself as well as from FIFA, UEFA, national governments, national associations and from fans across Europe. I think it unlikely an ESL could be set up outside UEFA's governance whilst also taking part in FIFA, UEFA and domestic tournaments. It would make the whole process of obtaining UEFA approving for the good of the game, for which there is precedent at the ECJ, and most recently last week, obsolete.

All, again, imh(non-lawyer)o.

So if you read back on previous posts, we both broadly agree on the substantive point that we believe UEFA/FIFA can't stop the ESL setting up outside their organisations, but if they did so, the could opt to ban all clubs, players, staff & officials from their organisation & tournaments.

HOWEVER, I still can't find where this is definitely stated by UEFA, ECJ or the ESL? This is probably the most important of the several points I've been making.

 

[halfcenturyup]

So if you read back on previous posts, we both broadly agree on the substantive point that we believe UEFA/FIFA can't stop the ESL setting up outside their organisations, but if they did so, the could opt to ban all clubs, players, staff & officials from their organisation & tournaments.

HOWEVER, I still can't find where this is definitely stated by UEFA, ECJ or the ESL? This is probably the most important of the several points I've been making.

Yes, I am not disagreeing with you at all on this, but I don't think you will find it definitively stated until it becomes an issue. The case so far was about the ESL within the FIFA/UEFA/domestic league/ESM structure and, as far as I am aware, it still is. The next court case will be when UEFA disapproves the ESL2 which will take 2 or 3 years more testing their approval criteria, even if it gets that far. Then, if the ECJ upholds UEFA's position, which I think is most likely, the ESL will have to decide whether to go it alone or not. In the unlikely event they decide to, then that is when we will get some clarity on punishment after another two or three years.

Both sides playing a long game here, and will challenge every little thing to delay, in much the same way City did with UEFA and are doing with the PL.

 

[Dribble]

Yes, I am not disagreeing with you at all on this, but I don't think you will find it definitively stated until it becomes an issue. The case so far was about the ESL within the FIFA/UEFA/domestic league/ESM structure and, as far as I am aware, it still is. The next court case will be when UEFA disapproves the ESL2 which will take 2 or 3 years more testing their approval criteria, even if it gets that far. Then, if the ECJ upholds UEFA's position, which I think is most likely, the ESL will have to decide whether to go it alone or not. In the unlikely event they decide to, then that is when we will get some clarity on punishment after another two or three years.

Both sides playing a long game here, and will challenge every little thing to delay, in much the same way City did with UEFA and are doing with the PL.

If the substantive point of whether UEFA can legally ban the setting up of the ESL within their structure, or if they can ban it outside their structure too hasn't been broached already, this stinks of smoke & mirrors more than it being a long game.

There's also my previous points too which are obvious, but to my knowledge, haven't been tackled, which begs the question why?

"Will UEFA & FIFA press the nuclear button & ban all clubs, players, officials & staff participating in the ESL from all its football related competitions & businesses globally?

If they dare, how would the G14 clubs react?

UEFA could even decide to give CL clubs more money, & massively increase the participation & prize money as a way of ending the ESL threat."

As I said, both UEFA & the ESL are claiming victory over the ECJ's ruling, but there's a helluva lot of caveats, moves & counter moves which could yet be made by both sides.

 

[ZanteWeatherman]

try the sheffield united matchday threat after four minutes if we aint 3 0 up

Strangely enough I have never been on any of the matchday threads, ever. After reading the comments on these forums about them, I won't be changing my strategy anytime soon...........

 

[burning blue soul]

So, to be clear.... Everyone involved in the initial ESL set up was fined by uefa and (presumably) paid, apart from the 2 Spanish grifters?
Those 2 walk through rain drops on a permanent basis!

 

[halfcenturyup]

If the substantive point of whether UEFA can legally ban the setting up of the ESL within their structure, or if they can ban it outside their structure too hasn't been broached already, this stinks of smoke & mirrors more than it being a long game.

There's also my previous points too which are obvious, but to my knowledge, haven't been tackled, which begs the question why?

"Will UEFA & FIFA press the nuclear button & ban all clubs, players, officials & staff participating in the ESL from all its football related competitions & businesses globally?

If they dare, how would the G14 clubs react?

UEFA could even decide to give CL clubs more money, & massively increase the participation & prize money as a way of ending the ESL threat."

As I said, both UEFA & the ESL are claiming victory over the ECJ's ruling, but there's a helluva lot of caveats, moves & counter moves which could yet be made by both sides.

We are doing this thing again where I say something I think clears up your question, but then you ask it again.

I found this is in the ECJ blurb, which may help:

"The Court observes that the specific characteristics of professional football, including its considerable social and cultural importance and the fact that it generates great media interest, together with the fact that it is based on openness and sporting merit, support a finding that it is legitimate to subject the organisation and conduct of international professional football competitions to common rules intended to guarantee the homogeneity and coordination of those competitions within an overall match calendar as well as to promote the holding of sporting competitions based on equal opportunities and merit. It is also legitimate to ensure compliance with those common rules through rules such as those put in place by FIFA and UEFA on prior approval of those competitions and the participation of clubs and players therein. It follows that, in the specific context of professional football and the economic activities to which the practice of that sport gives rise, neither the adoption of those rules nor their implementation may be categorised, in terms of their principle or generally, as an ‘abuse of a dominant position’ under Article 102 TFEU. The same holds true for sanctions introduced as an adjunct to those rules, since such sanctions are legitimate, in terms of their principle, as a means of guaranteeing the effectiveness of those rules.

Be that as it may, none of those specific attributes makes it possible to consider as legitimate the adoption or the implementation of rules and sanctions provided for by way of adjunct thereto, where there is no framework for substantive criteria and detailed procedural rules suitable for ensuring that they are transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate. More specifically, it is necessary, in particular, that those criteria and those detailed rules should have been laid down in an accessible form prior to any implementation of the rules at issue. Moreover, in order for those criteria and detailed rules to be regarded as being non-discriminatory, they must not make the organisation and marketing of third-party competitions and the participation of clubs and players therein subject to requirements which are either different from those applicable to competitions organised and marketed by the decision-making entity, or are identical or similar to them but are impossible or excessively difficult to fulfil in practice for an undertaking that does not have the same status as an association or the same powers at its disposal as that entity and which, accordingly, is in a different situation to that entity. Lastly, in order for the sanctions introduced as an adjunct to those rules not to be discretionary, they must be governed by criteria that must not only also be transparent, objective, precise and non-discriminatory, but must also guarantee that those sanctions are determined, in each specific case, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, in the light of, inter alia, the nature, duration and seriousness of the infringement found."

In the case the ESL actually gets off the ground, I suspect the legality of the criteria will be the next dispute and then, as I have said, if the courts find in favour of UEFA, the ESL has to decide if it goes ahead with the tournament without UEFA approval, in which case punishment will be meted out and tested in court again.

 

[Dribble]

We are doing this thing again where I say something I think clears up your question, but then you ask it again.

I found this is in the ECJ blurb, which may help:

"The Court observes that the specific characteristics of professional football, including its considerable social and cultural importance and the fact that it generates great media interest, together with the fact that it is based on openness and sporting merit, support a finding that it is legitimate to subject the organisation and conduct of international professional football competitions to common rules intended to guarantee the homogeneity and coordination of those competitions within an overall match calendar as well as to promote the holding of sporting competitions based on equal opportunities and merit. It is also legitimate to ensure compliance with those common rules through rules such as those put in place by FIFA and UEFA on prior approval of those competitions and the participation of clubs and players therein. It follows that, in the specific context of professional football and the economic activities to which the practice of that sport gives rise, neither the adoption of those rules nor their implementation may be categorised, in terms of their principle or generally, as an ‘abuse of a dominant position’ under Article 102 TFEU. The same holds true for sanctions introduced as an adjunct to those rules, since such sanctions are legitimate, in terms of their principle, as a means of guaranteeing the effectiveness of those rules.

Be that as it may, none of those specific attributes makes it possible to consider as legitimate the adoption or the implementation of rules and sanctions provided for by way of adjunct thereto, where there is no framework for substantive criteria and detailed procedural rules suitable for ensuring that they are transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate. More specifically, it is necessary, in particular, that those criteria and those detailed rules should have been laid down in an accessible form prior to any implementation of the rules at issue. Moreover, in order for those criteria and detailed rules to be regarded as being non-discriminatory, they must not make the organisation and marketing of third-party competitions and the participation of clubs and players therein subject to requirements which are either different from those applicable to competitions organised and marketed by the decision-making entity, or are identical or similar to them but are impossible or excessively difficult to fulfil in practice for an undertaking that does not have the same status as an association or the same powers at its disposal as that entity and which, accordingly, is in a different situation to that entity. Lastly, in order for the sanctions introduced as an adjunct to those rules not to be discretionary, they must be governed by criteria that must not only also be transparent, objective, precise and non-discriminatory, but must also guarantee that those sanctions are determined, in each specific case, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, in the light of, inter alia, the nature, duration and seriousness of the infringement found."

In the case the ESL actually gets off the ground, I suspect the legality of the criteria will be the next dispute and then, as I have said, if the courts find in favour of UEFA, the ESL has to decide if it goes ahead with the tournament without UEFA approval, in which case punishment will be meted out and tested in court again.

A couple things. I wasn't asking you for an answer to the main body of my post. After several attempts, you've already said you don't know. I was merely pointing out that I couldn't find a definitive answer to those obvious conclusions & resultant questions, which makes me wonder why? ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠⊙⁠_⁠ʖ⁠⊙⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

As per the ruling, I've read it previously & I found it incredibly open ended & not especially clear on the specific points I highlighted.

I then looked further & could find no clarifications, hence me asking on here. I'm beginning to think things are being left deliberately vague, because neither FIFA/UEFA or the ESL, want to press the nuke button & open a whole new can of worms.

Cutting to the chase, it seems there's nothing to stop the ESL setting up outside of FIFA/UEFA, just as there's nothing stopping FIFA/UEFA from banning teams from its competitions.

However, it seems banning players is a different thing to banning clubs, hence this ruling being about as clear as mud, & nobody really knowing what to do or what will happen/comes next, until one side or the other makes the next move.

 

[halfcenturyup]

A couple things. I wasn't asking you for an answer to the main body of my post. After several attempts, you've already said you don't know. I was merely pointing out that I couldn't find a definitive answer to those obvious conclusions & resultant questions, which makes me wonder why? ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠⊙⁠_⁠ʖ⁠⊙⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

As per the ruling, I've read it previously & I found it incredibly open ended & not especially clear on the specific points I highlighted.

I then looked further & could find no clarifications, hence me asking on here. I'm beginning to think things are being left deliberately vague, because neither FIFA/UEFA or the ESL, want to press the nuke button & open a whole new can of worms.

Cutting to the chase, it seems there's nothing to stop the ESL setting up outside of FIFA/UEFA, just as there's nothing stopping FIFA/UEFA from banning teams from its competitions.

However, it seems banning players is a different thing to banning clubs, hence this ruling being about as clear as mud, & nobody really knowing what to do or what will happen/comes next, until one side or the other makes the next move.

I can agree with that, except that I don't think the judgment is open-ended or unclear at all on the specific points it was asked to consider.

But yes, you are right what happens next depends on what happens next.

Personally, I would say UEFA are in the stronger position but, as you will rightly point out, that is an opinion, not based on any court rulings. Such rulings will surely have to come if this thing gets off the ground.