"In its ruling, the EU's top court said that FIFA and UEFA abused their dominant position by forbidding clubs to compete in a European Super League (ESL), although that project may still not be approved as the court did not rule on it specifically."The only way they could do that is if UEFA didn't licence the ESL for valid reasons (ie protecting the game and the pyramid) and the ESL went ahead anyway. That was the point of the recent case, as I understand it. UEFA didn't have any criteria for giving approval / not giving approval to any competitions under its umbrella and so acted illegally in preventing it. Now they have such criteria, I think, which, if they have done it right, will nullify the benefits to ESL clubs of the competition, but they haven't been tested yet. They will, of course, be tested if the ESL ever gets off the ground and UEFA refuse to licence it.
I've just raised these very points. However, the ECJ hasn't ruled on any of this, so a lot's been left open to interpretation, hence both the ESL & UEFA claiming victory.It won't be just the current "big name" player's, but the Barca under tens being unable to play for their school, an under 17 who doesn't make the grade not having an option to move to a Getafe or Malaga etc
Would you risk joining a breakaway club?
Which will leave it wide open to counter suits by UEFA because it may be against competition law. Wouldn't UEFA love that!Whatever they finally propose will have protectionism written into its very core.
Which will leave it wide open to counter suits by UEFA because it may be against competition law. Wouldn't UEFA love that!
"In its ruling, the EU's top court said that FIFA and UEFA abused their dominant position by forbidding clubs to compete in a European Super League (ESL), although that project may still not be approved as the court did not rule on it specifically."
The ECJ ruled on the aspect of UEFA/FIFA stopping clubs competing in alternative competitions as being against EU Competition laws. However, the ECJ didn't rule specifically on the ESL, which leaves questions.
1. Does the ECJ ruling mean UEFA can't stop the ESL from being setup within the current UEFA/FIFA setup?
2. Does the ECJ ruling mean UEFA can't stop the ESL from being setup outside of the current UEFA/FIFA setup?
I haven't found anything to clarify these points, & why UEFA/FIFA couldn't bar players/clubs appearing in the ESL, from appearing in all other UEFA/FIFA sanctioned competitions.
Also, how would this apply to referees, VAR assistants etc officiating ESL games?
Could this effect Academies etc? Could UEFA/FIFA ban Real & Barça's Academies too, because of the men's teams' involvement in the ESL?
A lot has been left open to interpretation, hence both sides claiming victory over the ESL. ¯\_(⊙_ʖ⊙)_/¯
https://www.france24.com/en/sport/2...all-super-league-broke-eu-law-top-court-rules
FIFA regulate ALL Association Football, if you wish to set up a rival organisation you are free to do so, but FIFA can then, through it's continental federations and national associations can expell those involved in the breakaway organisation."In its ruling, the EU's top court said that FIFA and UEFA abused their dominant position by forbidding clubs to compete in a European Super League (ESL), although that project may still not be approved as the court did not rule on it specifically."
The ECJ ruled on the aspect of UEFA/FIFA stopping clubs competing in alternative competitions as being against EU Competition laws. However, the ECJ didn't rule specifically on the ESL, which leaves questions.
1. Does the ECJ ruling mean UEFA can't stop the ESL from being setup within the current UEFA/FIFA setup?
2. Does the ECJ ruling mean UEFA can't stop the ESL from being setup outside of the current UEFA/FIFA setup?
I haven't found anything to clarify these points, & why UEFA/FIFA couldn't bar players/clubs appearing in the ESL, from appearing in all other UEFA/FIFA sanctioned competitions.
Also, how would this apply to referees, VAR assistants etc officiating ESL games?
Could this effect Academies etc? Could UEFA/FIFA ban Real & Barça's Academies too, because of the men's teams' involvement in the ESL?
A lot has been left open to interpretation, hence both sides claiming victory over the ESL. ¯\_(⊙_ʖ⊙)_/¯
https://www.france24.com/en/sport/2...all-super-league-broke-eu-law-top-court-rules
Whether morally right or wrong, this would make perfect sense to me.FIFA regulate ALL Association Football, if you wish to set up a rival organisation you are free to do so, but FIFA can then, through it's continental federations and national associations can expell those involved in the breakaway organisation.
It would be the club in it's entirely expelled, not just one of the clubs teams
FIFA regulate ALL Association Football, if you wish to set up a rival organisation you are free to do so, but FIFA can then, through it's continental federations and national associations can expell those involved in the breakaway organisation.
It would be the club in it's entirely expelled, not just one of the clubs teams
The crucial point for me is if clubs take part in a breakaway competition outside of the UEFA/FIFA sphere, can UEFA/FIFA ban these clubs, their players & the officials involved from future UEFA/FIFA competitions?As far as I understand it, and I am not a lawyer, this is exactly the same finding as the ECJ made against the European Basketball Federation a few years ago when it banned certain players after their participation in an unlicensed break-away tournament. The court found the action of banning the players was illegal because the Federation didn't have any criteria for approving / not approving external (ie those not operated by the Federation itself) tournaments. The ruling wasn't that the Federation wasn't the governing body for the sport in Europe, or that it couldn't run its own tournaments, it was that the Federation couldn't disapprove of an external tournament purely because they didn't like it, or because it devalues their own competition. Any approval criteria, of course, would have to be required for the benefit of the sport, not for the Federation's own benefit.
This is why I say the UEFA / ESL ruling is consistent with the previous ruling. UEFA tried to punish (in this instance) the clubs for joining an external tournament which didn't have the approval of UEFA. So I am not surprised at the ruling.
What the ruling doesn't say is that i: UEFA isn't the governing body for all football in Europe, ii) UEFA can't operate its own tournaments and iii) and can't disapprove an external tournament if it doesn't meet UEFA's criteria for licensing tournaments (again with the caveat that the criteria must be for the good of the game and support the European Sports Model).
So, to answer your questions, imho: i) UEFA can stop an external tournament within the UEFA / FIFA structure if it doesn't meet its criteria for such a tournament, and ii) UEFA can't stop a tournament if it is a break-away from the UEFA / FIFA set- up.
Of course, in case i) the ESL would challenge the criteria and that would take another two years, and in case ii) UEFA / FIFA would, I imagine, ban the clubs concerned (including, I would think, women's and academy activities unless they are spun off) from participating in FIFA / UEFA / domestic league tournaments and ban their players and any officials involved likewise, and then that would be challenged by the ESL in the courts for, say, another two years.
Difficult for me to see how it gets off the ground, really, if UEFA gets its ducks in a row with sound criteria set for the benefit of the game.
All my understanding, which may be absolute bollocks, of course.