The Super League | FA + PL: New Charter & Fines | UEFA: Settlement

Would you be happy if City joined this European Super League?

  • Yes

    Votes: 109 5.3%

  • No

    Votes: 1,954 94.7%
  • Total voters
    2,063
SamBlue said:
Chelsea and us will come off worst out of this bullshit, didn't have balls and nerves to say no and wait and now retreating like limp-dicked assholes. I actually have respect for that scumbag Peres or whatever his name is, he tried to the best for his club. I expect Bavarian rags to fuck us hard for the next 10 years.
Click to expand...
There’s bad takes and there’s bad takes and then there’s this.

But then again you were one of the ones “happy” for City to join the SL so it’s no surprise you’re seeing your arse. I’d probably keep your head down fit an hour or two whilst a lot of legacy fans celebrate the fact that they just may get their club back.
 

European Super League: Manchester City withdraw and Chelsea set to do so​

_90984110_roan200.jpg

By Dan RoanExclusive by BBC sports editor

Manchester City have withdrawn from the European Super League (ESL) and Chelsea are also preparing to do so.

Efforts to leave come just two days after both were announced as two of six English clubs to sign up to the controversial new competition.
The ESL has been widely criticised since being announced on Sunday.

Around 1,000 fans gathered outside Chelsea's Stamford Bridge home ground before their game against Brighton on Tuesday to protest their involvement.

Chelsea and City were part of English football's 'big six' clubs - alongside Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham - to have agreed to join the new league.

In total, 12 European clubs announced their intentions to form the breakaway league, which they hoped to establish as a new midweek competition.

It was condemned by football authorities and government ministers in the UK and across Europe by Uefa and leagues associations.

Chelsea were the first club to indicate they will not press ahead by preparing documentation to withdrawn. City withdrew soon after.

Chelsea and City were not drivers of this plan, they were the last to sign and feared being left behind.

It is not clear how easy it is or how binding the contracts are.

Clearly something changed on Tuesday, whether it was the backlash, the worldwide condemnation, the political pressure or whether the players have have had their say.

Analysis​

Former Chelsea winger Pat Nevin on BBC Radio 5 Live

I'm not even mildly surprised - it didn't look like Chelsea wanted to get on that train but they didn't want to be left at the station.

I don't think these clubs were prepared for anything. This seems like utter panic from a set of clubs. I think this is the first break that falls and then we are back into something like normality.

Chelsea wanted to move stadium a few years ago, fans weren't having it. The club, instead of pushing it through, said "we were wrong". They can change, they can adapt.

It's gone now, dead in the water. It is that big because the other clubs would look a bit silly without them now.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56823501
 
KnaresboroughBlue said:
I suspect that there was never any real intention to run the league (hence why details were so sketchy) but more to put some pressure on UEFA. Once the clubs have what they wanted, they could then withdraw from the SL. We may never find out what the true goal was.
Click to expand...
Yep a lot of giddy kippers predicting this was some grand plan by us, tosh and nonsense.

it was all these clubs, including us, exerting more power over eufa to get the UCL to resemble the SL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.