baxus

I'm two days late, but Wednesday has been a great day for me! I woke up to the news that my sister gave birth to healthy baby boy and the delivery went smooth and both were fine. Then I opened up sports news and read that this proposed European football Super League attempt collapsed (if anyone's interested in details, go read the football thread) and later in the day I got a revised calculations for some tax I need to pay that reduced the initial amount by half. It was a pretty good day at work, too, but nothing this major

They were trying to remove FIFA and UEFA out of the equation, why would they work with them? Sure, leagues should pick stuff that other leagues are doing better and copy them, but there are things that just can't work. Closed-shop league couldn't work in European football any more than a draft would, or youth academy system could in American pro leagues. The funny thing is, "not wanting to be left behind" is an excuse I've seen thrown around in the media to explain actions of Manchester City and Chelsea, of all clubs. As for apologies, I'd give extra punishment to clubs who try to find excuses. We all know what happened, you got greedy, tried to pull a stunt like this, got smacked down, say you're sorry, take the punishment (if any) and move on. No need for this "dog ate my homework" bullshit.

You're the one who started it with the whole "taxes buy nice things" thing, didn't you?

I loved HIMYM but that ending really ruined the whole show for me. Now it's not only that when I come across it on Netflix I have no intention of playing it but I groan and skip it once I run into it on TV.

I wasn't talking about giving clubs tax breaks or anything like that but deciding to specifically target a small number of organisations in retribution does not seem good to me. Today it was directed at those we feel deserve it, but tomorrow that could be aimed at, for example, media who is opposed to government at the time. Would these complications in the process of getting temporary residential permits be directed at players of these specific six clubs or would they apply for players of all clubs? If it was only for these six clubs, then it's discrimination. If it's for everyone, then why is everyone punished for actions of the few? Hell, even players of these six clubs had nothing to do with making the decision to join Super League, so why would they be punished? As I said, it worked out well this time but it's a slippery slope. P.S. It must be nice to live in a country where you have such confidence that taxpayers' money is being well spent. I wish I could experience that, at least for a while.

Do we generally see that as a good thing? Sure it worked in our favour this time but what happens if politicians at some point down the line start dictating how sports work by special case legislation such as this? I mean, if they can do that for sports, what's to stop them from imposing some type of special tax, luxury or not, on other type of organisations?

Based on this article, I think this happened after Mourinho was informed he's getting sacked and before the club made it official. It's pretty likely that players knew what's about to happen but it would still be unwise to ask your manager "why are you still here?" before having official confirmation that he shouldn't be there. It is insane how completely unsurprised I am by this, though.

Because stakes are higher in matches between the big clubs. I don't know how many times I have to point out that stakes make things fun. That's why American teams raise their level during play-offs (and right before) and games are more entertaining. That's why knockout stages in CL are more fun. No one said that team who get rewarded have to get the best of that reward. Stories of draft busts are very common. Revenue models are so "bad" that a club like Stoke was able to buy players from Bayern Munich and AC Milan. Revenue models are just fine, it's just that there is no GUARANTEED revenue, and there shouldn't be. There's no revenue sharing like in, for example, NHL and there shouldn't be. You get better, you get paid more. It's a simple equation. They could've pulled it off if they made this league quite different and used it as a replacement for CL, with clubs from top leagues qualifying through their domestic competitions. There's no doubt about that. And no one (or next to no one) would have a problem with that. A quick question - those who call BS on tradition, are they by any chance American? You are aware that there is a nationwide football competition called FA Cup that's 150 year old? That there is such a thing called The Boat Race, rowing race between Oxford and Cambridge that's coming close to 200 years since the first race? Where do you think that rowing in US came from? Continent-wide competition between best teams in Europe have been going on for 65 years now. It's unfair to call pick the youngest of the major American sports? Ok, shall we go with another? Let's take NHL. In 1942 there were 6 teams, and now there are 31. 25 teams popped out of thin air, many of whom were moved from traditional hockey environments like Canada to places like Florida where arenas were usually half-full at best (I don't know if things changed with Tampa's success in recent years, but that was the case while I was following NHL a bit). Baseball? All I can say is - fuck any sport in which you can play two full matches in a single day without a drop in quality. NFL I really don't know much about, so I would not get into that. I don't know how impossible it is to move teams in the US these days, but weren't Rams moved to LA recently? And there is always talk about moving Raiders from Oakland, I don't know what happened there. Moving teams in Europe is blasphemous. Don't get me wrong, I love the NBA and NHL system. Their play-offs are probably the best way of ensuring that the best team goes through. I love the system where you help weaker teams improve so that there is more competition next seasons, I love the salary cap and the fact it's difficult to have dynasties anymore. There's a lot of good parts in that system. It works great! For North America, where sports culture has been formed in a different way than in Europe.

This. So much this. It made me sick hearing Sky Sports saying that Chelsea and Man City were oh, so reluctant to join this league and basically did it only out of fear of missing out and being left behind. As if there is even a slightest possibility they didn't have their legal teams go through these contracts with fine-tooth comb and note every single thing, no matter how small it may appear. That just goes to show how much you know about European football. This season's matches between "the big 6" in the Premiership have mostly been stalemates that were very difficult to watch, as is too often the case in important games. On the other hand, two teams of lower quality but better-matched often make a very entertaining match. Jaguars playing the Browns is a match that has absolutely no stakes and as such it is irrelevant and that's why no one wants to watch it. If the loser was at risk of not playing in the NFL next year, you better believe teams would give a better performance. Or they'd at least try to. As it is, the team that wins gets a win and an increased, though still not too good, chances of making it to the play-offs and the loser gets a better shot at getting the next big star in the upcoming draft. Not only there are no consequences for sucking, you even get rewarded. There is nothing outdated about European sports, so your analogy doesn't really hold up. As far as 14 clubs being owned by foreigners, you just had the best display of how much those clubs would be worth without their supporters and traditions. This is very much you not understanding European traditions. European sport has adapted and will continue to adapt but it will not adapt in a manner determined by a bunch of billionaire assholes from half the world away who lack basic understanding of the sport and basic human decency to respect supporters that are the reason why their clubs are in a position they're in. And, no. You don't have 100+ years old traditions at the level sport fans in Europe do. You want to know why? Because every single country in Europe has some sports clubs that are 100 years old, or close to it. No matter how big or small the country, no matter how big or small the clubs are, there is a story there that's worth telling and hearing. And those clubs aren't whipped up out of the thin air like Toronto Raptors, Vancouver Grizzlies or Las Vegas Golden Knights. No. They have been created by a group of students who wanted to play the sport, or miners, or some sailors brought the game and local lads at the time loved it or whatever, or a group of people in one club had a falling out and decided to part ways. And that is exactly the reason why these clubs can't just be moved to another town like Seattle Supersonics were. Or Minnesota Lakers, while we're at it.

I'm still shocked at how easily and quickly this whole Super League thing collapsed. It almost feels like a test run for something down the line.

Nigerian minister of sport tried to appoint the FA president. I don't know the specific rules behind this and whether they are limited to something this blatant or would this type of legislation would also count as breaking these rules. FIFA statutes are 90 pages long and I really can't be bothered to go through them so I was wondering if anyone knew anything on the matter.

I'm quite certain UEFA wouldn't give a shit even if the legislation would break UEFA/FIFA rules as long as it's in their best interest. That's part of the problem, isn't it?

I'm not sure, that's why I asked. If I remember correctly there have some actions taken against Nigerian FA for government's involvement/encroachment on FA business a couple of years back? Not sure if those UEFA rules are limited to governments appointing FA officials and stuff like that or would they cover this kind of special legislation.

While I dislike international breaks as much as the next guy, they are very much needed if we want to see the World Cup or continental championships. I have nothing against them in principle, but some big changes have to be made in that system. Limit the number of breaks, number of matches, have national teams communicate more with clubs so that so many players don't come back injured from every international break. As it is, it's insane! Real Madrid is definitely to blame. That being said, they are definitely not the only ones to blame. It's just a nature of things, Real Madrid is the most successful club in Europe, and as such it sticks out way more than less successful and less popular clubs. Let's be honest, Madrid saying they won't be playing in CL raises every eyebrow in the football world. On the other hand, Arsenal saying the same would only get a "yeah, we know." Sorry for taking your club as an example, Arsenal fans of this board, it's just that Arsenal is the club that has the least chances of qualifying for CL next season our of all 12 clubs involved. Just out of curiosity, wouldn't special legislation directed at football clubs constitute government's involvement in football matters and, as such, go against rules and regulations of FIFA and UEFA which could result in national FA being banned from international competitions? National FAs maybe? There are 4 FAs in the UK and I guess they would all be affected by this legislation. A lot of people don't like UEFA and wouldn't be against cutting UEFA out. That's why this whole thing is so frustrating - it's been so poorly planned and executed even worse that it effectively killed any leverage clubs had to enforce any kind of changes. No, all that data is still applicable. Had Saudis bought Newcastle last summer it's quite likely there would be another club at the top in a few years. Also, we are talking about competitions with long traditions. What happened 50 years ago is in no way meaningless. You do need to separate from franchise-oriented sport if you want to understand European leagues and sports in general, that's not limited to football. Premier League has changed things but most of it was technicalities, the essence remained the same. There's no false sense of romance there, it's 100+ years of traditions, some pretty crazy rides clubs, teams and supporters took during that period, generations of people being raised as supporters of their clubs, making watching the matches (either in the stadium or on TV) family events, it's about club representing you and your friends and family. It's so much more than yelling "defense! defense!" with your mouth full of hot-dogs and that abomination you Americans call beer. And it's ok that you don't understand that (yet), but it's horrible that people who own these clubs apparently don't understand it either.

Yeah, I'm sure that CL ratings dropping for years had nothing to do with clubs worrying about their long-term income.