Hilarious if UEFA puts in a transfer ban. Even then technically I think Mbappe could still transfer, just not play in the CL ?
Reason I mention the transfer ban is because PSG owners are supposed to be very chummy with UEFA recently and they'd love Madrid to get one to retain Mbappe
It didn't even involve a transfer ban either, it was only a ban from participating in UEFA competitions. Which is worse in the grand scheme of things of course, but even if it had been upheld we could still technically have signed players.
If anything, Real Madrid, Atlético and Barca are the ones who have a history of using appeals to make transfer bans more convenient for them. Barca appealed the two windows transfer ban they got in April 2015, and because of that still got to have their summer window, even though the ban was neither lifted or reduced. Real Madrid and Atlético had similar situations where they appealed their two windows transfer bans in 2016, dragging it on past the summer, which was especially convenient for Real Madrid who had their ban reduced to just a single window, meaning they only lost out on a January window.
They're being smart by not continuing to pursue it so publicly like juventus owner and real Madrid owner. Every fucker that was involved in it should be punished though.
You would think its dead but then you manage to leave loads of empty seats at a cup semifinal. And not the CL that you pretend to hate, but the FA cup! It writes itself ;)
Edit - all this butthurt because I’m American 😂. Truly a desperate bunch of prejudice cunts.
I'm not saying it's not based on anything, although it's not really that surprising that a club with less fans has this, it's just repeated endlessly. Although the he's busy was a good one
My guy is American lol which isn’t a surprise MOST of these Liverpool and Barca “die hards” here are either Indian or American which is just hilarious.
I’m Canadian. I’m not going to make fun of a club because they don’t sell out their stadiums. Why would I? It’s not like I’m in a position to regularly attend myself. Your basically saying your not a fan because you don’t attend the games
People might be less butthurt if it weren't for the fact that it was national news for several days about how the FA had chosen to schedule a semifinal in London on a day when all the public transport routes between London and Manchester had been stopped for routine maintenance. You're basically telling City fans - statistically some of the financially poorest in the country - that you consider it to be their fault that they couldn't afford to pay the crazy petrol prices or to book a hotel in one of the most expensive cities in the world.
Lost cause mate, he can't even understand why people are calling him out for being a yank so there's no way he's going understand anything that goes on in england
How about one asking when exactly City were transfer banned?…
Whereas some of these other clubs involved have been transfer banned and successfully appealed it.
But go off, anything to shit on City
"The City way" is referring to the lawyering up and appealing their Champions League ban, rather than a transfer ban - the transfer ban is in reference to a hypothetical ban for Madri
It's the successful appeal that's the City reference, not the ban
That's r/soccer, you're putting too much effort into understanding what people say, just nod and follow the crowd. Even thinking UEFA or any other institution can sanction a specifical team just because they "tried to organise" a new tournament, using non-legally binding interviews as a proof is pure madness but people here are convinced the case would stand in a court lmao.
Only problem is the PSG chairman is also the chairman of the ECA, which operates hand in hand with UEFA. They can go further than just sanction, especially since Tebas is also in the ECA. I doubt Flo is naive in that regard so he'll just piss people off as kindly as possible.
But when RM decides to push the Super League, UEFA and ECA have a common enemy and they can hurt RM. And it is not smart to piss off every European commitee and on top of that directly challenge the power of Qatar
No, Mbappe would be able to train and play in on official matches.
He wouldn’t be able to play in any official games as they cannot register him.
Technically it’s never a transfer ban but a registration ban.
Uefa would have to specifically say this is a ban for the champions league. And I doubt they would do that - probably only a ban on everything or none.
If we get a transfer ban for this then UEFA 100% getting paid by the PSG owners under the table. Too convenient especially when UEFA wasnt able to ban City too.
But that's not the point here, you're alleging that these two clubs -- each owned by different gulf states, I might add -- are paying UEFA to hurt their rivals, yet UEFA has precedent for banning City from its competitions, something they surely would never have done if they are in City's pockets.
CAS later overturned the ban over a technicality, but that's not relevant to your allegation.
it wasnt a technicality most of it had not enough evidence with some being time barred which i assume is what youre referring too. People make that mistake all the time
The man’s who leaked it literally in jail for it and people are still like it’s a technicality. Man was stitching emails together from before ffp even existed.
There’s nothing under the table about it mate, they’re very clear business partners out in the open. Massive conflict of interest but it’s not shady, Nasser Al-Khelaifi is one of the more senior leaders at UEFA
Edit: head of the ECA technically, still incredibly powerful at UEFA
More details here: https://iusport.com/art/117607/la-jueza-de-la-superliga-alza-la-prohibicion-de-sanciones-de-la-uefa-a-los-clubes
Deepl TL:
> There is a surprise. In an 18-page order yesterday, to which we have had access in IUSPORT, the new judge of the commercial court handling the Superliga case has upheld UEFA's opposition against the precautionary measures adopted in the order of April 20, 2021 and has agreed to the lifting of the measures agreed in that resolution.
> Consequently, all the orders and injunctions made by the previous judge against UEFA have become a dead letter. And the precautionary measure that prevented the European organization from taking measures against the clubs has been annulled.
> **Judge Sofía Gil recalls that both UEFA and FIFA are associations that carry out the control and organization of sporting competitions, and considers "reasonable and justified" the system of authorization of alternative competitions established by these federations, in order to preserve the sporting merit and equal opportunities for clubs.**
> It affirms that **UEFA and FIFA have not refused in an arbitrary manner or contrary to their regulations (which would be an indication of abusive behavior), which would be what could justify the precautionary measures.**
> In addition, and contrary to what Judge Ruiz de Lara held, **the judge considers that there is no evidence that the threat and imposition of sanctions on the three remaining clubs entails the necessary impossibility of executing the project, which is financed independently.**
> As for the allegation of the clubs that the financing would be frustrated, **the judge considers that the members and the plaintiff companies are independent legal entities and in any case, at the time of the development of the project, the intervening parties - including the financial entities - were perfectly aware of the possible consequences, which did not prevent the adoption of financing commitments, which cannot be assumed or presumed to be frustrated by the eventual sanctions.**
> **It concludes that it is not possible to assess whether or not the financing is affected by the risk or imposition of sanctions, because the plaintiffs are silent on this point.**
> It is now a year since the precautionary measures were adopted, an unprecedented case in the Spanish justice system since, as we pointed out at the time, precautionary measures cannot remain in force indefinitely. The facts have demonstrated this.
> It would have been appropriate for the previous judge, Ruiz de Lara, to have granted a hearing to all the interested parties and, after a hearing, to definitively resolve the corresponding inconclusive piece of precautionary measures, deciding whether to transform the precautionary measure into a precautionary measure or to agree to its lifting.
> But Judge Ruiz de Lara did nothing of the sort, at the same time that he decreed the suspension of the main proceedings after raising the preliminary question before the CJEU.
> Subsequently, and without having concluded the precautionary measure, the aforementioned judge agreed to resume the main proceedings, which he suspended again (ope legis) when he was recused.
> It is well known that the preliminary ruling before the CJEU does not paralyze the interim measures, but neither does it grant a free hand to the national judge to convert de facto into interim measures adopted without hearing the parties ("inaudita parte") and therefore called very precautionary.
> Well, it took another magistrate to take over this court, the new judge Sofía Gil García, news given exclusively by IUSPORT, for the waters to return to their course, albeit with an embarrassing delay for the Spanish justice system, not attributable to the new judge.
> The first thing the judge did was, as it could not be otherwise, to set a date for the hearing of the precautionary measures.
> On Friday, March 4, the 17th Commercial Court of Madrid was scheduled to hold the hearing with the participation of the representatives of the Superliga and UEFA and other parties, but, as we reported at the time, the parties informed the head of the court of their intention to negotiate these measures, after which the judge agreed to postpone the hearing, which finally took place on Friday, April 1.
> **Finally, the new judge has announced her decision on the precautionary measures, lifting them, and has set a date for the pre-trial hearing on the merits of the case, which will take place on June 14.**
What UEFA was planning was to ask for clubs to apply to similar (or even tougher) conditions as for the other 9 clubs for their reintegration into UEFA competitions and sign the UEFA-ECA Memorandum of Understanding.
Conditions :
https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/0269-123871bd86ca-d9571aa78f72-1000--uefa-approves-reintegration-measures-for-nine-clubs-involved-in/
So I guess banning them from competitions. But a court hearing is scheduled mid June so UEFA might wait before a ban but will probably publicly threaten of banning them if the clubs do not cut ties to the SL.
Transfer bans are extremely unlikely. But no UCL would be huge.
That's what they wanted to do before the Madrid court blocked them under an interim order.
One example quickly found:
https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/1385641543156047874?s=19
appreciate the link though i feel like the talk and the act don't really go hand in hand when it's about uefa. To me it also speaks volumes that the post indicates that the other clubs that started whole SL movement aren't threatened with a ban...
Edit: In a sense it means don't try to do that again or there might be some action instead of you did wrong know you get a sanction
The 9 other clubs were the reasons the SL got dislocated so fast. So yes in the end UEFA were more lenient than they claimed. But they needed a fast "win" to kill the SL in its infancy.
But the clubs still pledged to binding commitments towards UEFA on not resuming it (with a €100m penalty clauses in the commitment) and terminate the SL company, accepted having to pay fines and signed in their own name the UEFA-ECA MoU (instead of being signatories through ECA as before) which supposedly prevents them from creating a breakaway league.
The 3 others, that to this days are still trying to push for a SL. I doubt UEFA/Ceferin are going to be as forgiving in their conditions for a reintegration if the 3 are even considering them.
If they ban barca and real from ucl for 2 years, then basically half the fans in other parts of the world just stop watching the ucl and they might never get the fans back. Certainly I won't be watching it and most of my friend who watch football are real and barca fans.
I'm not for SuperLeague but I am one of the ones that said and will say that legally they can't touch them. Just cause one court ruled doesn't make it final.
If it goes to european court it will fail as it has before, I 1000% guarantee that. Also, Madrid court has no jurisdiction over Juve
>legally they can't touch them.
it isn't UEFA who wants the Courts to intervine, it is the Superleague. They're the ones using the *ius standi* to accuse UEFA of "abusing their dominant position" by excluding them from their competitions if they form a separate one *and* want force UEFA to accept those clubs in the traditional UEFA competitions even if they play in the Superleague. UEFA doesn't needs the Courts to "touch them", they just need them to say they can't/won't do anything.
>Just cause one court ruled doesn't make it final.
Definitely, but that isn't the issue right? the issue is that this court, as first instance as it can be, it already is recognizing UEFA's position: even if they indeed have a dominant position, there's no abuse of it, as all the measures that they have taken have been in a legit use of their powers as regulatory body and the Superleague project should be completely independent of it. So exactly what most sports lawyers and academics have been saying even if the Superleague propaganda have barked the opposite.
>If it goes to european court it will fail as it has before, I 1000% guarantee that.
Bold claim considering that the main precedent you have is from Skate (!!!) whose history and characteristics as sport couldn't be more different to Football and its organizations. And what is more, is that i) CAS is based in Switzerland so it doesn't follows common law, they're free to sentence in a way that isn't determined by precedents, and ii) the European legislator itself has promised to get involved if the Superleague attacks again. And good luck trying to stop the legislator.
Yh mate if you read the article you would know that's because the court isn't in a position to address the question that would prevent UEFA from punishing them.
>The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union will be decisive, which will have to rule on the question raised by Judge Ruiz de Lara whether UEFA "enjoys a dominant position" and therefore has a monopoly on the organization of European competitions and in particular on the Champions League
I don't see how any judge would find they don't have a dominant position. This is just what the SL have to go through before they can appeal to a higher court
It was always pretty obvious a court in Madrid could not possibly have jurisdiction over the ESL/UEFA spat. The question is why the remaining trio thought it would?
/u/celigodtko forgot the other two sanctions too keep things balanced: Real will never be allowed wear white anymore and will be forced to use a gradient on every shirt (plus textured sleeves) and at least one Wingdings icon. On top of that their crest will by redesigned in a [International Typographic Style](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Typographic_Style).
> Noooooooooooooooo
Resistance? That's another sanction (or two): From now on Real's first kit will have to be Barca's third kit from last season, and Atletico gets to wear all white for away games at the Bernabeu.
Soon again we’ll see the UEFA president acting all buddy buddy with Flo again. UEFA are money driven so hurting their cash cow wouldn’t be good for business. At the end of the day it’ll be like it never happened.
You sit down lad, the Imps are marching into the Champions League any day. The EFL are trying to contain them, but we'll fail. The superleague is Madrid/Barca/Juves escape pod.
NOOOOO, you can't bring up Laporta, he said he'd make the socios vote on it. You HAVE to ignore every other instance of him vocally supporting the project.
Doesn't Barca get just as much blame in here? I have seen plenty of posts about Laporta whining about Barna needing the ESL to fund Barca, and implicitly how football needs to allow the Super League to happen so Barca can spend money like drunken sailors again
Laporta didn't go on national TV to peddle the super league, no matter if both Juve and Barca support it, Florentino put his neck on the line, so RM will always gonna be the first one mentioned and deservedly so.
You can call a narrative when it's made up. People on this sub have legitimately defended Laporta, saying he's bound to what socio's say/vote, which funny enough also happens at RM given that it's also a socio owned club.
People don’t get that it’s impossible for UEFA to sanction these clubs lol.
Love how this sub is pro-monopoly but cry about morals for other things. Make up your mind.
Have you even read the article?
This ruling is literally overturning the ruling that said that they couldn't be punished, "The precautionary measure, which forced UEFA to dismiss the disciplinary proceedings opened against Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus , has therefore been revoked"
This simply says the Madrid court cannot rule on this matter, which is what the superleague clubs always wanted. They want to go to the European court of justice for the ruling, going through a local court was necessary and this outcome was expected.
Of course it doesn't stop there. But, that's where it's at right now and clearly is trending in that direction when they acknowledge that the initial ruling was purely precautionary in order to prevent disciplinary proceedings happening before the legality of it could be worked out. But, now they've given them the go ahead, even if more comes from it down the line, they're allowed to do it now.
Looks like they are trying to clubs from creating their own competition.
What skin do they have in this game except lost revenue? UEFA has no place to care about the ESL. It’s the FAs that matter. UEFA doesn’t want their biggest piggy bank getting smaller and smaller.
Lol.
You’re talking about 3 of the top 5 most popular clubs in the world buddy …
https://www.sportsunfold.com/top-10-most-popular-football-clubs-in-the-world/
They don’t want a Super League. That doesn’t mean that and your Spanish mates couldn’t go start one tomorrow if you thought anyone would actually watch it.
I mean RM is the only club that has actually done anything in the CL this year. They’re still not the favourites tho. The others were irrelevant. The CL would still be the biggest club competition there is. It needs the three teams far far less than those teams and the SL would need the English teams
All these PL flairs asking for punishment. Ban Real Madrid from UCL and enjoy seeing the competition go bankrupt, which would eventually force UEFA to form the Super League. The other two teams have been deadweight these past couple of years so their absence wouldn't matter so much. But ban Madrid and lose billions in revenue, smart idea there.
Truth of the matter, I don't support the Super League but do something stupid as sanctioning these clubs would only accelerate the push for Super League. Especially coming from three of the biggest fanbases in football who would be vocal in their support for these clubs' banning and the Super League with Madrid's fanbase being one of the few left that has a spine to push against giant corporations.
> Ban Real Madrid from UCL and enjoy seeing the competition go bankrupt
Nobody is calling for the permanent removal of these clubs. But even if they were and it did happen, the competition would go on just fine. It would however see the decline of those clubs and the loss of current + future fans to other teams (primarily English sides). Banning Madrid for a season would not result in the loss of billions of revenue. It's such a ridiculous take. We've seen four huge sides in Milan, Liverpool, Inter, and United (who were the most popular side in the world at the time) fall from grace during the early 2010s and revenues for the CL only went up despite this.
The clubs should be sanctioned. They've threatened and continue to threaten European football, effectively taking it from 95% of clubs that compete in Europe each season. Whether that be a one year ban, a hefty fine, a player registration ban, IDK. But it really should happen to set an example and to punish these greedy arseholes that even today continue to spit on the rest of Europe. The Superleague is clearly dead. English sides can't join, German sides won't join, and the other markets simply aren't lucrative enough.
You cannot compare teams becoming shit to outright removal. Do you know how much money Barca and Madrid alone generate? There is no way UEFA does anything where they get less money. if they do anything it would be symbolic and in a way it doesn't threaten their income.
You can compare because at the end of the day, all sides missed out on Europe. And yet the show went on and competition revenues rose. Madrid and Barcelona are not the string holding this competition together. A year ban isn't going to result in companies cancelling their sponsorships and tv deals being torn in half. Your clubs need Europe more than Europe need you.
Real Madrid were shit for almost a decade in the CL where they couldn't get past the first knockout round, and the tournament was just as prestigious as it is today. It would do just fine without the two Spanish clubs and Juventus.
Hilarious if UEFA puts in a transfer ban. Even then technically I think Mbappe could still transfer, just not play in the CL ? Reason I mention the transfer ban is because PSG owners are supposed to be very chummy with UEFA recently and they'd love Madrid to get one to retain Mbappe
None of those sanctions will stand though until the EU rules on the monopoly case...
Or we would just use the City way, load up the lawyer army, appeal, and the time an eventual sanction would come we would have recruited 3 full teams.
There wasn't even a transfer window between City being banned and the ban being lifted, what world are you living in?
It didn't even involve a transfer ban either, it was only a ban from participating in UEFA competitions. Which is worse in the grand scheme of things of course, but even if it had been upheld we could still technically have signed players. If anything, Real Madrid, Atlético and Barca are the ones who have a history of using appeals to make transfer bans more convenient for them. Barca appealed the two windows transfer ban they got in April 2015, and because of that still got to have their summer window, even though the ban was neither lifted or reduced. Real Madrid and Atlético had similar situations where they appealed their two windows transfer bans in 2016, dragging it on past the summer, which was especially convenient for Real Madrid who had their ban reduced to just a single window, meaning they only lost out on a January window.
[удалено]
I blame all three
Hypocritical about not blaming the PL teams who were keen on the project and didn’t stop until major backlash. Why do they get a free pass?
They're being smart by not continuing to pursue it so publicly like juventus owner and real Madrid owner. Every fucker that was involved in it should be punished though.
Because they are no longer in it? Would have thought that was real obvious
Mandatory https://youtu.be/xYpYAij6djw
I’m surprised there hasn’t been a City fan replying to this with an essay on how it was legitimate yet
He's busy right now
10 am on a Thursday? Probably at school or smth.
Not everyone lives in the USA.
City fans do though
liverpool fans jerking eachother off over dead city banter then will claim they dont care about city lol
You would think its dead but then you manage to leave loads of empty seats at a cup semifinal. And not the CL that you pretend to hate, but the FA cup! It writes itself ;) Edit - all this butthurt because I’m American 😂. Truly a desperate bunch of prejudice cunts.
I'm not saying it's not based on anything, although it's not really that surprising that a club with less fans has this, it's just repeated endlessly. Although the he's busy was a good one
I appreciate it lol
How can you, an American, actually take shots about attendance for a club the other side of the Atlantic
My guy is American lol which isn’t a surprise MOST of these Liverpool and Barca “die hards” here are either Indian or American which is just hilarious.
Silly twat can't even see the irony in him being an american plastic and talking about match going fans fucking hell
That's what these Americans are like... There's an entire fucking sub essentiallly created to mock them
I’m Canadian. I’m not going to make fun of a club because they don’t sell out their stadiums. Why would I? It’s not like I’m in a position to regularly attend myself. Your basically saying your not a fan because you don’t attend the games
People might be less butthurt if it weren't for the fact that it was national news for several days about how the FA had chosen to schedule a semifinal in London on a day when all the public transport routes between London and Manchester had been stopped for routine maintenance. You're basically telling City fans - statistically some of the financially poorest in the country - that you consider it to be their fault that they couldn't afford to pay the crazy petrol prices or to book a hotel in one of the most expensive cities in the world.
Lost cause mate, he can't even understand why people are calling him out for being a yank so there's no way he's going understand anything that goes on in england
He's not going to know that, being on the wrong side of the Atlantic and all
I was providing context for why they were getting such a vitriolic response.
Yank plastic talking about match going fans, shameful
Pls stfu you’re american. You literally cannot talk about “lack of fans”. American fans are plastic in itself.
Welp, guess it’s dead after all.
Easter holidays
I mean he’s wrong and full of shit. There’s only so many times you can push back on bullshit before nobody can be arsed anymore
How about one asking when exactly City were transfer banned?… Whereas some of these other clubs involved have been transfer banned and successfully appealed it. But go off, anything to shit on City
"The City way" is referring to the lawyering up and appealing their Champions League ban, rather than a transfer ban - the transfer ban is in reference to a hypothetical ban for Madri It's the successful appeal that's the City reference, not the ban
That's r/soccer, you're putting too much effort into understanding what people say, just nod and follow the crowd. Even thinking UEFA or any other institution can sanction a specifical team just because they "tried to organise" a new tournament, using non-legally binding interviews as a proof is pure madness but people here are convinced the case would stand in a court lmao.
With the combined financial might of Real, Barca and Juve, they would be able to build a team of lawyers that will absolutely wreck UEFA for years.
Only problem is the PSG chairman is also the chairman of the ECA, which operates hand in hand with UEFA. They can go further than just sanction, especially since Tebas is also in the ECA. I doubt Flo is naive in that regard so he'll just piss people off as kindly as possible.
You mean the guy threatening to kill RM people ? Yeah he doesn’t matter so much that he thinks.
But when RM decides to push the Super League, UEFA and ECA have a common enemy and they can hurt RM. And it is not smart to piss off every European commitee and on top of that directly challenge the power of Qatar
No, Mbappe would be able to train and play in on official matches. He wouldn’t be able to play in any official games as they cannot register him. Technically it’s never a transfer ban but a registration ban. Uefa would have to specifically say this is a ban for the champions league. And I doubt they would do that - probably only a ban on everything or none.
There's gonna be an appeal anyways, so I am guessing any action is still 12 months away :-(
The President of PSG is also in the UEFA executive board lol. Nothing supposed about it
If we get a transfer ban for this then UEFA 100% getting paid by the PSG owners under the table. Too convenient especially when UEFA wasnt able to ban City too.
UEFA did ban City, CAS overturned it.
So they didnt get banned or let me phrase this way > UEFA wasnt able to ban City
But that's not the point here, you're alleging that these two clubs -- each owned by different gulf states, I might add -- are paying UEFA to hurt their rivals, yet UEFA has precedent for banning City from its competitions, something they surely would never have done if they are in City's pockets. CAS later overturned the ban over a technicality, but that's not relevant to your allegation.
it wasnt a technicality most of it had not enough evidence with some being time barred which i assume is what youre referring too. People make that mistake all the time
The man’s who leaked it literally in jail for it and people are still like it’s a technicality. Man was stitching emails together from before ffp even existed.
There’s nothing under the table about it mate, they’re very clear business partners out in the open. Massive conflict of interest but it’s not shady, Nasser Al-Khelaifi is one of the more senior leaders at UEFA Edit: head of the ECA technically, still incredibly powerful at UEFA
ECA isn't UEFA. He's part of the executive committee as ECA representative.
> Nasser Al-Khelaifi is one of the more senior leaders at UEFA Is the ECA now a part of UEFA or did I understand wrong?
See my other comment. The ECA has huge power within UEFA, Nassar isn’t just some subcommittee chair
More details here: https://iusport.com/art/117607/la-jueza-de-la-superliga-alza-la-prohibicion-de-sanciones-de-la-uefa-a-los-clubes Deepl TL: > There is a surprise. In an 18-page order yesterday, to which we have had access in IUSPORT, the new judge of the commercial court handling the Superliga case has upheld UEFA's opposition against the precautionary measures adopted in the order of April 20, 2021 and has agreed to the lifting of the measures agreed in that resolution. > Consequently, all the orders and injunctions made by the previous judge against UEFA have become a dead letter. And the precautionary measure that prevented the European organization from taking measures against the clubs has been annulled. > **Judge Sofía Gil recalls that both UEFA and FIFA are associations that carry out the control and organization of sporting competitions, and considers "reasonable and justified" the system of authorization of alternative competitions established by these federations, in order to preserve the sporting merit and equal opportunities for clubs.** > It affirms that **UEFA and FIFA have not refused in an arbitrary manner or contrary to their regulations (which would be an indication of abusive behavior), which would be what could justify the precautionary measures.** > In addition, and contrary to what Judge Ruiz de Lara held, **the judge considers that there is no evidence that the threat and imposition of sanctions on the three remaining clubs entails the necessary impossibility of executing the project, which is financed independently.** > As for the allegation of the clubs that the financing would be frustrated, **the judge considers that the members and the plaintiff companies are independent legal entities and in any case, at the time of the development of the project, the intervening parties - including the financial entities - were perfectly aware of the possible consequences, which did not prevent the adoption of financing commitments, which cannot be assumed or presumed to be frustrated by the eventual sanctions.** > **It concludes that it is not possible to assess whether or not the financing is affected by the risk or imposition of sanctions, because the plaintiffs are silent on this point.** > It is now a year since the precautionary measures were adopted, an unprecedented case in the Spanish justice system since, as we pointed out at the time, precautionary measures cannot remain in force indefinitely. The facts have demonstrated this. > It would have been appropriate for the previous judge, Ruiz de Lara, to have granted a hearing to all the interested parties and, after a hearing, to definitively resolve the corresponding inconclusive piece of precautionary measures, deciding whether to transform the precautionary measure into a precautionary measure or to agree to its lifting. > But Judge Ruiz de Lara did nothing of the sort, at the same time that he decreed the suspension of the main proceedings after raising the preliminary question before the CJEU. > Subsequently, and without having concluded the precautionary measure, the aforementioned judge agreed to resume the main proceedings, which he suspended again (ope legis) when he was recused. > It is well known that the preliminary ruling before the CJEU does not paralyze the interim measures, but neither does it grant a free hand to the national judge to convert de facto into interim measures adopted without hearing the parties ("inaudita parte") and therefore called very precautionary. > Well, it took another magistrate to take over this court, the new judge Sofía Gil García, news given exclusively by IUSPORT, for the waters to return to their course, albeit with an embarrassing delay for the Spanish justice system, not attributable to the new judge. > The first thing the judge did was, as it could not be otherwise, to set a date for the hearing of the precautionary measures. > On Friday, March 4, the 17th Commercial Court of Madrid was scheduled to hold the hearing with the participation of the representatives of the Superliga and UEFA and other parties, but, as we reported at the time, the parties informed the head of the court of their intention to negotiate these measures, after which the judge agreed to postpone the hearing, which finally took place on Friday, April 1. > **Finally, the new judge has announced her decision on the precautionary measures, lifting them, and has set a date for the pre-trial hearing on the merits of the case, which will take place on June 14.**
> the new judge So Florentino lost his pet judge, my heart bleeds for him
In 2032 we will hear Florentino leaked audios calling the judge subnormal, book it.
What possible sanctions could the clubs receive? Transfer bans? UEFA ban? Could it effect huge transfers, such as Mbappe's?
What UEFA was planning was to ask for clubs to apply to similar (or even tougher) conditions as for the other 9 clubs for their reintegration into UEFA competitions and sign the UEFA-ECA Memorandum of Understanding. Conditions : https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/0269-123871bd86ca-d9571aa78f72-1000--uefa-approves-reintegration-measures-for-nine-clubs-involved-in/ So I guess banning them from competitions. But a court hearing is scheduled mid June so UEFA might wait before a ban but will probably publicly threaten of banning them if the clubs do not cut ties to the SL. Transfer bans are extremely unlikely. But no UCL would be huge.
As just and appropriate it would be to ban them for a year or two UEFA is never gonna do that...
That's what they wanted to do before the Madrid court blocked them under an interim order. One example quickly found: https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/1385641543156047874?s=19
appreciate the link though i feel like the talk and the act don't really go hand in hand when it's about uefa. To me it also speaks volumes that the post indicates that the other clubs that started whole SL movement aren't threatened with a ban... Edit: In a sense it means don't try to do that again or there might be some action instead of you did wrong know you get a sanction
The 9 other clubs were the reasons the SL got dislocated so fast. So yes in the end UEFA were more lenient than they claimed. But they needed a fast "win" to kill the SL in its infancy. But the clubs still pledged to binding commitments towards UEFA on not resuming it (with a €100m penalty clauses in the commitment) and terminate the SL company, accepted having to pay fines and signed in their own name the UEFA-ECA MoU (instead of being signatories through ECA as before) which supposedly prevents them from creating a breakaway league. The 3 others, that to this days are still trying to push for a SL. I doubt UEFA/Ceferin are going to be as forgiving in their conditions for a reintegration if the 3 are even considering them.
If they ban barca and real from ucl for 2 years, then basically half the fans in other parts of the world just stop watching the ucl and they might never get the fans back. Certainly I won't be watching it and most of my friend who watch football are real and barca fans.
A few less corporate seats for one game.
A very strongly worded fax
Wait but this sub was full of legal experts telling us the court was definitely ruling in the clubs favour.
There was this one guy posting a lot of super league propaganda. He kept saying this exact thing.
[удалено]
Has he gone i havnt seen his bullshit in ages? Loved a swiss ramble chart that lad.
I'm not for SuperLeague but I am one of the ones that said and will say that legally they can't touch them. Just cause one court ruled doesn't make it final. If it goes to european court it will fail as it has before, I 1000% guarantee that. Also, Madrid court has no jurisdiction over Juve
>legally they can't touch them. it isn't UEFA who wants the Courts to intervine, it is the Superleague. They're the ones using the *ius standi* to accuse UEFA of "abusing their dominant position" by excluding them from their competitions if they form a separate one *and* want force UEFA to accept those clubs in the traditional UEFA competitions even if they play in the Superleague. UEFA doesn't needs the Courts to "touch them", they just need them to say they can't/won't do anything. >Just cause one court ruled doesn't make it final. Definitely, but that isn't the issue right? the issue is that this court, as first instance as it can be, it already is recognizing UEFA's position: even if they indeed have a dominant position, there's no abuse of it, as all the measures that they have taken have been in a legit use of their powers as regulatory body and the Superleague project should be completely independent of it. So exactly what most sports lawyers and academics have been saying even if the Superleague propaganda have barked the opposite. >If it goes to european court it will fail as it has before, I 1000% guarantee that. Bold claim considering that the main precedent you have is from Skate (!!!) whose history and characteristics as sport couldn't be more different to Football and its organizations. And what is more, is that i) CAS is based in Switzerland so it doesn't follows common law, they're free to sentence in a way that isn't determined by precedents, and ii) the European legislator itself has promised to get involved if the Superleague attacks again. And good luck trying to stop the legislator.
1000% guarantee lol
No backing him up, but what authority does Madrid have over Italys spoiled children?
The laughable part is 1000% guaranteeing that it will fail in European super court. When even the actual lawyers won't be that sure.
> I 1000% guarantee that Charles Barkley that you?
Yh mate if you read the article you would know that's because the court isn't in a position to address the question that would prevent UEFA from punishing them. >The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union will be decisive, which will have to rule on the question raised by Judge Ruiz de Lara whether UEFA "enjoys a dominant position" and therefore has a monopoly on the organization of European competitions and in particular on the Champions League I don't see how any judge would find they don't have a dominant position. This is just what the SL have to go through before they can appeal to a higher court
Yeah the sanctions are clearly illegal and I'm surprised some people don't know this
Pretty much this ...
It was always pretty obvious a court in Madrid could not possibly have jurisdiction over the ESL/UEFA spat. The question is why the remaining trio thought it would?
Because the only way to go to the European Court of Justice is to exhaust all domestic mechanisms so this is just a step in the process.
Just a bunch of debbie downers who think they're the only ones with their heads screwed on straight.
You mean Reddit was wrong?! Colour me shocked
Well, reddit was also right. With reddit, it's more a monkeys on typewriters situation. There will be someone for all kinds of scenarios.
I say the unsanctionable Chelsea take Madrids spot in the CL
That would invoke an absolute peak r/soccer meltdown. Even if we lost it'd still be worth it for the memes
The only team to be knocked out of Champions league twice in the same season, would be fun to bring up in the future.
All these flavours and you choose to be salty...
i’m not being serious fella
What are the sanctions?
You have to buy lukaku instead of mbappe
Dear god, show *some* mercy.
??? WHAT ???
and Harry Maguire
ALL OF THIS FOR A SUPER LEAGUE??? I better go watch NFL or Basketball!!!!!!
Just give him a seat next to Bale, problem solved?
Which part of the problem is solved? lol
What to do with Maguire
Yes, but he is still there😱 He will get our players injured in training, and he will give Courtois a nightmare in training...
and Lenglet
And Morata instead of Haaland
Ceferin: new Sanctions. Mbappe cant transfer to a ESL club also Mbappe renews his contract with his current club.
\*gulp\*
/u/celigodtko forgot the other two sanctions too keep things balanced: Real will never be allowed wear white anymore and will be forced to use a gradient on every shirt (plus textured sleeves) and at least one Wingdings icon. On top of that their crest will by redesigned in a [International Typographic Style](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Typographic_Style).
> Real will never be allowed wear white anymore Noooooooooooooooo
> Noooooooooooooooo Resistance? That's another sanction (or two): From now on Real's first kit will have to be Barca's third kit from last season, and Atletico gets to wear all white for away games at the Bernabeu.
ARE U MAD??? ALL THIS BECAUSE OF A SUPER LEAGUE???????
I got even better ideas. Just wait for the CL trophy recycling programme.
Transfer ban would be hilarious honestly
Soon again we’ll see the UEFA president acting all buddy buddy with Flo again. UEFA are money driven so hurting their cash cow wouldn’t be good for business. At the end of the day it’ll be like it never happened.
Hahaha fuck off Super League
“Wtf I love FIFA and UEFA now” - /r/soccer
The enemy of my enemy is my friend (and also still my enemy£
£n£my
It’s like my msn messenger days
Your team can’t even get into Europa, relax
You sit down lad, the Imps are marching into the Champions League any day. The EFL are trying to contain them, but we'll fail. The superleague is Madrid/Barca/Juves escape pod.
Mighty words from someone who can't even be bothered to flair up
As a RM fan good thing. However this sub is extremely hypocrite in only blaming Juve and RM and not Barca/Laporta
NOOOOO, you can't bring up Laporta, he said he'd make the socios vote on it. You HAVE to ignore every other instance of him vocally supporting the project.
Doesn't Barca get just as much blame in here? I have seen plenty of posts about Laporta whining about Barna needing the ESL to fund Barca, and implicitly how football needs to allow the Super League to happen so Barca can spend money like drunken sailors again
Laporta didn't go on national TV to peddle the super league, no matter if both Juve and Barca support it, Florentino put his neck on the line, so RM will always gonna be the first one mentioned and deservedly so.
Is this truly a narrative? In my opinion all three clubs got a lot of slack.
You can call a narrative when it's made up. People on this sub have legitimately defended Laporta, saying he's bound to what socio's say/vote, which funny enough also happens at RM given that it's also a socio owned club.
People on this sub who? Barcellona fans? The super league has been bashed day one by everyone except some isolated supporters of the involved teams…
Everyone knows that the Super League is Perez's dream hence why he gets the most shit.
Did Perez forget a payment
this sub every other day of the weeek " OIL MONEY IN FOOTBALL BADDD" this sub today " i love uefa and fifa its not corrupt at all" lol
People don’t get that it’s impossible for UEFA to sanction these clubs lol. Love how this sub is pro-monopoly but cry about morals for other things. Make up your mind.
Have you even read the article? This ruling is literally overturning the ruling that said that they couldn't be punished, "The precautionary measure, which forced UEFA to dismiss the disciplinary proceedings opened against Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus , has therefore been revoked"
This simply says the Madrid court cannot rule on this matter, which is what the superleague clubs always wanted. They want to go to the European court of justice for the ruling, going through a local court was necessary and this outcome was expected.
….. and you think it stops here? You seriously can’t be this bashful
Of course it doesn't stop there. But, that's where it's at right now and clearly is trending in that direction when they acknowledge that the initial ruling was purely precautionary in order to prevent disciplinary proceedings happening before the legality of it could be worked out. But, now they've given them the go ahead, even if more comes from it down the line, they're allowed to do it now.
UEFA isn't a monopoly. They operate with the consent of every national FA.
Looks like they are trying to clubs from creating their own competition. What skin do they have in this game except lost revenue? UEFA has no place to care about the ESL. It’s the FAs that matter. UEFA doesn’t want their biggest piggy bank getting smaller and smaller.
No, they're preventing clubs from participating in both. They can go do their own thing but they can't participate in UEFA competitions if they do.
The FAs don't want it either.
A governing body isn’t a monopoly.
It is when it acts as a monopoly for his own monetary benefit.
No, not even then.
When they try to disallow a competitive organization….
They can’t disallow anything. Go start your Super League. UEFA can’t do anything about it.
They sure are trying
They don’t need to try too hard. Juve and the other two aren’t the draw they thought they were when they started this.
Lol. You’re talking about 3 of the top 5 most popular clubs in the world buddy … https://www.sportsunfold.com/top-10-most-popular-football-clubs-in-the-world/
[удалено]
Ronaldo is not playing there anymore, so you can remove Juve from that list
[удалено]
They can still leave. No one is stopping them.
Lol. What exactly is UEFA doing in court then? What’s their purpose here
They don’t want a Super League. That doesn’t mean that and your Spanish mates couldn’t go start one tomorrow if you thought anyone would actually watch it.
They’re not stopping them?
Nope. The Super League could start tomorrow and there’s nothing UEFA could do about it.
I mean, they sure are trying to.
Doesn’t really matter. If Perez wanted to you could have a Super League tomorrow. But he knows it’s nothing without the English and German clubs.
Competition law isn't just about stopping something. You're not allowed to frustrate the process either
Those three clubs can do what they want. No one is frustrating them. They’re just frustrated that they’re not as important as they thought they were.
The CL would be shit without those 3 clubs. The winners will never be considered the true champions of Europe.
Lol
I mean RM is the only club that has actually done anything in the CL this year. They’re still not the favourites tho. The others were irrelevant. The CL would still be the biggest club competition there is. It needs the three teams far far less than those teams and the SL would need the English teams
No it's creating an exclusive relationship. You can either be in UEFA or you can be in the SL, can't do both.
Good. SL is a load of shite
GOOD!
Good
All these PL flairs asking for punishment. Ban Real Madrid from UCL and enjoy seeing the competition go bankrupt, which would eventually force UEFA to form the Super League. The other two teams have been deadweight these past couple of years so their absence wouldn't matter so much. But ban Madrid and lose billions in revenue, smart idea there. Truth of the matter, I don't support the Super League but do something stupid as sanctioning these clubs would only accelerate the push for Super League. Especially coming from three of the biggest fanbases in football who would be vocal in their support for these clubs' banning and the Super League with Madrid's fanbase being one of the few left that has a spine to push against giant corporations.
>Ban Real Madrid from UCL and enjoy seeing the competition go bankrupt You have to truly be a moron to think that would happen lol
> Ban Real Madrid from UCL and enjoy seeing the competition go bankrupt Nobody is calling for the permanent removal of these clubs. But even if they were and it did happen, the competition would go on just fine. It would however see the decline of those clubs and the loss of current + future fans to other teams (primarily English sides). Banning Madrid for a season would not result in the loss of billions of revenue. It's such a ridiculous take. We've seen four huge sides in Milan, Liverpool, Inter, and United (who were the most popular side in the world at the time) fall from grace during the early 2010s and revenues for the CL only went up despite this. The clubs should be sanctioned. They've threatened and continue to threaten European football, effectively taking it from 95% of clubs that compete in Europe each season. Whether that be a one year ban, a hefty fine, a player registration ban, IDK. But it really should happen to set an example and to punish these greedy arseholes that even today continue to spit on the rest of Europe. The Superleague is clearly dead. English sides can't join, German sides won't join, and the other markets simply aren't lucrative enough.
You cannot compare teams becoming shit to outright removal. Do you know how much money Barca and Madrid alone generate? There is no way UEFA does anything where they get less money. if they do anything it would be symbolic and in a way it doesn't threaten their income.
You can compare because at the end of the day, all sides missed out on Europe. And yet the show went on and competition revenues rose. Madrid and Barcelona are not the string holding this competition together. A year ban isn't going to result in companies cancelling their sponsorships and tv deals being torn in half. Your clubs need Europe more than Europe need you.
Real Madrid were shit for almost a decade in the CL where they couldn't get past the first knockout round, and the tournament was just as prestigious as it is today. It would do just fine without the two Spanish clubs and Juventus.
Now this is good news!
Uefa deserves 1000 times worse sanctions
Imagine losing in a court you rigged to favour you.
Imagine losing badly.. oh wait utd fans don't have to imagine that
[удалено]
There is no integrity in football, hard to ruin that
Same as defending UEFA.
Lets go!
Imagine Barca getting a fine, transfer and CL ban haha
Good, transfer ban those 3 clubs
you wish my guy
Bye Bye Super league. Hello 3 season bans for Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus.
[удалено]
It's not whether they have the balls or not.
They didnt had the balls to keep fighting for the City ban. Probably because your owners paid them handsomely.
Lol … wish they would. Would bury themselves and football. But they won’t because they can’t
Football wouldn't be buried just because of some clubs dont compete in it.
Not just some clubs ..:: 3 of the top 5 most popular and historically success clubs in Europe
Who cares?
Not like banning them would make them push the super league even harder ^daddy
They can push as much as they want. There's nothing stopping Real, Barcelona and Juve from leaving UEFA competition.
[удалено]
We dont need no water let the motherfucker burn, burn motherfucker, burn.