(UEFA) Football Thread - Football not Soccer
- Thread starter Jax
- Start date
Not surprising that match-day revenue is much higher. Even though I prefer the German model of full stadiums and low ticket prices.
The problem is that Italian football totally didn't capitalize on the dominant period of the 1990's. They just wasted money on transfers and wages instead of improving the infrastructure. That's even more sad because the stadiums built for 1990 almost all had athletic tracks for whatever the hell reason.
Way to completely screw up and lose the dominant position in Europe. Quality in the league has been recovering in the last years, though so there's some hope.
Well, I'm curious to see if Platini's Financial Fair Play plan will have any impact. There's plenty of ways to bypass the rules but they can't be completely ignored. Next season will be the first season to be monitored.
That's what you get for having the most stupid president in Serie A. They already lost Del Neri (who then ended up screwing up at Juve) last summer and then were stupid enough to sell both Cassano (to Milan for no money at all) and Pazzini (to Inter), their best players of the previous season.
Way to go from 4th place to relegation.
Not surprising that match-day revenue is much higher. Even though I prefer the German model of full stadiums and low ticket prices.Clubs in the Premier League fall into two camps - 1. the big clubs that can charge whatever they like for tickets and still sell out - 2. the smaller clubs who could charge peanuts and still not get any bigger attendances than they already do.
In theory though, I have to say, I prefer the logic of the German model myself. Surely better to bring in the same matchday income but have a full ground of support cheering your team on.....?!
Yes, that's true. Through the 90s Italian football was totally dominant. The English sides were still trying to find their way back into the European game after coming back from the ban, and Spanish football was out of sorts at the time. Italian football, and the likes of Milan and Juventus just completely dominated.
Italian football will come good again, it all works in cycles - England, Spain and Italy all go through booms and busts. We've had Spanish dominance, Italian dominance, English dominance all down the history of the European Cup/Champions League, with the odd exceptions every now and then (Bayern, Ajax, Porto etc).
I doubt it'll make a massive amount of difference to be honest, and to be fair, even if it does then it predominantly protects the likes of Barcelona, Man Utd etc who can generate the most football-related income. What we're likely to see however is more scenarios like Man City's and the naming rights for their ground. £400m. What next, Sheikh Mansour sponsored half-time burger and chips? The rich clubs, particularly those with mega-rich benefactors will just find ways to pump money into their clubs. They'll need to be a bit more creative, but it'll happen.
Was Cassano in the final year of his contract? They'd have been as well holding on to him and letting him see out the season, at least preserve top-flight football.
Pazzini, fantastic little striker. I think he's the type of striker that would actually do well over here.
Well, hopefully Serie B football will be a short-term visitation!
Wenger still trying to hold onto Fabregas and Nasri, if they both leave I feel Arsenal could drop out the top 4. IMO I'd sell Fabregas for around £32 million + Bojan and a 2 year loan option for that youngster Thiago Alcantara. As for Nasri I would say to him right sign a 1 year extenstion and you can leave next summer for £15 million clause in contract and we will raise your wages for this season. I would then move Nasri into Fabregas former central position.
Other buys Juan Mata for the left wing would be great and they could sell Arshavin. Buy that wizz kid from saints as backup for Walcott who really needs to play more central this season anyway (RVP/Bojan can play wide role at times like Nasri). Enrique from Newcastle would be a cheap solid buy for the LB role and for Cahill £15 million plus Ramsey loan (loan worked great for Wilshere when he was there). I was also surprised Wenger didn't make Given part of the Clichy deal with Man City.
Sell the likes of Almunia, Fabianski, Mannone, Squillaci, Vela, Denilson, Bendtner, Traore, Fabregas, Arshavin + some youth and then loan out some too for the funds.
Other buys Juan Mata for the left wing would be great and they could sell Arshavin. Buy that wizz kid from saints as backup for Walcott who really needs to play more central this season anyway (RVP/Bojan can play wide role at times like Nasri). Enrique from Newcastle would be a cheap solid buy for the LB role and for Cahill £15 million plus Ramsey loan (loan worked great for Wilshere when he was there). I was also surprised Wenger didn't make Given part of the Clichy deal with Man City.
Sell the likes of Almunia, Fabianski, Mannone, Squillaci, Vela, Denilson, Bendtner, Traore, Fabregas, Arshavin + some youth and then loan out some too for the funds.
^ We'll find out later today just who Almunia and Bendtner are in talks with.
Shame Swansea have brought in that goalkeeper from Benfica. I'd have loved to see Almunia go there.
Shame Swansea have brought in that goalkeeper from Benfica. I'd have loved to see Almunia go there.
Pot Six. The shame of it. We are surely not that bad.
Hopefully this is a blessing in disguiuse and we get some teams from pots 3-5 we can actuallly get results against and get ourselves back into the top 80 or something vaguely respectable.
I'm getting very excited for the domestic season now though - the rebuild is complete and we're just a week and half away from kick-off!
Hopefully this is a blessing in disguiuse and we get some teams from pots 3-5 we can actuallly get results against and get ourselves back into the top 80 or something vaguely respectable.
I'm getting very excited for the domestic season now though - the rebuild is complete and we're just a week and half away from kick-off!
It could be the last World Cup (FIFA's -that is) - if the bigger European clubs get their way:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jul/27/european-clubs-breakaway-fifa-uefa
"European clubs will break away from Fifa and Uefa and create their own super league unless the world governing body urgently addresses their growing concerns over international fixtures and finances. It would be the most radical development in the history of football since the first World Cup in 1930, ripping up the established world order of the game and seizing power from Sepp Blatter, Fifa's president.
The Guardian can reveal the background to Karl-Heinz Rummenigge's comments on Tuesday about a "revolution" for football: a European super league that would see the clubs seize control of their own affairs from the regulators. The European game is currently ordered through a memorandum of understanding between clubs and Uefa that was signed three and a half years ago. It runs until 2014, and when it expires the top European clubs will no longer be legally bound to play in Uefa's Champions League or, crucially, to release their players for international friendlies or tournaments, including the World Cup.
In a reflection of their belief that Fifa lacks legitimacy – especially in the wake of the damaging bribery allegations currently surrounding the organisation – the clubs will not shrink from breaking away if they do not receive sufficient guarantees.
A board member of the European Club Association of which Bayern Munich's Rummenigge is president told the Guardian on Wednesday: "The fact that Bayern Munich, who have always been close to the institutions, are being so vocal and loud about the situation is a clear sign we're very close to breaking point. We have a memorandum of understanding with Uefa that expires in 2014. After that time we can no longer be forced to respect Fifa statutes or Uefa regulations. And we won't be obliged to compete in their competitions."
When asked what that would mean for clubs' finances if they were to withdraw from the Champions League, which generates tens of millions of pounds a year for his organisation's richest and most influential members, the ECA board member responded: "Don't be naive. Don't think there would be no alternative competition."
Although the ECA has a broad constituency, representing 197 European clubs, it is the interests of nine in particular that will drive this agenda. They are Real Madrid, Milan, Liverpool, Internazionale, Manchester United, Barcelona, Arsenal, Chelsea and Rummenigge's Bayern. When the Guardian contacted the four English clubs for their views on the matter, all declined to comment. However, a director at one of the clubs said: "[Financially] there is a lot of unfulfilled potential in football as it stands."
The English experience of the past 20 years, since a breakaway group of the leading clubs withdrew from the Football League to form the Premier League (albeit under the auspices of the Football Association), has been exceptionally lucrative for the game domestically and the hawks within the ECA are pushing for a replica at European level.
The news will not come as a surprise at Uefa where in some quarters there is a long-held view that the clubs will seek to go their own way. This has arisen from a number of points of conflict with the world football authorities. As revealed by the Guardian last month there is considerable disquiet about perceived moves to expand the international calendar, forcing clubs to release their expensively remunerated players to national associations without any payback. Fifa denies there have been any discussions about the subject but the ECA source claimed that the matter will be ratified at a Fifa executive-committee meeting in the autumn. As is consistent with relations between Fifa and the clubs, the decision will have been taken without any formal negotiations with the clubs about how the additional fixtures would be accommodated.
There is a further grievance, this time with Uefa about insurance. The ECA alleges Uefa has pulled back from its commitment to provide insurance for players who are called up for international duty. "Uefa said we would have our insurance after their presidential elections [in March]," the source said. "Now the elections have taken place and we're still waiting for talks." A spokesman for Uefa did not respond to the Guardian's call.
Yet despite the details of the enduring dispute between the clubs and Fifa and Uefa, there is an overriding financial motive. "When you have every club losing money every year and the only winners the players and Fifa," the source said, "how can that be allowed to go on?"
For the good of the game? - in that they no longer trust FIFA after it's corruption and attitude to openness and transparency - or the greed of the clubs?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jul/27/european-clubs-breakaway-fifa-uefa
"European clubs will break away from Fifa and Uefa and create their own super league unless the world governing body urgently addresses their growing concerns over international fixtures and finances. It would be the most radical development in the history of football since the first World Cup in 1930, ripping up the established world order of the game and seizing power from Sepp Blatter, Fifa's president.
The Guardian can reveal the background to Karl-Heinz Rummenigge's comments on Tuesday about a "revolution" for football: a European super league that would see the clubs seize control of their own affairs from the regulators. The European game is currently ordered through a memorandum of understanding between clubs and Uefa that was signed three and a half years ago. It runs until 2014, and when it expires the top European clubs will no longer be legally bound to play in Uefa's Champions League or, crucially, to release their players for international friendlies or tournaments, including the World Cup.
In a reflection of their belief that Fifa lacks legitimacy – especially in the wake of the damaging bribery allegations currently surrounding the organisation – the clubs will not shrink from breaking away if they do not receive sufficient guarantees.
A board member of the European Club Association of which Bayern Munich's Rummenigge is president told the Guardian on Wednesday: "The fact that Bayern Munich, who have always been close to the institutions, are being so vocal and loud about the situation is a clear sign we're very close to breaking point. We have a memorandum of understanding with Uefa that expires in 2014. After that time we can no longer be forced to respect Fifa statutes or Uefa regulations. And we won't be obliged to compete in their competitions."
When asked what that would mean for clubs' finances if they were to withdraw from the Champions League, which generates tens of millions of pounds a year for his organisation's richest and most influential members, the ECA board member responded: "Don't be naive. Don't think there would be no alternative competition."
Although the ECA has a broad constituency, representing 197 European clubs, it is the interests of nine in particular that will drive this agenda. They are Real Madrid, Milan, Liverpool, Internazionale, Manchester United, Barcelona, Arsenal, Chelsea and Rummenigge's Bayern. When the Guardian contacted the four English clubs for their views on the matter, all declined to comment. However, a director at one of the clubs said: "[Financially] there is a lot of unfulfilled potential in football as it stands."
The English experience of the past 20 years, since a breakaway group of the leading clubs withdrew from the Football League to form the Premier League (albeit under the auspices of the Football Association), has been exceptionally lucrative for the game domestically and the hawks within the ECA are pushing for a replica at European level.
The news will not come as a surprise at Uefa where in some quarters there is a long-held view that the clubs will seek to go their own way. This has arisen from a number of points of conflict with the world football authorities. As revealed by the Guardian last month there is considerable disquiet about perceived moves to expand the international calendar, forcing clubs to release their expensively remunerated players to national associations without any payback. Fifa denies there have been any discussions about the subject but the ECA source claimed that the matter will be ratified at a Fifa executive-committee meeting in the autumn. As is consistent with relations between Fifa and the clubs, the decision will have been taken without any formal negotiations with the clubs about how the additional fixtures would be accommodated.
There is a further grievance, this time with Uefa about insurance. The ECA alleges Uefa has pulled back from its commitment to provide insurance for players who are called up for international duty. "Uefa said we would have our insurance after their presidential elections [in March]," the source said. "Now the elections have taken place and we're still waiting for talks." A spokesman for Uefa did not respond to the Guardian's call.
Yet despite the details of the enduring dispute between the clubs and Fifa and Uefa, there is an overriding financial motive. "When you have every club losing money every year and the only winners the players and Fifa," the source said, "how can that be allowed to go on?"
For the good of the game? - in that they no longer trust FIFA after it's corruption and attitude to openness and transparency - or the greed of the clubs?
^^
It's against the board rules to quote full articles, next time just post the link and cut out some relevant parts.
I don't really know what to think of this, the Guardian makes a big deal of it, but we've heard that in the past and nothing much has come of.
Here's a goal by Neymar from yesterday, just wow:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yilmHgZntsM[/yt]
It's against the board rules to quote full articles, next time just post the link and cut out some relevant parts.
I don't really know what to think of this, the Guardian makes a big deal of it, but we've heard that in the past and nothing much has come of.
Here's a goal by Neymar from yesterday, just wow:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yilmHgZntsM[/yt]
England
Montenegro
Poland
Ukraine
Moldova
San Marino
Could of been worse but also could of been a lot lot better. I have to admit I am puzzled how Montenegro, Poland and Ukraine are all in different pots.
3 major tricky away games and ENG will not stroll through this group but should come out on top still as our 3 rivals should all take points off each other.
Montenegro
Poland
Ukraine
Moldova
San Marino
Could of been worse but also could of been a lot lot better. I have to admit I am puzzled how Montenegro, Poland and Ukraine are all in different pots.
3 major tricky away games and ENG will not stroll through this group but should come out on top still as our 3 rivals should all take points off each other.
I'm rooting hard for Montenegro, one of my favourite national teams and I think if England shows some weaknesses they have a chance to win this group.
England, even in transition, will walk through that group. Right at the end there was a 50/50 chance of England being drawn in France's group, but that honour went to Spain.
Re the superleague idea, long been a fan of that prospect, but even that aside, anything that wrestles control of football away from FIFA, is IMO, a good thing.
Re the superleague idea, long been a fan of that prospect, but even that aside, anything that wrestles control of football away from FIFA, is IMO, a good thing.
Hear hear!
Meh. Be careful what you wish for. UEFA and FIFA certainly have their flaws but they do occasionally concern themselves with what's good for the sport in general; especially since the smaller federations carry significant power. As a supporter of a club that's absolutely insignificant in the grand scheme of things in Europe I don't see how any good could come out of this for me. The English are just butthurt because they don't rule European football anymore imo and the big clubs are greedy to get a bigger slice of the pie as always
^ Well, I'm not against FIFA as a concept, I'm against the reality of the machinations behind FIFA as a governing body for the sport 
In other news, following the DFB-Pokal was fun yesterday:
Leverkusen, Werder Bremen and Wolfsburg sent crashing in German Cup
In other news, following the DFB-Pokal was fun yesterday:
Leverkusen, Werder Bremen and Wolfsburg sent crashing in German Cup
The problem with the Super League breakaway is that it gives you, as an alternative to Blatter and co, the likes of the Glazers, Abramovich and the president of Real. The moneymen. You can forget any semblance of giving a shit about the fans then.
How would such a league even work? Will it have relegation/promotion (I seriously doubt it - can you imagine United/Munich/Barca getting relegated?) Would it be mid-week? Would anyone other than the first clubs in be allowed to join somehow? What're the criteria for entry (money, probably).
All this because of some shitty international friendlies no one cares about.
How would such a league even work? Will it have relegation/promotion (I seriously doubt it - can you imagine United/Munich/Barca getting relegated?) Would it be mid-week? Would anyone other than the first clubs in be allowed to join somehow? What're the criteria for entry (money, probably).
All this because of some shitty international friendlies no one cares about.
Speak for yourself
I love international football but that could be because my club is Notts Forest and theres nothing exciting about that 
Your country is England and there's nothing exciting about their team either!
