Because, at the moment, they run/own football and its participants (don't forget it's the UEFA Champions League, the UEFA World Cup and so on). It's a not very well disguised form of slavery known as restriction of trade. I've realised I don't actually care very much, any more.
It's more likely a power play for further bias in the champions league structure than something they expect to come to fruition.
GAA?
I read that the teams will carry on in their own leagues.I read that they've said they want to carry on in domestic leagues and CL, but UEFA is saying no. Given they also claim pressure on schedules as a factor in wanting this new league, it doesn't quite add up.
It's the Champions League competition that will suffer.
The first 4 stories on France Info's web site were about this shit. Jesus wept.Just wait till PSG sign up!
No, not the world famous RL competition, but a plan for the top European 11-a-side teams to split off and form a closed shop competition.It's a bit like when Packer's cricket teams split off. UEFA/FIFA couldn't stop anyone playing in another league, but as the natinal sides play in FIFA/UEFA competitions, then those bodies are entitled to state the entry criteria for their competitions.
Much rage:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56794673
What I don't get is
- why clubs shouldn't be allowed to choose to move to a different league if they want to, why should they be legally prevented?
- how can UEFA say they will stop players playing for a national team? How can they say that player X plays in the wrong league and therefore can't play for their country?
- why is everyone so piss-scared of a league with no Promotion/Relegation? P/R is an alien concept in many countries (Oz/US) and doesn't work for many sports in this country (Rugby of either code).
Removing promotion and relegation just entrenches the haves and have-nots in a sport.This. Which raises an interesting possibility if ESL goes ahead and its members remain in their domestic leagues. It will look a bit odd if one or more of them slips out of the top group, let alone top league, nationally, but if we look at some of the members, such as Liverpool or Chelsea, history suggests this is quite likely.
It's like the English Premier League - that was also a breakaway in the search for more money, which has ruined the wider game.The difference with the Premier league was they had the FA on side.
Yes, because the FA were at war with The Football League. The FA ran the FA Cup and the England team, and the Football League ran the rest (which is where the money was). So the Premier League came up, and the FA stuck the boot into the Football League and took what they viewed as their rightful place at the top of the game in control of all the money.It's like the English Premier League - that was also a breakaway in the search for more money, which has ruined the wider game.The difference with the Premier league was they had the FA on side.
The first 4 stories on France Info's web site were about this shit. Jesus wept.Just wait till PSG sign up!
Quote- why is everyone so piss-scared of a league with no Promotion/Relegation? P/R is an alien concept in many countries (Oz/US) and doesn't work for many sports in this country (Rugby of either code).
This is plainly false for Rugby Union. ... I remember when my team (Rotherham) got promoted, we had to meet a range of ground criteria that existing clubs such as Bath didn't have to, got less TV money for playing in the Premiership than Harlequins got for playing in National One that year, and had to wait well after the season finished before we were confirmed as promoted, so after most player transfers had occurred. As it was, we got smashed for a season and then went down, which wasn't great, but at least we have played Premiership Rugby.
Removing promotion and relegation just entrenches the haves and have-nots in a sport. In Rugby Union, that would have been that the whole of the North of England was represented by Sale, for example. In RL, it would have also cemented teams with a rich History such as Halifax and Widnes out of the Super League, and made it pretty much impossible for the sport to spread out of a narrow band of England based mainly around the M62.
The European Super League will have 20 participating clubs - 15 founding ones with five other clubs qualifying each season.
The clubs will play in a new midweek competition with teams continuing to compete in their respective national leagues, the ESL was keen to stress.
Sounds like Mourinho has taken a stand against the ESL. And got sacked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56799400
Spurs face Manchester City in the Carabao Cup final on Sunday.
Sounds like Mourinho has taken a stand against the ESL. And got sacked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56799400QuoteSpurs face Manchester City in the Carabao Cup final on Sunday.
In the what? When I was a small Mr Larrington a carabao was a water buffalo ???
(Googles)
Ah. Apparently it’s what the League Cup is called these days.
The carabao is a domestic swamp-type water buffalo native to the Philippines. Despite the popular notion that this bovine has been declared the national animal of the Philippines, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts of the Philippines has stated that this has no basis in Philippine law.Well that's more interesting than being named after an "energy drink".
Sounds like Mourinho has taken a stand against the ESL. And got sacked.I think he actually got sacked for not being very good.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56799400
Sounds like Mourinho has taken a stand against the ESL. And got sacked.I think he actually got sacked for not being very good.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56799400
Firstly I can't see these teams operating to a salary cap, and if they do it will not be anywhere near low enough to allow the other teams in their national league to compete against them. Secondly how do you run a draft system for 12 clubs in a global sport where they are competing in their national leagues? It's not like giving the twelfth of these at the end of the season first pick is possible unless junior players are going to have release clauses from whichever clubs they are playing for to allow them to 'declare' for the draft, at which point national leagues are little more than college football.There's no plan for a draft. There is a plan for a "spending framework", which is presumably a salary cap by another name.
If they want to go ahead with their midweek league then I suspect the clubs should be punished with immediate points reductions, shall we say 10 points for each unsanctioned game played? Also how are they going to fit these extra games into the calendar given all the concerns about player burn out and the need for a winter break to allow the national sides to be better in summer tournaments?
The first 4 stories on France Info's web site were about this shit. Jesus wept.
No, not the world famous RL competition,Fanciful pronouncement: It's from a commercial disagreement such as this that rugby league, a whole new form of football, was formed. Give it time, an independent structure, player disagreements (odd perhaps that we've heard from clubs, their fans, administrators, pundits, but not players), and several tens of billion of dollars (or euros) and who knows?
the League Cup in EnglandThe Water Buffalo Cup as it shall now be known. Mozzarella for the cup!
I see Tottenham is one of the teams on the list. Remind me again when Spurs were last the Champions of English foopball as she is played?There are a lot of memes going around about the vast success of Spurs when compared to the rest of the 12. I think this may be my favourite: https://twitter.com/Orbinho/status/1384063188216414212
[“1962” – Ed.]
It’s capitalism in action. If the new super league can convince the television bean counters that they are who everyone* wants to watch, they get the TV money and no one else gets a look in. Those on the gravy train at FIFA don’t want completion for thebribesincentives and so threaten the players with not playing for their national teams.
Well Johnson has pledged to stop it which means it's almost certain to go ahead, probably with Dido Harding in charge.Which would be cunning, as everything she touches turns to shit.
I don’t think the audience care one way or another to be honest. As long as they get wall to wall association football streamed into their homes or pubs and that they can support ‘their’ team occasionally, they’ll be happy. I think audience is a better term these days because I associate fan with those chaps that went along to the football grounds of a weekend to support the team they had done so since they were knee high to a grasshopper.It’s capitalism in action. If the new super league can convince the television bean counters that they are who everyone* wants to watch, they get the TV money and no one else gets a look in. Those on the gravy train at FIFA don’t want completion for thebribesincentives and so threaten the players with not playing for their national teams.
Yes, but why is the new superleague seen as any worse for fans than FIFA or EUFA?
Then you aren't listening. Fan reaction from pretty much all the clubs involved has been extremely anti (Spurs fans might be busy with other things). I've not heard/read anyone trying to defend it. There is an article somewhere saying they have done this based on the idea that they can irritate the "legacy fans" because there are enough "new fans" to take their places. Utterly disregarding the idea that "legacy fans" are the ones who go to the game, create the atmosphere, support their team for life etc.I don’t think the audience care one way or another to be honest. As long as they get wall to wall association football streamed into their homes or pubs and that they can support ‘their’ team occasionally, they’ll be happy. I think audience is a better term these days because I associate fan with those chaps that went along to the football grounds of a weekend to support the team they had done so since they were knee high to a grasshopper.It’s capitalism in action. If the new super league can convince the television bean counters that they are who everyone* wants to watch, they get the TV money and no one else gets a look in. Those on the gravy train at FIFA don’t want completion for thebribesincentives and so threaten the players with not playing for their national teams.
Yes, but why is the new superleague seen as any worse for fans than FIFA or EUFA?
Because, at the moment, they run/own football and its participants (don't forget it's the UEFA Champions League, the UEFA World Cup and so on). It's a not very well disguised form of slavery known as restriction of trade. I've realised I don't actually care very much, any more.
Up to a point, Lord Copper. The World Cup is FIFA's, er, ball-game.
Bayern Munich should have been a shoe-in for this caper.They were invited (presumably pressured) but turned it down to stay in the existing structures. Presumably because of 50+1.
Bayern Munich...turned it down to stay in the existing structures. Presumably because of 50+1.Please explain.
Bayern Munich...turned it down to stay in the existing structures. Presumably because of 50+1.Please explain.
Notice there are no German clubs involved. You cannot play in the Bundesliga if commercial investors have more than a 49 percent stake in your club. In other words, the majority vote on anything like this is down to the fans. And the fans say nein to this nonsense in Germany, just like they would everywhere else if they could....
Sounds like Mourinho has taken a stand against the ESL. And got sacked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56799400
Bayern Munich...turned it down to stay in the existing structures. Presumably because of 50+1.Please explain.Notice there are no German clubs involved. You cannot play in the Bundesliga if commercial investors have more than a 49 percent stake in your club. In other words, the majority vote on anything like this is down to the fans. And the fans say nein to this nonsense in Germany, just like they would everywhere else if they could....
Basically in Germany the fans have to hold 50% + 1 vote in the ownership structure of the club, therefore you would have to persuade the supporters association to back the idea for the club to join. Given the current fan reaction and DuncanM's accurate observation about fans being able to afford to travel to 9 european mid week away games, (flights, tickets, hotels, time off work etc.) then this might not be possible with the German clubs.
All fan created flags are going to be removed from Anfield:
According to C4, Jürgen Klopp holds this idea to be a Bad Thing. He continues to rise in my estimation.
According to C4, Jürgen Klopp holds this idea to be a Bad Thing. He continues to rise in my estimation.
1. It's anti-meritocratic, and it makes much of the season meaningless. If it was already in place, then pretty much every team from 3rd to 14th would have nothing riding on their remaining 6 or 7 games. Having consequences to winning/losing is part of what makes a match important.All fair points. I do think that fans are currently knee-jerk reacting to how this was initially perceived as a league above the the PL/La Ligua/etc - once the details actually have time to sink in I think that they will be less worried.
2. It is turning it's back on the European Cup/Champions League heritage. No matter whether you are Real chasing #14, Liverpool chasing #7, or City chasing #1, the European cup and it's successor tournament have come to define the top of European football. To tell fans that the chase is over, that there is some new tournament with a new name and a new trophy, and they will never see their team lift the European Cup (they kept the same cup - it's part of the charm) is a big deal.
3. It's explicitly aimed at keeping the wealthy clubs at the top of the game forever, which makes it more about money than about competition on the field.
4. It stokes the divisions within the local/international fanbase - who can afford to travel to 9 away games in europe?
5. With 6 English teams, that means you'd get to play 2 other English teams at least 4 times a season - that gets boring (see Liverpool Chelsea 2005-9).
I don't think that the German teams and PSG sticking to the CL model has anything to do with 51% fan ownership. I think it's down to their league system and how the clubs operate. Basically, Bayern and PSG would be mid-tier at best in the ESL - it's better for them to play a more cup orientated comp where they have a better chance of winning. The Spanish clubs, with 51% fan ownership, have signed up - this makes sense for them because they could compete in the ESL and if anything it gives their clubs something more competitive than La Ligua.Which makes it all the odder that Spurs have signed up.
Basically, Bayern and PSG would be mid-tier at best in the ESL
I'm just suggesting that once this gets time to calm down and people have a chance to think about it fans will rethink or modify their position.
I can't understand why the government is against this. Huge wealth and power lording it to the detriment of everyone else is exactly what they encourage in all other forms of business. it couldn't be to do with a passing bandwagon and the need to stay ahead in the polls, could it? Surely they wouldn't be so shallow.They must have forgotten to make a suitable donation to the Tory party.
I can't understand why the government is against this. Huge wealth and power lording it to the detriment of everyone else is exactly what they encourage in all other forms of business. it couldn't be to do with a passing bandwagon and the need to stay ahead in the polls, could it? Surely they wouldn't be so shallow.
Also, I think that describing Arsenal and Spurs as the big teams is absurd and demonstrates why locking teams in as overlords is a bad idea. Nottingham Forrest have more Big Cups than Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham, City, and Atletico combined.I think it's as much or more to with their bossing the relevant leagues over the last couple of decades than European victories. At least, that explains Arsenal. For Tottenham I guess it's just because they are one of the richest clubs. (Which itself poses a question: they haven't got money from wining cups and leagues and they don't have a global fanbase like the others – though I wonder if City do too – so it must come from their local fans, the very people they're alienating with this move*. Or maybe just from astute investments?)
Im not buying the view that the removal of the 6 English clubs in the Dirty Dozen from the Premier League would represent the end of the world.The giant driver behind premier league revenues is overseas TV. TV companies struggled during the pandemic, and the French league lost their TV deal when the company that bid massive money for it went into administration. If the Premier League were to expel the 6 biggest clubs, then the overseas TV companies would have all the grounds they need to pull their cash, especially if there is a new competition they would rather show instead. As a neutral, do you watch West Ham vs Leicester, or Barca vs City? Player salaries are guaranteed, you can't just cut player wages. Most premier league clubs last year ran at a significant loss despite over £100m each from TV - if you cut that then everyone will be struggling to stay afloat. Likewise, the "solidarity payment" from the Premier League is what keeps lower league clubs afloat (though they have fewer long term contracts, so might escape out from under the wage bill).
Football clubs have generally used the additional money from recent TV contracts to pay players more, so any reduction in TV revenue from losing these 6 teams would flow through to lower wages. Boo fucking hoo. The TV companies have schedules to fill and will get busy selling Leicester v Everton if they have to.
Four out the top 6 in the Championship have recently been in the top flight so its not like a bunch of no hopers would be parachuted in - and in any event they might take the opportunity to restructure the top league to have fewer than 20 clubs.
While doing everything they can to avoid it, the Premier League ultimately need to be prepared to expel these 6 teams, though it appears that UEFA are preparing to get in there first vis a vis this seasons Champions League.
Still think its brinkmanship mind.
Im not buying the view that the removal of the 6 English clubs in the Dirty Dozen from the Premier League would represent the end of the world.The giant driver behind premier league revenues is overseas TV.
Football clubs have generally used the additional money from recent TV contracts to pay players more, so any reduction in TV revenue from losing these 6 teams would flow through to lower wages. Boo fucking hoo. The TV companies have schedules to fill and will get busy selling Leicester v Everton if they have to.
Four out the top 6 in the Championship have recently been in the top flight so its not like a bunch of no hopers would be parachuted in - and in any event they might take the opportunity to restructure the top league to have fewer than 20 clubs.
While doing everything they can to avoid it, the Premier League ultimately need to be prepared to expel these 6 teams, though it appears that UEFA are preparing to get in there first vis a vis this seasons Champions League.
Still think its brinkmanship mind.
...
I wasnt suggesting that football clubs cut players wages. Football clubs like other business will be able to manage employment costs by cutting their cloth to fit by (i) having fewer employees ....
Overseas TV is the growth market, and the only bit that went up last time. The numbers from that article are all pre-pandemic numbers, which is relevant because BT and Sky negotiated a significant discount on future payments when games were stopped last March. If the 6 most screened clubs suddenly disappeared, I think they would be similarly unhappy.Im not buying the view that the removal of the 6 English clubs in the Dirty Dozen from the Premier League would represent the end of the world.The giant driver behind premier league revenues is overseas TV.
Football clubs have generally used the additional money from recent TV contracts to pay players more, so any reduction in TV revenue from losing these 6 teams would flow through to lower wages. Boo fucking hoo. The TV companies have schedules to fill and will get busy selling Leicester v Everton if they have to.
Four out the top 6 in the Championship have recently been in the top flight so its not like a bunch of no hopers would be parachuted in - and in any event they might take the opportunity to restructure the top league to have fewer than 20 clubs.
While doing everything they can to avoid it, the Premier League ultimately need to be prepared to expel these 6 teams, though it appears that UEFA are preparing to get in there first vis a vis this seasons Champions League.
Still think its brinkmanship mind.
Overseas TV revenue isn't even the majority of the EPLs TV revenue https://media.sportbusiness.com/news/premier-league-rights-value-up-8-to-9-2bn-on-overseas-income/
I wasnt suggesting that football clubs cut players wages. Football clubs like other business will be able to manage employment costs by cutting their cloth to fit by (i) having fewer employees and (ii) amending the terms of contracts as and when they come up for review which tends to happen on a staggered basis. They might also be able to dust down their top earners contracts to see if they contain "force majeur" clause or similar that they might invoke.
The remaining 14 clubs would want none of this voluntarily, but its survivable for them.
...
I wasnt suggesting that football clubs cut players wages. Football clubs like other business will be able to manage employment costs by cutting their cloth to fit by (i) having fewer employees ....
i'm not sure playing with 7 players will be a successful strategy, and any reduction beyond that would mean no games played :demon: :demon:
One problem is that it’s a closed shop and clubs who have won the top-level title a lot more recently than Spurs won't get a look-in, because they’re unfashionable. Also it smells USAnian, where the notion of promotion and relegation is anathema :demon:
One problem is that it’s a closed shop and clubs who have won the top-level title a lot more recently than Spurs won't get a look-in, because they’re unfashionable. Also it smells USAnian, where the notion of promotion and relegation is anathema :demon:
I must be thick, so what?
It is not a sport where the relation between the effort and the success, the effort and the reward, does not exist. It is not a sport where success is already guaranteed or it is not a sport when it doesn’t matter where you lose.
There is the argument that by freeing up places in the Champions League, European football with its accompanying glamour, skill-intensification and money, becomes available to a wider distribution. If winning the, say, Bulgarian league lands you with a CL spot, that intensifies competition and brings money to Bulgarian football.
I must be thick
Chelsea Pitch Owners plc is a nonprofit organisation which is part of Chelsea Football Club, tasked with the upkeep of the stadium. It owns both the freehold of the Stamford Bridge stadium and the naming rights of Chelsea Football Club.
Like all Chelsea FC supporters, the CPO Board is monitoring the proposals for a European Super League as they develop. We will keep in mind our objective, which is to ensure that the Club continues to play football at Stamford Bridge, a ground owned by the Club’s fans.
I don't see the reason for the fuss?.
Any connection to the 'fans' are long gone anyway and they're just marks to milk money from.
I'd loved to see them push ahead, if nothing else as a big FU to UEFA and the PL/FA.
Glad I didn't bother to try and find out what this was all aboutIt's a sports form of Brexit, with England taking back control from European sports. This means next time you ride the Forest Green Rovers 200, you'll have to be on a custom-made Reynolds-tubed bike, with components from Hope and Chater-Lea, a saggy leather saddle and a huge canvas saddle bag. You know you're going to just love it!
It looks very much as though the wheels have already come off the proposal with all six English clubs having a sudden change of heart. Some reports have both Milan sides and Atletico Madrid doing likewise. Barcelona is apparently going to put it to the club members, as if it'll make a difference. I don't think there’s much money to be made out of a series consisting solely of Juventus v. Real Madrid matches.
Plus Neville is a co-owner of Salford City FC who some say have thrown money around and bought their way into the league.I don't see the reason for the fuss?.
Any connection to the 'fans' are long gone anyway and they're just marks to milk money from.
I'd loved to see them push ahead, if nothing else as a big FU to UEFA and the PL/FA.
This is why it grates so much to hear the likes of Sky mouthpiece Gary Neville positioning himself as a moral crusader on this. Sky are largely responsible for making this situation inevitable.
What I don't like is the coefficient bit at the end. Basically that seems to be a sop to the biggest clubs in Europe. Do well in previous seasons of the competition, and you can qualify even if you have a bad year domestically. AS I've heard it described, you could get to the situation where a big team like a Man City or Liverpool could qualify for the CL, when finishing the Premiership below smaller teams with less previous success. I can't see how that would feel fair for a Leicester/Leeds/Everton who would miss out.Kinda, but the smaller clubs doesn't miss out as such. If they finish in the top 4, they get into the CL. The only way that it would be odd is if they come 5th, and a club with a big coefficient come 6th. Then, if the big coefficient club is in the top 2 of clubs ranked by coefficient who have missed out on the CL, they would get an extra space in the CL. It's odd, but it doesn't take anything away from the club in 5th.
I don't understand why they need more games.
Kinda, but the smaller clubs doesn't miss out as such. If they finish in the top 4, they get into the CL.
I agree entirely about the notion of Everton or Leicester being a "small" club. My response was worded that way because of the question, but it's a common way of thinking now - there's the richest 6 who were leaving and then a bunch of smaller clubs. It's down to the giant riches that the Champions League has brought to the ones that frequently finish in the top 4. However, the idea that you can go back to only the winners playing in the CL would only work if the CL had no money associated with it. In a world where the CL gives you up to £100m a season, that entrenches inequality just as much as having the top 4 setup we have now (see countless smaller European leagues where the same team wins year after year after year). 7 clubs have won the PL since 1992, and 3 of those have only won it once. There are probably only 3 or 4 teams that can realistically hope to win it each year. Also, without a "race for top 4" this year, the league would be utterly done. Relegation is sorted, the title is sorted, it's only the CL spots that are being competed over. The Europa League (and Conference!) are more trouble than they are worth.Kinda, but the smaller clubs doesn't miss out as such. If they finish in the top 4, they get into the CL.
This notion of "smaller clubs" needs to be put into context. That's "smaller" within the elite leagues. Even the biggest clubs within the smaller leagues don't get a look in.
I'd be very happy if we went back to only the actual league champions qualifying (plus maybe the previous year's winners). Leeds players were wearing T-shirts the other night proclaiming that clubs should earn the right to play in the "champions" league. I wonder if they'd have felt the same if they were competing for fourth place.
However, the idea that you can go back to only the winners playing in the CL would only work if the CL had no money associated with it. In a world where the CL gives you up to £100m a season, that entrenches inequality just as much as having the top 4 setup we have now (see countless smaller European leagues where the same team wins year after year after year). 7 clubs have won the PL since 1992, and 3 of those have only won it once. There are probably only 3 or 4 teams that can realistically hope to win it each year. Also, without a "race for top 4" this year, the league would be utterly done. Relegation is sorted, the title is sorted, it's only the CL spots that are being competed over. The Europa League (and Conference!) are more trouble than they are worth.
I was watching I, Tonya the other night. Ice skating seems to be just as corrupt as any other sport.Next you'll be telling us it's fake ice!
The fans may be celebrating, but I don't see any moves to make Association Football any more approachable, affordable or available, so I'm not sure what they think they've won.
For a stadium that wasn't allowed to be open for fans to watch a football match, one has to wonder
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/may/02/manchester-united-fans-invade-old-trafford-pitch-during-glazer-out-protests (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/may/02/manchester-united-fans-invade-old-trafford-pitch-during-glazer-out-protests)
This latest development is a very interesting one - fans stopping their team playing in protest at the behaviour of the owners.
Relating to the number of fans who broke into the ground - the article says "around 100", but the first picture there of the fans on the pitch gives me the impression that there are rather more than 100 there.
The police aren't there to protect a stadium. There were a large number of stewards, but the crowd broke in through a set of barriers thanks to force of numbers.For a stadium that wasn't allowed to be open for fans to watch a football match, one has to wonder
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/may/02/manchester-united-fans-invade-old-trafford-pitch-during-glazer-out-protests (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/may/02/manchester-united-fans-invade-old-trafford-pitch-during-glazer-out-protests)
This latest development is a very interesting one - fans stopping their team playing in protest at the behaviour of the owners.
Relating to the number of fans who broke into the ground - the article says "around 100", but the first picture there of the fans on the pitch gives me the impression that there are rather more than 100 there.
how they were allowed to gain entrance and get onto the pitch. Where were the police (to beat up
and arrest the crowd) when you need them. :-D
The cops seem to think it's ok to duff up defenseless women on a protest though. Just sayin'.
The police aren't there to protect a stadium. There were a large number of stewards, but the crowd broke in through a set of barriers thanks to force of numbers.The was a large gathering of people, not keeping their distance from one another. The police, who are in attendance at all Premier League matches, had the legal power to disperse the crowd (who may or may not have had permission to gather).
Do they show up (in significant numbers) at all matches even when there's not supposed to be crowds?The police aren't there to protect a stadium. There were a large number of stewards, but the crowd broke in through a set of barriers thanks to force of numbers.The was a large gathering of people, not keeping their distance from one another. The police, who are in attendance at all Premier League matches, had the legal power to disperse the crowd (who may or may not have had permission to gather).
There have been reports that Chelsea’s U-turn was prompted by a telephone call from Russian president Vladimir Putin to his compatriot Roman Abramovich, the billionaire who owns the London club. Some media outlets have even suggested that Putin declared a super league would be “against the spirit of the fatherland”.https://theconversation.com/champions-league-final-2021-a-game-of-two-sides-powered-by-gas-and-oil-160939