It wasn’t hard to notice that something was wrong. Not only did the UEFA president hold a rare press conference from his wood-panelled offices, but Aleksander Ceferin was also joined by Paris Saint-Germain’s Nasser al-Khelaifi and La Liga’s Javier Tebas. Each was there to talk about a single court decision, the consequences of which even Ceferin acknowledged had not yet been fully digested. This is how seriously the powers that be take the European Super League.
That day, the decision of the European Court of Justice in the case filed by the European Super League Company against UEFA meant something to everyone. The headline of the 71-page document was that UEFA (and FIFA) had “abused a dominant position” and must change. As the regulator of the game, the rules allowing the creation of new competitions were not “transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate” and were “incompatible with competition law”.
Relating to: Free to watch, relegation, midweek: How will the new football Super League work?
This is language that will likely surprise even the most determined executives. On the other hand, the decision does not seem to have a general problem with UEFA. He did not try to stop competitions from being allowed. It was no problem that UEFA was the regulator of European football and also controlled its biggest competition, the Champions League. He equally endorsed UEFA’s priorities, arguing, as did the governing body, that any new competitions were right to fit into the existing international match calendar and be “based on equality of opportunity and merit”.
The company representing the interests of the Super League and the remaining clubs (Real Madrid and Barcelona, with the resolution of Juventus’ status) made its own presentation. Bernd Reichart, managing director of A22 Sports, used the occasion not only to celebrate the decision, which he believes will “liberate football”, but also to unveil a new model for the Super League. Key details of the revised proposal included the addition of internal promotion and relegation, exiting competitions for 20 men’s clubs each season and making every match free to watch on an app now known as Unify.
These innovations bring up other questions. Promotion and relegation were introduced to defuse one of the key complaints against the original Super League: that it was a closed competition with a fixed group of 16 clubs playing each other each year. The new structure will be more open, but a team in the top “star” league will be guaranteed uninterrupted competition for three years. Expanding to more teams, meanwhile, means that revenue shared among a small group must be spread more widely. And this income may be less than expected. Let’s say it’s hard to find a business (let alone sporting events) that chooses to distribute its premium content online for free and finds this a shortcut to billions.
If the ideas seem unconvincing, it’s because the Super League’s concept has never been that deep. There was plenty of talk about every fixture being important, the best playing the best, but in reality what made the competition truly enticing for member clubs (this included, of course, Manchester City, Liverpool, Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs) more It was a chance to make money. That was the gist of Super League’s offer, and it is unclear whether it will continue beyond Thursday.
When asked whether the estimated $5bn (£4bn) offered by JP Morgan to support Super League’s original bid was still on the table, Reichart chose not to answer. Sources within A22 confirmed to the Guardian that discussions with potential investors are ongoing. Fifa, meanwhile, is 18 months away from the first edition of its own flashy new competition, the 32-team Club World Cup. Many expect this to be generously supported by funds from Saudi Arabia, which will host the 2034 World Cup.
Relating to: The European Super League project gained great momentum after the decision of the court of justice
UEFA spent two years preparing for this moment. It approached the European Club Association (led by Khelaifi), giving the organization seats on UEFA’s internal committees and a share in a joint venture set up to increase commercial revenues from the Champions League. Khelaifi was in full support of the status quo, backed by a barrage of messages in the same format from ECA clubs on social media. UEFA has closed a lot of ground around it by zooming in on potential rivals, engaging with the European Commission on the nature of its role, updating its rules and increasing prize money and associated solidarity funding for the Champions League. The original Super League emerged.
While A22 did not comment on how it plans to test the consequences of the decision, a related case is likely to constitute the next flashpoint in the Spanish legal system. But the ECJ did something indisputable: it made clear that it was legal and appropriate for competitive competitions to seek a place in European football. The Super League may not be a competition that breaks the 70-year-old football tradition, but it will open the door to a competition that does this.