The 48-hour disintegration of the European Super League: a rare defeat for the export of American capital and culture

By Fu Zhenghao

How long does it take to go from taking a blood oath and making a contract to breaking the contract and falling apart? The answer given by the European Super League is less than 48 hours, which completely refreshes the world's understanding of the word "rabble".

Late at night on April 18, Beijing time, Real Madrid and other 12 European soccer clubs announced the establishment of the European Super League. The news immediately triggered a global debate, and supporters of the European Super League even vowed that the history of European soccer would be rewritten.

But only less than 48 hours later, late on April 20, Manchester City and six other Premier League clubs announced their withdrawal from the UEFA Super League. In response, the European Super League reluctantly said it would suspend its existing tournament plans and reconsider how it plans the program.

And as of press time, Serie A's Guolan, AC Milan, Juve and La Liga's Atletico Madrid also announced their withdrawal one after another, the European Super League's 12 clubs instantly left only two in La Liga, Barcelona and Real Madrid. UEFA President Cheferin issued an ultimatum: before 5 p.m. local time on the 21st, the remaining European Premier League teams must withdraw, or they will be penalized.

In view of the European super in the European scope of the encounter of the multinational government, sports associations, soccer leagues, media, fan groups of collective opposition, so, the European super progress is not smooth and even abortion is a probable event. But what's really surprising is how fragile and weak this alliance is. The European Super League is falling apart so fast, but also reflects the European Super League in the process of organizing the chaotic disorder.

As the saying goes, it comes and goes in a hurry, and if nothing else, the European Super League will soon be dead in the womb and reduced to a farce. A farce, a chicken feather, lift the eyes, I'm afraid there is only the legendary U.S. financial giant JP Morgan Chase's $5 billion blank check floating in the air, the U.S. investment bank intended to rely on the advantages of the U.S. dollar big release of the advantages of the large-scale looting of the European soccer assets of the dream has also been broken. In the European soccer and the United States capital in this war without smoke, the traditional culture of European soccer temporarily won the victory.

So what happened in the last 48 hours? Real Madrid President Florentino vowed that "no one will quit", but the fire was quickly hit in the face, UEFA actually took what initiatives, so that those who have been seduced by the dollar capital of the giants quickly repented, willing to be a traitor? And prompted the European super 12 giants quickly divided and disintegrated the deeper reasons in the end is what? In fact, looking at the global sports world, the club alliance rebellion, challenge the existing mature tournament system of the case is not uncommon, but in addition to the European Basketball League, a few successful cases, the reason is intriguing.

The government + associations + sponsors joint pressure, ten clubs quickly withdrew from the group

Needless to say, the soccer giants out of the European Super League is precisely the reason why they joined in the first place, and that is two words: interest.

The concept of the European Super League has been around for a long time, and for a long time, the European soccer giants have been unhappy with the way the Champions League operates, especially the commercial revenue sharing mechanism, so every few years, they have been discussing how to come together to make a bigger cake for themselves, and to replace the UEFA-dominated Champions League with a fixed Premier League for the giants to participate in. And now with the support of the American financial giant, this plan has really begun to materialize.

According to the previous program of the European Super League, the league will use the "15 + 5" composition mechanism, 15 founding teams will have the right to participate in the permanent, the remaining five places will be decided through qualifying. The United States JP Morgan Chase commitment to contribute at least $ 5 billion to support the preparation of the European Super League, all the 15 founding clubs will **** enjoy 3.5 billion euros of start-up capital, in addition, the digital media platform DAZN also intends to use a year of 3.5 billion euros of the price of the European Premier League copyright purchase.

It is estimated that the UEFA Super League's annual revenue will easily surpass the $10 billion mark, with the founding teams expected to share up to €350 million in the first year. The sheer allure of these astronomical figures cannot be overstated. Especially considering that the epidemic has led to huge losses for European soccer clubs, it's only natural that the giants would find it difficult to hold on to their checks in the face of the American giant.

But in just two days, these giants suddenly felt that the American check didn't smell as good, because their original interests could be hit hard. One is just a big picture of the future, and the other is a real benefit right now, and when it comes down to it, most people are going to go with the safe and secure benefit of the moment.

In the immediate aftermath of the announcement of the European Super League (ESL), senior European government officials, UEFA and the national associations of football associations, the clubs' celebrities, the fans' groups, and the brotherhood of soccer clubs all expressed strong opposition, and the relevant sponsors chose to pressure the clubs to participate in the ESL. Among them, UEFA, in conjunction with the British, Italian and Western football associations, said that players participating in the European Super League will be banned from participating in any domestic, European or world-level competitions, and may be banned from representing their respective national teams.

When the government, associations, leagues, fans, media, and sponsors come together to exert pressure, it means that clubs may suffer losses in sponsorship revenue, box office revenue, and league dividends, and in the face of these potential losses, clubs can naturally feel the pain. Because Britain has Manchester City, Liverpool, Manchester United, Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur and Chelsea, the six soccer clubs to join the European Premier League, occupying half of the European Premier League, the opposition in Britain is also the most intense.

The fanbase of many Premier League clubs made it clear that they were boycotting the EPL, and during the Leeds United v Liverpool match, there were large banners saying "Say no to the EPL". Leeds United players wore T-shirts calling for a boycott, with the slogan "Football is for the fans" emblazoned across them. Sponsors have threatened to suspend their partnerships with the six Premier League clubs, while potential new sponsors are interested in suspending negotiations.

In addition, Spain's El Mundo Deportivo revealed that UEFA had promised the six Premier League clubs that it would offer them a large sum of money as compensation for their withdrawal from the competition. The six Premier League clubs were naturally polarized by the coercion of the former and the enticement of the latter.

Club rebellion is rarely successful, but it can ultimately drive professionalism

In professional sports, the biggest pain point is worrying about how to make the cake bigger in the early stages of a tournament and how to share the cake after the tournament has achieved milestones. Around the bigger cake and share the cake this eternal contradiction, these years down, through the domestic and international sports world, in fact, often appear the luxury clubs privately allied rebellion, another portal case, but most of the time, these organizations will be dissolved on their own, no end.

It's important to note that the purpose of the club revolts is not really to create a new IP from scratch, but to use it as a bargaining chip to force the rule makers to make compromises. From this perspective, these revolts have often been realized to some extent.

As noted earlier, the concept of a European Super League surfaced as early as the 1960s, with some of the biggest clubs hoping to make more money by organizing their own tournaments, and in 1998 Italian media mogul and AC Milan owner Berlusconi and media mogul Murdoch and others proposed a closed league like the four major North American professional sports leagues, with the top clubs in Europe invited to compete. The idea of inviting Europe's top clubs to compete was immediately rejected by UEFA.

That same year, AC Milan, Barcelona and 14 other European soccer giants held a secret meeting in Brussels, Belgium, to set up the G14 organization, hoping to make the big teams in the Champions League to get a greater share of the benefits, and then UEFA agreed to their proposed reform of the Champions League system.

In September 2000, the G14 officially completed its registration in Brussels, and since then the membership has expanded to 18, constantly exploring the idea of establishing a European super league. At the same time, these giants in the name of the G14 even and with FIFA, UEFA negotiations, successfully forced UEFA and FIFA agreed to participate in the World Cup and UEFA Cup after the payment of salaries to the participating soccer players, and to provide financial compensation to the clubs of players injured during the period of financial compensation. 2008, after the clubs and UEFA reached an agreement on the relevant G14 announced the dissolution of the, but turned to set up the nature of a similar The G14 was dissolved in 2008 after the clubs reached an agreement with UEFA on the matter, but a similar organization was formed, the Association of European Clubs, which continues to press UEFA on the irrational mechanics of the Champions League.

In addition to the European Super League's predecessor, the G14, the domestic sports world is more familiar with the case of club rebellion, the seven clubs in the Chinese Super League in 2004 launched the G7 revolution, the seven clubs in the CBA in 1998 set up the "Professional Basketball Clubs League Preparatory Committee", and 18 clubs in 2016 set up the CFL Inc. As you know, all three of these organizations were quickly dissolved after their respective associations stepped in, but they also achieved their demands to some extent and pushed the league's professionalization process, despite their failures.

In October 2004, seven soccer clubs, including Guoan, reached a strategic alliance and proposed to the CFA to "withdraw from the administration, decide on the capital, separate the government from the enterprises, separate the management from the office, and corporatize the management". However, under the strong intervention of the CFA, the G7 then announced the dissolution, but since then the CFA has also launched the structure of the Super League, committed to respecting the interests of investors, and using corporatization to operate the Super League, which lays the foundation for the establishment of the Super League Company later on.

In December 1998, the CBA's Shanghai men's basketball team and seven other clubs' bosses jointly set up the "Professional Basketball Clubs Union Preparatory Committee" in Shanghai. These seven clubs hope that the Basketball Administration Center to allow the CBA teams to participate in the league rules, such as allowing clubs to negotiate their own equipment sponsors, and called for the CBA to promote as a "* * * survival * * * glory, * * * with the development of * * * enjoy the results of the interests of the unity of the body, which is regarded as the leadership, management, and the right to operate. This is seen as an open challenge to the "leadership, operation and management" of the three powers of the Basketball Administration Center. (For more details, please refer to my work, "CBA's two alliance rebellion and a separate central")

From December 18, 1998 to the establishment of the February 18, 1999 dissolution, "Professional Basketball Clubs Union Preparatory Committee" to promote the professionalization of the CBA as the task of the Preparatory Committee existed for only two months. But it wasn't for nothing. Between the 1999-2000 and 2003-04 seasons, the Basketball Control Center allowed CBA teams to seek their own equipment sponsors.

In 2016, Yao Ming, then chairman of the Shanghai Men's Basketball Club, called on all 20 CBA clubs to come together to form a company to run the CBA league on their own, resulting in two clubs refusing to join, and the 18 clubs coming together to form the CSL Basketball Club Co. ), and in the name of the company to the Chinese Basketball Association to request that the CSL company to obtain the CBA league business operations and competition management rights.

The CBA rejected the request, but then proposed that the CBA would combine all 20 clubs to form a CBA company to run the league. Eventually, in September 2016, China Basketball Association Company (commonly known as "CBA Company") was established, with Li Jinsheng, then deputy director of the Basketball Administration Center, as chairman, Yao Ming as vice-chairman, and the CBA holding a 30% stake, with the 20 clubs holding an average of 3.5% each.

Since then, with the support of the upper echelon, Yao Ming became the chairman of the Basketball Association and succeeded Li Jinsheng as chairman of the CBA, the Chinese Basketball Association retired its shares from the CBA, and the 20 clubs each held 5% of the shares. Meanwhile, the 18 clubs set up by the CBA have not really operated since the beginning, and were quietly canceled soon after the CBA company officially operated.

Although it has been jokingly said that the CFL is more like a bargaining chip with the Chinese Basketball Association, and, in the process of leading the rebellion, Yao Ming, who became the chairman of the Basketball Association, is no less than being recruited, in addition, the Chinese Basketball Association has a veto in the CBA company, the major affairs are still by the Chinese Basketball Association behind the scenes to clap, but compared to the past, the establishment of the CBA company has been a huge step forward. The CBA company is also considered to be a disguised realization of its original intention when it was established.

After looking at these cases of failure, you will find that the rebel platform jointly set up by the clubs is more of a negotiation condition to force the association to make compromise concessions. Therefore, this time, the European Super League very coincidentally snatched in the UEFA General Assembly officially announced the establishment of the day before the official vote on the Champions League expansion plan, this coincidence is really intriguing.

The giants have long been very dissatisfied with the constant expansion of the Champions League, the UEFA meeting to vote on this matter, the European Super League hastily announced the establishment of the undoubtedly to the UEFA clearly say no, the future of the UEFA probability of the Champions League through some of the reforms to the giants to compensate for the abortion of the European Super League is not likely to be all unproductive.

As for why the European super is hastily established? There are two supporting evidence:

First, the membership of the European super mechanism is 15 + 5, but at present only put together 12, not only the remaining three fixed seats have not yet been confirmed, and the remaining five flexible seats in the specific how to screen the rules are not very detailed, in this case hastily choose the foreign official announcement, can be seen in some haste;

Second, the 12 giants clubs to jointly set up a European Super League The official announcement was made in a hurry, and the announcement was made in a hurry, so it was very hasty!

European soccer temporarily repelled the U.S. capital, fans are very wary of soccer oligarchy

The idea of the European Premier League has been surviving for decades, can be called the dream of several generations of luxury clubs in charge of the dream, and now it is not easy to have a U.S. investment giant such as JP Morgan Chase is willing to contribute to the support, why is it so easy to be dismantled?

If the opposition of clubs and fan bases that aren't part of the European Super League can be attributed to envy and jealousy, then why are the fan bases of the big clubs so vocal in their opposition? What's more, the reason why these giants set up the UEFA Super League is because they have long been dissatisfied with UEFA's strategy for running the Champions League and the mechanism for distributing the benefits, so since the UEFA Super League is designed to push the boundaries of the game and get rid of the ills, why is it that the world is not welcoming these revolutionaries?

The direct reason is that the UEFA Super League only absorbs luxury teams, and small and medium-sized clubs are excluded, which is essentially a further oligopolization of gold-dollar soccer, with capital institutions forcing the monopoly of the soccer market and cutting up a bigger slice of the cake, with the UEFA Super League enjoying exclusive access to the sky-high broadcast rights contracts and top-tier sponsorship resources. The existing national leagues are difficult to obtain core resources to support, the luxury players in order to play a good European super high probability will choose to rotate in their own country league, so the income of their own league is a probable event, and the small and medium-sized team's share of the dividend is further shrinking.

It is important to realize that the lifeblood of European soccer is precisely the large number of small and medium-sized soccer clubs that are not widely known, and it is they who reach out to communities across the country, covering and nurturing a vast soccer population, while the giants tend to buy potential stars directly from the small and medium-sized clubs. Once the capital is oligopolized, the small and medium-sized clubs and the giants will be further fragmented, and the small and medium-sized clubs will not be able to make ends meet, and sooner or later they will tend to die out.

Of course, the U.S. investment giants are spending huge sums of money to create a brand-new European Premier League, and ultimately, these investments will have to recover their costs through the tournament and realize profits, which are destined to come from the fans, after all, the wool always comes out of the sheep's body. Once the European Super League forms a monopoly, the cost of watching soccer for soccer fans will increase dramatically, which is a major phenomenon that European fans have protested frequently in recent years.

In light of this, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said, "The European Super League will hit the core events of the domestic game and will affect the core interests of the British fan base." And the legendary Figo, who has played for Real Madrid, Strike and other giants, was unequivocally opposed to the European Super League, denouncing it as something that would destroy the very foundations of European soccer: "This so-called 'Super League' is not super at all, and this greedy and callous act will bring disaster to our grassroots soccer, women's soccer, and to the wider system of soccer that we are This greedy and callous behavior will bring disaster to the establishment of our grassroots soccer, women's soccer and the broader soccer system. And it's designed solely to serve the interests of selfish capitalists who don't give a damn about what the fans think anymore and who have contempt for the ethics of sport. It's pathetic."

Perhaps it's hard for people in China to empathize with the aftermath of the capitalist monopoly on soccer, which has passed on its high costs to European fans - after all, soccer is dispensable in China, and not an indispensable way of life. But suppose, there is capital suddenly all of China's 985 colleges and universities to buy out and privatize, and then re-organize the "China Super Famous Schools Alliance", only the high price can enter the school. Perhaps, then, the people of China can understand why Europeans hate the capital monopoly soccer.

European and American sports culture, the European Union legislation more support for UEFA

Of course, the European super doomed to abortion of the deeper reason is that this is the United States of America sports culture and the European sports culture of the head-to-head competition. It's hard to say for sure whose sports culture is more developed and mature between Europe and the United States, but it's hard for a strong dragon to repress a snake, and it's only natural that the European Super League, which is modeled after the U.S. closed tournament mechanism, would be boycotted by the whole country in Europe.

Since World War II, the United States has been exporting its values and cultural products to the world, and in the field of sports, the NBA is the most internationalized sports event, and it is also the strongest export of American sports culture in the world today. However, the world's number one sport is soccer, and the center of gravity in the soccer world is Europe. Over the years, U.S. investment institutions have been traveling to Europe to invest in soccer clubs, which is seen by Europeans as the Marshall Plan for culture and sports.

The gold master behind the European Super League this time is the American investment predator JP Morgan Chase, and the three vice-chairmen of the European Super League - Manchester United chairman Glazer, Arsenal chairman Kroenke, and Liverpool chairman John Henry - are all American tycoons. Therefore, Europe's blockade of the European Super is seen more as a resistance of the European soccer culture to the American capital predators.

In addition, Fran?ois Godard of Enders Analytics argued that U.S. professional sports are all closed sports leagues, while European sports have a more competitive system of elevation and relegation, which U.S. investors are not used to. "Elevation and relegation means that a club's revenue can be very volatile, which creates insecurity for the investor, and why should professional sports create that insecurity for the investor? In America, everything is accountable to the investors."

And what upsets European fans most is precisely that the European Super League is a closed tournament. There is no elevation or relegation, which goes against the values of sport and the principle of open competition in the European soccer ecosystem, and is a blatant defiance of the spirit of competition and the principle of fairness that has long characterized European soccer. Voller, CEO of Bundesliga team Leverkusen, bluntly stated, "A closed tournament system is a crime against soccer."

Behind these two kinds of logic, there is a clear difference between Europe and the United States on the pyramid of professional and amateur sports: the pyramid structure of the European sports organizations will be the integration of professional and non-professional sports, for the purpose of public welfare by the association and the league of the vertically integrated hierarchical management, so the implementation of the ascending and descending system to give the small and medium-sized clubs a channel of upward mobility. However, the North American sports model strictly distinguishes between "amateur" and "professional" sports, which are two completely different sets of management institutions and operational logic. Professional sports in the United States seeks to use oligopoly to obtain the greatest benefits and does not bear social responsibility, while the NCAA is not allowed to allow athletes in the past. In the past, sports athletes were not allowed to have any income and were purely amateur players.

Even if the European super without the intervention of American capital, the European super is also very difficult to survive in the current European sports culture. Because current European sports law gives UEFA a high degree of autonomy and antitrust immunity, which means that without UEFA's support, it's hard to see how a top-level IP could survive the Champions League on its own.

As early as 2000, the EU countries have reached a **** knowledge, that is, the EU competition law can not be fully adapted to the field of sports, to respect the uniqueness of the field of sports, sports associations are allowed to enjoy a high degree of autonomy and enjoy some of the antitrust immunity, for example, the FIBA stipulates that in a country is allowed to have only one top-level basketball league, can not be two side-by-side level of the basketball, or else it will have the right to ban the country, but also to ban the country. FIBA, for example, has stipulated that only one top-level basketball league is allowed in a country, and there cannot be two concurrent basketball tournaments, or else it will have the right to ban that country, which is derived from the sectoral antitrust immunity authorized for single sports associations under European law.

In 2000, the EU issued the European Declaration on the Social Function and Special Characteristics of Sport, also known as the Nice Declaration, which called for the application of EU competition law in the field of sport to be guided by three basic principles: first, to take full account of the unique characteristics of sport; second, that the application of competition law does not affect those regulatory functions of sports organizers that are carried out for the sole purpose of the smooth running of games; and third, to maintain, as far as possible, the unique characteristics of sport. Third, the social and cultural functions of sport should be preserved as far as possible.

In 2009, the EU published the EU White Paper on Sport, which clearly states that the EU respects the specificity of sport, and that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) should follow the principle of case-by-case review in sport-related cases, and that it should use the EU competition law in a cautious manner, fully respecting the rights of international sports organizations and individual sports associations to regulate sports organizations.

Based on this, the EU allows sports leagues and sports associations to have a certain degree of antitrust immunity and a high degree of autonomy in the management of specific events. Although the European Super League clearly emphasized that the establishment of the European Super League is not contrary to any European law, but once the two sides really go to court, I am afraid that the EU law will still be more in favor of the UEFA as a trade association. What's more, the British Prime Minister and the French President have made it clear that they do not rule out legislative initiatives to protect European soccer. Therefore, from a legal point of view, the European super abortion is really normal.