Debatable. Perez himself has said they have signed binding contracts that wont expire for 23 years.
The court will have to decide if uefa have to let them play in the cl while they are also a member of a rival competition. Which they created in part because they didn't want to be in uefa competitions.
Not arguing with you. These are the arguments that uefas lawyers will be using. To justify their side.
So did every other club that signed up to it. They have exited it easily enough.
I don't think that UEFA have any grounds whilst they aren't playing in the competition and I am not even sure that they do if the ESL goes ahead. I think UEFA acting as if it has a veto over competitions is anti-competitive
This thread can be closed now surely.
it's bloody tedious though!Just getting interesting.
it's bloody tedious though!
So the courts rule that it's not legal for UEFA to stop them from setting up their own competition and exclude others.
If that's the case then all the other clubs, leagues and UEFA can set up their own competitions and exclude the ESL clubs.
Then they're out of their leagues, playing in that one competition, players can't play in internationals etcThen all they will do is go ahead with the ESL and take the money and TV with them.
Then they're out of their leagues, playing in that one competition, players can't play in internationals etc
Not sure it would work like that though. It's in all parties' interests to maximise their income from whatever competitions they can, so there would be little point in excluding clubs / players and the massive revenues they can generate by working something out.Then they're out of their leagues, playing in that one competition, players can't play in internationals etc
Aren't these clubs doing just that, creating a monopoly and keeping other teams out (punishing them)? If it's good for the goose...That is one of the questions the ecj has to answer. Are sporting governing bodies creating monopolies. Are they allowed to "punish" teams for having their own competitions.
If they are decided to be monopolies and restricting competition, what then?
There would be plenty of incentive if it stops them doing it or turns players off joining these teamsNot sure it would work like that though. It's in all parties' interests to maximise their income from whatever competitions they can, so there would be little point in excluding clubs / players and the massive revenues they can generate by working something out.
Money talks.
Aren't these clubs doing just that, creating a monopoly and keeping other teams out (punishing them)? If it's good for the goose...
It is quite interesting. Firstly can you effectively apply commercial competition law to sport? Football has long been a business so why not?
A league by its very nature is a closed shop. You can't form a club and say UEFA give us a shot at the Champions League. A new club has to work its way up. That is not anti-competitive per se. Does that make leagues and the bodies that rule over them monopolistic? Probably not. Anyone can work their way up and vice versa. The ESL was far more of a closed shop and cartel-like.
As to whether UEFA can impose sanctions on clubs who wish to compete with UEFA, that does seem anti-competitive and monopolistic. But Uefa should be able to expel clubs who don't want to be part of their league, I don't see that as anti-competitive. Haven't RM, Juve chosen to exit Uefas competition? until they renounce the ESL I don't think it's unreasonable for a sporting organisation to expel or part suspend clubs that can not function within its rules. The league's rules/principles/ethics should allow free competition within their league, and if you are intending to play outside the league you may earn larger sums which distorts free and fair competition. Thus Uefa should have some case too.
It is quite interesting. Firstly can you effectively apply commercial competition law to sport? Football has long been a business so why not?
A league by its very nature is a closed shop. You can't form a club and say UEFA give us a shot at the Champions League. A new club has to work its way up. That is not anti-competitive per se. Does that make leagues and the bodies that rule over them monopolistic? Probably not. Anyone can work their way up and vice versa. The ESL was far more of a closed shop and cartel-like.
As to whether UEFA can impose sanctions on clubs who wish to compete with UEFA, that does seem anti-competitive and monopolistic. But Uefa should be able to expel clubs who don't want to be part of their league, I don't see that as anti-competitive. Haven't RM, Juve chosen to exit Uefas competition? until they renounce the ESL I don't think it's unreasonable for a sporting organisation to expel or part suspend clubs that can not function within its rules. The league's rules/principles/ethics should allow free competition within their league, and if you are intending to play outside the league you may earn larger sums which distorts free and fair competition. Thus Uefa should have some case too.
There is no way that they will stop all of the best players in the world from playing for the national teams and i very much doubt they would really want to kill the league by not letting the best play in it.Then they're out of their leagues, playing in that one competition, players can't play in internationals etc