• Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Champions League revamp

Status
Not open for further replies.

ToffeeTim said:
Barnes pushing the PL 1992 comparison on Talksport

Anyone pushing that narrative quite frankly hasn't a clue. We spent the 90's trying to avoid relegation, so the closed shop PL argument is nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Why did he not speak up until today? yet another one who comments when it is all over.

Only Gary Neville had the balls to say it as it was and when it mattered.
 
Martin Alvito said:
The discussion needs to center around the breach of trust, and what these clubs are going to do to repair that breach.

If I were Moshiri, I would tell them, "Here's the problem. I no longer believe a word you say. You told UEFA that you were satisfied with the reforms while scheming to stab them in the back. Your word about your future intentions is no longer any good. I now know that you are capable of lying to my face and pursuing your own interest behind my back.

I'm prepared to be convinced, but only action will do. You have to tie your own hands meaningfully, so that when you say you will do something I know it's in your interest to do so.

Penance won't cut it. That says you're sorry. But maybe you're just sorry you got caught, and that's part of your plan to regain my trust so you can abuse it again.

So, tell me, how do you plan to take action that irrevocably commits you to common cause with us, so that I can once again believe what you say?"
Click to expand...


But the question is, were UEFA involved all along?

In the midst of panic, and crisis, UEFA pushed through the CL reforms, which actively benefitted 4 of the 12 teams, and it got brushed under the carpet.

Then broke news that they'd brokered their own reform of the CL with similar payments.

You're right, but we're a seat at the back of congress, and who will listen to that?
 

PaddyJames said:
I don't know how you punish them though.

Fine the owners? They will just push it back onto the fans and they will suffer. they don't deserve that when it's them who have turned this around.

European ban? 3 of them likely won't even make the Champions League next year anyway plus UEFA aren't turning RS, Spurs, Arsenal away from the Europa League or Utd away from the ECL. UEFA are far too greedy.

Transfer ban? I'd imagine the rats lawyers would have a field day with that.

This whole thing is disgusting. That fit & proper ownership test before the buy a club needs a revamp.
Click to expand...

How about if the owners are forced to participate in American Ninja Warrior, but replace the pool with a pit of black mambas?

1618995242712.webp
 

This is a fascinating debate .
ToffeeTim said:
Barnes pushing the PL 1992 comparison on Talksport

Anyone pushing that narrative quite frankly hasn't a clue. We spent the 90's trying to avoid relegation, so the closed shop PL argument is nonsensical.
Click to expand...
When John Barnes speaks , you listen . His manager CV demands it .

Seriously I can't believe people still pay him to speak . The only thing decent to come out of his mouth were written for him by some famous pop stars .
 
Martin Alvito said:
I keep hearing variants on the argument that to deter this behavior in the future, we must punish them now. That's simply not the case.

When the league rules that prohibit the behavior and specify sanctions don't prevent the behavior in a situation like this, what you have is a failure of deterrence. Either they didn't believe the threat would be carried out, or they didn't care until circumstances changed.

It's possible to rewrite the rules in such a way that leaves the clubs no choice but to take action, or renders the action trivial. If every club had to stump up 10-20% of the annual wage bill as surety against such behavior, or the TV money were paid out lagged up a year and the funds in escrow were automatically forfeit in the event of such action, the clubs involved would have thought twice about this.

Punishing them for this isn't necessary for the threat to become credible. That's really about our notions of justice, rather than trying to establish a credible detterent threat. In general, when you start talking about needing to apply sanctions for reasons of credibility, you've already lost the next round. Truly effective sanctions are never actually applied - they're designed creatively enough that they prevent the problem from ever arising.
Click to expand...
I get what your saying. And the things you've listed do need to happen.

However I disagree with your assertion that punishment would be counterproductive. I think punishment would help draw a line under this whole process, and allow us to move on.

Let me give an example. A few years ago, a customer came into my old place of work looking for a refund. My old boss refused, and things got heated. They came to a head when the customer grabbed me and through me to the floor as he attempted to steal money out of the till. I took him court for assault and he got a suspended sentence and a fine he never had any intention to pay, and he got his refund.

So what was the point in me taking it to court? It was my way of getting closure. It was me saying 'your behaviour was wrong, and I couldn't simply let it lie'. Basically I took a stand because I felt his actions were wrong.

I feel the same principles apply here.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top