Evropska Superliga

[AleksaVP]

[emirates]

Meni je daleko bitnije misljenje Evropskog suda. Iz tumacenja njihovog pravobranioca su izdvajali sljedece:

§101. It is not in dispute in the present case that the majority of the clubs participating in the ESL (that is to say, 15 of the 20 participants) would see their participation guaranteed. Furthermore, the ESL’s founding clubs intended to continue to take part in the open national competitions organised by the national federations and leagues under the aegis of FIFA and UEFA.

§102. However, such a competition would inevitably have a negative impact on the national championships by reducing the appeal of those competitions (and in particular those of the Member States whose clubs are part of the ESL). As things currently stand, the final standing obtained at the end of each season in the national championships plays a decisive role in determining the participants in the top European competition, which (depending on the level of the national league) makes reaching the top spots in those championships particularly attractive. That element could vanish, or at least be significantly weakened, if the results of the national leagues were largely irrelevant to participation at the top level of the pyramid, as appears to be indicated by ESLC’s ambitions. The founding clubs would thus be protected, in their national championships, from competition from rival clubs for a place in a high-level European competition. However, such a competition does not appear consistent with the principle governing European football, under which participation in competitions is based on ‘sporting merit’ and the results achieved on the pitch.

§103. Furthermore, a competition with the characteristics of the ESL could have a negative impact on the principle of equal opportunities, which is one component of the fairness of competitions. Thanks to their guaranteed participation in the ESL, certain clubs could book significant additional revenue, whilst continuing at the same time to participate in national competitions in which they would face other clubs which would be unable to generate revenue on a comparable scale, let alone on a permanent and constant basis. The guaranteed revenue from permanent participation at the highest level may be regarded as a significant competitive advantage in financing the acquisition and the remuneration of new players, which is a decisive parameter of competition. The fact that there are currently significant disparities between the clubs taking part in UEFA’s competitions would not be capable of justifying an increase in those disparities.

§104. In addition, in line with the almost unanimous view of the governments which participated in the procedure in the present case, such a competition would essentially prevent the participation of teams from most European countries, since it would be limited to participants from a restricted number of countries, and this also might well run counter to the ‘European’ dimension of the sports model enshrined in Article 165 TFEU.

§105. Subject to the checks that are for the referring court to carry out in this regard, the ESL model would also risk calling into question the principle of solidarity, since the creation of that competition format could have the effect of undermining the appeal and the profitability of UEFA’s competitions (in particular the Champions League) and of thus reducing the revenue from them, a percentage of which is earmarked for grassroots football.

§106. In addition to the purely sporting objectives, and even accepting that the reasons for both the rules established by UEFA and FIFA and the threats of sanctions made by them lay in purely economic considerations, such provisions of statutes could, at the very least, prove necessary. It is thus my view that, in the context of the present case, the application of the rules established by UEFA and its conduct vis-à-vis ESLC should be construed as seeking to avoid a ‘dual membership’ (or even a free riding) scenario which would risk weakening UEFA’s (and therefore FIFA’s) position on the market.

§107. It must be pointed out, in this regard, that ESLC’s intention is not to create a ‘proper’ closed and independent league (a breakaway league) but to set up a rival competition to UEFA’s in the most lucrative segment of the market for the organisation of European football competitions, whilst continuing to be part of the UEFA ecosystem by participating in some of those competitions (and in particular in the national championships). In other words, it would appear that ESLC’s founding clubs want, on the one hand, to benefit from the rights and advantages linked to membership of UEFA, without however being bound by UEFA’s rules and obligations.

§108. From the perspective of competition law, an undertaking (or an association of undertakings such as UEFA) cannot be criticised for attempting to protect its own economic interests, in particular in relation to such an ‘opportunistic’ project that would risk weakening it significantly. (55) It should be recalled, in that regard, that the Court has already found to be appropriate provisions of the statutes of a cooperative association limiting the ability of its members (including through sanctions involving exclusion) to participate in other forms of cooperation which are in competition. (56)

§109. Finally, it should be noted that, unlike Case C‑124/21 P (International Skating Union v Commission) which is currently pending before the Court, the present case does not concern UEFA’s refusal of the organisation of a competition or its imposition of disciplinary measures in respect of clubs wishing to participate in a third-party competition or event which would not risk influencing the sporting calendar or destabilising the existing structure of the governance and organisational model of the sporting discipline concerned. (57)

§110. In the light of the foregoing observations, I take the view that the non-recognition by FIFA and UEFA of an essentially closed competition such as the ESL could be regarded as inherent in the pursuit of certain legitimate objectives (within the meaning of the case-law deriving from the judgments of 19 February 2002, Wouters and Others (C‑309/99, EU:C98), and of 18 July 2006, Meca-Medina and Majcen v Commission (C‑519/04 P, EU:C492)), in that the purpose of that non-recognition is to maintain the principles of participation based on sporting results, equal opportunities and solidarity upon which the pyramid structure of European football is founded.

Boldao meni najzanimljivije dijelove, posebno sto se odnosi na competition law i krsenje njegovih principa sto sam pominjao ranije u threadu.

[Sherpa]

Možeš malo objasniti koliko koji sud ima utjecaj u toj hijerarhiji. Recimo koliko je španjolski sud mjerodavan kazati da neka međunarodna organizacija nemre kazniti nekoga ili nešto. Ako imaš vremena i volje naravno

[emirates]

Pa ukratko, tumacenju EU prava pripada Evropskom sudu pravde i oni nadgledaju primjenu prava koje su ustanovljene konvencijama EU. Lokalni sudovi poput onog spanskog imaju nadleznost da tumace ista prava u kontekstu case lawa koji je relevantan za EU prava, ali u konacnici ako dodje do neslaganja izmedju lokalnog suda i ECJ, ECJ je taj koji je stariji i koji osigurava da se prava EU postuju. Po nekom pravilu bi moralo tako da bude.

[Sherpa]

gdje u sve to dolazi onaj sportski sud, ili je ovo van njegove nadležnosti?

[emirates]

Ako mislis na onaj u Svicarskoj, to je za sportsku arbitrazu. Tu su da rjesavaju sporove na sportskom nivou, ali nemaju ovlasti da tumace EU konvencije koje se pominju u ovom sporu.

[Sherpa]

Jer će ikada doći to te eu sud arbitraže kad liga vjerojatno neće nikaa zaživiti u tom obliku?

[emirates]

Jer će ikada doći to te eu sud arbitraže kad liga vjerojatno neće nikaa zaživiti u tom obliku?

Pa eto, u ECJ se vec vode rasprave oko toga mogu li ovi kaznjavati ucesnike superlige. Posto se spore oko konvencije mogu samo tu. Sportska arbitraza bi ukljucila neki drugi tip spora.

[TheViper]

[Hangman98]

[Sherpa]

Evo da i ja najavim organiziranje svoje super lige

Ovo što izvodi spada u domenu očaja.

[TheViper]

Uefa "unistila" Superligu da bi napravila svoju. Ko bi rekao.

https://www.mozzartsport.com/fudbal/ves ... ali/463168

[TheViper]

Ovo je moguci kraj Uefe.

[TheViper]

[Sherpa]

Daj ne budi lud. Eufa ima još toliko mehanizama s kojima to može stopirati i oštetiti. Pogotovo političkih.

Na kraju dana, ovo nije zeleno svijetlo za superligu, ovo je samo presuda da uefa nije mogla stopirati na način na koji je htjela.