A year after the failure of the Super League – “Concern that we will lose fans – and with it the foundation”

Chelsea FC fans are protesting against the Super League plans, which their club has also joined. (IMAGO / Sportimage)

Just before midnight on April 18, 2021, a press release shook European football. Twelve of Europe’s leading football clubs announced at the time that they were creating a new competition, the Super League. It would have been a practically closed league of the most glorious clubs from England, Italy and Spain, financed by 3.5 billion euros from the US investment bank JP Morgan Chase. The initiative, independent of UEFA and national leagues, was a frontal attack on the European football system. The national leagues, the fans, governments unite against the Super League and within a few days this new alliance falls apart.

A year later, Christoph Peschek, Managing Director of Economics at Rapid Vienna, Helen Breit, fan representative and chairwoman of the fan alliance “Unsere KURve” and the sports journalist Chaled Nahar discuss the future and prospects of European football in the Dlf sports talk.

According to Christoph Peschek from Rapid Wien, the initiators of the Super League are “mainly investor-led or heavily indebted clubs that want to get rid of the sporting competition in order to have the greatest possible planning security. I understand that as a general manager. But not as a football fan. It’s certainly also a bit of alienation between fans and professional football,” said Peschek.

Fan representative wide: outcry big, effect small

For the fan representative Helen Breit, the bitter balance is that the attempt to create a Super League has not led to any positive change. “The outcry was huge, but the effect of it is not great.”

Sports journalist Chaled Nahar emphasizes that the Champions League reform plans also go in a similar direction: “You want to keep the sporting element as small as possible and increase business planning security.” This should be done using a coefficient that fundamentally successful teams can also use can save in a weak season in the Champions League. It’s not a closed league like the Super League would have been, “but it’s a step in that direction.”

And Nahar puts it up for debate: “If two clubs qualify in this way, who says that there won’t be four or eight or even more clubs from 2027?” His criticism: “We don’t dare to tackle the cause of the problem , the distribution of money. We are fighting the symptom.” According to Nahar, a new mode would lead to the same result again.

Financial scissors a major problem

The guests also see a problem in the unequal distribution of financial resources. Christoph Peschek explains that his club Rapid Wien makes a turnover of 40 million, the big competitor Red Bull Salzburg 140 million. He says: “Rapid was founded to play football, Red Bull Salzburg to promote a can. That means, of course, there are a few things that differentiate us in terms of the footballing worldview. But what I have to accept and respect is that they now do their job very, very professionally.” The current reforms provide that those who are already at the top receive even more planning security.

Chaled Nahar adds to this problem that only a bottom-up redistribution of income would eliminate this problem. This is illusory, but actually the only effective measure. The money from UEFA ensures that there is usually one dominant team in the national leagues in Europe.

Helen Breit sees the UEFA solidarity pot as a possible lever to ensure more justice. This means that the clubs in the national leagues that are not qualified for Europe will receive four percent of the proceeds. On the home page of their alliance “Unsere KURve” it says: “To clarify: The clubs in the national leagues that did not qualify for Europe received a total of 130 million euros in 2018/19, while FC Bayern Munich alone took in 117 million euros for the CL victory.”

Breit said: “We demand that the solidarity pot accounts for up to 50 percent, which means that half get those who are qualified and participate, and half get everyone else. Then I might gradually come back towards equal opportunities.” There are ways to ensure more justice, but officials dismiss them as utopias and the romanticism of football. Since the UEFA is not different to the Super League. “It’s about money and it’s about power.”

Peschek (Rapid Wien): Concern that clubs give up their identity

Christoph Peschek also expresses concern that clubs are giving up their independence and identity. “I have the great concern of alienation, that the fans will no longer go along or that we will lose fans and ultimately our foundation.”

Sports journalist Chaled Nahar also sees the tendency for football to be downgraded to a “production site for TikTok videos by saying yes, here you have Ronaldo, there you have Messi. And then you have someone in Belgrade or Piraeus running against the post, then you have seen the three most important videos on TikTok from the day of the match. ”That would be football. That is sad, but in many top clubs the focus is on it.

Together with fan representatives from other countries, Helen Breit is trying to have football protected by politics. The initiative is called “Win it on the pitch“. “Without regulations, we won’t be able to get the greed of individuals and investor behavior under control,” says Breit.

Christoph Peschek from Rapid Vienna points out: “What is needed is a very comprehensive discussion that not only scratches the surface, but also about the direction in which football should develop.” That is what initiatives like that of Breit and her fellow campaigners are for important.

ttn-9