Several club representatives from the Bundesliga and the 2nd Bundesliga, like numerous fan scenes, are calling for a new vote on investor entry into the DFL. Now the topic is moving – what is possible in this regard and what is not.
Is there a chance of a new vote?
At the request of the Sportschau, the DFL announced last week on behalf of executive committee spokesman Hans-Joachim Watzke: “If we have the feeling that the majority no longer wants this in March, we will certainly not give our vote against their will. Then we would have a new situation.”
According to information from Sportschau, the DFL executive committee wants to meet for a meeting on Wednesday. There will be talks between the DFL and the clubs on February 28th and 29th, and a general meeting with a vote on the issue could then follow. “Sport Bild” first reported on this process.
Hans-Joachim Watzke, presidential spokesman for the DFL
What exactly should the new vote look like?
In a letter to the DFL executive committee, 1. FC Cologne announced that it would submit an application “in order to exempt the DFL executive board from the final mandate issued by the general meeting”. St. Pauli and Gladbach also suggested this approach. Cologne announced that it would request an extraordinary general meeting for this purpose. A total of ten clubs would have to submit this application if the DFL executive committee does not call such a meeting itself.
Tennis balls on the court
Background: In the vote on December 11, 2023, the DFL Presidium “commissioned and empowered”to bring the deal with an investor to a conclusion within set framework conditions. This decision must be overruled in order to completely re-vote or end the process. According to association law expert Lars Leuschner from the University of Osnabrück, a simple majority would be sufficient.
The consequences: If approved by a simple majority among the 36 clubs, the executive board would be exempt from the final mandate. However, a rejection of such an application would mean that the decision would continue to exist and the business could be closed – without the two-thirds majority required for the general vote.
What other topics are there in the vote?
According to information from Sportschau, parts of the DFL executive committee recently considered a vote on the final offer from an investor. Then it would not be with a qualified two-thirds majority, as with the basic vote, but with simple majority Voted. An approach that could attract opposition. Michael Becker, managing director of Karlsruher SC, has already called for the SWR to vote again with a two-thirds majority.
However, the changes to the statutes that are still necessary for investor entry would have to come with a Two-thirds majority be decided. The DFL believes that the clubs are obliged by the statutes to agree to this change in the statutes in order to implement the agreed deal. In the interview, association law expert Leuschner expressed doubts about whether the clubs have an obligation to give consent.
Is the decision regarding Hannover 96 still legally challengeable?
The parent club Hannover 96 recently made serious allegations against the DFL. In a statement it was said that the club had informed the DFL in advance of the vote of its instructions to managing director Martin Kind – Kind should vote “no”. “The DFL had to assume very specifically that Martin Kind, after years of violating the club’s board of directors’ instructions, would again ignore them.”, it was said. The DFL intentionally made the vote incomprehensible in order to achieve the desired result.
Martin Kind, Managing Director of Hannover 96
The DFL responded to Sportschau’s request: “The DFL has no knowledge of whether such disregard has occurred on the part of Martin Kind. In principle, the DFL firmly rejects the allegations of Hannover 96 eV.” The scope of the right to give instructions is regulated in the so-called Hannover 96 contract between the child and the club. The contract regulates “This question is obviously not open to interpretation between both parties.”
Association law expert Leuschner believes that it is hardly possible to challenge the December vote through legal means. On the one hand, it is still not clear whether Child actually voted “yes”. On the other hand, even voting against the instructions of the parent association does not necessarily invalidate the vote and a corresponding lawsuit would probably come too late.