I generally dreaded there’d come when we’d truly lament lashing off this present country’s footballing royal gems, and Prods, to proprietors with no grip of our danger and-prize pyramid design. What’s more, here we are. The ESL shut shop plan may have gone until further notice, however without genuine legislative intercession, it’ll be back. For us Gooners, it’s completely felt like the most recent advance in an unabashed double-crossing – one that started with leaving Highbury and was aggravated by our non-attendant landowner’s acquisition of the pitiful extent of offers still in private hands. The outcome is fans feeling like just an unknown income stream for our clean new ground.
Any positives? Conceivably, on the off chance that it moves a move towards the Bundesliga proprietorship model. Football is excessively significant for it to be the fiefdom of a couple of ravenous men.
Should the “enormous six” be rebuffed? Monetarily, yes: the solitary fitting approach to focus on those responsible.Aston Estate
As a “heritage fan” of a clearly insignificant club I’m quite reasonable about my own situation in the football hierarchy (I’m Ronnie Corbett to the proprietors’ John Cleese). So the ravenousness, the dismissal for fans and the total “What planet are they on?” conduct were nothing unexpected. The ESL wouldn’t have changed my life in any case: it wouldn’t influence my Saturdays one scribble in the event that I never saw us play the “huge six” ever again.ny positives? In the event that the solidarity that fans have shown can be bridled to appropriately battle prejudice and homophobia, at that point yes. Obviously more fan portrayal higher up in clubs and in the game is required, and not simply empty talk to it by the same token.
Would it be a good idea for them to be rebuffed? I totally can’t help contradicting our President that consigning the six would act naturally hurt for every other person. The “hit the proprietors not the fans” stuff is gibberish, as well – where was this reasoning when the executives at Cover/Sheffield Wednesday and the rest disrupted the guidelines? So each of the six ought to be consigned. It would make future seasons a more level battleground, precisely what the six don’t need. It would shake out the nouveaux enormous six fans, and give all the Title clubs six additional sellouts along the way.Brighton
I love football, yet I wouldn’t have watched the parade of an ESL. It’s completely featured again that we are so fortunate to have Tony Blossom as Brighton proprietor. The club called the ESL “the most recent in a disturbing and developing rundown of furtive endeavors from a little gathering of clubs”, and our players wore “Champions Class, procure it” Shirts.
Any positives? The manner in which it joined fans. Also, despite the fact that it’s nauseating to see the public authority unexpectedly seem to think often about the game in the wake of releasing clubs bankrupt while players and specialists get moronic cash, we should utilize this energy to push for change, both for fans (who are cheated) and players (who need to play an excessive number of games in view of television cash).
Would it be a good idea for them to be rebuffed? It’s maybe better to coordinate energy into the most ideal method of moving forward.Burnley
The entire gutless, avaricious idea was a flat out shame. We’ve seen for quite a long time how these “huge” clubs menace to get what they need, yet fortunately they’ve taken on way too much this time.Any positives? The manner in which everybody met up to battle it, from fan gatherings, players, ex-players, intellectuals, writers, supervisors to government and even eminence. What’s more, our seat, Alan Speed, unmistakably gets it. The guaranteed fan-drove audit should now occur. We can’t have a little arrangement of clubs choosing the fate of football. They did this behind the backs of their fans when those fans couldn’t go to games. Despicable.
Would it be a good idea for them to be rebuffed? They can’t simply pull off it, they truly can’t – yet how would we rebuff the proprietors, as opposed to the fans?Chelsea
I’m so baffled with Chelsea’s inclusion and the melancholy assertion in the wake of pulling out – yet not amazed. I surely wouldn’t have upheld the club in the ESL. The fault lies with the individuals who run the club for Abramovich: the buck stops with Buck. He should go.
Any positives? The show of fan power: it’s unmistakable, ideally, that clubs should include allies more when changes are being assessed. Yet, will football truly change because of this? I question it. Uefa are driving this money‑first culture, as demonstrated by the new Heroes Association design.
Would it be a good idea for them to be rebuffed? A troublesome one. Rebuffing fans and players for something they have no influence over is brutal – except for possibly a year’s restriction from Europe would be the best approach to place a marker in the ground for when the present circumstance no uncertainty shows up once more. It’s poor to see groups like Everton calling for point allowances from which they would profit.