- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Super League may NOT actually be happening!
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:15 pm to bkPoseidon
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:15 pm to bkPoseidon
Replacing the World Cup...while that sounds ridiculous, the World Cup as it exists today is not the same without the players from whatever 20 Super League teams. Separation of players across two tournaments becomes a travesty for everyone.
0
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:15 pm to DByrd2
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:16 pm to DByrd2
quote:
If that's the case, we've been arguing the same thing the whole time.
You keep saying UEFA, when I don't think you know what it means. And you understand that these clubs did agree to rules and regulations that operate on multiple levels, right? A PL club agreed to the PL's rules, the rules of the English FA, the rules of UEFA, of which the English FA is a member, the IFAB, and FIFA. There are rules specific to this exact situation with regards to the PL, which results in a tribunal being called, made up of 3 people, who have wide leeway to determine penalties. That you pretend that these clubs didn't agree to these rules is hilarious to me. Also, a sanctioning body isn't a closed system. Anyone can start a club in the English FA, as long as you agree to their rules and regulations.
The game these PL clubs are playing is straight gamesmanship, daring the PL to penalize them. You really think that among the bylaws these clubs agreed to, that there wouldn't be a bylaw for this exact situation?
quote:
I could give a frick about fairness. These owners didn't just kill the game. You're being delusional if you think so.
Link me to where I said they killed the game. I've been very succinct in my arguments that the mediocrity of these clubs is being rewarded, which I'm against. I never said they were killing the game. I haven't even gotten worked up. Again, can you tell me what UEFA is now?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:19 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
You really think that among the bylaws these clubs agreed to, that there wouldn't be a bylaw for this exact situation?
Quote ithe bylaws for each "competition" or STFU.
That's all you've done is scream bylaws and not quoted a single one. And you've gotten worked up in the process.
This post was edited on 4/18/21 at 8:20 pm
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:19 pm to DByrd2
quote:
Never argued it is a good idea. Just that they aren't some evil entity for taking the opportunity they saw.
I mean, if the only thing that matters is the relentless chase for short term profit regardless of cultural significance, long term profit, or fostering other community goals, then YOLO, I guess.
When LSU decides to disband athletics when some SJW Board of Directors gets a federal grant to disband the patriarchy and give themselves a raise with some of the extra grant money, I'm sure you'll just say it's people "taking an opportunity they saw". I'm sure you'll bend over to the "free market". BuT mUh FrEe MaRkEt ReSpOnSe. I feel like I'm arguing with IB Chinaman about his Daddy Xi doing whatever he wants under the guise of the "free market". This is literally the same thing.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:20 pm to DByrd2
quote:
You're not wrong. If you like socialism and disagree with my principles that I agree with
Any regulation is socialism? That's an extreme argument by any stretch of the imagination.
quote:
Side Question: Does it really bother some people that much when you have a neutral opinion that isn't emotionally driven?
Mocking these owners isn't an emotionally driven argument. My arguments have been quite clear I think. You just don't understand what UEFA is.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:20 pm to crazy4lsu
American sports resemble socialism way more than European sports
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:22 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I mean, if the only thing that matters is the relentless chase for short term profit regardless of cultural significance, long term profit, or fostering other community goals, then YOLO, I guess.
A free or open market doesn't GAF about culture if it makes money.
quote:
When LSU decides to disband athletics when some SJW Board of Directors gets a federal grant to disband the patriarchy and give themselves a raise with some of the extra grant money, I'm sure you'll just say it's people "taking an opportunity they saw". I'm sure you'll bend over to the "free market". BuT mUh FrEe MaRkEt ReSpOnSe. I feel like I'm arguing with IB Chinaman about his Daddy Xi doing whatever he wants under the guise of the "free market". This is literally the same thing.
When LSU does that, I'll vote with my money and throw it to a product that I can support the principles of.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:22 pm to DByrd2
The bylaw I referenced is quite broad, and gives the league leeway to enact a wide variety of punishments.
I guess quoting bylaws would be lost on a person who thinks these clubs did not agree to these rules beforehand. Where is my link to where I said they were killing the game?
quote:
That's all you've done is scream bylaws and not quoted a single one.
I guess quoting bylaws would be lost on a person who thinks these clubs did not agree to these rules beforehand. Where is my link to where I said they were killing the game?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:23 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Liverpool supposed to be a club of the people
Now fricking over its people
This basically goes against everything that community stands for
Ahh yes, because Liverpool are expected to refrain from joining a mega league that every other big six club is joining and neuter themselves financially when they’re already at a financial disadvantage to city, Chelsea, and United.
All of the elite talent is already monopolized. When players enter their prime they are going to one of the 12 clubs that are joining this league. Don’t act like this changes anything in that regard. A “small” club hasn’t won the champions league since 2003-2004 when Porto won it. European football has had the parity of college football for quite some time now. State funded oil clubs are okay to compete against Sheffield and Brighton, but by god it’s a travesty if the biggest clubs in the world want to play in their own league.
This faux outrage is ridiculous. The playing field hasn’t been level as it is for a long time. These are teams/owners capitalizing on their clubs value. If/when this goes through, Bayern, PSG, Dortmund, Marseille, Lyon, Roma, etc will join within the next 5 years. Money makes the world go round, and these clubs aren’t going to miss out on a mountain of it out of principle. Like it or not, this is happening and it will grow before it shrinks.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:25 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Any regulation is socialism? That's an extreme argument by any stretch of the imagination.
Wanting to control the market by way of monopolies is. And I disagree with that principle at home and abroad.
If it helps you, I won't use the acronym anymore. I'll refer to them as "domestic leagues and competitions who share profit in their own agreed to system".
With, of course, the asterisk being "did they agree not to do something like this and is that bound by contract".
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:27 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
The bylaw I referenced
But refuse to quote.
quote:
I guess quoting bylaws would be lost on a person who thinks these clubs did not agree to these rules beforehand.
That's not how intelligence, which it seems you lack, works.
If it is there then quote it.
quote:
Where is my link to where I said they were killing the game?
You didn't say that. But if that isn't the side you are taking, where is this ridiculous outrage coming from champ?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:28 pm to DByrd2
quote:
Wanting to control the market by way of monopolies is.
How is an association of non-profit entities established for the express purpose of governing the game a monopoly? Who is stopping these clubs from forming their own? Be specific. Why don’t you cite the bylaw for me that is stopping them?
quote:
If it helps you, I won't use the acronym anymore. I'll refer to them as "domestic leagues and competitions who share profit in their own agreed to system".
Haha, I just explained to you what UEFA is, and you still mangle the definition. Bravo.
Again, please quote for me that line where I said they were killing the game?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:31 pm to DByrd2
quote:
A free or open market doesn't GAF about culture if it makes money.
Not. Every. Business. Decision. Is. Good.
Consumers care about culture. Consumers care about the idea of their local club competing for it all.
quote:
When LSU does that, I'll vote with my money and throw it to a product that I can support the principles of.
A free or open market doesn't GAF about your money when the decision makers report a quarterly gain right out the gate, I thought?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:33 pm to Riseupfromtherubble
quote:
This faux outrage is ridiculous. The playing field hasn’t been level as it is for a long time. These are teams/owners capitalizing on their clubs value
Short term capitalization at the expense of everyone else, ultimately ending in everyone being worse off. You're a Longhorn Network guy.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:37 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
How is an association of non-profit entities established for the express purpose of governing the game a monopoly?
You left out the part of them not wanting other entities to profit off of "their" market. Nice try though.
quote:
Who is stopping these clubs from forming their own? Be specific.
Potentially the domestic clubs and competitions. Whose right to do that will be supported by me if it is legal for them to do so.
quote:
Why don’t you cite the bylaw for me that is stopping them?
You're the one that brought it up Sparjy, I'm not doing your homework for you. With all this knowledge you're cock strong to bring but leaving out, expected you to be able to produce.
Until that point, I'll continue toASSUME that these bylaws are a made up straw man argument by you. Again, you are the one that mentioned bylaws.
quote:
Again, please quote for me that line where I said they were killing the game?
Maybe reading is hard for you. It's a post or a few up where I addressed this.
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:42 pm to DByrd2
quote:
But refuse to quote.
Looking at the rule book, there is actually more than one bylaw, but the description in B.6 would suffice. Like I said, it is quite broad, but it gives clubs themselves leeway to expel any member, which is a different bylaw than the one where a tribunal is called.
quote:
You didn't say that. But if that isn't the side you are taking, where is this ridiculous outrage coming from champ?
The side I’m taking is agains the side that rewards the utter mediocrity of the big clubs. You should be outraged too, if you were consistent. The reason why is simple. The Sky deal changed the nature of the league, just as the advent of the PL changed the nature of the league. You have big money and better coaches at a whole slew of what were once also-rans, and absolute losers like the Glazers and the Kroenkes are at risk of losing their investment more than ever. Notice who I am including in my assessment of mediocrity and who I am not. Mediocre clubs not being rewarded by virtue of their historical standing is a very benign position.
This post was edited on 4/18/21 at 8:43 pm
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:43 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Not. Every. Business. Decision. Is. Good.
Consumers care about culture. Consumers care about the idea of their local club competing for it all.
I get that. But the market determines that. My argument has not once been that it is right for the game or people in general. I disagree with those who say that it is greedy and unethical to do this on the grounds that ethics aren't always bound in legality, which is the case here.
As Riseupfromtherubble suggested, I am at odds with the faux outrage and acting like world market unwritten rules override what these owners are doing.
quote:
A free or open market doesn't GAF about your money when the decision makers report a quarterly gain right out the gate, I thought?
Huh? Maybe I am not reading that right...
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:47 pm to DByrd2
quote:
You left out the part of them not wanting other entities to profit off of "their" market
You understand how the game was codified right? If you did, then you would understand why this is so idiotic. Nothing is stopping them from starting their own football association. The English FA is under no duty to let a rival operate under a market that they themselves created.
quote:
Potentially the domestic clubs and competitions. Whose right to do that will be supported by me if it is legal for them to do so.
Yes, rather than the illegal methods so often used.
quote:
I'm not doing your homework for you. With all this knowledge you're cock strong to bring but leaving out, expected you to be able to produce.
I’d love for you to just give me a history of the game. I’m sure it will be accurate with full of understanding about why specific structures developed.
quote:
Until that point, I'll continue toASSUME that these bylaws are a made up straw man argument by you. Again, you are the one that mentioned bylaws.
They are not, as each association reserves the right to expel clubs for whatever reason they see fit. They don’t even need a good reason, though generally they do so only with regards to finances. Do you know how voluntary organizations work?
Posted on 4/18/21 at 8:48 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Looking at the rule book, there is actually more than one bylaw, but the description in B.6 would suffice. Like I said, it is quite broad, but it gives clubs themselves leeway to expel any member, which is a different bylaw than the one where a tribunal is called.
I'll read that in a few. Actually now if you care to give me the title of the document.
quote:
The side I’m taking is agains the side that rewards the utter mediocrity of the big clubs. You should be outraged too, if you were consistent. The reason why is simple. The Sky deal changed the nature of the league, just as the advent of the PL changed the nature of the league. You have big money and better coaches at a whole slew of what were once also-rans, and absolute losers like the Glazers and the Kroenkes are at risk of losing their investment more than ever. Notice who I am including in my assessment of mediocrity and who I am not. Mediocre clubs not being rewarded by virtue of their historical standing is a very benign position.
You can take that stance and still be of the mind that things should be worked out legally, and if UEFA and the clubs don't stand up to these clubs and ban them then they are complicit in the downfall of the game.
Which is all I have been arguing at all until you wanted a socialist vs capitalist debate.
Page 11 of 49
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News