Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Cy's avatar

I find this comical. So we go back to the model of "only the 2 or 3 teams with rich owners who are probably more corrupt than any other owners" wins? How is that different from or better than 15 clubs in the ESL?

Expand full comment
Brian's avatar

I keep reading about the German 50+1 model as a desirable reform but I'm not sure I agree. First, the Bundesliga has absolutely zero competition. Bayern is set to win its ninth title in a row without breaking a sweat. When another team dares challenge Bayern they just buy that team's best player (see also PSG buying Mbappe when Monaco had the audacity to dethrone them). With the 50+1 model in place, Bayern's ridiculous financial advantage over its competitors seems insurmountable. Unless of course someone (or say an energy drink company) was able to find a loophole around the 50+1 model.

That's the second factor that has me questioning the efficacy of the 50+1 model. What's to stop Abu Dhabi from finding a work around to "buy" Man City like Red Bull (err RasenBallsport) while smaller clubs like West Brom are purchased by "true" fans? The financial gaps will still exist with no guarantee of increased competition. Also, if the big clubs with workarounds are still controlled by deep pocketed owners, what's to stop them from trying for another Super League?

Banning agents, whatever you think of Raiola, is inherently unfriendly to labor. Seems like an unnecessary step when clubs could simply refuse to pay those exorbitant fees.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts