Should governments legislate to null and void the contracts of players and managers at break away clubs.

[RMNottm]

I am interested in our sentiments regarding the position the players and managers are in.

My view is- kick out these clubs out at the end of the season. The breakaway clubs are banned from FA, UEFA, FIFA competitions.

Therefore, If you are player or manager at those clubs which are ejected at the end of the season by the sanctioning bodies the national governments should pass laws to null and void their contracts on the grounds they are no longer football clubs.

At that point those players can choice to take the big money in sports entertainment (while it lasts) or play football.

Oh, and if you think governments cannot do this; COVID laws!

 

[inaglasshouse]

You are right in that I think the only people who can sort this mess out are the government. Businesses will only act in their perceived interests.
The other 14 are meeting today - they will condemn and slap the wrists and try to negotiate a piece of the action. they will reframe it as modernisation and necessary because of the covid losses.
I would be shocked if it transpires they are actually prepared to expel the 6 if they don't reverse. They will say they can't do this because of the fans of those clubs but it's not about that, it's about the money and the product. How many will watch Wolves Burnley on the BBC next weekend? They would be turkeys voting for Christmas to expel them.
The only people who can intervene are those without a financial interest in the club's or indeed the old and new media. Is that the UK government?

 

[Deleted member 9202LYK]

yes.

 

[Lisas Husband]

The contracts will be a very difficult ask for even the government to render null and void. There aren't any contracts as such for particular competitions but to the club itself as an employer.
My say would be for the government to put the pressure on the broadcasters to resist the temptation to broadcast the games. No money from those would leave a massive hole and where then is the incentive? No Sky and BT Sport and also it's quite easy to make sure that the online broadcasters like Amazon and Dazn are blocked inside the UK.

 

[RMNottm]

The contracts will be a very difficult ask for even the government to render null and void. There aren't any contracts as such for particular competitions but to the club itself as an employer.
My say would be for the government to put the pressure on the broadcasters to resist the temptation to broadcast the games. No money from those would leave a massive hole and where then is the incentive? No Sky and BT Sport and also it's quite easy to make sure that the online broadcasters like Amazon and Dazn are blocked inside the UK.

No its simple, employment law changes all the time. More holiday, minimum wage, consider flexible working, diversity protection. It is illegal to practise as a medical practitioner without NMC or GMC approval, work on gas installations without GasSafe, fit a window unless build regs approved unless Fensa approved, sell food without hygiene certificate.

I am amazed people think this is hard.

 

[Lisas Husband]

No its simple, employment law changes all the time. More holiday, minimum wage, consider flexible working, diversity protection. It is illegal to practise as a medical practitioner without NMC or GMC approval, work on gas installations without GasSafe, fit a window unless build regs approved unless Fensa approved, sell food without hygiene certificate.

I am amazed people think this is hard.

I've never looked into employment contracts and government legislation towards them, therefore I and many others won't know.

 

[Bondi Wolf]

I would be shocked if it transpires they are actually prepared to expel the 6 if they don't reverse

I read the rules of the league the other day and it needs 75% to agree to anything in a vote.

My theory is that’s why Spurs are in on this, it means no votes can go against them and they were the skintest.

 

[Lisas Husband]

No its simple, employment law changes all the time. More holiday, minimum wage, consider flexible working, diversity protection. It is illegal to practise as a medical practitioner without NMC or GMC approval, work on gas installations without GasSafe, fit a window unless build regs approved unless Fensa approved, sell food without hygiene certificate.

I am amazed people think this is hard.

What I do know (as my wife owns her own company) if government change the law and it affects the working day then the company has to either let that person(s) go, or change/rewrite their contracts to suit the new legislation and company.

 

[RMNottm]

I read the rules of the league the other day and it needs 75% to agree to anything in a vote.

My theory is that’s why Spurs are in on this, it means no votes can go against them and they were the skintest.

Would the 75% include the clubs being sanctioned? That would be strange, not having the defendant on the jury seems a basic principle.

 

[Very Proud (AKA Still Proud)]

Would be very wary about this. The inference is that any player could tear up his contract with any club. Another club could just come along at any point and offer big bucks, they resign and become free agents.

 

[Lisas Husband]

I read the rules of the league the other day and it needs 75% to agree to anything in a vote.

My theory is that’s why Spurs are in on this, it means no votes can go against them and they were the skintest.

Why can't anyone vote against Spuds?

 

[VancouverWolf]

No.
Really bad idea.

 

[RMNottm]

Would be very wary about this. The inference is that any player could tear up his contract with any club. Another club could just come along at any point and offer big bucks, they resign and become free agents.

No that's not what I saying. If the clubs are no longer under the FIFA umbrella, the acknowledged sanctioning body, their contracts are debatably subject to force majeure. I cannot be a professional footballer if the club is not a football club, third parties cannot hold ownership. If you play for Wolves this does not apply. These clubs are leaving the game. If UEFA, FIFA, the FA, or Premier League expel them (and as they are clear working against the interests of the these bodies) they are as much a football club as me and my mates playing five a side.

Games have to be sanctioned. Kick them out at the end of the season.

 

[BigSteve]

No...

And I'd rather keep the government out of it altogether.

I don't see the PL kicking anybody out.

 

[BigSteve]

No that's not what I saying. If the clubs are no longer under the FIFA umbrella, the acknowledged sanctioning body, their contracts are debatably subject to force majeure. I cannot be a professional footballer if the club is not a football club, third parties cannot hold ownership. If you play for Wolves this does not apply. These clubs are leaving the game. If UEFA, FIFA, the FA, or Premier League expel them (and as they are clear working against the interests of the these bodies) they are as much a football club as me and my mates playing five a side.

Games have to be sanctioned. Kick them out at the end of the season.

Possibly the biggest load of nonsense I've ever read.

 

[Oldgold Wolfcub]

Anything can happen. Bosman!!!
I would guess though this will be decided outside of present laws but influenced by the present football autorities for approval.
The balance of the contract would be in favour of the player if a fundamental part of the contract is changed.

 

[bod101]

Possibly the biggest load of nonsense I've ever read.

I'd be interested to hear the counter argument

 

[BigSteve]

I'd be interested to hear the counter argument

A football club doesn't cease to be a football club by creating an alternative to the champions league...?

 

[Contrarian]

What happened to "Keep Politics out of Sport"?

What's it to do with Governments? Isn't it for the Premier League and EUFA to deal with it?

if government is going to get involved, I'd prefer they get start by banning playing in those countries with real human rights issues. Starting with the Qatar world cup.

The super league looks like an employment and social thing, I don't see any crime being committed.

 

[bod101]

A football club doesn't cease to be a football club by creating an alternative to the champions league...?

i think in the sense of being sanctioned, much like the example that a gasman cant be a gasman unless gas safe etc.

 

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

The contracts will be a very difficult ask for even the government to render null and void. There aren't any contracts as such for particular competitions but to the club itself as an employer.
My say would be for the government to put the pressure on the broadcasters to resist the temptation to broadcast the games. No money from those would leave a massive hole and where then is the incentive? No Sky and BT Sport and also it's quite easy to make sure that the online broadcasters like Amazon and Dazn are blocked inside the UK.

People need to stop pinning their hopes on broadcasters refusing to pay for the product. These giant clubs will make more money selling streams direct to the consumer.

 

[forge]

The government should be allowed to implement an independent regulatory board which should have this power.

 

[VancouverWolf]

People need to stop pinning their hopes on broadcasters refusing to pay for the product. These giant clubs will make more money selling streams direct to the consumer.

Then hopefully the PL will do the same. I’d prefer to pay the PL directly rather than DAZN if they’re also showing the Slimey Six.

 

[Lisas Husband]

People need to stop pinning their hopes on broadcasters refusing to pay for the product. These giant clubs will make more money selling streams direct to the consumer.

The government can stop these streams though. The illegal streams are the ones they'll struggle with but if the government says "Sorry, no can do" then that's it.

 

[Lisas Husband]

The government can stop these streams though. The illegal streams are the ones they'll struggle with but if the government says "Sorry, no can do" then that's it.

But no club makes money from an illegal stream.

 

[WWFC4EVA]

The government should treat the owners of these clubs like owners of listed buildings that are being left to fall to rack and ruin. Issue them with compulsory purchase orders and take them back, as national interests, on behalf of the fans and the national game!

 

[jrpb-3]

Any breaking of contracts should be down to the players, but maybe governing bodies should look favorably on them should they wish to do so. The ESL is being forced on the players and managers and fans of these clubs as much as everyone else, and many of them will be just as against it. Maybe we should be encouraging those players to refuse to play for the clubs if they do go ahead with this.

 

[WickedWolfie]

A football club doesn't cease to be a football club by creating an alternative to the champions league...?

It ceases to be an sanctioned football club able to access all of the game's facilities and play in their competitions though.

 

[Me Babbies]

It would be interesting to see what the work permit situation for foreign nationals would be if they are no longer participating in the national league system...

 

[WickedWolfie]

It would be interesting to see what the work permit situation for foreign nationals would be if they are no longer participating in the national league system...

Something that a couple of us raised previously, not least because the FA help to set the criteria...

 

[Wandsworth Wolf]

Forget the clubs - don’t FIFA / UEFA hold the registrations of all professional footballers? Wouldn’t a ESL player have to withdraw that to go play in this unsanctioned league. Surely the governing bodies wouldn’t allow players to be half-in, half-out.
So did those 12 clubs anticipate having different squads for domestic and ESL? Maybe the ESL squads would be full of mercenaries who would be prepared to turn their backs on domestic and international football. Which begs the question - why bother? Idiots.

 

[WW1963]

Why can't anyone vote against Spuds?

5/20th leaves 75% - enough to vote all five clubs out of the PL forever.

6/20th leaves 70% - not enough to volte all six clubs out of the PL forever.

Spurs were being used big time.

 

[RMNottm]

A football club doesn't cease to be a football club by creating an alternative to the champions league...?

It does it is in banned by the governing bodies Rochdale? Plenty of examples for financial misconduct . Plenty of examples of organisations losing licenses to operate.

but clearly rubbish

 

[Bondi Wolf]

I read the rules of the league the other day and it needs 75% to agree to anything in a vote.

My theory is that’s why Spurs are in on this, it means no votes can go against them and they were the skintest.

Would the 75% include the clubs being sanctioned? That would be strange, not having the defendant on the jury seems a basic principle.

Why can't anyone vote against Spuds?

I don't doubt this, but do you have a source for the 75%? I was under the impression that decisions required a 2/3rds majority, which is 14 out of the 20?

I'm quoting @Bondi Wolf from the government thread.

I took this from the Premier League Handbook

B.7. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 27, the League may expel a Club from membership upon a special Resolution to that effect being passed by a majority of not less than three-quarters of such members as (being entitled to do so) vote by their representatives or by proxy at a General Meeting of which notice specifying the intention to propose the Resolution has been duly given.

This is an exception to Article 27 which is the usual two-thirds majority which @thisisgil points out

27. Except where the Act specifies that a particular resolution of the Company requires a greater majority, two-thirds of such Members who are present and who vote by their Representative or by proxy at a General Meeting of which notice has been duly given shall be required for the passing of all resolutions of the Company.

My theory was that if only five EPL clubs joined then the other 15 could vote to kick them out, but having six meant that the three-quarters vote couldn't be reached. It seems the Premier League is owned by the clubs, and they have to hand over their 'share' when relegated.

Spurs were the obvious candidate to become the sixth member, despite never winning the Premier League, as their ground has cost them dearly, and they are money grabbing. I just can't imagine when the discussions were taking place with Madrid and Juventus they were saying "we must have Tottenham in this."

 

[Lisas Husband]

5/20th leaves 75% - enough to vote all five clubs out of the PL forever.

6/20th leaves 70% - not enough to volte all six clubs out of the PL forever.

Spurs were being used big time.

I see.
I wasn't aware that the putrid sicks would be allowed a vote.