Uefa president Aleksander Ceferin barbed that the European Super League representatives should “go off and do a competition between the three” rebel clubs, in a three-hour meeting at Nyon on Tuesday morning that was described as everything from an “ambush” to a “staged tribunal”.
The breakaway group were called “liars” four times.
In perhaps the one tangible outcome from the talks, however, the ESL representatives claim that Ceferin said that Uefa “won’t do anything” when asked if clubs who talk to the project “will remain free of sanctions”? Uefa had previously sought to punish any prospect of a breakaway.
It was in this spirit of “open dialogue” that A22 - a marketing agency working with the Super League - arranged a meeting with the governing body in the first place, even though there is currently a court case over whether the running of European football represents a monopoly. The next step of that, on 15 December, will effectively decide the future of the game. Although A22 had expected it to just be a meeting with Ceferin, and maybe some key figures such as European Club Association president Nasser Al-Khelaifi, they were stunned to find it was filled with all of the continental game’s main stakeholders.
The meeting was arranged in a u-shaped table, with the three A22 representatives - led by new chief executive Bernd Reichart - at the foot, encircled by the majority of the most powerful figures in the game.
Ceferin is said to have been assertively cold from the off, ranging between acerbic jokes about the European Super League and outright aggression. The Super League representatives felt it was mostly an opportunity for the various stakeholders to finally vent anger about April 2021, “and needed to get stuff off their chest” as the Uefa president went around the table.
“I am the host, I make the rules, I tell you when to speak,” Ceferin said.
After just 10 minutes, Reichart said they may as well leave if it was going to be this “hostile”, to which Ceferin again quipped that they were the ones who wanted dialogue.
There were two driving forces to the meeting. One was A22’s insistence that they just want to be able to openly discuss the future of football. Two was a series of questions that Uefa and their stakeholders wanted answering. They were: who are you? Who do you represent? What is your model?
A series of sources said they found the responses unsatisfactory, with a frequent description of “naive” or “deer in the headlights”.
As regards the first question, A22 insisted they were just a “private entity” and “marketing agency interested in the future of European football”, who were not representing the three clubs - Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus - but “a broader constituency”. This was met with scorn, as Ceferin wondered how they would get a meeting in Nyon if they were just a marketing agency.
The A22 representatives were then implored to make their case for their project and to “try and convince people”.
“They had nothing,” one source at the meeting said. “I thought they might come up with some marketing talk, even if ambushed, but they didn’t really have anything to present.”
One quip was that “in April 2021, the Super League was a model without a face, now it’s a face without a model”.
The rationale on the A22 side is that this remains an exploratory process and that they of course wouldn’t have a new model yet, given they were previously criticised for coming up with an idea without consulting people. That was one of their intentions with the meeting, especially given a previous obstacle had been Uefa threatening sanctions against anyone who met with them.
This consultation mostly involved damning comments, with the group told “you are not football” and “you keep missing that football is not a business”.
While many of the most senior figures present - such as LaLiga president Javier Tebas and Al-Khelaifi - were relatively measured in their responses, it was the fan groups present, Football Supporters Europe [FSE] and the Football Supporters’ Association [FSA], that “tore them to pieces”.
Among the statements were: “Who do you think you are?”
“We’re not falling for it.”
There were some in the room who did feel some of their arguments had a certain rationale, however, such as the idea that European football currently has no competitive balance and that it is ludicrous that a club like Legia Warsaw can never make a Champions League final.
The future of the game, however, rests on whether a Super League is the correct solution to that. The next stage of the legal proceedings, on 15 December, will start to decide what next as one of the judges gives his counsel on whether it should go to a full case. The fate of the sport rests on the interpretation of whether Uefa do run a monopoly, as the sole organisers of competition, and need to be broken up, or is this is actually necessary to preserve football’s cultural value.
Some objective observers viewed the entire meeting in this context. Although A22 would not confirm they are meeting connected figures and politicians in Brussels next week, that is widely understood to be the case.
“They say they want a dialogue on trust and understanding, but there can’t be trust after they betrayed European football last year,” the FSE told the Independent, with an explicit message to the Super League. “Please stop, you’re endangering European football and stop before you make any more damages.”
Uefa meanwhile followed with another statement attacking A22’s view of events.
Reichart claimed Uefa accepting the invitation to discussion was an “important signal to clubs and fans across Europe that we need discussion and that it is welcome, even when it is difficult,” while also suggesting that the continental governing body wanted no alteration to their position of strength even if it came to the detriment of the sport.
“Our takeaway from the meeting was that the status quo is satisfactory to Uefa,” the A22 statement read. “This position was anticipated as Uefa has been the sole, dominant operator of European club competitions since 1955.” The agency highlighted “major issues” including “the failure of European club competitions to reach their full potential, lack of adequate financial controls, affordable prices for fans, and the investment needs to fund the women’s game, infrastructure and very importantly, solidarity” as particularly relevant.
In response, Uefa were adamant that the environment of the discussion was rather different.
“A22 Sports Management has published an account of their visit to Uefa Headquarters in Nyon today. Uefa is currently checking the recording to see if they are talking about the same meeting.
“The ‘other executives’ they refer to were not faceless bureaucrats but senior stakeholders from across European football, players, clubs, leagues and fans; people who live and breathe the game every day. To fail to recognise that is disrespectful.
“If there is a “takeaway” from today, it should be that the whole of European football opposes their greedy plan, as was clearly communicated in our media release. European football has constantly demonstrated its openness to change but it must be for the benefit of the whole game not just a few clubs.
“A22 wanted dialogue so we gave them 2.5 hours of time from all of the game’s stakeholders and each one rejected their approach. As the Football Supporters’ Association said, the UK has had as many Prime Ministers in the last two months as they have supporters of their plans.
“They claim not to represent the three remaining clubs. They refuse to define what their alleged new approach is. They claim to want dialogue. But when presented with the chance, they have nothing to say.
“The time for real dialogue is tomorrow, when the Convention on the Future of European Football reconvenes here in Nyon. National associations, clubs, leagues, coaches, players, fans, agents and administrators will gather to discuss the real issues facing the game, not to spend time indulging bankers and marketing executives on ideas that put the future of the world’s favourite game in jeopardy.”
