The Rapid Rise and Spectacular Fall of the European Super League

Football plays a unique role in Europe, and specifically in the UK. It breaks down the class barriers that often come between the working class and the middle class, and it unites them behind a common cause. The UK Culture Secretary, Oliver Dowden, described this phenomenon in a speech to the House of Commons in which he criticized the Super League: “Football clubs aren’t just businesses; they define communities across the country.” For 56 hours, however, these communities united beyond even the geographical divides that usually act as barriers, and united against the financial giants that were at the helm of this project. This David v. Goliath moment is the brief story of how these communities managed to topple the commercial master plan of a handful of greedy European bureaucrats.

Reports began to break of a rumored “breakaway” European Super League during a match between Arsenal and Fulham on Sunday the 18 of April. Mikel Arteta, the manager of Arsenal Football Club, was asked about the rumors after the game. His lack of knowledge or involvement was apparent from his double take after the project was mentioned. This interaction is a perfect example of the disconnect that was in place prior to the project between the owners of these clubs, and the footballing communities that they preside over.

The suggested project involved 12 clubs breaking away from their respective national and international competitions and forming a new, exclusive championship. It is precisely this idea of exclusivity that was a central reason for the project’s unpopularity.

Domestic championships are a tier-based system. They reward clubs for merit and punish them for inadequacy through promotion and relegation between championships. Despite the financial disparity that exists between clubs, this gives them all the opportunity to challenge “the Big Six” (Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea, Tottenham & Arsenal); these teams being the six wealthiest in the UK (prior to the recent takeover of Newcastle United by the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia).

An example of this type of success story is when Leicester City F.C. went from playing in the Championship, the second division of English football, to winning the Premier League in the space of three years. While this type of event occurs less and less due to the increasing wealth gap between clubs, the important thing is that it remains a possibility, despite its unlikeliness.

This possibility of challenging the bigger teams and winning incentivizes fans of smaller clubs to get back behind their teams in a more active manner. This includes attending football games and buying club merchandise, which provide the club with active moral and financial support.

An exclusive championship without the possibility of failure through regulation would also motivate players less as they would be guaranteed the same quality of football games each year. This demotivation would become even more pronounced as a breakaway league would remove the financial bonuses that are often included within each players’ contracts which reward exceptional individual performance, in the context of high team performance.

The argument of those driving the project, notably Florentino Perez, the president of Real Madrid C.F., is that the Super League will “save football” through the millions of euros it would receive in television and sponsorship revenue. In addition to this, the project would include the 12 most successful teams in Europe in order to create a league with a high level of skill, thus making it an attractive concept for football fans world-wide. However, both arguments were unsatisfactory and, more importantly, unconvincing in the eyes of supporters across the globe, and particularly in Britain.

Firstly, the poor planning on behalf of the business titans behind the project manifested the disconnect that exists between owners and fans. The prioritization of money over supporters in an attempt to reinvigorate the football economy reflects a complete misreading of the footballing community, as the leaders of the project rapidly came to understand following many fan-led protests across the country.

While the argument of creating a league that plays more attractive football may appear to hold more weight, fans argued instead that such a project would, in actual fact, render football more boring and less attractive for fans. They argued that the existing international competition, the UEFA Champions League, was special because it is infrequent. The fact that matches from this competition were rare during the football season and often brought similarly successful European teams in contact created a certain aura and hype around the competition, which fans argued would disappear with the creation of the Super League, as it would sensitize them to elite-tier football.

It is interesting to consider such an argument from a scientific perspective as well, to better comprehend this idea of sensitization, as it holds some scientific weight. The hypothalamus, a section of the brain responsible for maintaining constant certain aspects of the body, such as heart rate, blood pressure and hormone levels, releases a neurotransmitter called dopamine to amplify a person’s feeling of pleasure during any kind of enjoyable activity. When continued amounts of dopamine are injected into one’s system, it causes the person to become resistant to the effects of dopamine, and thus receive less pleasure from the same amount of dopamine. This is what many football fans think could happen as a result of the creation of a Super League.

As well as the heavy opposition from the army of English supporters, there was also significant political pressure from leading European politicians, including Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, which led to the project’s suspension. The project’s clear unpopularity provided governments with the opportunity to side with fans and gain favor among voters and none made more use of this opportunity than Boris Johnson, who, as Prime Minister of a stagnating economy and fragile, post-Brexit union, needed a story to divert attention from Britain’s domestic issues.

As a European football official said, “not all politicians are football fans, but every politician is aware that every fan is a voter.” The pressure created by the possibility of political intervention was pivotal. However, this was only made possible by the strength of the popular revolt against the project.

This debacle has highlighted the problems of greed and elitism that currently plague the football industry and has raised important questions as to how club ownership should be structured. Many have referenced the German 50+1 structure which prevents any one body being the majority stakeholder in a club by placing 51% of the club’s ownership in the hands of fans. Chief reporter Tobi Altschaeffi of the German sports newspaper SportBild stated that it is precisely this ownership structure that creates such a strong community surrounding the club, as it involves fans in a more active manner.

Boris Johnson went as far as to announce a “root-and-branch investigation into the governance of football and the role of fans in that governance.” Oliver Dowden went on to mention the governance structure that German clubs employ as a possible influence, if there were to be a restructuring of Premier League club ownership.

One would hope that government intervention is not necessary. However, as has been the case time and time again, owners have consistently shown a lack of empathy with their club’s players and supporters and the wider footballing community, and have chosen instead to put their own monetary gain first.

While this does create a cause for concern, the speed at which the project was reversed due to public outcry and political pressure should also give football fans confidence that there is a strong enough community to keep these billionaire owners and business titans in check. While many might still view the opposition to the Super League as being excessive, it is important to understand that these communities only seek to maintain the integrity of what is fundamentally a game that unites and empowers people, no matter their class, race, religion, sexuality, disability or any other factor which divides us.

- Hugo Lagergren