The last remaining proponents of a European Super League attempted to revive the idea Thursday after a landmark court ruling limited UEFA's and FIFA's ability to block a breakaway league run by soccer's dominant clubs.
In a long-awaited judgment, the European Union’s Court of Justice wrote that UEFA and FIFA, the European and global soccer governing bodies, were “abusing a dominant position” when they opposed and threatened to sanction the so-called Super League in 2021.
The league's architects, an opaque company called A22 backed by Real Madrid and FC Barcelona, jumped on the decision to unveil revamped plans, including a new meritocratic format for men's and women's competitions that would usurp the current UEFA Champions League.
But the Court or Justice clarified: Its ruling "does not mean that a competition such as the Super League project must necessarily be approved."
And it does not mean that the Super League will suddenly come back to life.
In fact, the full 258-paragraph judgment is far more favorable to UEFA and FIFA than initial headlines suggested. It does not undercut their power nor invalidate their self-appointed positions atop the sport.
And no legalese could invalidate the fundamental reason the Super League swiftly collapsed in 2021, two days after 12 top clubs tried to launch it. Nine of those 12 clubs withdrew amid backlash from fans, coaches, players, politicians, and a broad coalition of soccer's established stakeholders. The establishment all viewed the project as a greedy attempt by wealthy owners and commercially driven institutions to consolidate power. And on Thursday, rose once again to shout down a potential Super League 2.0.
So no, explosive change is not imminent. Here is what we know about the Super League’s future after Thursday’s ruling.
What did the European Court of Justice rule?
A22 had accused UEFA of operating an illegal monopoly on European soccer — controlling tournaments (like the Champions League), selling commercial rights to monetize them, and enforcing rules that impede other entities from creating renegade tournaments (like the Super League) that challenge the Champions League's supremacy.
The court ruled, essentially, that UEFA had indeed done this. “The FIFA and UEFA rules making any new interclub football project subject to their prior approval, such as the Super League, and prohibiting clubs and players from playing in those competitions, are unlawful,” the court explained in a news release.
Its full reasoning and context, though, were more nuanced. The rules were unlawful because they weren’t sufficiently “transparent, objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate.” But, with some updates, the rules have a right to exist.
Paragraph 144 of the court's judgment confirmed, crucially, that UEFA and FIFA are allowed to maintain and enforce rules that "guarantee the homogeneity and coordination of [] competitions within an overall match calendar" and rules that "promote … the holding of sporting competitions based on equal opportunities and merit."
So, assuming the rules are amended to comply with EU law — a process that already began last year — UEFA can (and likely will) still control European soccer. It can (and likely would) prevent the formation of a Super League.
And FIFA will control global soccer. "With the greatest respect for the European Court of Justice," FIFA president Gianni Infantino said in a statement, "today's judgment does not change anything, really."
How did the Super League founders respond?
Despite all those details, Real Madrid president Florentino Perez “welcome[d] the decision with great satisfaction.”
A22 boldly proclaimed that, "after nearly 70 years, UEFA's monopoly over European football has come to an end. Without fear of punishment, clubs can now propose and openly discuss new ideas for midweek European competitions. With the #RightToCompete, a new era begins."
And within a few hours, with pre-produced videos on a spruced-up website, they'd already proposed two such competitions.
What is the new Super League proposal?
The “European Men’s Super League” would be an expanded, amended version of the reviled April 2021 Super League — with one key difference: Nobody would be guaranteed a permanent place in it.
Back in 2021, the 12 founders pitched a 20-team league. They hoped to woo three more traditional powers, and they indicated that those 15 clubs would be entrenched, immune to relegation out of the Super League. Only five places would be open to others, via qualification through domestic leagues.
That semi-closed format reeked of unabashed self-interest. It drew widespread, scathing rebuke. So, two-and-a-half years later, the new proposal features promotion and relegation. The reimagined format would feature 64 teams divided into three tiers — 16 in the top tier, 16 in the second, and 32 in third. And after each season …
In Tier 1: Two last-place teams fall down into Tier 2; the Tier 2 finalists replace them in Tier 1.
In Tier 2: Two last-place teams fall down into Tier 3; the Tier 3 finalists replace them in Tier 2.
In Tier 3: 20 of the 32 teams — the bottom five in each eight-team group — fall out of the Super League altogether; they’re replaced by other clubs, who, like for the current Champions League, qualify through performance in their domestic leagues.
The women's format would replicate the top two tiers of the men's competition. Both are explained, verbally and visually, here and here.
Their problem is that there aren’t 64 or even 32 teams that want to participate. There are, it seems, only two.
Which clubs are in the Super League?
Within 48 hours of their April 2021 announcement, nine of the 12 founders — Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham, Atletico Madrid, Inter Milan and AC Milan — pulled out of the project.
Real Madrid, Barca and Juventus remained faithful, until Juve also withdrew its support this past summer.
The two Spanish giants forged ahead, and celebrated Thursday’s ruling. Perez, the Real president, said it would mark an inflection point, and a “a great day for the history of football and for the history of sport.”
But their former partners quickly distanced themselves from the Super League. "Our position has not changed," Manchester United said in a brief Thursday statement. Nor has Bayern Munich's — "such a competition would be an attack on the importance of the national leagues and the structure of European football," CEO Jan Christian Dreesen said in a statement. "So let me make it very clear once again that the door for the Super League remains closed at FC Bayern."
Borussia Dortmund, PSG, Atletico Madrid, Inter Milan, and a laundry list of other top clubs also opposed it. The English Premier League, as a united entity, said it "continues to reject any such concept." The European Clubs Association, an umbrella group representing more than 400 pro clubs, stated that Thursday's court ruling "in no way whatsoever supports or endorses any Super League project."
“In short, the world of football moved on from the Super League years ago and progressive reforms will continue,” the ECA said.
UEFA president Aleksandr Ceferin, speaking at a news conference as most of his members united in their opposition, took a shot at A22 and the Super League holdouts.
“It's close to Christmas; [they] saw a big, well-decorated box under the tree; they were super happy, and started to celebrate,” Ceferin crowed. “But then when they opened the box, they realized there was not much inside.”
