Plans for a European Super League collapsed barely two days after its announcement last year after outcry from fans and governments. FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images
From Spain to Ireland to Italy, European countries gave full-throated support to UEFA over the rebel European Super League at Europe’s top court, praising its open model as well as its social and educational importance.
The comments from the countries at a two-day hearing at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) underline the high stakes involved for UEFA and other sports bodies with monopoly power and lucrative media rights.
– Marcotti: Will court case revive European Super League?
The countries’ endorsement of UEFA, in effect a call to preserve the status quo, suggests the Court would need to take into account the social and economic aspects of the case, and not just the legal and antitrust arguments.
UEFA found itself in the docks after the Super League accused it of abusing its power to block rival events and penalise players and clubs.
The Super League collapsed barely two days after its announcement last year as elite English, French and Italian clubs pulled out following outcry from fans and governments, leaving just Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus involved in the project.
Editor’s Picks
- European Super League Q&A: Now what?125dGabriele MarcottiWhere does soccer stand one year after Super League collapse?83dGabriele MarcottiUEFA, FIFA to battle Super League in EU court4dReuters
2 Related
Hungary said UEFA represents the values of the European Sports Model in terms of protecting the physical and moral integrity of players and merit-based competition.
“These are values which UEFA and FIFA follow, both in the organisation of sports and the reallocation of revenues,” Hungary’s lawyer Ester Gyarmati told the 15-judge panel on the second day of the hearing.
UEFA’s restrictions clearly infringe EU competition law but are justified to safeguard the European Sports Model, Austria’s lawyer Franz Koppensteiner said.
Malta’s lawyer took a pop at the Super League.
“The Super League only took into account the narrow interests of its clubs, it ignores the open nature of competition based on merits,” Malta’s lawyer Andria Buhagiar said.
Romania’s lawyer said the case was an existentialist one.
“This cartel cannot co-exist with the organisation of UEFA and FIFA without leading to the certain death of open competition,” its lawyer Emilia Gane said.
The European Commission, which acts as the competition enforcer in the 27-country bloc, took a more nuanced stand, saying there should be checks and balances on monopoly power.
“The exercise of regulatory functions must be subject to limits, obligations and control to prevent such bodies from distorting competition,” its lawyer Carlos Urraca Caviedes said.
He said the European Sports Model was one way to run a sport but alternative governing bodies could be another.
Urraca Caviedes, however, criticised UEFA and FIFA’s sanctions against players.
“It does not seem sanctions excluding players from participating in UEFA, FIFA are necessary or proportionate to protect those principles,” he said.
The Court will issue its ruling next year.
Source: espn.co.uk
