[英超]利物浦和曼聯為首的六支英超球會推動改革英格蘭足球的方案，包括英超參賽隊伍減至18隊、取消聯賽盃和社區盾 [復制鏈接]

Premier League: The key proposals of revamp - have your say

A big six takeover by stealth? Or a much-needed reform to protect the future of the football pyramid? Welcome to the 'Project Big Picture' debate over a possible Premier League revamp.

But what do the radical proposals - which have been criticised by the Premier League, the government and supporters' groups - actually involve?

BBC Sport looks at the main issues and asks for your opinion.

Cutting the numbers
Prior to the formation of the Premier League in 1992, there had been a desire to reduce English football's top flight to 18 teams to cut the number of fixtures and support the national team.

The Football Association argued the removal of fixtures would leave players fresher for international matches and tournaments. That stance was also taken by former England bosses Sven-Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello, who repeatedly called for fewer fixtures and a winter break - but not if clubs were going to fill those dates with lucrative friendlies.

The new proposals would see each Premier League team play four fewer league matches.

There would be no change in the Championship, League One and League Two, with all retaining 24 teams.

But the structure of the professional game would alter, going from 92 clubs down to 90 overall - meaning two clubs from League Two would drop into the National League.

Axing the League Cup and the Community Shield


The plans also call for the abolishment of the Community Shield - a fixture played since 1908-09 - and the League Cup.

Liverpool hold the record for most victories in the League Cup, having won it on eight occasions since it was introduced in 1960-61.

Discussions have reportedly taken place about maintaining the League Cup but without clubs involved in European competition.

The competition currently provides additional revenue for clubs and a route into the Europa League for the winners.

Revised top-flight promotion and relegation


The 16th-placed top-flight club would participate in a play-off tournament with the Championship's third, fourth and fifth-placed teams.

This system was used in 1986-87 and 1987-88 but then scrapped after the old First Division was reduced from 22 clubs to 20.

The approach is also similar to the promotion and relegation system used in other countries - most notably in Germany's Bundesliga.


New format, new finance?


The economic disparity between Premier League clubs and those in the English Football League has grown considerably since 1992, largely down to television income.

Under the new plans, EFL clubs would be given a £250m rescue fund to help replace lost gate receipts and the controversial parachute payments, which provide a percentage of broadcast revenue to relegated top-flight clubs for three years, would also be scrapped.

Instead, 25% of TV money would filter down to be shared among all EFL clubs.

A new democracy?


Probably the most controversial aspect of the plans - the proposals would also rewrite the Premier League's current voting structure.

At present each club has an equal status and that means any new rules or regulations require the support of at least two-thirds of clubs (14) to pass.

Nine clubs would be given 'special voting rights' on certain issues, based on their longevity in the Premier League - currently that is Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham, Everton, Southampton and West Ham.

A transfer of power would open the door for those clubs to control broadcast contracts, financial rules and even the power to veto takeover bids at rival clubs.

'Supportive' or an 'unashamed power grab' - fans' perspective

Peter Collins: I am supportive of money cascading down the pyramid. I don't mind the Premier League cutting to 18 teams (although a shame). Similar with Community Shield, and EFL Cup, although would prefer to retain EFL Cup for non-European competition competing teams. Don't change the voting system. Please. Keep it fair.

Matt Canning: The proposals from Liverpool and Man Utd are disgraceful, they don't even come close. Removal of parachute payments will mean promoted clubs would not be able to attract players due to the risk of being relegated and no longer being able to afford their wages.

Mike Woods: A lot of the proposals make sense, but it would be silly to miss out on a chance to make further change. With so many clubs struggling financially, EFL should look at scrapping League One and Two and replacing them with separate North and South divisions.

Matt Deeks: Why don't we form a six-team Super League for the top six to play each other and exclude them from the PL? The PL will be way more competitive and fairer as the top six, and their billions of spending, will not be contending the trophy. Then give the TV money to the EFL.

Kieran C: Anyone that thinks it's OK that established successful clubs have the power to veto takeovers of those trying to improve their circumstances does not have the interest of the game at heart.

Will: It's an unashamed power grab by those clubs with the most money and laughs in the face of democracy. How about a 10% transfer tax, with money going to EFL clubs that need it the most?

Analysis
Kieran Maguire, football finance expert on BBC Radio 5 live

People have been negotiating this deal for three years so it's not a response to Covid - this has been coming, but Covid-19 is a Trojan horse for the introduction of these proposals.

Some people are trying to promote this as Manchester United and Liverpool being a combination of Father Christmas and Mother Teresa, but that's not the case as they are the clubs that will benefit the most financially from this.

They will be able to sell lucrative rights themselves, have the benefit of an expanded Champions League and also be able to go on lucrative pre-season international friendly tours.

There's no doubt major clubs in Europe are pushing for some changes to the Champions League and they are scheduled to come in between 2024 and 2025.

Any opportunity for Premier League clubs to play more matches [in the Champions League] is simply impossible with 20 teams in the Premier League, the Carabao Cup, the FA Cup and the Community Shield. This is a way to clear space for an extended European competition, which would benefit those clubs.

The claim that this would benefit the England team is absolutely nonsense. Players will not be playing fewer fixtures, just fewer Premier League fixtures.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54507523

羅力亞:EFL rejects £50m Premier League offer and wants control over money
Unhappiness that Championship excluded from rescue package
Premier League offers hardship funding to second-tier clubs
....... (2020-10-16 07:07) 

英格蘭足球聯會稱或有10間球會本月未能支薪

負責管理英冠、英甲及英乙的英格蘭足球聯會表示，多達10間球會今個月可能無法支付工資，希望盡快與英超達成救助協議。英超上月曾經向管理英冠、英甲及英乙的英格蘭足球聯會建議，推出總值5000萬鎊的資助及免息貸款計劃，但對象只有英甲及英乙，不包括英冠的24支球隊，結果被英格蘭足球聯會批評是分化，拒絕建議。英格蘭足球聯會主席帕里說，據他們了解，有10間球會今個月很有機會未能支薪給職球員，期望再次與英超商討援助方案，又聲稱英超願意繼續磋商。

2020-11-11 06:36:41

https://sportsyeah.hk/2020/10/articles/footballfinance/34406/
總結：整個計劃重中之重，很明顯就是為少數豪門鞏固自身的地位，透過給予其他球隊不同的甜頭換取足夠支持。目前在英超層面，任何方案都必須獲得不少於全體三分之二球會（即14隊）贊成才能通過。從上面的分析來看，計劃在英超得到足夠票數支持的機會應該很低。不過，調整英格蘭各級球會間財務失衡的聲音從無間斷，而在目前疫情大量球會極度需要財務協助的情況下，筆者預期即使 Project Big Picture 不獲通過，不同持份者或會以計劃中部分提案作爲基礎，提出不同的改革方案以改變現狀。畢竟對一衆球隊而言，已經到達一個在不行動就等同坐以待斃的局面，爲了生存，不得不求變。

EFL rejects £50m Premier League offer and wants control over money
Unhappiness that Championship excluded from rescue package
Premier League offers hardship funding to second-tier clubs

English Football League clubs have rejected a £50m rescue package for League One and League Two after deeming the bailout inadequate and insist Championship clubs should be part of any deal.

The Premier League has in turn extended an offer of hardship funding to second-tier teams but, in a move that shows the depths to which relations with the EFL have fallen following the revelations of Project Big Picture, it is to make the offer to clubs directly, cutting out the EFL.

Following a heated shareholders meeting on Wednesday, the Premier League declared a willingness to consider means-tested loans to Championship clubs on top of a bailout for lower-league sides. Its move on Thursday makes the offer explicit, although the specifics of any funding offered remain unclear.

EFL clubs are uncomfortable with the Premier League excluding the Championship from the loans and grants package proposed and are unanimous in believing those teams must be part of any future conversation.

Clubs also believe the EFL and not the Premier League should dictate where any financial support goes, although there is an acknowledgment that most League One and League Two clubs are in greater peril than those in the Championship and would be the first to receive such help.

A Championship source stressed the EFL is “72 clubs, not 48” and acknowledged the EFL must continue dialogue with the Premier League to establish a sufficient financial package.

One League One chairman described the Premier League’s offer, which was £20m in grants and £30m placed in reserve to prevent any clubs from going bust, as “embarrassing, disgraceful and disingenuous”, adding that the deal was akin to giving a “starving child tidbits to survive”.

A statement from the EFL was more conciliatory, saying that “while EFL clubs are appreciative that a formal proposal has now been put forward, the conditional offer of £50m falls some way short” of its financial requirements.

Emphasising the solidarity among the clubs it said: “There was a strong consensus that any rescue package must meet the requirements of all 72 clubs before it can be considered in full … The EFL is keen to continue discussions with the Premier League to reach an agreeable solution.”

There is a general appreciation that the Project Big Picture proposal rejected by Premier League clubs on Wednesday, which was put forward by Manchester United and Liverpool, together with Rick Parry, the EFL chairman, containing a £250m bailout, was “one step too far” but clubs believe something closer to that package is required. Parry is understood to have EFL clubs’ unanimous backing, with many feeling he has sparked discussions on issues that had previously proven impossible.

The rejection of Project Big Picture was welcomed by some Premier League managers on Thursday, with Southampton’s Ralph Hasenhüttl saying: “It ends up in a league that maybe has one champion for the next nine years like in Germany or in Italy. For me, it’s boring, to be honest. What I like so much about the Premier League is that we have every two, three years a new champion. ‘A Leicester’ will never be possible with these changes.”

Several League One and League Two clubs believe they will have to turn to the government for urgent help to save “half a dozen clubs” from entering administration if the Premier League does not substantially increase their offer. Other topics of conversation in the Championship call included the re-introduction of being able to use five substitutes and they also raised the possibility of refusing to pay HMRC bills amid the absence of financial help but agreed that was not an option to pursue.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/oct/15/efl-clubs-to-reject-50m-premier-league-offer-and-demand-control-over-money-championship

Hearing EFL clubs don’t want to accept the PL’s £50m for L1+2 as it would ‘split the league’.

freezefox:其實大陸都做緊差唔多既野架。
好多中東、非洲國家，好窮！無錢發展！ 大陸咪幾十億幾十億咁借比佢地囉。 要黎建公路，築橋鋪路， 建碼頭⋯⋯⋯ 完全係「有利」於個個國家架。 咁跟住呢？
....... (2020-10-15 12:25) 

freezefox:其實大陸都做緊差唔多既野架。
好多中東、非洲國家，好窮！無錢發展！ 大陸咪幾十億幾十億咁借比佢地囉。 要黎建公路，築橋鋪路， 建碼頭⋯⋯⋯ 完全係「有利」於個個國家架。 咁跟住呢？
....... (2020-10-15 12:25)

宜家都ban左
證明人地有公開透明傾
反證左根本做唔到黑箱作業

其實大陸都做緊差唔多既野架。


好多中東、非洲國家，好窮！無錢發展！ 大陸咪幾十億幾十億咁借比佢地囉。 要黎建公路，築橋鋪路， 建碼頭⋯⋯⋯ 完全係「有利」於個個國家架。 咁跟住呢？

無錢還，咪用你既天然資源黎還囉。 又或者起好既鐵路、公路收歸「國有」（中國有）囉。 佢地都會話， 飯都無得食，你攬住啲天然資料有咩鬼用！ 我地都無能力開發。 放係到咪得個吉。 宜家國家可以借助外力發展， 放棄某啲權利，都係無可奈何。



此所謂一帶一路。行緊既，咪又係相同既政策。

Premier League says clubs will not back 'Project Big Picture'

Premier League clubs have "unanimously agreed" that 'Project Big Picture' will not be "endorsed or pursued".

The controversial plans, proposed by Liverpool and Manchester United, were rejected at a meeting of the 20 clubs in England's top flight on Wednesday.

Instead, the clubs agreed to "work together" on a new "strategic plan" for the "financing of English football".

They also decided on a £50m rescue package for League One and Two clubs at the meeting.

A Premier League statement said "discussions will also continue with the EFL" over financial support for the Championship.

'Project Big Picture' involved reducing the Premier League from 20 to 18 clubs and scrapping the EFL Cup and Community Shield.

In addition, the English Football League would have got 25% of all future TV deals, which would have been negotiated jointly, plus a £250m bail-out.

However, it would also have seen more power transferred to the so-called 'big six' Premier League clubs.

In its statement, the Premier League said its members had "agreed to work together as a 20-club collective on a strategic plan for the future structures and financing of English football, consulting with all stakeholders to ensure a vibrant, competitive and sustainable football pyramid".

It added: "Clubs will work collaboratively, in an open and transparent process, focusing on competition structure, calendar, governance and financial sustainability.

"This project has the full support of the FA and will include engagement with all relevant stakeholders including fans, government and, of course, the EFL."

"Clearly there's some frustration that a proposal that hadn't had the input from the clubs has been pushed so hard in public," said Premier League chief executive Richard Masters.

"We don't have any beef with the EFL. We have a historic relationship - we want that to be constructive.

"It was a candid, positive and - in the end - a unanimous meeting.

"We decided to move on from 'Big Picture' and move on to a new review process.

"Solidarity is incredibly strong so while there's been a lot said, I don't think it's irreparably damaged the Premier League."

FA chairman Greg Clarke had said a breakaway league was suggested "as a threat" by the organisers of 'Project Big Picture'.

Masters added: "I don't think anyone has been talking about breaking away.

"We acknowledge the English model is a huge success but it hasn't been reviewed for a long time, so maybe there are some systemic issues that haven't been dealt with."

The League One and Two rescue package
The Premier League said the financial package for League One and Two clubs was intended to make sure they "will not go out of business as a result of the financial impact of Covid-19 and be able to complete the 2020-21 season".

It conceded they were at more risk than Premier League and Championship clubs as they "rely more heavily on matchday revenue and have fewer resources at their disposal".

"This offer will consist of grants and interest-free loans totalling a further £50m on top of the £27.2m solidarity payments already advanced to League One and League Two this year, making a total of £77.2m," added the Premier League statement.

The EFL will meet all its clubs on Thursday to discuss the Premier League's proposal and said it was "encouraging that there is an acknowledgment that a review of the current status quo is required".

Its statement went on: "The EFL welcomes the opportunity to contribute to any wider debate with colleagues across the game as we seek to finally address impossible economic pressures and deliver on the objective of having a sustainable EFL in the long term."

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden, who described 'Project Big Picture' as 'Project Power Grab', has previously called on the Premier League to look after those lower down the football pyramid.

"This morning I reiterated calls of many in the football family for bigger clubs to look after smaller clubs," he said.

"An offer has been made by the Premier League to EFL League One and Two which is a good start.

"I urge them to work together and stay focused on helping clubs through this crisis."

Analysis
BBC Sport's Simon Stone

The wording of the Premier League statement is interesting.

On the one hand, Project Big Picture is not being endorsed; on the other, all 20 clubs have agreed to work on a strategic plan "in an open and transparent process, focusing on competition structure, calendar, governance and financial sustainability".

So, depending on how you look at it, the work of Liverpool owner John Henry and Manchester United counterpart Joel Glazer is either dead in the water or has opened discussion on something the EFL in particular has been calling for desperately.

I was told the reaction to Liverpool and Manchester United in today's meeting was tame compared to what it might have been.

However, there has been no apology and some clubs believe there is now a lack of trust between the 'big six' and the rest, which probably underlines why "all 20 clubs" and "open and transparent" were so high up in the Premier League's statement.

We can never know whether there would have been this new commitment to reform had Project Big Picture not made its way into the public domain. Its authors are sceptical that there would have been and hence feel justified - nor do they view their ideas as being over.

Evidently though, the suggestion that the voting mechanism within the Premier League could be changed so six clubs out of a 'special' nine would have to power to create, change or block any issue has no support and will have to be changed.

The other interesting aspect of the past 72 hours surrounds EFL chairman Rick Parry.

There were some EFL clubs who were not entirely happy with Parry before this news came out. Now they are solidly behind him. It is fair to say this enthusiasm is not shared by his Premier League counterparts. The relationship between the two leagues now will be fascinating.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54545053


So, depending on how you look at it, the work of Liverpool owner John Henry and Manchester United counterpart Joel Glazer is either dead in the water or has opened discussion on something the EFL in particular has been calling for desperately.

Premier League: “All 20 Premier League clubs today unanimously agreed that Project Big Picture will not be endorsed or pursued by the Premier League, or The FA.”

Clubs “agreed to work together as collective on strategic plan for future structures + financing of English football, consulting with all stakeholders to ensure vibrant, competitive + sustainable football pyramid.

“Clubs will work collaboratively, in an open and transparent process, focusing on competition structure, calendar, governance and financial sustainability.”

根本就係提PBP先逼到D官僚做野

呢個世界點都有正面同反面, 用錢換權都好合理姐
冇理由幾間球會無啦啦比幾億出去救其他會架嘛
呢D應該政府做, 不在其位不謀其政
個提案我個人認為就係各取所需
小球會要錢渡難關, 大球會要權鞏固地位
如果正常時期推呢樣就多數都無行
但呢D特殊時期提出又真係有討論既空間喎
我諗絕大多數既小球會都會同意, 畢竟英超權力同佢地無太大關係
受影響既係目前英超中下游同英冠既部分球會

Cardiff City say finance has been an issue since the Premier League's launch in 1992 and they have backed Project Big Picture "in principle."

Find out more: https://bbc.in/3nWUe2z

Sunderland CEO Jim Rodwell tells @SkySportsNews on Project Big Picture: “SAFC are in better shape than most, but clubs will topple at the end of this month. I’d like to think if we were the SAFC of 5 years ago we would have cast an eye to the EPL and thought ‘that could be us’.”

“It’s heartbreaking that fans can’t get in. We were ready to go with a pilot event against Peterbrough last month but got the rug pulled from under our feet. We believe we can get a certain number of fans in-and-out safely to a 49,000 seater stadium.”

“If something good is to come out of this awful pandemic this (Project Big Picture) could be it. The plans don’t hurt anyone in a meaningful way. Liverpool, Man United & Rick Parry should be applauded for trying to do something for the game.”

Six Championship clubs have told Sky Sports News that if there is no financial bailout forthcoming they fear for the survival of their club.