Union of European Football Assns (UEFA)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Soccer

      Euro 2020: Austria’s Marko Arnautovic Faces UEFA Investigation

      by

      North Macedonia’s soccer federation filed a complaint and said that it “strongly condemns the nationalistic outburst” by the forward after a goal on Sunday.European soccer’s governing body has begun an investigation of Austria forward Marko Arnautovic after he was accused of making nationalist comments after scoring a goal in victory against North Macedonia in Euro 2020 on Sunday.UEFA confirmed on Monday that it had appointed an investigator “to conduct an investigation regarding the incident involving the player Marko Arnautovic.” The action came after North Macedonia filed a complaint.With two minutes to play on Sunday in Bucharest, Romania, Arnautovic scored a goal to seal Austria’s 3-1 victory over North Macedonia. His vigorous celebration included shouted words and gestures directed at several North Macedonian players.At one point during the outburst, the Austrian team captain, David Alaba, entered the team’s goal celebration and grabbed Arnautovic by the jaw. Many have interpreted the action as Alaba’s attempt to silence Arnautovic.North Macedonia filed an official complaint after the game.“The FFM strongly condemns the nationalistic outburst of Austrian player Marko Arnautovic, after a goal scored in yesterday’s match, addressed to the Macedonian player Ezgjan Alioski,” the federation said in a statement. “At the same time, we inform you that we have submitted an official letter to UEFA demanding the harshest punishment for Arnautovic.”Unofficial reviews of the video from the game have suggested that the remarks by Arnautovic, who is of Serbian heritage, referred to Albanians, and North Macedonia has contended they were directed at Alioski, who has Albanian roots.Ethnic and political rivalries are a persistent story line in European soccer. Just last week, UEFA ordered a change to Ukraine’s jerseys after Russia objected to a slogan on the collar and a map that included Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.Disputes involving Serbia and its Balkan neighbors are common, and frequently involve Albania, since representatives of the Albanian diaspora dot the rosters of several national teams, including North Macedonia, Kosovo and Switzerland.At the World Cup in 2018, for example, two Swiss players of Albanian extraction, Granit Xhaka and Xherdan Shaqiri, were fined for making the sign of the double eagle, an Albanian national symbol, during a game against Serbia. That match produced at least six separate disciplinary investigations.Arnautovic spoke with North Macedonia’s Ezgjan Alioski after the match.Pool photo by Justin SetterfieldArnautovic apologized for his outburst on Instagram after Sunday’s game.“There were some heated words yesterday in the emotions of the game for which I would like to apologize — especially to my friends from North Macedonia and Albania,” he wrote. “I would like to say one thing very clearly: I am not a racist. I have friends in almost every country and I stand for diversity. Everyone who knows me is aware of that.”Arnautovic, 32, is a veteran forward currently playing club soccer in China for Shanghai Port. His previous stops include Germany’s Werder Bremen and Stoke City and West Ham in England.But he has been dogged by a reputation for bad behavior and anger on the pitch. “People are always searching for something,” he told The Telegraph in 2013. “If I drop a water bottle it’s like I’ve dropped a bomb or killed a guy. They make a big drama of it.”In 2009, when playing in Holland, he was accused of directing a racial slur at a Black opponent. The authorities said they found no evidence, and no action was taken. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Soccer

      Christian Eriksen’s Teammates Question Decision to Resume Play

      by

      “We made the least bad decision,” one Denmark player said of the choice to continue a Euro 2020 match after Eriksen collapsed and went into cardiac arrest.Denmark’s soccer team returned to the field on Monday, practicing for the first time since the shocking collapse of their teammate Christian Eriksen during a match on Saturday. But the players did so amid growing criticism of the decision to resume the team’s Euro 2020 match just over an hour after Eriksen received lifesaving treatment on the field after his heart stopped.When the players on Denmark’s team and their opponents from Finland returned to the field on Saturday, it was widely reported that they had chosen to do so.But the players on Monday disputed that simple explanation, which had been offered by the tournament’s organizer, UEFA, and said they had been put in an impossible position: resume the game that day, or return the next day to complete it.“We were all about to lose a friend and a teammate,” Denmark forward Martin Braithwaite said. “There were lots of players who were unable to play. We were in a bad place. We made the least bad decision.”“We were put in a position that I personally feel that we shouldn’t have been put in,” goalkeeper Kasper Schmeichel said.Hannah Mckay/ReutersEriksen, one of Denmark’s stars, collapsed on the field late in the first half of a game against Finland at Parken Stadium in Copenhagen. He lost consciousness and received treatment on the field, including C.P.R. His teammates were visibly shaken. Several prayed as they stood in a circle to protect Eriksen from view. A few wiped away tears.Eriksen was removed from the field by stretcher and appeared to be conscious. The game was halted, and there was talk of postponing the evening game between Belgium and Russia as well.But then, to the surprise of many, it was announced that the game would resume after a two-hour delay. UEFA, the governing body for European soccer, said the decision came “following the request made by players of both teams.” Finland scored on a header in the second half to beat Denmark, 1-0.But on Monday, Danish players and staff members said the reality was far less straightforward.“We were put in a position that I personally feel that we shouldn’t have been put in,” goalkeeper Kasper Schmeichel said.Liselotte Sabroe/EPA, via ShutterstockDenmark’s players returned to training Monday in Copenhagen. At Scotland’s game, fans sent messages of support.Pool photo by Robert PerryAustria’s Michael Gregoritsch ran to the bench to display a jersey with a message to Eriksen after scoring on Sunday.Pool photo by Marko Djurica“It probably required that someone above us had said that it was not the time to make a decision and maybe should wait for the next day,” he added.Braithwaite said: “We had two choices from UEFA: to go out and play the match immediately or play the next day at noon. None of those choices were good. We took the lesser of two evils.”Coach Kasper Hjulmand said the team had decided that facing the prospect of returning the next day was unworkable.“The players couldn’t imagine not being able to sleep tonight and then having to get on the bus and come in again tomorrow,” Hjulmand told reporters after Saturday’s game. “Honestly it was best to get it over with.”Peter Schmeichel, the former Denmark goalkeeper and the father of Kasper, disputed UEFA’s characterization that the players insisted on playing.“I know that not to be the truth,” he said on “Good Morning Britain.” “Did they have any choice? I don’t think they had.”UEFA said the tournament’s tight schedule required a quick resolution. Denmark’s next game was Thursday, but the Finns had to travel to Russia and prepare for a game on Wednesday afternoon.“UEFA is sure it treated the matter with utmost respect for the sensitive situation and for the players,” UEFA said in a statement. “It was decided to restart the match only after the two teams requested to finish the game on the same evening. The players’ need for 48 hours’ rest between matches eliminated other options.”Eriksen, 29, remained in stable condition in a Copenhagen hospital on Monday. He has spoken with his teammates and was said to be in good spirits, the players said.“I have no doubt that we’ll see something special at Parken on Thursday,” Braithwaite told reporters. “Not just from the players but from the entire crowd. That’s something I look forward to. And I’m sure I will use it as motivation to go out and play for Christian.” More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Soccer

      Stunning Soccer Moments in European Championship History

      by

      UEFA Euro 2020, delayed by the pandemic, will sweep across the continent into July.The 16th European Championship, UEFA Euro 2020, is finally about to start, having been delayed until this year because of the pandemic.The soccer tournament, held every four years, began as a four-team event in 1960, won by the Soviet Union, and was hosted by one or at most two countries. But it has since grown. This year’s event, from Friday to July 11, will be a 24-team Pan-European extravaganza, with 11 host nations staging matches.Six groups of four teams will play a round-robin format, with group winners, runners-up and the four third-place teams with the best records advancing to the single-elimination rounds. Baku, Azerbaijan; Munich; St. Petersburg, Russia; and Rome will host the quarterfinals; the semifinals and the championship game are set for Wembley Stadium in London.And fans will be in the stands. Except for Budapest’s Puskas Arena, which will allow full houses, stadiums will fill only 25 percent to 50 percent of their capacity.Dreamed up by Henri Delaunay, the first head of European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, the European Championship is second in popularity and prestige to only the World Cup.The last UEFA championship, held in 2016, was won by Portugal, even though its star, Cristiano Ronaldo, left the game early with an injury. Here are a handful of the tournament’s most memorable moments.Magic Marco, 1988The Netherlands, the “nearly team” of world soccer, won its first and only title with a 2-0 victory over the Soviet Union in Munich. In the 32nd minute of the final match, the Dutch captain Ruud Gullit took advantage of a poorly cleared corner to head in the return ball. Later, at the other end, goalkeeper Hans van Breukelen gave away and then saved a penalty from Igor Belanov. Both plays were vital but ultimately were overshadowed byGullit’s goal.In the 54th minute, midfielder Arnold Muhren lofted a high cross from the left, a few yards outside the Soviet penalty area. Marco van Basten, level with Muhren when the pass was made, strode down the far right side of the area, met the ball in midair, and swung in a wicked volley from an acute angle that flew over Rinat Dasayev (one of the game’s better keepers) into the far corner for the second goal.The game was effectively over at the point, but the stadium didn’t stop buzzing because a goal like that is rare, especially in a final. It was masterful technique, timing and skill, from the weight and arc of Muhren’s pass, to van Basten’s run and audacious finish. The ball didn’t hit the ground from the moment it left Muhren’s foot until it was pulled out of the net. Rinus Michels, the Dutch coach, covered his eyes in disbelief.John Jensen, right, was an unexpected force for Denmark, a late addition to the 1992 tournament. He scored the Danes’ first goal in a 2-0 victory against Germany in the final.Paul Popper/Popperfoto, via Getty ImagesJensen’s Big Boot, 1992Sweden hosted Euro ’92 with the slogan “Small Is Beautiful.” The tournament also had a fairy tale ending. After Yugoslavia was expelled from the competition in the spring because of an escalating civil war, Denmark was a late addition. The squad wasn’t quite scooped off the beach, but not too far off.The Danes weren’t a ragtag gang, though. They had a smattering of journeymen from the Bundesliga and goalkeeper Peter Schmeichel, in his first year with Manchester United.Denmark’s campaign sparked to life with a late 2-1 win over France that put it in the semifinals against the defending champion, the Netherlands. The Danes won, 5-4, on penalties.Having dispensed with the European champion, Denmark faced the reigning world champion, a reunified Germany (now with added East Germans). Predictably, Germany dominated early, but unpredictably John Jensen gave the Danes the lead. Jensen, for whom self-belief and ambition trumped technique, usually had his shots clear not only the goal, but also the running track and several rows of seats. Not this time. He hit the roof of the German net with a decisive wallop.Denmark defended capably, and Schmeichel rescued the team when it didn’t. After Kim Vilfort added an insurance goal, the Danish fans sang, “Deutschland, Deutschland, Alles ist vorbei” (“Germany, Germany, it’s all over”).Small might have been beautiful, but Euro ’92 was the last eight-team tournament. Four years later in England, the field doubled. And Jensen? He headed to England too, and continued to shoot wildly from distance, finding the net only once in 138 league appearances for Arsenal.Andreas Möller, left, celebrating with Andreas Köpke, Dieter Eilts, Markus Babbel and Thomas Helmer after Germany’s victory in the 1996 final over the Czech Republic.Paul Popper/Popperfoto, via Getty ImagesHome to England, 1996Billed as a return to the game’s spiritual roots, Euro ’96 was in England. “Football’s Coming Home” was the chant featured in the song “Three Lions.”And indeed, the English notched a 4-1 win over the Dutch and beat Spain, with penalty kicks.But the semifinal presented a big impediment: Germany. England played well, but so did Germany. Stefan Kuntz of Germany tied the score after Alan Shearer’s early goal for England. Sure enough, the tie resulted in a shootout. Each team scored five times. Gareth Southgate of England then hit a weak shot that was saved. Amid the general sympathy for Southgate afterward was a notable dissent: from his mother, Barbara. “Why didn’t you just belt it?” she said.Andreas Möller smashed home Germany’s winner, then stood defiantly, hands on hips.Germany won its third title with what is known as a golden goal (in sudden-death overtime), beating the Czech Republic, 2-1. Both goals came from the substitute Oliver Bierhoff, the first a well-directed downward header, the second a low shot that hit off the hand of keeper Petr Kouba and rolled in off the post. It brought to mind the dictum of the former England striker Gary Lineker:“Football is a simple game. Twenty-two men chase a ball for 90 minutes and at the end, the Germans always win.”Zinedine Zidane, center, during France’s 2-1 victory over Italy in the 2000 final. He carried his team to the title match with a golden-goal penalty against Portugal in the semifinals.Pierre Lahalle/Corbis/VCG, via Getty ImagesZizou’s Light Touch, 2000France’s feel-good home World Cup win in 1998 was hailed as a multicultural phenomenon, Parisian sidewalks spilling over with fans shouting, “Black, Blanc, Beur,” referring to the team’s Black, white and North African players. On the field, defenders got the big goals (Lilian Thuram and Laurent Blanc), and France won without really clicking; not until the final did Zinedine Zidane find his footing.Fast-forward two years, and the team had blossomed into beautiful worldbeaters. Thierry Henry was a star striker, Emmanuel Petit, Patrick Vieira and Didier Deschamps powered the midfield, and Zizou, as Zidane is known, did everything else. He was simply at the top of his game. The strength and acceleration, the close control, the feather-light touch, the ability to pick up a ball and gracefully drag opponents across a field, then shake them off and craft the perfect pass — he was peerless.In the semifinal against Portugal, he was tirelessly inventive. When a move broke down, he demanded the ball and tried something new. And he carried his team into the final with a coolly taken golden-goal penalty.Zidane’s self-belief infused his teammates. Even when they trailed Italy in the final, the French looked as if they would find a way to win. Sylvain Wiltord’s late equalizer disheartened Italy and emboldened France. Then David Trezeguet’s fine volley in the 103rd minute confirmed what everyone knew: France was the best in Europe and world champion, and its midfield maestro was on another planet.An injured Cristiano Ronaldo joined Coach Fernando Santos in directing Portugal to the 2016 championship in the final against France.Mustafa Yalcin/Anadolu Agency, via Getty ImagesCoach Ronnie, 2016He has won a ton of trophies with his clubs, but international success has always eluded Cristiano Ronaldo.At 19, he cried uncontrollably as Greece ruined Portugal’s party when it hosted the tournament in 2004. In 2012, he was an unused penalty taker in a semifinal loss to Spain.In 2016, he was in a mood, seizing a television microphone during a team walk and flinging it into a nearby lake. But Portugal squeaked into the elimination rounds, defeating Croatia, Poland and Wales to get to the final — against the hotly favored host nation, France.The teams emerged to a carpet of moths, drawn by the Stade de France lights. It didn’t take long to end Ronaldo’s night. An ugly collision with Dimitri Payet in the eighth minute left him writhing in pain. He returned with his leg bandaged but collapsed and was carried off.Then the world saw a different Ronaldo. He prowled the sideline, cursed, cheered, shadowed Coach Fernando Santos, barked instructions at his teammates and roared them on, a limping amalgam of coach and superfan. The TV cameras lapped it up.And when Eder scored the winner 20 minutes into overtime, Ronaldo celebrated like the other Portuguese spectators.Often derided as a one-man team, Portugal had accomplished the unthinkable: winning without its talisman.Greece’s Traianos Dellas, left, scored the winner against the Czech Republic in the 2004 semifinals, and later hoisted the trophy with teammates.Tony Marshall/EMPICS, via Getty ImagesKing Otto and His Underdogs, 2004Greece’s 2004 triumph was a giant upset. Make that a series of upsets, as the Greeks twice defeated France, the host nation and reigning champion, and beat Euro 2004’s best team, the Czech Republic, en route to its first international title.A nation that had never won a single game at a major tournament, Greece was regarded as a soft touch and routinely troubled by indiscipline and infighting. But it was transformed by the veteran German coach Otto Rehhagel.“King Otto” instilled organization, discipline and a strong work ethic. The team won ugly, but it was a nightmare to play against. Nothing gave the Greeks more pleasure than watching the air drain out of puffed-up opponents. Faced with banks of blue and white jerseys, harried in the midfield and with dedicated defenders stalking their attackers, other teams were reduced to disaffected spectators.Although Greek scoring chances were rare, the team excelled at the most effective tool of the underdog’s arsenal: the set piece, winning the semifinal and final with headers from corner kicks. In the semifinal, the Greeks took advantage of a silver goal (a form of sudden death that allowed an opponent the remainder of an overtime period to tie the score). Traianos Dellas ghosted between a pair of Czech defenders to head home a corner at the end of the first 15-minute overtime.“I realized when we were given the corner that exactly 14 minutes 36 seconds of overtime had been played,” Dellas said. “I said to myself that now we must do it. Someone heard me.”In the 2008 quarterfinals, Andrei Arshavin of Russia mugged for the camera after his low drive nutmegged the Netherlands goalkeeper Edwin van der Sar in overtime.Laurence Griffiths/Getty ImagesArshavin Sparkles, 2008For the Russia midfielder Andrei Arshavin, Euro 2008 began with a two-game suspension for violent conduct in a qualifier. Guus Hiddink, Russia’s Dutch coach with a reputation for creating overachieving national teams (most recently South Korea and Australia), saw something special in Arshavin, who resembled a cartoon throwback to another era: a bowl haircut, rosy cheeks and uniforms that looked like a big brother’s hand-me-downs.But what talent. He had a low center of gravity, magnetic ball control, a rocket of a shot and a willingness to try anything.Arshavin scored in a 2-0 win over Sweden to secure a quarterfinal matchup with the Netherlands, one of Hiddink’s former employers.“When I’m a traitor, I like to be a very good traitor,” Hiddink said before the game. “I want to be the traitor of the year in Holland.”A late Ruud van Nistelrooy goal for the Netherlands sent the game into overtime at 1-1. Then Arshavin popped up in spectacular fashion. First, he tore down the left flank to the endline, turned and sublimely chipped his defender, giving Dmitri Torbinski the ball to back-heel into the net. Then Arshavin settled matters with a low drive that nutmegged keeper Edwin van der Sar. Arshavin gave a comical shrug for the camera, before pressing an index finger to his lips.Russia lost its semifinal, 3-0, to the eventual champion, Spain, which had a stockpile of midfield tyros of its own. That winter, Arshavin moved from Zenit St. Petersburg to England, treating fans to occasional brilliance before he faded and headed home, where he made headlines exiting a strip club on horseback.Antonin Panenka, kissing the trophy, used a long run-up to loft a penalty kick that sealed Czechoslovakia’s win over West Germany in the 1976 final.Peter Robinson/EMPICS, via Getty ImagesA Panenka, 1976The 1976 European Championship was the last to have only four teams — and the first decided on a penalty shootout.West Germany and Czechoslovakia were deadlocked after 120 minutes. The Czechs went ahead, 4-3, in penalty kicks when Uli Hoeness fired his shot over the bar. Enter Antonin Panenka. He made a long run-up and goalie Sepp Maier committed early; what followed has been variously described as a spoon, a shovel, a slice, a chip or a gently lofted shot that floated over the line and plopped into the back of the net. These days, fans simply call it a Panenka. Czechoslovakia won the tournament.Panenka hadn’t had a sudden inspiration. He had been practicing his specialty during training sessions with his goalkeeper, according to Ben Lyttleton’s book and blog, “Twelve Yards.”“My run-up was always longer to gain a bit of extra time, and faster so the goalkeeper doesn’t have a chance to change direction,” Panenka told Lyttleton. “The shot should not be too fast; you have to chip the ball so it glides.“I always tried to entertain fans, to do something unexpected so they could talk about it after matches,” he said. “And all my goals, all my assists and passes have been forgotten because of this penalty. So, I am obviously proud of the penalty, but also a little bit sorry, too.” More

    • 63 Shares199 Views

      in Soccer

      How Euro 2020 Was Saved

      by

      Pulling off a tournament with games in 11 countries was always going to be difficult. Then the pandemic struck, and the job got even harder.If Aleksander Ceferin has any say on the matter, there will never be another European soccer championship like the one that starts this week. And that decision has nothing to do with the coronavirus.Ceferin, the president of European soccer’s governing body, quickly listed the headaches that came with organizing this summer’s championship. Matches in 11 countries, originally 13, meant finding 11 cities and 11 stadiums capable of hosting them. It meant creating teams to run each site and arranging for dozens of hotels to house everyone who would go. But it also meant navigating legal jurisdictions and linguistic boundaries, tax laws and big politics as well as soccer politics, currency values and visa rules.And that was before the coronavirus made it all exponentially harder.“I would not do it again,” Ceferin said in a phone interview late last month.For the first time in its 61-year history, the European Championship, which begins on Friday with a game between Italy and Turkey in Rome, is being played on a continentwide basis. It will feature big players and small crowds, and host cities as far apart as Seville, Spain, near the southwest tip of the Iberian Peninsula, and Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, nestled on the Caspian Sea. The latter is closer to Tehran and Baghdad than it is to any of the other 10 tournament sites.It will play out using a schedule that had to be fixed enough to ensure several countries would play the bulk of their games on home soil, yet flexible enough that it could change as coronavirus outbreaks and travel restrictions demanded. It meant coming to terms with what Britain’s departure from the European Union amounted to in practice, sometimes before even Britain was sure, and finding solutions after two cities were stripped of their games in April.And it meant that whatever happens over the next month — however many goals are scored, however many thrilling matches are played — that there is certain to be only one overriding sensation for organizers when the final whistle blows on July 11: relief.“It’s very complicated,” Ceferin said in a world-class understatement, “and now it’s even more complicated.”And none of it, he is quick to point out, was his idea. The idea of a pan-continental European championship was the brainchild of Michel Platini, Ceferin’s predecessor as president of UEFA. Platini had proposed the idea of a Europe-wide celebration in 2012, after Turkey, the only bidder for the soccer event, refused to rule out also seeking the hosting rights for the Olympics that would be held in the same summer in 2020.Anatoly Maltsev/EPA, via ShutterstockCrowds, still a rare sight at soccer matches in many countries, were a nonnegotiable requirement for host cities.Joe Klamar/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“It’s very complicated,” the UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin said, “and now it’s even more complicated.”Alessandra Tarantino/Associated PressNo country, UEFA felt, could pull off the Olympics and the European Championship — a soccer tournament second only to the World Cup in viewership and prominence — in close succession. Spreading the Euros around, Platini decided, could spread the joy of the event, but also serve as a valuable hedge in case Turkey had to choose between the games and the Games.By 2015, though, Platini was gone, one of the soccer officials ousted in a corruption scandal. But his concept lived on. When Ceferin was elevated to the UEFA presidency in 2016, he decided to forge ahead with the multinational concept, which by that stage had announced several host cities.While there were some hiccups — Brussels was forced out in 2017 after it could not guarantee a promised stadium would be ready — organizers believed they had pulled off what they once thought to be a Sisyphean task. By March 2020, almost everything that needed to be in place was in place, and the buzz around the tournament was beginning to grow. Some sponsors had activated their promotions, and Euro 2020 collectibles, cards and sticker albums were in stores.And then the pandemic brought the world to a halt.“Everybody was a little bit lost for a while,” Martin Kallen, the UEFA director responsible for the tournament, said of the feeling when it became clear the tournament would not be played as planned. “‘How are we going to do this? How are we going to go forward?’ Not only football, it was everywhere in society. We didn’t know what will happen next week.”Cancellation, according to Ceferin, would have been a devastating financial blow, imperiling the future of some of the federations that rely on stipends from European soccer’s governing body for their existence.“If you postpone, you can negotiate, and the loss is smaller,” Ceferin said. “But if you say, ‘We will not play at all,’ this is a big, big financial impact.”After a couple of weeks of assessing their options — which included raising and then dismissing the possibility of staging the entire tournament in Russia or England — and discussions involving a dizzying array of partners, from politicians to stadium owners, sponsors and broadcasters, the hard work to save the multinational mosaic started again.The first few calls were easy. Rescheduling the tournament for the same dates a year later solved the scheduling concerns, and since the merchandise with the Euro 2020 branding had been shipped, the tournament’s name would stay, too.By the fall of 2020, in fact, it had been decided to stick as close to the original plan as possible, with one important guarantee: Even amid the pandemic, each host city would have to make provisions to allow fans to attend the matches.The requirement seemed onerous and led to some tense exchanges between UEFA and national and regional governments. The decision, officials said, was partly made out of financial necessity — UEFA’s financial projections for the tournament have been revised downward by at least 300 million euros ($366 million) — but organizers also felt the return of fans, even in reduced capacities, was symbolically important.“We want to come back to normality in life, and we want to come back to normality in football stadiums,” Kallen said. Crowds at a big event like the Euros, UEFA had decided, would send that signal.Karim Benzema and France, one of the tournament favorites, warmed up with a win over Wales.Franck Fife/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesWith the virus raging, though, and several countries struggling with their vaccination programs, the demand for in-person crowds threatened the hosting ability of as many as four cities.In the end, only two cities lost out. Dublin, where politicians had always said it would be impossible to play with fans, was the first to go. It was the easiest, too; Ireland had not qualified for the tournament, and UEFA considered it unlikely many fans would attend the games in Ireland given restrictions on travel. Bilbao, in Spain, was a different matter.The largest city of the Basque region, where separatist feelings remain high, Bilbao was always a strange choice for UEFA. Spain’s national team has not played in the region since 1967, and it appeared to have made the list only because the since-ousted head of Spanish soccer had pushed its candidacy. Many of the city’s soccer-loving public had eventually come around to the idea of hosting other teams, though, and local officials welcomed the chance to take a turn in the international spotlight.When the games were pulled after UEFA felt the conditions required for fans to attend could never be met, furious local officials publicly assailed the decision and vowed to extract damages. Ceferin expressed sympathy and suggested both cities might host future events, but within weeks he and organizers had a new fire to put out.On the morning of the Champions League final in May, members of UEFA’s hierarchy held an emergency meeting at their hotel in Portugal after learning that new rules in Scotland could force an entire team into quarantine if even a single player tested positive there.A decision was quickly taken to scrap team bases in the country for the Czech Republic and Croatia. (Scotland had already announced that it would train in England.) But two days later, Scotland revealed that one of its players had tested positive. He and six teammates were left home from a friendly at the Netherlands, but their absence highlighted another change instituted this year in deference to the pandemic: Teams have been allowed to travel with 26 players instead of the usual 23.UEFA’s leadership will minimize its travel by splitting into two teams for the tournament. Ceferin will lead one group, and his top deputy, Theodore Theodoridis, will lead the other.UefaThe challenges might not be over, either. There is anxiety about a quarterfinal match set for Munich on July 2, since one of the participants will be traveling from England, which is subject to new, harsher travel rules. (The game could still be moved.)“We always have to have a plan, B, C or D,” said Kallen, noting that UEFA was now experienced in adapting to unforeseen circumstances after moving the Champions League on late notice two years in a row.Even UEFA’s leaders have had to recalibrate their travel plans: They will split into two traveling parties in order to visit all 11 host cities, with one headed by Ceferin and the other by his top deputy, Theodore Theodoridis. Their itineraries have been meticulously planned through June 21, a key date the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, has earmarked to “unlock” England from most of the remaining pandemic-related restrictions on social contact.Ceferin said that he had plans to speak with senior British politicians, including Johnson, before the tournament, and that he still hoped to receive the backing of the British government for a full stadium for the final at Wembley Stadium in London in July.“I think it’s possible,” Ceferin said. “Why not?”The signage is up at Wembley Stadium in London, where the Euro 2020 final (fingers crossed) will be played on July 11.Carl Recine/Action Images, via Reuters More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Soccer

      How to Watch Euro 2020: Schedule, Location, Teams and More

      by

      11 cities, 24 teams and hundreds of headaches: The European soccer championship is here after a year’s delay. Here’s what you need to know.The European Championship, generally considered the biggest soccer tournament after the World Cup, is being held this summer after a year’s delay because of the coronavirus pandemic. Here’s a rundown on the teams, the players and the host cities for what is still being called Euro 2020.When and where is the tournament?Euro 2020 — back on, with a few changes, but still refusing to admit it’s 2021 now — runs from June 11 to July 11.The Euros, like the World Cup, traditionally have been hosted by one country, or two in partnership. But for the current edition, European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, decided to spread the games around to at least a dozen cities across Europe. The choice was not universally supported, given the inherent logistical hurdles of managing sites as far apart as Spain and Azerbaijan. But it turned out to be an even more awkward decision once the coronavirus hit.First, the entire tournament was postponed a year. Then, only weeks before the first game, coronavirus restrictions for several more changes: Dublin lost its games, and several matches in Spain were shifted to Seville from Bilbao.Unless something else changes, 11 European cities will host games: Amsterdam, Baku, Bucharest, Budapest, Budapest, Copenhagen, Glasgow, London, Munich, Seville, St. Petersburg.The first game, Italy vs. Turkey, is June 11 in Rome. The knockout stages begin on June 26, and the semifinals and final all will take place at Wembley Stadium in London. The final is July 11.Robert Lewandowski, who broke the Bundesliga goals record this season, is Poland’s biggest threat.Roman Koksarov/Associated PressWho’s playing?Twenty-four teams qualified for the tournament, including all the major European powers you would expect: France, Spain, Italy, Germany, England. New rules created qualifying paths for lower-profile countries who normally miss out, allowing North Macedonia to qualify for the first time. Finland, which qualified in the traditional way, is also making its debut.Just about all the top-name players from Europe, like Robert Lewandowski of Poland, Cristiano Ronaldo of Portugal and Kylian Mbappé of France, will be there. Karim Benzema is back in the French team after being dropped five years ago in a sex tape blackmail scandal, but several top players are out, and Spain will arrived at a major tournament without a Real Madrid player for the first time.Who’s missing?Qualifying knocked out regular faces like Serbia and Norway, and Romania and Azerbaijan will host games even as their teams failed to make the field.The absence of Norway will mean no Erling Haaland, whose transfer saga may be the story of the summer. Also missing will be Zlatan Ibrahimovic of Sweden, who has a knee injury, and the veteran Spain defender Sergio Ramos, who was omitted by his coach because of fitness concerns. The Netherlands goalkeeper Jasper Cillessen was dropped after testing positive for the coronavirus, and Germany’s Toni Kroos has only recently returned to training after a recent bout with it.A more recent, more worrisome injury has Belgium concerned: its star midfielder Kevin de Bruyne of Belgium sustained a fractured nose and eye socket in the Champions League final. His status for the monthlong tournament is unclear.Will fans be allowed?Yes, but the numbers and rules vary by city, and the rules are still changing. Scotland recently urged its fans, who can attend games in Glasgow, not to travel to London when the team plays there.The shifting of matches may not be over, either. As teams advance, the tournament schedule still could be affected by rules about travel set by various European governments.Who has won in the past?Portugal is the defending champion. The tournament dates to 1960, and Germany and Spain have the most wins, with three. England is the highest-profile team never to have won it (or even made the final).Who is going to win this time?France is the favorite in the betting at this stage, with England just behind. But the tournament is considered quite open, with Belgium, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Italy and the Netherlands all given a fighting chance. Slovakia and Hungary have the longest shots, at 500-1 or more.Thomas Müller and Germany will rank, as usual, among the tournament favorites.Andreas Schaad/Associated PressYou can also bet on who will score the most goals: The current favorites there are Harry Kane of England, Romelu Lukaku of Belgium, France’s Mbappé and Portugal’s Ronaldo.How does the tournament work?The 24 teams are divided into six groups of four and play three games each in the preliminary round. The top two teams from each group, plus four of the six third-place teams, all advance to a 16-team knockout round.After that, it’s single elimination, with tied games heading to extra time and then penalty kicks, if necessary, to produce a winner.How can I watch?In the United States, the bulk of the games will be on ESPN, with a few on ABC. When two games are played simultaneously, one will run on ESPN2 instead. For Spanish language coverage, many games will be on Univision. Games also will be streamed on ESPN+.Broadcasters elsewhere include Bell Media and TVA (Canada), BBC and ITV (Britain), Optus (Australia), M6 and TF1 (France), ARD and ZDF (Germany) and Wowow (Japan). Here’s a complete list.Now, the most important question. Is there a mascot?Yes. He is Skillzy. He is reportedly inspired by “freestyling, street football and panna,” which is a fancy term for a nutmeg, the move in which a player kicks the ball through an opponent’s legs.Skillzy follows in the footsteps of Super Victor (France 2016), Goaliath (England 1996) and Pinocchio (Italy 1980).Like many sporting mascots, Skillzy has drawn a mixed reception. You be the judge.You might say the Euro 2020 mascot, Skillzy, is edgy. You might also wonder why he’s wearing a hoodie and long sleeves in the summer heat.Robert Ghement/EPA, via Shutterstock More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Soccer

      Champions League Final: The Rich Get Richer

      by

      Seismic shocks to European soccer’s landscape have turned Saturday’s Champions League final between Manchester City and Chelsea into a sign of things to come.The shadows are drawing in across Europe.Inter Milan must shed millions of dollars from its salary bill. One or more of its brightest lights will have to be sold. Antonio Conte, the coach who only a few weeks ago ended the club’s decade-long wait for an Italian championship, does not intend to stick around to see his title-winning team broken up.Barcelona, a billion dollars in debt, must build a squad to meet its princely ambitions on a pauper’s budget. The club’s wish list does not extend much beyond the giveaway aisle: Sergio Agüero, Georginio Wijnaldum, Eric García and Memphis Depay are all out of contract, all available for nothing, a cut-price cavalry.Juventus must strip back in order to retool. Real Madrid’s president, Florentino Pérez, knows his fans crave a Galáctico but also that he cannot afford one. The usual delirium of transfer rumors swirls around Manchester United and Liverpool, but some players will have to go in order for others to arrive.It is not just the grand houses that are feeling the pinch. The Lille team that won the French title will be stripped for parts. The rest of Ligue 1 faces a fire sale. Spending in the January transfer window was a fraction of its normal level across all of Europe’s top five leagues.After years of plenty, money is tight, and times are straitened, for everybody. Almost everybody.Manchester City paid more than $80 million to add Rúben Dias, who became the cornerstone of its defense.Pool photo by Peter PowellTimo Werner, center, was the prime acquisition in Chelsea’s free-spending pandemic summer.Neil Hall/EPA, via ShutterstockThere remain a handful of bulls in soccer’s bear market, not just immune to but liable to benefit from the recession unfurling all around them. Saturday’s Champions League final features two of them. A little more than a decade ago, it seemed certain that the 2010s would be dominated by the coming of Manchester City and Chelsea. Between them, they represented soccer’s new dawn: Chelsea, bankrolled by the wealth of its billionaire Russian owner, Roman Abramovich, and City, transformed by the functionally bottomless riches of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. For a while, their meetings were referred to as El Cashico, always with the slight ghost of a sneer: a confected nickname for an ersatz imitation of an authentic rivalry.Indeed, when Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan first arrived at Manchester City, it was Chelsea where he first trained his sights. Chelsea had been so confident of signing Robinho, the Brazil forward, from Real Madrid that its website had started selling jerseys emblazoned with his name. When the Spanish club noticed, it withdrew from the deal. City, eager to make a statement of intent, duly stepped in.The next summer, City tried to go a step further, identifying John Terry — Chelsea’s captain — as its priority transfer target. The club was, it was reported, prepared to pay him a then-unthinkable $300,000 a week. He chose not to accept, eventually, but City at least managed to bloody Chelsea’s nose: Abramovich was forced to reward Terry’s loyalty by making him the club’s highest-paid player.It took much longer for an on-field rivalry to develop. The clubs did, as predicted, emerge as the prime forces in English soccer in the 2010s: Between them, they have won eight of the past 12 Premier League titles. But rarely did they find themselves in direct opposition. More often than not, one waxed as the other waned, and the greatest threats to their immediate ambitions came from the ranks of the established elite both were seeking to usurp.Now, though, the situation has changed. Over the last year, the landscape of both English and European soccer has undergone a fundamental shift, one that has diminished almost all of their peers and leaves both Chelsea and City in a position of almost unparalleled strength. This Champions League final is not the culmination of a rivalry. It is, instead, a harbinger of what the future might hold.They owe their prospects of uncontested primacy to a confluence of factors. Foremost, of course, is the economic impact of the pandemic, and the year of empty stadiums and balance-sheet black holes.To assemble their star-studded teams, Chelsea and Manchester City have relied on some of the deepest pockets in soccer.Pool photo by Shaun BotterillEstimates vary, but most suggest that the pandemic has cost Europe’s clubs somewhere in the region of $5 billion, almost half of it borne by the 20 richest teams on the continent, some of whom — Real, Barcelona and Juventus in particular — were already struggling under the weight of mismanagement.City and Chelsea, because of the largess of their owners, seemed blissfully unaffected by that contraction. City spent $140 million on central defenders alone at the start of this season as its payroll hit an English-record high: almost $500 million-a-year, at a time when most of its rivals were trying to limit their spending.Chelsea spent more last summer than any other team in Europe, and almost as much as all 18 teams of the Bundesliga combined. Chelsea paid out more in fees, in fact, than it had at any point under Abramovich, taking advantage of being a rare predator in a world of prey to acquire the likes of Timo Werner and Kai Havertz effectively unopposed.There is little reason to believe, given the limited horizons across much of the rest of Europe, that this summer will prove any different. Among their peers, there is a growing acceptance that competing for talent with Chelsea, Manchester City and Paris St.-Germain is no longer feasible.Combating that, of course, was part of the rationale behind the short-lived and unmourned Super League. Buried in the aborted competition’s founding document were a set of specific provisions on spending that went way beyond the Financial Fair Play regulations that govern the Champions League.There would be “zero tolerance” for the manipulation of balance sheets. Expenditure on players, coaches and salaries would be strictly capped — at 55 percent of club revenues, or 27.5 percent of the highest-earning club, an effort to favor those teams with the largest fan bases — and clubs would have to commit to being profitable over a three-year period.The rules would be overseen and enforced by a monitoring body, responsible for auditing member clubs’ finances, ruling on sponsorship agreements and sanctioning anyone who transgressed. It was to be called the Financial Stability Group.City was part of the project, of course, but it was also, as those involved in its creation admit, its target. The Super League was not just a power play to grab a greater share of soccer’s revenues; it was also, for some of those involved, the only way to level a distorted playing field.Its collapse, though, has weighted the dice ever further in the favor of the new elite.Will even the dream of a Champions League final soon be out of reach for all but a few teams?Pool photo by David RamosManchester City and Chelsea had already, in effect, been given a free pass when UEFA announced, last year, that it was suspending the financial regulations that previously prevented both teams from making full use of their owners’ wealth. The losses across Europe were so broad and so great, it said, that barely any teams would be able to meet its criteria.UEFA is adamant that the system is not defunct. It says it is currently examining how to redraft and improve its cost-control rules to give them a “stronger focus on the present and the future.” European soccer’s governing body has said that it believes “wages and transfer fees, which represent the majority of clubs’ costs, must be reduced to acceptable levels.”But in their current absence there are benefits for those in a position of strength. First, by stockpiling talent now, they can in effect get in before the door closes. Second, and most important, they have an opportunity to shape the new rules to their needs.City, Chelsea and P.S.G. had long felt that the previous system of Financial Fair Play did not so much apply to them as apply at them. The original idea, their logic ran, of ensuring European soccer did not take on too much debt had been co-opted by a cartel of the game’s established powers to prevent clubs from investing in their teams, an effort to set in stone their position at the pinnacle.This time, though, as a consequence of the Super League, it is City — who in withdrawing started the collapse of the breakaway — and P.SG. — which never joined it — who can expect to have a seat at the table when the new rules are discussed. Whatever form of financial regulation is introduced, it is more likely to represent their interests than the ostracized old elite. Chelsea, its ambitions aligned with those two, will benefit by proxy.That, of course, is what those clubs who find their positions of power under threat fear: not that the collapse of the Super League will lead to some utopian, egalitarian vision of soccer’s future, but that one set of vested interests will be exchanged for another.Privately, owners admit there is little prospect now of holding back City, in particular. Some in England believe the club could win the Premier League for the next decade if it continues to use its wealth as adroitly as it has. In Europe, the fear is that the Champions League will become the exclusive preserve of the new elite, rather than the old.To some, of course, that may be a good thing, a welcome change after years of dominance by a handful of entitled and presumptuous superclubs. To others, it will have the feel of yet another step toward some grim vision of soccer’s future, where the global game becomes the plaything of oligarchs and plutocrats and nation states.Either way, the path from there to here has been laid, irrevocably, over the last year as the pandemic hit and the money dried up and the regulations loosened and the establishment crumbled. The new future is here, and it starts on Saturday. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Soccer

      The Super League Thought It Had a Silent Partner: FIFA

      by

      Publicly, soccer’s global governing body criticized a breakaway European Super League. Privately, it had held talks for months with the founders about endorsing the competition.Tucked away in the pages and pages of financial and legal jargon that constitute the founding contract of the Super League, the failed project that last month briefly threatened the century-old structures and economics of European soccer, were references to one “essential” requirement.The condition was deemed so important that organizers agreed that the breakaway plan could not succeed without satisfying it and yet was so secret that it was given a code name even in contracts shared among the founders.Those documents, copies of which were reviewed by The New York Times, refer to the need for the Super League founders to strike an agreement with an entity obliquely labeled W01 but easily identifiable as FIFA, soccer’s global governing body. That agreement, the documents said, was “an essential condition for the implementation of the SL project.”Publicly, FIFA and its president, Gianni Infantino, have joined other soccer leaders, fans and politicians in slamming the short-lived Super League project, which would have allowed a small group of elite European teams — a group that included Spain’s Real Madrid, Italy’s Juventus and the English powerhouses Manchester United and Liverpool, among others — to accumulate an ever larger share of the sport’s wealth.But privately, according to interviews with more than a half-dozen soccer executives, including one Super League club owner, Infantino was aware of the plan and knew some of his closest lieutenants had for months — until at least late January — been engaged in talks about lending FIFA’s backing to the breakaway league.The Super League was perhaps the most humbling failure in modern soccer history. Announced by 12 of the world’s richest clubs late on a Sunday night in April, it was abandoned less than 48 hours later amid a hailstorm of protest from fans, leagues, teams and politicians. Its founding teams have since apologized — some of them multiple times — for taking part in it, and a few could still face significant financial and sporting consequences.But the behind-the-scenes discussions that led to a week of public drama have laid bare simmering tensions between FIFA and European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, over control of billions of dollars in annual revenue; exposed a series of frayed relationships among some of the sport’s top leaders that may be beyond repair; and raised new questions about the role played by FIFA and Infantino in the project that shook soccer’s foundations.FIFA declined to respond to specific questions related to the involvement of Infantino or his aides in the planning of the Super League. Instead it pointed to its previous statements and its commitment to processes in which “all key football stakeholders were consulted.”The Super League’s discussions with FIFA began in 2019. They were led by a group known as A22, a consortium of advisers headed by the Spain-based financiers Anas Laghari and John Hahn and charged with putting together the Super League project. A22 officials held meetings with some of Infantino’s closest aides, including FIFA’s deputy secretary general, Mattias Grafstrom.In at least one of those meetings, the breakaway group proposed that, in exchange for FIFA’s endorsement of its project, the Super League would agree to the participation of as many as a dozen of its marquee teams in an annual FIFA-backed World Cup for clubs. The teams also agreed to waive payments they would have earned by taking part, a potential windfall for FIFA of as much as $1 billion each year. After their initial meetings, the advisers reported back that they had found a receptive audience.The Super League’s driving force: Florentino Pérez, Real Madrid’s president.Gabriel Bouys/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesObtaining FIFA’s support was not merely a hedge; the organization’s consent was required to prevent the project from being mired in costly and lengthy litigation and to preclude any punishments for the players who took part.But it was also an insurance policy for the players. In a previous superleague discussion in 2018, FIFA had issued dark warnings that players could be banned from their national teams — and thus the World Cup — for appearing in an unsanctioned league.By the middle of last year, the advisers from A22 were telling clubs that “FIFA was on board,” according to a Super League club owner. Others interviewed, including several with direct knowledge of the meetings who spoke anonymously because they would face legal action for publicly disclosing information subject to secrecy rules, said FIFA was at least open to the idea of the new league. But they said the organization and its leaders remained noncommittal — at least officially — until more details about the structure of the project were in place.Confident they could obtain the support they needed, the organizers discussed various concepts for their new league before landing on the one they presented to the world when they broke cover on April 18. The Super League, as it would be known, would have 15 permanent members but would allow access to five additional teams from Europe each season.A22 had been working on iterations of a superleague for as long as three years. Laghari, an executive at the advisory firm Key Capital Partners who has known the Real Madrid president, Florentino Pérez, since he was a child, was to be the league’s first secretary general. Pérez had long been the driving force behind a superleague, but now, as he had come to grow confident he had FIFA on board, the stars started to align for him and his friend.In Infantino, Pérez and Laghari had found an energetic president eager to remake the soccer business. Infantino often spoke about being open to new ventures and proposals — he has championed the expansion of both the World Cup and FIFA’s Club World Cup in recent years — as he sought to assert FIFA’s dominance over the club game in a manner unlike any of his predecessors. Pérez and Laghari also found kindred spirits in the men who controlled most of Europe’s top clubs. Most were drawn to a project that promised to open a spigot of new revenue while ensuring that costs would be controlled, leading to enormous profits and access to elite competition in perpetuity.Aleksander Ceferin, left, and Infantino in 2018. They have clashed repeatedly over control of club soccer, particularly in Europe.Alexander Hassenstein/Getty ImagesYet even as they received assurances from the A22 advisers about FIFA’s involvement, some skeptical club owners did their own due diligence by reaching out directly to senior FIFA officials. And the word they got back, according to a team executive with direct knowledge of at least one of those conversations, was the same they were hearing from Madrid: If the plan was put together in a certain way, FIFA would not oppose it.Those talks gave the clubs and JPMorgan, the American investment bank that had agreed to finance the project, a level of comfort about its viability. Their confidence wavered, though, when leaks about a potential superleague emerged in news reports in January, accompanied by whispers of FIFA’s involvement in the talks.Alarmed by the reports, European soccer’s top official, Aleksander Ceferin, the UEFA president, held an urgent meeting with Infantino at UEFA’s headquarters in Nyon, Switzerland in which he asked Infantino directly if he was involved in the plan. Infantino said he was not, but he initially demurred when asked to commit to a statement condemning the proposals. Amid intense pressure and growing requests for comment, though, he backed down.On Jan. 21, a statement was issued in the name of FIFA and soccer’s six regional confederations. It said a “closed” European league would not be recognized by FIFA or the confederations and reiterated the threat of a World Cup ban for any participant.The statement shocked the organizers of the Super League, as their talks with FIFA until that stage had been positive. But according to people involved in the planning, they also sensed a signal in its wording: FIFA said it would not recognize a closed competition, but the Super League was now planning to supplement its roster of 15 permanent members with five qualifiers every season.The A22 advisers, according to the club owner, insisted that loophole meant all was not lost. “They reported that FIFA was still open to something,” he said.The founders’ plan was to tie the Super League to FIFA’s Club World Cup, the owner said. That way the clubs would commit as many as 12 of the biggest teams in Europe to Infantino’s ambitious global competition in exchange for FIFA’s blessing of their new league. To sweeten the deal, they considered waiving $1 billion in potential payouts to allow FIFA to keep the money as a so-called solidarity payment that could be spent on soccer development projects around the world.It is unknown if any more talks took place between FIFA and the Super League clubs in the weeks before the clubs broke cover and announced their project. But FIFA was the last of the major soccer governing bodies to issue an official statement on the proposed league after the clubs went public, and it only did so after UEFA, top leagues and politicians had made clear their opposition.Arriving as Ceferin was calling the leaders of the breakaway league “snakes and liars,” FIFA’s statement was far more measured. Any talk of excluding players from the World Cup was quietly dropped, and FIFA instead offered nuanced, conciliatory language. FIFA said it stood “firm in favour of solidarity in football and an equitable redistribution model which can help develop football as a sport, particularly at global level.”It also reiterated that it could only “express its disapproval to a ‘closed European breakaway league’ outside of the international football structures.”For those engaged in the breakaway, the words — as they had in January — were vague enough to suggest that there was still hope for their project, that FIFA might still be open to providing its backing.Within 48 hours, though, their hopes were dashed. Opposition to the plan had by then reached a fever pitch. Fans in Britain — where six of the 12 founding members were based — were protesting in the streets, and politicians had threatened to enact laws to block the league.Fans of Chelsea and the five other Premier League clubs that had signed up for the Super League forced their teams to reconsider and withdraw.Matt Dunham/Associated PressInfantino, just as he had in January, once again came under pressure from Ceferin to distance himself from the plans. He did so in a speech to UEFA’s congress on April 20 in which he effectively walked away from the Super League project.“We can only strongly disapprove the creation of the Super League,” Infantino said. “A Super League which is a closed shop. A breakaway from the current institutions, from the leagues, from the associations, from UEFA and from FIFA. There is a lot to throw away for the short-term financial gain of some. They need to reflect, and they need to assume responsibility.”Hours later, realizing that the “essential” requirement their contract had called for would not be forthcoming, the first clubs started to walk away. By nightfall, all six English clubs had announced they were out. By midnight, three other founders had followed.Today only three teams — Pérez’s Real Madrid, Juventus and Barcelona — remain as holdouts, refusing to sign a letter of apology demanded by UEFA as a condition of their reintegration into European soccer. If they do not sign, all three face significant penalties, including a potential ban from the Champions League.Infantino, meanwhile, faces pressures of his own, not to mention accusations of betrayal. The head of the Spanish league, Javier Tebas, openly called him one of the masterminds behind the breakaway league and said he had told Infantino as much when the men met briefly at the UEFA Congress.“It’s he who is behind the Super League, and I already told him in person,” Tebas said this month. “I’ve said it before and I will say it again: Behind all of this is FIFA President Gianni Infantino.” More

    • 100 Shares109 Views

      in Soccer

      Champions League Final: Porto Replaces Istanbul as Host

      by

      UEFA will take this month’s Manchester City-Chelsea final to Porto after talks to bring the game to London failed to produce an agreement.This month’s all-English Champions League final between Manchester City and Chelsea will be played in Porto, Portugal, a shift of one of soccer’s showcase events to one of the few countries where Britons can travel without restrictions related to the coronavirus pandemic.European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, cleared the last hurdles to shifting the game from its scheduled site in Turkey on Wednesday. It confirmed the move on Thursday.The #UCLfinal between Manchester City and Chelsea will now be held at the Estádio do Dragão in Porto.6,000 fans of each team will be able to attend.Full story: ⬇️— UEFA (@UEFA) May 13, 2021
      The decision to move the final from Istanbul, which recently re-entered a virus-related lockdown, came after discussions between European soccer leaders and British government officials, who had been seeking to bring the game to London. When the sides failed to reach an agreement that would have allowed the teams and their domestic fans to avoid international travel, Portugal was chosen as the site of the game for the second year in a row.The final, which will be played May 29 at the Estádio Dragão in the coastal city of Porto, is the biggest day on the European club soccer calendar. It had been scheduled to be played at the Ataturk Olympic Stadium in Istanbul, but that would have ruled out attendance for most British fans of the finalists, since Turkey is on a so-called red list of countries to which travel is discouraged.Holding the game in Turkey also raised the prospect that players and officials from both teams would have to quarantine for as long as 10 days upon their return to England. That would have complicated the preparations of a handful of national teams for this summer’s European Championship, which begins June 11.The game will be played with Estádio Dragão’s capacity of about 50,000 reduced to less than half that figure. City and Chelsea are expected to receive 6,000 tickets for their fans, figures that mirrored the allotments in Turkey.Chelsea beat Manchester City, 2-1, in a Premier League match on Saturday. The teams will meet again in the Champions League final on May 29.Pool photo by Laurence GriffithsEurope’s governing body, UEFA, and British officials began holding direct talks on Monday, three days after the British government placed Turkey on its red list of countries, destinations where all but essential travel is prohibited.The British government said it was open to holding the match at Wembley Stadium in London, and even was prepared to agree to allow thousands of fans to attend, but they acknowledged that UEFA, as the tournament organizer, would have the final say. UEFA provided a list of key requirements, mainly around exemptions to quarantine rules for visitors.UEFA’s demands created a problem for British officials, though, since they had to balance the popular appeal of bringing a major sporting event featuring two English teams to the country against continuing concerns about public health amid a spreading virus. When the government balked at UEFA’s request that it waive quarantine requirements so UEFA’s staff members — as well as international broadcasters, sponsors, suppliers and officials — could attend the game without an isolation period, the prospect of a London final was dead.In Portugal, the European soccer body has found a familiar savior to get it out of a crisis. The country — and Lisbon in particular — rode to the rescue last year when the Champions League’s final stages, including a final also set for Istanbul, had to be reorganized because of the outbreak of the pandemic.The tournament, suspended on the eve of the quarterfinals, was completed with a knockout format and in a so-called bubble environment in Lisbon. Turkish officials had agreed to surrender their role as host of the final in exchange for a promise that Istanbul would host the final this year.Discussions about a move were completed quickly. Last Friday, after City and Chelsea had confirmed the all-English final and as talk swirled about a change of venue, Tiago Craveiro, the chief executive of the Portuguese soccer federation, reached out to UEFA. Officials at the soccer body were then reeling from that day’s sudden announcement that travelers from Britain faced severe restrictions for any travel to Turkey. That created a crisis that went well beyond questions about fan access.Players on both sides faced the prospect of having to isolate for 10 days upon their return to Britain, creating doubts over their participation in the European Championship, the national team competition organized by UEFA that is second in size and importance only to the FIFA World Cup.With Portugal on Britain’s green list — and thus subject to far less stringent travel rules — Craveiro offered to organize the final at short notice. Porto was picked because it did not get an opportunity to stage Champions League games last year when the event was confined in its Lisbon bubble.Sympathetic that Istanbul is losing out for the second straight year, UEFA officials are considering offering Turkish officials the Champions League final in 2023, to coincide with the centenary of the Turkish republic. More