Twelve of the world’s most influential football clubs announced, on social media, their plan to launch a new competition run by the founding clubs. Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico Madrid, AC Milan, Inter Milan, Juventus, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, and Tottenham Hotspur positioned themselves as the founders, with Florentino Pérez elected as the first president of the proposed Super League.
UEFA monopoly
It has been a full year since UEFA’s declaration rocked European football. The European Club Association (ECA) and the leagues community, along with world players association FIFPRO, expressed concern because they had not been consulted. The Super League faced a standstill and awaited a resolution. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Luxembourg, a body formed by 27 judges (one per member state) and 11 advocates general, was set to decide whether UEFA holds a monopoly by blocking competitions outside its framework, such as the Super League. The three clubs that led the charge previously, Real Madrid, Barcelona, and Juventus, briefly pressed forward but stepped back amid threats from UEFA and its president, Aleksander Ceferin.
The CJEU paused the matter when a request for expedited review was rejected, pushing a final decision into late spring or early summer of the following year. UEFA’s position maintained that the current framework protected competition aligns with sporting values, though this stance also sparked debates about how rules shape opportunities for ambitious projects like the Super League to emerge. The case continued through legal channels, with procedural timelines scrutinized in Spain where it began.
Spain’s judge who raised the issue, Manuel Ruiz de Lara, was later replaced by Sofia Gil Garcia, a magistrate specializing in commercial matters at Barcelona’s Commercial Court Number 2. The future of the Super League now hinged on pending rulings from the CJEU, and eventually a final verdict that could alter the European football landscape. The central question remained: could a rival model coexist with existing leagues and competitions without undermining the economic and competitive balance that many leagues rely upon?
As the clock ticked forward, the general expectation was that the outcome would influence the viability of any new competition open to promotion and relegation based on sporting merit. In this framework, the courtroom would determine whether the current structure equates to a monopolistic lock that stifles potential challengers, or if a revised, more open model could coexist with established channels for competition. The discussion extended beyond Spain to the broader European ecosystem, affecting clubs across the continent and inviting broader scrutiny of governance in football by the top judicial bodies in Europe.
Looking at Luxembourg
El Periódico, a paper aligned with the same publishing group as this outlet, consulted insiders from Spanish clubs about the incident. The Super League was described as awaiting a decision on UEFA’s monopoly. If the court found abuse, steps toward launching the Super League could accelerate, with strong backing from clubs in Spain, Italy, and the United Kingdom. The momentum behind the plan was built on a belief that the top clubs deserved greater control over commercial arrangements, broadcasting deals, and prize distributions. [Source attribution: European sports press, credible outlets covering the case]
Florentino Pérez was vocal about the breadth of support for the Super League, signaling that a coalition of clubs outside the traditional UEFA framework might sustain the project even if the initial push faced delays. Meanwhile, UEFA responded by introducing a revamped Champions League structure, claiming it offered a broader revenue share to participating clubs. The rationale cited cited to explain the reform was to raise long-term financial return for participants while preserving competitive integrity. The tension between ambitious clubs and governing bodies highlighted a broader contest over who controls the economics of modern football, and how much independence can be accommodated within a cooperative, league-led system.