SOCCER

Super League lawyer reads out Ceferin threats during trial

At the hearing, Luis Alonso Díaz read a message from the UEFA president to an American supplier who wanted to organize a summer tournament.

On Monday 11 July, a trial began in Luxembourg to determine whether UEFA and FIFA have the legitimacy to veto the organization of competitions that are not organized by themselves. Some of the investigation will centre around the proposed Super League but the general thrust is whether UEFA enjoys a monopoly with the Champions League.

AS has gained access to a video of one of the moments of the hearing. In it you can see Luis Alonso Díaz, one of the Super League lawyers, highlighting threats made by UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin’s threats to a North American supplier who wanted to organize a summer tournament involving some of the clubs that are promoting the new continental competition. At one point, he read verbatim a message from the UEFA president to the businessman.

“I represent the Super League and I also represent A22. A22′s objective is to develop competitions. In spring last year, we did something so ‘disruptive’ and aggressive’ towards the European market such as trying to organise a friendly summer tournament in the United States. The was a problem with that tournament right from the start - it involved clubs from the Super League. UEFA denied us the opportunity to go ahead with it. They wouldn’t let us work in the United States. I am going to read, word for word, the letter which an American supplier received from none other than UEFA’s president concerning this project: “I have heard about your business with the three clubs. Those clubs didn’t cause issues with UEFA, they tried to destroy me personally. It’s a shame that you didn’t understand it. The fact that you work with them means that me, UEFA or anyone that can have influence on, we don’t have any business or private relation with you. Trust me, this was a big mistake”.

The final ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on whether or not both institutions violated community law is expected in 2023.