Real Madrid are asking Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur to contribute to the costs of establishing the European Super League, despite their withdrawal just days after its launch in April 2021. The club confirmed to ‘Reuters’ on Tuesday that it was seeking those contributions, following reporting by ‘The Athletic’. The request raises a dispute over the former partners’ commitments: whether leaving a competition that never took place also ended their financial obligations.
One source quoted by ‘The Athletic’ estimates that total costs could reach €80 million. The publication reports that Madrid, FC Barcelona and Juventus have so far shared the project’s promotional expenses. That figure is not an established debt owed by the six English clubs, and the amount sought from each has not been disclosed. Tottenham declined to comment to ‘Reuters’, while the other five did not immediately respond to the agency’s enquiries. There has also been no public confirmation that legal proceedings over these payments have been initiated.
What obligations survived the withdrawal?
Madrid’s position rests on the shareholders’ agreement the founders signed with European Super League Company, the Spanish holding company established to develop the competition. According to ‘The Athletic’, the dispute centres on commitments to “jointly own and manage” the project and carry out the actions envisaged for its creation. The leaked documents examined by the publication contain no specific provision on sharing costs. The question is therefore whether those broader clauses also required clubs to meet expenses, and how their subsequent withdrawals affected any such obligation.
A Madrid source told the publication that any money owed would be payable to European Super League Company. Madrid are pursuing the contributions, but the project’s company would receive the money. Establishing a payment obligation would require examining the contract, the expenses claimed and the terms of each club’s departure. In his analysis for ‘The Athletic’, journalist Matt Slater suggests that legal action would probably be necessary to secure the contributions. That possibility does not mean proceedings have begun or indicate which interpretation of the contract would prevail.
The UEFA agreement and A22’s transition
The request follows the agreement of principles announced on 11 February by Madrid, the Union of European Football Associations -UEFA- and European Football Clubs -EFC-. The three organisations said the understanding would resolve their Super League-related legal disputes once a definitive agreement was implemented. The announcement addressed their institutional relationship, sporting merit and clubs’ financial sustainability. Its published terms do not settle financial obligations between the former shareholders, so the rapprochement with UEFA cannot be taken to mean that the allocation of costs was also resolved.
The move coincides with a transition in the business structure associated with the project. ‘The Athletic’ reports that Bernd Reichart, who has led A22, will join Madrid as head of business operations once he has concluded his affairs at the promoter. A22 declined to comment to the publication. The company had developed successive versions of the competition: a 64-club proposal in 2023 and a 96-club format presented in December 2024 as the Unify League. Neither became an operational tournament, leaving the future of the original project unresolved.
Unfinished business from 2021
The Super League launched with twelve founding clubs in April 2021, but opposition from supporters, clubs and football authorities prompted nine to withdraw: the six English teams, Atletico Madrid, AC Milan and Inter Milan. Juventus announced its departure in 2023, and Barcelona formally withdrew in February this year. After the initial departures, Florentino Pérez maintained that the contracts were binding and that “the clubs can’t leave”. That statement reflects the Madrid president’s position at the time, but does not establish that the payment obligations now being disputed remain in force. Madrid also did not immediately confirm to ‘Reuters’ whether they were seeking contributions from the other three clubs that initially withdrew.
The English clubs reached a separate agreement with the Premier League and the Football Association -FA- in June 2021: a joint £22 million contribution supporting fans, grassroots football and community programmes. That commitment does not, by itself, determine their obligations to the Super League company. Five years on, the latest request requires clarity over which expenses remain outstanding, which clauses might allow them to be shared and who must pay. Leaving the project does not automatically answer those questions, but Madrid’s interpretation alone does not establish an enforceable debt without agreement between the parties or a ruling confirming it.
Last related articles
