Serie A Giants Unite Against League Chief: Inter, Juventus, AC Milan Stand Together

In a dramatic turn of events, four of Italy's football giants—Inter Milan, AC Milan, Juventus, and AS Roma—have united to cast a vote of no confidence against Serie A President Lorenzo Casini. This move, essentially an impeachment, has been confirmed by leading Italian media outlets such as ANSA and La Gazzetta dello Sport. The timing of this rebellion is particularly significant as Casini is scheduled to attend a crucial meeting with Italy's Sports Minister Andrea Abodi tomorrow, where potentially game-changing regulations or laws for Serie A could be announced.

The core of this conflict lies in the significant divergence in views between Casini and the four major clubs. These clubs have firmly expressed that Casini does not represent their interests, stating in a joint letter to the Serie A League: "Casini cannot represent our position; his attitude does not equate to ours." Essentially, if the Serie A League and the Ministry of Sport make declarations "in consultation with all clubs," the four powerhouses will assert that "all clubs" only includes 16 teams and excludes Juventus, the Milan clubs, and Roma. This highlights a deep rift within Serie A.

The question arises: Why have these four football giants rebelled? What policies could unite historical rivals like Inter and Juventus, or recent adversaries like Inter and AC Milan, to stand shoulder to shoulder? ANSA reports that the catalyst is a series of controversial decisions made by the Serie A League on February 14th, which these clubs find unacceptable.

According to comprehensive reports from La Gazzetta dello Sport, La Repubblica, and Sky Sports, the full details of these decisions have yet to be disclosed. However, the currently revealed elements contain three significant points of contention that harm the interests of the big clubs.

Firstly, the top four clubs demanded a reduction in Serie A teams from 20 to 18. This proposal was vetoed by the league due to strong opposition from smaller clubs. The league, unable to reconcile these differences, resorted to a simple vote where the more numerous smaller clubs prevailed, resulting in a defeat for the larger clubs.

Secondly, future revenue distribution in Serie A is set to follow a principle that further reduces the share for big clubs while increasing the income for smaller clubs.

Thirdly, in future commercial negotiations such as advertising deals and broadcast rights, big clubs are not allowed to negotiate independently but must instead participate collectively with smaller clubs, who are unwilling to allocate a larger share to the big clubs.

Aside from these three points, other undisclosed elements also severely damage the interests of the major clubs. In summary, dissatisfaction with the "rob the rich to feed the poor" approach is the primary reason behind the rebellion of the northern giants and Roma.

Napoli and Lazio have not joined this movement. Speculation suggests that Claudio Lotito, Lazio’s president and a significant political beneficiary of this "wealth redistribution" policy, has managed to convince Napoli’s Aurelio De Laurentiis to stay onside.

ANSA points out that there are deep-seated, irreconcilable conflicts within the Serie A League, which have driven the northern trio and Roma to express their discontent through such drastic measures. The root of these conflicts lies in the voting system itself, which has become a poison for the ailing Serie A.

Commentator Altobelli offers an analogy: Imagine a gravely ill person in ancient Greece who desperately needs treatment. Instead of seeking the most skilled doctor in the village, he gathers everyone to vote on who should treat him. They end up selecting a charismatic speaker with no medical knowledge, leading to the patient's worsening condition. This, Altobelli argues, is the current state of Serie A. Despite the "democratic" façade of voting, it is driving the league deeper into trouble.

Take the example of the expansion of the UEFA Champions League and the FIFA Club World Cup. Executives like Marotta advocate for reducing Serie A to 18 teams, mirroring the Bundesliga and Ligue 1. This would eliminate weaker teams, significantly enhance the league's appeal, and improve Italian teams' performance in European competitions, thus boosting Serie A’s reputation. The Bundesliga’s experience post-reduction shows that this move can increase broadcast revenue. However, smaller Serie A clubs resist this change, fearing increased relegation pressure with 18 teams. Thus, a vote is held, and the big clubs lose again due to being outnumbered.

Another example is the issue of advertising revenue. It's clear that advertisers invest in Serie A mainly because of the large fan bases and international reputations of clubs like Juventus, Milan, Inter, and Roma. Given this, it’s reasonable that these clubs should receive a larger share of the revenue. Yet, the smaller clubs vehemently oppose this idea, demanding equal distribution. After another vote, the big clubs are defeated again.

Is this fair? Does it align with the principle of "more work, more reward"? Clearly not. The four giants’ impeachment of the league’s leadership highlights the significant issues with Serie A’s current voting system, which has hindered meaningful reforms for years.

Looking ahead, the situation is likely to escalate. Can Serie A find a decision-making mechanism outside of the voting system that genuinely addresses the league’s problems? The outlook is grim.