Home » DFL investor crisis: Hellmann – “We didn’t manage to convey the advantages”

DFL investor crisis: Hellmann – “We didn’t manage to convey the advantages”

by admin
DFL investor crisis: Hellmann – “We didn’t manage to convey the advantages”

As of: February 24, 2024 11:55 p.m

Eintracht Frankfurt’s board spokesman blamed the clubs’ communication with their fans for the failure of the investor deal.

“We have not managed to convey the advantages of this model and the need for investment as the best model,” said Hellmann in the current ZDF sports studio. Hellmann is one of nine members of the DFL executive committee and a supporter of investor entry.

The 36 clubs are responsible for the failure; credibility among fans was lacking in many locations, said Hellmann. “In Frankfurt, we didn’t just start looking for a close connection to the active fan scene in crisis situations,” noted Hellmann. In Frankfurt he was able to credibly assure that the DFL was actually defending the “red lines”. At the DFL, the “red lines” meant the exclusion of an investor’s influence on issues such as kick-off times.

DFL-Investor

Fans celebrate the end of the investor deal – and take a look at 50+1

Hellmann emphasized that, in his view, the investor model would have been more financially advantageous than other proposals. Clubs such as SC Freiburg or 1. FC Köln had publicly preferred financing investments in the future through loans or using existing income.

Hellmann: “Four weeks before, 30 clubs were in favor”

Four weeks before the vote, 30 clubs had spoken out in favor, said Hellmann. “Some clubs noticed that their flow of information to control committees, general meetings and fan scenes was not such that they could stick to their commitment.” In the end there were 24 yes votes.

See also  Mancini also calls Joao Pedro with Cragno, Barella and Sirigu

“It is a fundamental problem that this 24th vote can be called into doubt,” said Hellmann. “There’s a lack of legitimacy.” What was meant was the vote in December. The suspicion remained until the end that the narrowest necessary majority of 24 of the 36 clubs in the vote was also based on a yes from Hanover’s managing director Martin Kind, even though the parent club had demanded a no. This means a violation of the 50+1 rule – a major reason for the protest. Hellmann said again that he didn’t know how Kind voted.

Martin Kind, Managing Director of Hannover 96

Investor deal collapsed after fan protests

The DFL Presidium decided to terminate the process on Wednesday (February 21, 2024) at the suggestion of its spokesman Hans-Joachim Watzke. Watzke said after a meeting of the executive committee in Frankfurt am Main that he had the feeling that the majority of clubs would prefer the DFL to distance itself from the issue. The investor entry had become an ordeal, said Watzke. “It couldn’t be sustained any longer.”

In the previous weeks there had been many protests by active fans in the stadiums, some of which led to long interruptions in the game. More and more clubs are also demanding that there should be another vote on the possible entry of an investor.

Presidium DFL eV Person Club Position Hans-Joachim Watzke Borussia Dortmund Speaker Oliver Leki SC Freiburg 1st deputy Steffen Schneekloth Holstein Kiel 2nd deputy Jan-Christian Dreesen Bayern Munich member Oke Göttlich FC St. Pauli member Axel Hellmann Eintracht Frankfurt member Holger Schwiewagner SpVgg Gr . Fürth member Marc Lenz DFL member Steffen Merkel DFL member

See also  New Orleans Pelicans' Zion Williamson is out

The future of the 50+1 rule is coming into focus

On the initiative of the DFL, the Federal Cartel Office should examine the 50+1 rule with regard to its compatibility with competition law. The end of the process was ultimately considered a formality because there was a compromise: This stipulated that the DFL would impose conditions for Bayer Leverkusen and VfL Wolfsburg, where 50+1 did not apply. In addition, there should be no new exceptions to the rule.

Association rules must be transparent, objective, precise and non-discriminatory, the Federal Cartel Office said upon request. Therefore, this must also be demonstrated in its practical application. “This handling can allow conclusions to be drawn as to whether the DFL is consistently and consistently pursuing the objectives of the rule,” the cartel office continued. The question now is how the Hannover 96 case will be assessed by the office.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy