![]()
On the same fieldAGREEMENT ACHIEVED: Bora Stankoviฤ (FIBA) and Eduardo Portela (ULEB) in Munich
Many will say: it was logical and expected. Others will retort with the question: where did the split and division into two leagues come from? The third will dig into the details to find out who won or lost more. The fourth, certainly the most numerous, i.e. basketball fans, will be happy because they are interested in basketball as a sport and spectacle, not as a business, and the unique Euroleague will offer more interesting and better competition. It is, of course, about relations between FIBA โโand ULEB.
On Wednesday, April 4, an end was put to the conflict in Munich, an agreement was signed, according to which it turns out that there was no conflict at all. Everything, or almost everything, that FIBA โโdid not even want to hear about last summer, has now accepted, realizing that the new organizational structure and the gradual transfer of power to the clubs and their association does not mean the dethronement of FIBA. The time of centralism has passed in all areas and all systems, and sport cannot be an exception, it's just a question of who solved crisis situations in their yard and how. In the conflict with the G-14 several years ago, UEFA applied a different recipe than FIBA โโ- it released the bag. When Europe's strongest clubs announced rebellion, secession and the establishment of their own League, UEFA increased the prizes fivefold and the hatchets were immediately buried.
FIBA could not apply the same formula because it does not have the money that UEFA has, nor can basketball compete with football in terms of interest and money turnover, but instead of caution and taking clubs seriously, it began to "train rigor". The impression is that until the last hour, FIBA โโdid not believe in the possibility of the majority of the strongest teams in Europe actually seceding, and when it happened, it took half a year for Munich to realize that this was a reality and that further aggravation of the situation would lead to nothing.
When hints started arriving from Munich that FIBA โโwas ready for a discussion and compromise in the Euroleague, ULEB, the initiative was met with dismay since the "rebels" did not like the prolongation of dual power and two parallel leagues. The Euroleague pushed through the first season relatively well, but the question is whether the second one would be equally successful, especially since the policy of selling TV rights (mainly according to the system pay for view) made the competition "anonymous" in a certain way. No television from the most developed countries such as Spain, Italy and Greece broadcast the Euroleague games openly, and the playoffs were not broadcast in Greece either because no Greek TV company wanted to pay what the owners of the TV rights demanded. Unification, of course, does not mean that next year's Euroleague matches will be available to everyone, but in countries where there is no codified television (which includes Yugoslavia), the only solution is an agreement with national television, as was the case in Croatia this season, where HRT broadcast the matches of Cibona and Zadar, or in Yugoslavia, where RTS broadcast the matches of Partizan in the Suproliga, and TV Montenegro broadcast the matches of Buduฤnosti in the Euroleague.
Be that as it may, there was a rapprochement of views, then discussions and finally an agreement by which FIBA โโceded part of its rights to the Euroleague. ULEB returned under the auspices of FIBA, recognizing its authority, and in return received the autonomy it longed for. In essence, it is a conflict of two conceptions - the clubs demanded, and finally got, the right to decide for themselves about their competition, their rights and their money. If they make a mistake or misjudge something, at least they won't be able to blame FIBA. The headquarters of the Euroleague will remain in Barcelona, โโthe competition and marketing will be conducted from Barcelona, โโand several sports aspects are divided: the disciplinary referee of the Euroleague decides in the first instance, FIBA โโin the second, licenses are approved by FIBA, which also takes care of the global calendar in which the Euroleague fits, doping control also belonged to FIBA, the referees will be jointly delegated by Kostas Rigas (Euroleague) and Ljubo Kotleba (FIBA), three arbitrators will judge (as in the Euroleague), and will be formed a joint elite list with some 75-80 names and those referees will, in principle, judge only the Euroleague, although, when they are free, they will be able to arbitrate in other cups as well. FIBA will also manage the second European Cup, which should be created by the fusion of Saporta and Korac, the women's European Cup and the entire international selection program of all ages. So everything is agreed, it remains to be seen how it will work.
From the Euroleague: Kinder, PAF, Benetton, Real Madrid, Barcelona, โโOlympiakos, Olympia, Cibona, Buducnost, Zalgiris, London Towers, Cibona and Frankfurt (these last two teams only have a contract for the next season). From the Super League: Panathinaikos, Maccabi Tel Aviv, Villerban, Po Ortez, Ulker, Efes Pilsen, Alba and CSKA Moscow. Guaranteed places: for two more clubs from Spain, two from Greece, one each from Italy, Yugoslavia, Belgium and Poland. From the qualifiers: the three best teams out of 12 who will start the qualifiers and who come from France, Turkey, Russia, Croatia, Lithuania, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, Israel, Belgium, Slovenia and Germany.
Vladimir Stankoviฤ, a journalist from "Vremen", will continue to perform the role of spokesperson for the now united Euroleague next season. On September 1 last year, our journalist accepted the Euroleague's offer to be its spokesperson, with the condition that he would continue to write for "Vreme", of course not on topics related to the Euroleague. The same principle applies to the next season.