I have two questions about the Super League plot that has been bubbling under, emerging whenever it is convenient, for about 20 years.

One is: has anyone done any research into whether people want it? The big clubs/organisations aren't thick: they'll have worked out that CL games are special because they're rare. But are they *sure* they'll still be special if they're played twice a year?

(On the other hand: maybe this is a generational thing. I don't know anyone who wants one, but that's just my late-30s bubble. Maybe there's loads of younger fans or more international fans or whatever who actually find the idea of a national league a bit restrictive)

And the other question is: these super-clubs think that it's teams like Burnley and West Brom and Palace who hold domestic leagues back, because nobody wants to watch them. But they know that, after a few years, one of them will end up being that league's West Brom, don't they?

It is kind of an unavoidable consequence of having a league that some of the teams end up at the bottom of it. Juventus-PSG sounds glamorous now, but it's not quite as glamorous when it's 12th against 15th and there's nothing to play for.

All of these thoughts and more will be available in tomorrow's @setpiecemenu, which we recorded this morning and, completely coincidentally, discussed this very idea.