This was after the extraordinary meeting of the UEFA Executive Committee held in reaction to the escalation of the security situation in Europe which has Russian invading Ukraine.

The final earlier scheduled for Saint Petersburg will now be played at the Stade de France in France on Saturday, May 28, 2022, UEFA said in a statement on its website.

The statement read in part, “UEFA wishes to express its thanks and appreciation to French Republic President Emmanuel Macron for his personal support and commitment to have European club football’s most prestigious game moved to France at a time of unparalleled crisis. Together with the French government, UEFA will fully support multi-stakeholder efforts to ensure the provision of rescue for football players and their families in Ukraine who face dire human suffering, destruction and displacement.At today’s meeting, the UEFA Executive Committee also decided that Russian and Ukrainian clubs and national teams competing in UEFA competitions will be required to play their home matches at neutral venues until further notice. The UEFA Executive Committee further determined to remain on standby to convene further extraordinary meetings, on a regular ongoing basis where required, to reassess the legal and factual situation as it evolves and adopt further decisions as necessary.”

In the latest draw, Manchester United will take on La Liga champions, Atletico Madrid, with PSG to face Real Madrid. 

Current champions, Chelsea will go head to head with Lille, with Sporting Lisbon to face Manchester City. 

Draw in full below. 

Salzburg v Bayern Munich

Sporting Lisbon v Man City

Benfica v Ajax

Chelsea v Lille

Atletico Madrid v Man United

Villarreal v Juventus

Inter Milan v Liverpool

PSG v Real Madrid 

Barcelona, Juventus and Real Madrid are the only founding members of the breakaway competition that have so far refused to abandon the project.

UEFA threatened the clubs with legal action and planned to suspend them from this year’s Champions League, but it was announced in May that legal proceedings would be delayed after a Madrid court accused the governing body of acting “outside the rule of law”.

The UEFA Appeals Body has now announced that the case against the three clubs will be dropped.

A statement from the governing body read: “Following the stay of proceedings against FC Barcelona, Juventus FC and Real Madrid CF, in the matter related to a potential violation of UEFA’s legal framework in connection with the so-called ‘Super League’, the UEFA Appeals Body has declared today the proceedings null and void as if the proceedings had never been opened.”

The European Superleague was a controversial plot to form a new competition that would challenge the Champions League for supremacy in European football. It was announced in April.

Nine other clubs which include Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Tottenham, Atletico Madrid, AC Milan and Inter announced that they would also join the Super League as founding members. But the plan quickly fell apart amid protests from fans as UEFA and the national football associations across Europe spoke out against the idea.

The Premier League teams, Atletico, Milan and Inter all announced they would be pulling out of the plan within days of the initial announcement. The clubs that pulled out agreed to pay a total of £22 million ($31m) to UEFA but now the governing body has also cancelled the fines.

The rule, which was introduced in 1965, has since been used to determine the winner of a two-legged knockout tie where teams had scored the same number of goals on aggregate over the two matches. Now in matches where two teams score the same number of goals over two legs, games will go straight to extra time and then penalties, if they are required.

UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin said “The away goals rule has been an intrinsic part of UEFA competitions since it was introduced in 1965. However, the question of its abolition has been debated at various UEFA meetings over the last few years.  Although there was no unanimity of views, many coaches, fans and other football stakeholders have questioned its fairness and have expressed a preference for the rule to be abolished. The impact of the rule now runs counter to its original purpose as, in fact, it now dissuades home teams – especially in first legs – from attacking, because they fear conceding a goal that would give their opponents a crucial advantage. There is also criticism of the unfairness, especially in extra time, of obliging the home team to score twice when the away team has scored. It is fair to say that home advantage is nowadays no longer as significant as it once was. Taking into consideration the consistency across Europe in terms of styles of play, and many different factors which have led to a decline in home advantage, the UEFA Executive Committee has taken the correct decision in adopting the view that it is no longer appropriate for an away goal to carry more weight than one scored at home”

The clubs are the only three of the original 12 to have not distanced themselves from the project despite heavy criticism from fans and football pundits.

UEFA said in a statement “Following an investigation conducted by UEFA Ethics and Disciplinary Inspectors in connection with the so-called ‘Super League’ project, disciplinary proceedings have been opened against Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus FC for a potential violation of UEFA’s legal framework, further information will be made available in due course”

The European football body’s statutes include a section on “prohibited groupings” of clubs or leagues forming without UEFA’s permission or outside its control.

UEFA’s move raises the prospect of the three clubs being sanctioned, with some reports suggesting they face expulsion from UEFA competitions such as the Champions League for a period of two years.

The Super League was announced on April 18, but within 72 hours it had fallen apart with the English clubs withdrawing after fan protests and Government pressure.

Nine of the original 12 European Super League clubs, including the Premier League’s Arsenal, Man U, Chelsea, Tottenham, Liverpool and Manchester City declared their commitment to UEFA and its competitions at the continental and domestic level on Friday, May 7. The clubs also agreed to give a percentage of its earnings next season to UEFA.

The nine clubs face fines of 100m euros (almost £87m) each if they seek to join an unauthorised competition in the future, and a fine of half that if they breach any other terms of the declaration, UEFA said in a statement.

However, Juventus, Real Madrid and Barcelona have refused to quit the European Super League saying it will be modified and the other clubs risk financial penalties if they decide to leave the European Super League.

Real Madrid, Barcelona and Juventus on Saturday, May 8, issued a joint statement vowing to “persevere in the pursuit of adequate solutions” amid the fallout from the European Super League, warning UEFA to stop threatening them while denouncing the “intolerable” pressure put on them by UEFA to drop the project.

It read: “In relation to the statement released by UEFA on the 7th May in respect of the Super League and the position taken by 9 of its founding clubs, Fútbol Club Barcelona, Juventus and Real Madrid Club de Fútbol state the following: I- The founding clubs have suffered, and continue to suffer, unacceptable third-party pressures, threats, and offences to abandon the project and therefore desist from their right and duty to provide solutions to the football ecosystem via concrete proposals and constructive dialogue. This is intolerable under the rule of law and Tribunals have already ruled in favour of the Super League proposal, ordering FIFA and UEFA too, either directly or through their affiliated bodies, refrain from taking any action which may hinder this initiative in any way while court proceedings are pending. II- The Super League project was designed jointly by its 12 founding clubs: a. with the aim of providing solutions to the current unsustainable situation in the football industry. The 12 founding clubs shared the same concerns -as other stakeholders in European football do-, particularly under the current socio-economic context, that structural reforms are indispensable to ensure our sport stays appealing and survives in the long term. To that effect, on 18th April, they announced their willingness to create the Super League and establish a channel of communication with UEFA and FIFA, in a constructive spirit of collaboration between the parties, as it was so notified to each of them on such date; b. with the utmost respect for the current football structures and ecosystem. The founding clubs expressly agreed that the Super League would only take place if such competition was recognised by UEFA and/or FIFA or if, in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, it was deemed to be a competition duly compatible for all purposes with the continuity of the founding clubs in their respective domestic competitions. However, despite being aware of the above terms, UEFA and FIFA have so far refused to establish any adequate channel of communication; and c. to bring financial stability to the entire European football family, currently under the effects of a deep crisis that threatens the survival of many clubs. Testament of it, the announced commitment to establish annual solidarity payments for guaranteed annual amounts that materially multiply those distributed by UEFA, and the obligation to reinforce financial sustainability rules, through the creation of a clear, transparent and effective control system verified by experts. III- The 12 founding clubs also acknowledged that the Super League was a unique opportunity to offer fans around the world the best possible show and to reinforce global interest in the sport, which is not a ‘given’ and is challenged by new generational trends. Moreover, one of its main objectives was to promote women’s football on a global level, a tremendous, but currently underestimated, an opportunity for the sector. IV- We are fully aware of the diversity of reactions to the Super League initiative and, consequently, of the need to reflect on the reasons for some of them. We are ready to reconsider the proposed approach, as necessary. However, we would be highly irresponsible if, being aware of the needs and systemic crisis in the football sector, which led us to announce the Super League, we abandoned such mission to provide effective and sustainable answers to the existential questions that threaten the football industry. V- We regret to see that our friends and founding partners of the Super League project have now found themselves in such an inconsistent and contradictory position when signing a number of commitments to UEFA yesterday. However, given that the material issues that led the 12 founding clubs to announce the Super League weeks ago have not gone away, we reiterate that, to honour our history, to comply with our obligations towards our stakeholders and fans, for the good of football and for the financial sustainability of the sector, we have the duty to act in a responsible manner and persevere in the pursuit of adequate solutions, despite the unacceptable and ongoing pressures and threats received from UEFA. VI- Mostly, we reiterate to FIFA, UEFA and all football stakeholders, as we have done on several occasions since the announcement of the Super League, our commitment and firm will discuss, with respect and without intolerable pressure and in accordance with the rule of law, the most appropriate solutions for the sustainability of the whole football family”.

The governing body of European football said that “in a spirit of reconciliation” the nine clubs had agreed to a “Club Commitment Declaration” and accepted a five per cent cut in their European revenue for one season.

UEFA said the three holdouts, Barcelona, Real Madrid and Juventus, would be “promptly referred” to disciplinary bodies.

European body UEFA will look to support from the world football chief at its congress in Switzerland as it attempts to quash an initiative that threatens its prized Champions League and the health of domestic competitions such as England’s Premier League.

Twelve powerful clubs, six from England, and three each from Spain and Italy — have signed up for the Super League, which offers guaranteed spots for its founding members and billions of dollars in payments.

Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur are the English clubs involved, together with Barcelona, Atletico Madrid and Real Madrid from Spain and Italy’s Juventus, AC Milan and Inter Milan.

Three more clubs are expected to sign up, including “at least two” from France, a source told AFP. Qatar-owned Paris Saint-Germain is a notable absentee, while Bayern Munich, the reigning European champions, have distanced themselves from the project.

Five more clubs will qualify annually for the 20-team, midweek competition, where two groups of 10 will precede two-legged quarter- and semi-finals and a one-off final. The competition is due for launch “as soon as is practicable”.

FIFA’s reaction so far, ahead of Infantino’s speech at the opening of the UEFA congress, has been markedly less strident, expressing “disapproval” and calling for dialogue.

The world body’s stance is likely to be crucial. In January, FIFA and the six global confederations warned that any club or player involved in a breakaway would be ineligible for FIFA competitions.

Backed by finance company JP Morgan, the Super League is offering the founding clubs 3.5 billion euros ($4 billion, £3 billion) for infrastructure investment and to offset pandemic costs.

The clubs, most of them heavily indebted and saddled with enormous player salaries, are expected to receive a further 10 billion euros in “solidarity payments” over the life of the initial commitment — much more than the returns available in the Champions League.

The breakaway announcement came just hours before UEFA announced a new, 36-team format for the Champions League, which had been conceived to placate the continent’s biggest clubs.

The Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet in a report claimed that Ibrahimovic’s Stockholm-based company Unknown AB owns 10 per cent of the shares of Bethard, a gambling site with offices in Malta.

The report also details that the Swedish Football Association have been aware of the problem for three years and it is the reason why Ibrahimovic was left out of Sweden’s squad for the 2018 World Cup.

His participation in the company could reportedly land him with a three-year ban or a hefty fine, as the issue is being closely followed by both FIFA and UEFA.

FIFA and UEFA do not allow players participating in their competitions to have financial interests in gambling companies.

The report adds that Ibrahimovic’s company is the fourth-largest owner in Bethard, which according to the latest available annual report in 2019 made a profit after tax of £25.79m.

It details that Ibrahimovic may have violated FIFA’s rules during March’s World Cup qualifier against Georgia and in the Europa League qualifier against Shamrock Rovers in September 2020.

FIFA’s ethical regulations state that anyone who violates their rules will be punished by a fine and a possible suspension from all football-related activities for a maximum of three years, while UEFA’s regulations are less clear when it comes to punishment.

The news story comes as the 39-year-old is set to extend his career by another year, with a new contract at AC Milan until June 2022.

The European football governing body said this on Wednesday, June 3 in a statement which revealed that the  Turkish club “failed to be break-even compliant as required by a settlement agreement, which it entered into on 20 May 2016”.

The statement reads in part “On 5 July 2019, the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) Adjudicatory Chamber determined that Trabzonspor A? (TUR) failed to be break-even compliant as required by a settlement agreement, which it entered into on 20 May 2016 and sanctioned the club with a conditional exclusion from participating in one (1) UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the 2020/21 and 2021/22 seasons. The sanction would not take effect if the club fulfilled certain conditions, including meeting a target with respect to its financial results for the 2019 financial year. The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber has now determined that Trabzonspor A? failed to meet the target fixed for the 2019 financial year. As a result, the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber has ordered that the club be excluded from participating in one (1) UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the 2020/21 and 2021/22 seasons”