- Comparison of drug use among footballers with the popluation at large
- Why Arsenal don’t tackle more and why Tottenham are fouled so much
By Tony Attwood
As the Guardian admits, by and large, the English media has moved away from considering the impact state-financed clubs like Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain have on football, perhaps because they think the issues are too complex for their readers to understand. Although possibly it is because of the feeling that these clubs are now bigger than football, and so will always win.
In fact, both views could be right. We don’t read too much about battles with those clubs any more, and now the European Commission has decided not to get involved after the president of the Spanish League complained to the Commission about the use of state funds by the two giant state-funded clubs.
The European Union certainly does have regulations to control the use of foreign donations to run businesses within the EU, and it is fairly obvious that this is what has happened with PSG and Manchester C who have each had funding from governments in their controlling countries. The clubs don’t deny this, but each just say that such complaints were motivated by jealousy. Seemingly to prove that it could handle finances ManC then put up its ticket prices. Their supporters protested so they brought them back down again.
All of this was expected, but there is a point within the situation that really is rather chilling. And it is that the EU Commission has admitted that due to its limited resources, it can’t take on oil-rich countries that fund football clubs, since the EU fears that it is simply going to be out-gunned in financial terms.
In short, just as ManC has threatened to keep the Premier League tied up in fiancial knots until the league runs out of cash, the two clubs have effectively made the same threat to Uefa and the EU: “We’ve got more money and we are not backing down, so shut up,” is a fair summary of their message.
As a result, the EU has given in and announced that the link between ManC, PSG and companies funded by the governments of the countries with which the clubs are associated, is not something that the EU by itself can take on. In short, the clubs are bigger than the Europan Commission. As the defining statement said, “The commission may examine information regarding any alleged foreign subsidies distorting the internal market, in any economic sector, including sports.” Except that when up against countries that have the finances to, and the history of, keeping legal cases running to enternity, the EU is going to back down.
However, there does seem to be a bit of internal wrangling going on as Uefa have announced that in their view the president of Fifa (Gianni Infantino, of whom it has been said), is pursuing “private political interests” instead of overseeing matters of football. In protest at Infantino’s work, Uefa president Ceferin, the chair of the FA Debbie Hewitt and other delegates walked out of the Fifa annual congress this week. Infantino didn’t notice as he turned up late as he had been trotting around the Gulf with Donald Trump.
The delegates statement said, “to have the timetable changed at the last minute for what appears to be simply to accommodate private political interests, does the game no service and appears to put its interests second.” But seemingly it was more important for Infantino to watch Trump sign a golden football given by the Emir of Qatar, than attend the meeting. Infantino said by way of explanation, “I felt that I needed to be there to represent football and all of you.”
Although the UK media haven’t made too much of it in the past, the fact that Uefa and Fifa are fighting has slowly seeped through to the media despite their constant obsessions with transfers that never happen. Indeed there is a growing recognition that Uefa is, to put it in the vernacular, utterly pissed off with Fifa both because Fifa’s leadership seem more interested in its own jaunts around the globe than in football, and Fifa’s utter abandonment of any thought of human rights by giving the world cup to Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
Of course, the fight against Fifa has been going on for some time and has been led by the Norwegian FA, an organisation with little profile or influence when compared with the FA of England, but which has certainly embarrassed the English FA by showing that a moral stance can and should be taken on occasion.
Their president Lise Klaveness, was the person who led the battle against Infantino’s absenteeism, said, “I understand the frustration and disappointment from European Fifa members, and we feel sorry for the excellent hosts in Paraguay. Now we expect Fifa to explain this situation to its members and ensure that the voices of the member associations are heard and respected going forward.”
As the Telegraph pointed out Infantino was utterly humiliated during his congress speech, reporting “Fifa members stage walkout after governing body’s chief turns up late having prioritised meeting with US president.”
An uprising in the ranks? Maybe, and if so, it is better late than never.
All well and good for UEFA to upset FIFA but they are just as bad. You have covered UEFAs pathetic staging of UCL finals in recent years. Didn’t Ceferin give the administration to a “business associate” for a couple of years. They were a great success!
I think the only way for things to improve is to disband both organisations and start from scratch.
The clubs could surely make a better job than these 2 inept organisations. They cant even enforce their own rules governing “fairness”