A World Cup without UEFA would be worthless – and FIFA know it – Game of the People
AT LAST, football’s governing bodies are showing some cojones in the face of bullying and authoritarian behaviour. UEFA’s 55 members have made it clear that they do not approve of FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s proposal to sell-off part of the World Cup to investors. They have unanimously pledged not to support the World Cup if FIFA find a way to go ahead with their ludicrous plan. Furthermore, two more confederations – Asian Football Confederation (AFC) and CONCACAF – have also expressed their anger after being “mushroomed” by Infantino. AFC accused FIFA of “undermining the very foundations of football”.
Although pressure will surely put paid to Infantino and his private equity friends, should UEFA have to exercise an all-out boycott, the next World Cup would be completely devalued and would require a series of asterisks in the honours list. As well as diluting the value with sponsors, broadcasters and ticket sales, a UEFA-less World Cup would also be a far weaker competition from a footballing perspective.
FIFA have even tried to sweeten the pill with members by offering a fee (depending on your source, this ranges from US$ 20 million to US$ 40 million), which is tantamount to a very chunky carrot at the end of a stick if you play ball with us. So far, only the Czech Republic have taken the bait.
Ultimately, this has got nothing to do with football itself, it is the creation of an asset class that will, undoubtedly, reap rewards for those that arrange it, FIFA and the legal profession. International finance and speculators discovered football a while ago, but now they clearly see FIFA as an opportunity to benefit from healthy fee business.
But the comparisons between FIFA and other sporting entities are misleading and show a lack of understanding by some of the people involved. FIFA is, apparently, “undermonetised” which is Wall Street speak for, “we can make more money for you”. FIFA is a governing body that is not a league or a football club. Revenue generation is based around its tournaments. At present there are around 200, but under this master plan, there could be as many as 450 in what has been described as “a growing tournament portfolio”. More football, more meaningless competitions, more TV money, more strain on players, clubs and fans. Why are the advisors comparing FIFA to a league, or more accurately, US sports leagues such as Major League Baseball, National Basketball Association and the National Football League. This is not only inaccurate, it is a worthless exercise designed to support an agenda.
Nobody, it seems, is happy with Infantino’s plan. The European Leagues board called it a “reckless and divisive development for world football… the World Cup should not be for sale. It is not the FIFA president’s private equity asset.” FIFPRO Europe, meanwhile, exposes the underhand way the idea has been tabled: “It is particularly troubling that a project of this magnitude has been developed largely behind closed doors and brought close to agreement without any meaningful engagement with those most affected.”
But the loudest voice is UEFA’s. “It is not FIFA’s to sell. None of us are the owners of football,” said UEFA. It is worth noting that the World Cup is reliant on the quality that Europe brings to the competition, which is even more important in the expansionist era that Infantino has launched. Lawmakers in Brussels actually want to hold Infantino to account. Without Europe, the number of weak teams would be overwhelming in a World Cup.
FIFA seems to be losing control and this form of football capitalism could merely be the start of something that kills the game as we know it. If member countries do not protect the integrity of the game by standing firm, the possibilities are very worrying: leagues without relegation, wage caps, greater TV intervention, four quarters instead of two halves and more owners lacking knowledge of the sport and its industry. Think about it.
Photo: My Profit Tutor, via Unsplash
Published by
