Football leaders gather at potentially game-changing summit

It might take a true governing body to thaw the football Cold War.
 
Representatives from the world’s most powerful football organizations assembled in Brussels as part of the European Union’s parliamentary meeting on the state of football. Despite being pitted against each other in litigation, the summit featured representatives from FIFA and the G14, as well as UEFA which has previously turned a blind eye toward the G14.
 
The review, which was launched in February and scheduled to end later this month, is being chaired by former Portuguese senior government minister Jose Luis Arnaut. He is expected to deliver a report shortly after the sessions conclude and, in June, European politicians are expected to discuss and debate the points raised by Arnaut.
 
European Union (EU) Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy and Competition chief Neelie Kroes can decide if football should be governed by EU laws.
 
“It’s going to a huge few days for football with huge decisions to be made,” British Conservative MEP and referee, Chris Heaton-Harris, told Reuters
 
There are various purposes, including seeing how the European football authorities, European Union institutions and member states can implement the 2000 Nice Declaration on the sport at a European and national level. In the declaration, European governments call on EU member nations to take account of sport’s social, educational and cultural functions.
 
Fans and stakeholders also have been given a say at the hearings in what issues concern them.
 
The review has requested a variety of experts testify on the legal, political and financial issues with which football is dealing. For the football governing bodies, a goal has been set to find a way for the organizations to work in conjunction with over governing entities, member states and institutions.
 
Other wide-ranging issues include ownership stability, control and management of clubs, expenses for players, financial strength of some clubs and weakness of other and the concentration of wealth among certain elite clubs.
 
Activities of agents will come under scrutiny, as well as concerns about match-fixing and corruption.
 
The first part of the final round kicked off this 3 May, with a driving goal of how to better the game. There was also the hope of somewhat patching together the strained relationships of international football politics.
 
The G14, which represents 18 of the world’s most powerful clubs, has been part of two lawsuits involving FIFA, the international football governing body. One has the G14 siding with Belgian Charleroi, as the club seeks compensation for a footballer injured while playing in an international match. A ruling on that case is scheduled 15 May.
 
French Olympic Lyon had filed a similar suit against FIFA. In that atmosphere, FIFA president Sepp Blatter said he would go to "war" against the G14.
 
Immediately at the review, fingers were pointed and ideas were tossed about.
 
Well received by the MEPs was an idea from UEFA about a home-grown player rule, with the lack of hometown athletes partially blamed for a decline in local sports activities. The rule would go into effect this upcoming season, with clubs required to have four locally trained players, defined as players who have been registered for three seasons or years with the club between the ages of 15 and 21. A sliding scale would be in place, with the hope that the future would yield more players.
 
One major concern is that the law would violate competition laws.
 
"We don’t say whether the rule is right or wrong, but whether it is legal," G14 general manager Thomas Kurth said at the hearing. "The rule could clearly be construed as a breach of EU treaties on non-discrimination and free movement and creates potential legal and financial challenges for clubs."
 
While that was a solution, UEFA CEO Lars-Christer Olsson placed the blame at the feet of the richer clubs. He felt that many clubs sign players to outlandish contracts more for commercial appeal than for ability. Commercial ties remain strong for a popular player, even if that player is relegated to a small role on the field.
 
"Too many big clubs are just going out and buying the best players and leaving them on the bench and so depriving the fans of seeing them, and also depriving other clubs at which they could play from having them," Olsson said.
 
He added, "An example of just how bad the problem is, is what we call the ‘Asian factor’ where a club buys a player from Asia purely to gain commercial links, paying him big wages and leaving him on the sidelines."
 
But even major clubs, such as those in the G14, felt players’ wages were being driven to outlandish heights. Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, the president of German Bayern Munich, threw barbs toward English Chelsea, citing a fiscal irresponsibility that has netted the club two championships.
 
"We have a EUR 200 million [GBP 137.213 million] turnover and Chelsea, who as everyone knows are owned by Roman Abramovich, have turnover [of GBP 146.6 million]," Rummenigge said. "We make a EUR 35 million profit; this is required for our investment. Chelsea lost EUR 204 million; Mr Abramovich obviously stumped up for it. This [makes for] unequal competition but we are playing against each other in the Champions League. This is not acceptable."
 
Chelsea director of communications Simon Greenberg countered that there are clubs that have been even more free with the purse than Chelsea.
 
"It is total nonsense to suggest that this is somehow uncompetitive or unequal," said Simon Greenberg, Chelsea’s director of communications. "There are clubs who have spent more than Chelsea in the last 10 years."
 
Either way, the finer points of the summit, and what makes the impact on Arnaut, will soon be in the hands of EU politicians.

Source: euFootball.BIZ © Copyright 2006 - All rights reserved.