This week Sepp Blatter has reiterated his belief that there should be a quota system in the top leagues in Europe, which ensures that at least six home nationals play in every domestic side. It is his belief that the number of foreign players in the big leagues around the world, is detrimental to the standard of the National football sides. The sentiment was barbed, and it was fairly obvious which particular National Team he was referring to. While it has been apparent in the past that Mr Blatter is far from being a fan of the English national side, their high profile absence from major tournaments seriously damages the sponsorship revenues offered. Blatter has made a lot of noise about the fact that he believes football has strayed too far from it’s grass roots, and that the focus needs to go “back onto the origins of the game- the clubs”. This point seems at odds with much of what Blatter has stated in the past- at best it is at odds with his previous statements, at worst it is downright hypocritical.
Blatter has been in charge of FIFA since 1998, when he took over from Joao Havelange. To say that his time as head of FIFA has been controversial is something of an understatement. Whether it is ill advised comments about women’s football (”they should wear tighter shorts“) or allegations of corruption, Blatter’s opinions have always sparked debate. The Premiership has long been the target for much of his ire, not least because the Football Association frequently refuse to adhere to Blatter’s new directives. The most recent example of this is the recommendation that players should not be allowed to appeal red cards, even if TV evidence shows a player to be innocent. It is also likely that he resents the fact that the national associations of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland are autonomous, when they tend to vote together on football matters. Certainly this would explain his lobbying for a Great Britain football side at the 2012 Olympics.
However, his latest comments are altogether more strange. On the same day that he criticised the number of foreign players in the top leagues, he was encouraging more businesses to buy into “the football product”. Surely the Premiership, with its melting pot/salad bowl (depending on your point of view) of foreign players, represents the perfect example of “the football product”. The Premiership has the biggest sponsorship deals in the world, the highest paid players, and is watched all over the world. Whether you believe it or not, the Premiership sells itself successfully as “The Best League In The World”, and all because the stars which ply their trade in England appeal. Certainly, people all over the world want to see Gerrard, Terry, Lampard, Joe Cole and Rooney in action, but it is the attraction of the likes of Torres, Ronaldo, Tevez, Drogba, Cech, Malouda, Elano, Ballack, etc that really makes it a perfect product to sell to the world. Football is a world game, and nowhere is this more evident than in the Premiership. Under Blatter, FIFA have seen their revenues rise to around $1.6B (not bad for a regulatory “non business”), fueled in no small part by the huge worldwide interest the SKY Sports’, Setanta’s and ESPN’s of the world have generated. Considering that Blatter comes from a business background rather than a football one (he has a degree in Business Administration from Law College), who was involved in the Swiss Ice Hockey team and two Olympic bids before joining FIFA), his latest outburst does seem rather like he is biting the hand that feeds him.
Allegations of hypocrisies are not new to Sepp Blatter. In 2003, following the death of Marc-Vivien Foe, Mr Blatter suggested that players were under too much physical duress, and there should be a limit to the amount of games a player can play in a season. What he neglected to mention was that Foe had died following a heart attack at the Confederations Cup- a “friendly” tournament organised by Blatter to fill the summer gap in international football tournaments after a World Cup. Despite being against more games for each player, and with a fatality in a friendly competition, he insisted the Confederations Cup should be played to a conclusion. He also conveniently forgot that he had authorised the FIFA Club World Championship in 2000. The same tournament that Manchester United had to pull out of the FA Cup to fly to Brazil to play in.
Blatter’s assertion that he wants more nationals in each club also rings hollow. Blatter has made a name for himself as a defender of the international game, with little regard for the club game. Indeed, why should he? He is in charge of a regulatory body who’s interests are entirely in the International game. The fact that there are several clubs with far more power than FIFA suggests there may be viable reasons for his concerns- the turnover of the G14 clubs in 2005 was double that of FIFA’s. Claiming that he now wants to look out for the clubs is rather difficult to believe though, especially when you consider Blatter’s refusal to allow clubs compensation for players injured in friendlies, even going as far as to suggest sanctions against Charleroi for trying to reclaim medical expenses from FIFA.
Blatter would do well to realise where his strengths as FIFA leader lie. He is an excellent publicist, and has governed FIFA during a time when there is more money in football than ever before. He must take some credit for this. Yet, it would be best if he stayed out of the running of the actual Sport altogether. His regime is littered with aborted ideas for reforms and failed experiments. The most high profile of these has been the new offside rules, stating that a player is only offside if they are interfering with play. The rule has been unanimously lambasted for its duality and how open it is to interpretation. Despite the fact that fans, players and managers are against the rule, it has stayed in place. These objections can be filed alongside the directives to book players for “over celebrating“, the abandoned golden/silver goal rule, the rule which states no country can play games over 2500m above sea level (particularly useful for Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador, and slightly ironic considering Blatter was born in Alpine Switzerland) and the fact World Cup winners must now qualify for the next tournament. With Italy holding a strong hand within FIFA, watch the sparks fly should Italy fail to make it to South Africa.
It seems that Blatter is intent on creating a lasting legacy in football. His business nous has taken the game to a new level of recognition and financial success, but his ideas on how the game should actually work are less successful. His assertion that there should be a limit on foreign players in each side is unlikely to meet with much support, not least as it seems to contravene European employment law. Even those who support the proposition, notably Alex Ferguson and Steven Gerrard, would find it difficult to compete at the levels they do were they forced to play with a limit on foreign players. Blatter rather naively asserts that “We have to convince the purists on the application of the European Union law. But EU law cannot overrule world law”. As the Bosman (and EU employment laws) show, it can and it does. He has also stated that footballers cannot be treated like other workers “because you need 11 of them” and “they are more artists than workers”. Something may have been lost in translation in this statement, because- to use a football cliche- they are paid to do a job. You may need 200 people to run a factory floor, but they are still workers. Even if, as Mr Blatter says, footballers are artists (anyone who has seen a East Stirlingshire vs Stenhousemuir match will debate that) there is currently no restriction on the movement of artists working within the EU. On one hand Blatter is the defender of the new Business of Football, on the other he seems to be intent on restricting the flow of wealth into the game. If his term as FIFA president is to be seen as being truly successful then he should concentrate on promoting the game, and let the individual nations worry about their own national sides.
