I have to admit I wouldn’t normally dwell on an announcement by FIFA President Sepp Blatter that the FIFA Executive Committee had decided that the football association of a rocky 2.3 square mile enclave at the tip of the Iberian peninsula cannot be accepted as a member of FIFA.
‘If you build it, UEFA will come.’ With apologies to Kevin Costner and the rest of those responsible for Field of Dreams, the fantasy Black Sox baseball movie, this looks like a more and more apposite slogan for a venue some four thousand miles east of Ray Kinsella’s ploughed-under Iowa corn-field: Wembley Stadium.
Given the number of times I read that football agent Jorge Mendes won the summer transfer window, it is ironic that his profession stands technically to be legislated out of existence before the end of the 2014-15 season. If world governing body FIFA gets its way, a new regulatory system dealing not with licensed agents, but with “intermediaries” will take effect on 1 April 2015. Some, including agents I have spoken to who predict that the new rules will produce chaos,
Recent reports suggesting that European Union countries were mulling a possible future sports boycott against Vladimir Putin’s Russia triggered two immediate thoughts.
So FIFA President Sepp Blatter is a step nearer securing a fifth term as boss of world football, following this week’s announcement by his UEFA counterpart Michel Platini, probably his most credible potential challenger, that he would not stand against him in next year’s election. That means that world football’s governing body may be a step nearer possibly losing its direct, active representation in world sport’s most powerful club – the International Olympic Committee (IOC).
Liverpool posted the biggest pre-tax loss in the Premier League in 2012-13. The previous year only Manchester City posted a bigger one. In such circumstances, you might have expected the Anfield club to be squirrelling away at least some of its Luis Suárez windfall; to be showing a modicum of restraint in this summer’s transfer market in the interests of its bottom-line. All the more so with UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) provisions hovering in the background.
Rummaging through my mother’s garage, I found a mildewed relic: a copy of Shoot! “incorporating Goal”‘s summer special from 1974.
It was not a happy time for English football. The Alf Ramsey era had just fizzled to a close with a goalless draw in Portugal. With the World Cup that England had failed to qualify for about to take place in West Germany, the first article was an assessment of Ramsey’s long reign.
Against my better judgment, I yesterday waded into the lively Twitter debate over Celtic and the Champions League being prosecuted (the bits that I have seen) by those better informed and/or more emotionally engaged than me.
Top football clubs are different to other businesses. Whereas most companies exist to generate wealth for their shareholders, football clubs must balance this against the pursuit of trophies. Of course, the two aims are linked, or can be: mountains of silverware will increase a club’s popularity, tending to make it more valuable and, hence, to enable its owners, should they so choose, to sell it at a profit.
With the start of a new Premier League season less than three weeks away, I have repeated last year’s exercise drawing on data from the Deloitte Annual Review of Football Finance to compile 26 top-three ‘mini-tables’. These rank the 20 English top-tier clubs in the 2012-13 season according to different financial parameters.
July 8 – The last few weeks, with the tournament in full swing, have been a lot better. But I don’t think anyone could justifiably argue that Brazil’s first of three years in the global sporting spotlight has gone entirely to plan. Today in Belo Horizonte Brazilians must face up to the distinct possibility of more bad news: can their yellow-shirted warriors, shorn of their two best players, feasibly get the better of a typically well-drilled,
Considering they have a common 450km-long border and have together been the beating heart of the European project for nearly 60 years, France and Germany are remarkably dissimilar.
Not so their football teams, which clash in Rio on Friday in what promises to be a fascinating World Cup quarter-final.
Take the goalkeepers: Hugo Lloris and Manuel Neuer don’t exactly look alike; but they are very proactive exponents of their craft, among the quickest to sprint off their lines to snuff out trouble.
Twenty-eight years ago I moved to Chicago a month or two before the 1986 World Cup started. A report I wrote then underlines how far soccer has come in the land of the gridiron and the baseball diamond in the intervening nearly three decades.
“Just my luck,” I wrote. “While the rest of the football-mad globe is getting punch-drunk on a ball-by-ball account of the trail to glory, Windy City is more concerned with the size of Bears quarterback Jim McMahon’s close-season midriff.”
Dear Holland,
I’m sorry, but it’s over between us.
Along with millions of other school kids, I became besotted with you 40 years and a week ago – on 19 June 1974, the day of the Cruyff turn. It was a difficult time: Sir Alf Ramsey’s World Cup-winning team had broken up and England hadn’t made it to the 1974 tournament in West Germany. What is worse, Scotland had. Into this emotional void strode coach Rinus Michels’s team of strutting demigods headed by Johan Cruyff,
And so, with a final flourish, Sepp Blatter got out his cheque-book and wrote out a cheque for $200 million. No, the FIFA President’s closing gesture at this week’s FIFA Congress was not quite that dramatic. But his promise of $750,000 to all 209 national associations and $7 million to each of the six confederations has the same effect.
To which my question is this: has this $198.75 million of apparently extra expenditure already been written in to FIFA’s budgets?