How the Super-Rich stole the Beautiful game
Football was once managed by humble local businessmen but now, it is the playground of billionaire oligarchs who have amassed vast fortunes from oil and gas, royalties, and other shady sources. But who are these new cosmopolitan rulers? And what are their intentions with our beautiful game?
It all started in 2003 when Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea Football Club. Owning a football team became a marketing cost for global oil companies, a method to hide money from untrustworthy international leaders, and a secure storage facility for money from accountants. Abramovich enriched himself and Chelsea by spending millions on players and improving the club’s infrastructure.
His investments have paid off, today Chelsea is one of the most decorated clubs in the world, with 16 major trophies since his investment, including two UEFA Champions League trophies and five Premier League titles.
According to several journalists, Abramovich bought Chelsea to raise his profile across the world and avoid persecution from Russian President Vladimir Putin. He used a football club as a political tool.
Chelsea was transformed from a small English club to a worldwide brand backed by Russian natural riches after Abramovich made a single acquisition.
Roman Abramovich sparked somewhat of a trend.
Billionaires have since invested in some of Europe’s top clubs, including the likes of Manchester City, Paris Saint Germain and Arsenal. Other billionaires have invested in shirt sponsorships. You would’ve probably seen Emirates, Malaysia and Azerbaijan appearing on the shirts of top European Clubs.
In the case of the Qatar Foundation, which sponsors Barcelona’s shirts, its engagement with the club may be interpreted as an attempt to soften the market in response to the horrors committed in the construction of World Cup venues in Qatar.
Football today represents the global economy and the demands of its sponsors, rather than the heart of the community.
This trend is very evident, only a few teams compete for the national title and international glory, while the others fight for scraps. Ticket costs, on the other hand, continue to climb.
Many hoped that UEFA’s financial fair play ruling, as well as other recently implemented rules in the Premier League and Championship, would put an end to some of the practises and disparities that have resulted in an impenetrable hierarchy of elite clubs more concerned with profits than with fan experience or equality.
But that didn’t work out as well, as Manchester City have proved so after they had successfully won in court against UEFA’s two-season ban.
Indeed, these regulations appear to be cementing the elite hierarchy more than ever before. UEFA recognises the huge financial imbalance between clubs and claims that the FFP regulations do little to narrow it. That has already been proven incorrect during FFP’s brief existence.
There has also been inequality between different teams who have been proven guilty to have broken the rules. Malaga was banned from UEFA competition for unpaid bills in 2012, while bigger clubs such as PSG and Man City have committed much more serious offences and had gotten off with fines and squad limitations that had no serious effect on the club or to the team. Both of these clubs have since reached the final of the Champions League.
The message appears to be that certain teams have the financial means to get themselves out of trouble.
The tension reached boiling point earlier this year. The biggest football teams in Europe declared their desire to create a new Super League on Sunday, April 18th. While they intended to remain in the national leagues, the cartel-like league would syphon off significant TV revenue.
Off the pitch, the beautiful game was in for some major drama. Fans rushed to the streets to show their support. Former and present players revolted. Managers were adamant in their opposition. Politicians joined in as well. The league was over in less than 48 hours.
The tournament’s entire framework was so delicate that any blow would have brought it down. We only knew about the 12 original clubs. Which additional teams would be a member of the unsupportive project, and how would they be chosen? The 12 looked to have sealed their own destinies while the remainder went unnoticed.
The establishment of the Super League was quickly seen by critics as a symptom of modern football owners’ relentless greed. The 48 hours that the Super League existed, in truth, have been in the making since the early 1960s. Because European Football has been so successful in establishing a contemporary business that draws enormous amounts of wealth and influence, it’s only natural that those who have invested in it are searching for ways to increase their profits.
The European Super League may well be the largest display of greed that football has ever seen. But the Sport was already broken before.
The days of David overcoming Goliath to win the league are long gone. The most important aspect of football, faith, is under jeopardy.
We all know Southampton will not have a Sergio Aguero-like moment to steal the championship from an illustrious opponent. We all know Newcastle United will not participate in the Champions League final and stun Bayern Munich. A player like Erling Haaland will choose Chelsea over Arsenal.
Things like these have all become common knowledge. The global economy has sucked money from the middle and lower classes while allowing the wealthiest to grow super-rich.
We know this because the game is rigged in favour of those with the most money.
Knowledge erodes faith over time.
When will it start to undermine fan loyalty?
