There is a certain amused confusion in listening to FIFAs critics, now that FIFA have proposed a new more commercial mode of managing the organization after a hugely succesful World Cup, not least commercially.
UEFA, who came out vociferously as the defender of community football, is hardly a small, altruistic grassroots organization: It runs the most lucrative club competition in the world through the UEFA Champions League, negotiates billion-euro media rights contracts, and behaves as much like a commercial enterprise as FIFA does (and let us not forget that Gianni Infantino himself, as Secretary General of UEFA, oversaw big commercially successful expansion for UEFA as well).
Many national associations and other FIFA critics appear to be themselves perfectly happy to benefit from the enormous revenues generated by football.
"Commercialization is fine when we do it."
Football may be a public good, but it is clear that UEFA and FIFA packages it to their benefit; they organize and sell tournaments that we all love to purchase and criticize (one of the most important things on their product).
We buy the apple, happily eat it, and then complain about its price and quality, but we still buy the same apple day after day…
Now, I have not studied the proposal, but truth is that this NGO that manages football, huge income and commercial deals, with no public funding, probably needs to change something. Governments routinely work with private companies, sovereign wealth funds, investment funds, and corporations managing sums far larger than FIFA's revenues. The argument that "private capital is involved, therefore this is unacceptable" is not, by itself, very convincing. The more relevant question is whether the governance structure protects the interests of the sport and us supporters.
And that is the only part where criticism is valid: FIFA is an NGO with regulatory powers over world football. It is simultaneously referee, legislator, organizer, and commercial actor. When such an organization proposes a model that brings in private investors or adopts corporate structures, we should worry that maximizing revenues could increasingly drive sporting decisions. This is a legitimate concern.
It is just a pity that FIFA reform is not part of the criticism from football associations and others who themselves lack credibility.
The proposal from FIFA may not be good, the process may have lacked transparency, I don’t know. But I think that maybe this is the occasion to discuss what FIFA should become, and not continue like it does now. Gianni Infantino was brought in with the support of UEFA to make reforms, but now it seems UEFA does not even want to discuss reforms, if it threatens their own interests and European commercial control of global football.
Finally, let us not be fooled that anybody frankly cares about the fans. Why should they? We will still be buying the product!
