By Vince Rugari
Late on Tuesday night (AEST), FIFPro Europe – a branch of the global players’ union FIFPro – said it would take joint legal action against FIFA with European Leagues, the umbrella body representing the organisations that run professional club football in 31 countries.
It is the latest and most significant escalation in the dispute between players, clubs and competitions such as the Premier League and La Liga, and FIFA over the world governing body’s allegedly jam-packed international match calendar. FIFPro says it is “beyond saturation” – hence the move to file a formal complaint with the European Commission.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino.Credit: AP
FIFA hit back immediately, accusing clubs of “hypocrisy” and clogging up the calendar themselves with endless lucrative off-season friendlies to far-flung destinations.
Who’s right? Who’s wrong? Why should you care?
What’s this really all about?
For years, there have been growing tensions over the number of games being added to the football calendar – which Premier League chief executive Richard Masters recently said was at “tipping point” – and the impact this is having on the health of players, who are being exposed to greater risk of injury the more they are asked to do.
The lightning rod for all of this appears to be FIFA’s imposition of a rejigged Club World Cup, starting in 2025.
Two months ago, FIFPro and the World Leagues Association (yet another umbrella body for clubs and/or leagues) called on FIFA to reschedule the Club World Cup, saying players were being “pushed beyond their limits”, and threatening legal action if they didn’t. FIFA insisted players and clubs were consulted about changes to the international calendar, and that they were pushing on, full steam ahead. Unstoppable force meets an immovable object.
FIFPro’s statement claims FIFA has, for several years, refused “to develop a clear, transparent, and fair process” in its construction of the international match calendar, and instead has been making unilateral decisions. FIFPro says the situation is now unsustainable for leagues and players, and alleges that FIFA’s conduct is an infringement of EU competition law and an “abuse of dominance”; with its dual role as a regulator of football and an organiser of competitions, FIFA is a living, breathing conflict of interest, FIFPro claims.
It hinted at the decision by the EU Court of Justice late last year over the Super League imbroglio: the court found that FIFA and UEFA had been “abusing a dominant position” by blocking the rebel competition from getting off the ground.
Real Madrid’s after winning this year’s Champions League final.Credit: AP
The ruling didn’t validate or endorse the Super League concept, or diminish the federations’ power, but it did say that FIFA and UEFA’s conduct had to be compliant with EU law, and therefore “transparent, objective, nondiscriminatory and proportionate”. FIFPro reckons they have not been any of these things.
This action sits alongside another case submitted to the Brussels Court of Commerce last month against FIFA by the players’ associations of England, Italy and France on broadly similar grounds.
Just like most high-level disputes in the beautiful game, this is ultimately a battle for money and power: who should be allowed to run competitions, and therefore profit from them?
Wait – isn’t the Club World Cup dead?
The old version is. That was the seven-team annual tournament FIFA had run annually between 2005 and 2023, which nobody really cared about.
Could the Central Coast Mariners play in the Club World Cup?Credit: Getty
But Gianni Infantino has long been plotting a relaunch under a different format involving 32 teams in eight groups and staged every four years, just like the World Cup for countries. It will be played in the same slot that was once used for the definitely still-dead Confederations Cup.
And in our humble opinion, it looks fantastic, and gives an opportunity for clubs from around the world who win their respective continental tournaments – which theoretically could include an A-League team if they won the AFC Champions League – to compete in meaningful matches for a proper trophy against the big guns from Europe. The first edition will kick off next June in the United States, and qualified teams include Chelsea, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, River Plate, Flamengo, Seattle Sounders, Mamelodi Sundowns, Al-Hilal and Urawa Red Diamonds.
If Australia ever got the chance to host the tournament, it would be massive.
The problem is nobody in Europe seems to care about this competition, even though it has the potential to enrich football globally, and the steps taken by FIFPro and European Leagues are a pretty clear sign that players and clubs from that part of the world don’t want to participate, and aren’t happy with the way FIFA have gone about things. And you can’t have a tournament without players and clubs.
How has FIFA responded?
Fairly strongly, with a stern 122-word statement you can read in full below. But here are the crucial bits.
“FIFA’s calendar is the only instrument ensuring that international football can continue to survive, co-exist, and prosper alongside domestic and continental club football,” it says.
“Some leagues in Europe – themselves competition organisers and regulators – are acting with commercial self-interest, hypocrisy, and without consideration to everyone else in the world. Those leagues apparently prefer a calendar filled with friendlies and summer tours, often involving extensive global travel. By contrast, FIFA must protect the overall interests of world football, including the protection of players, everywhere and at all levels of the game.”
And, frankly, FIFA has a point. Although it is partly responsible for the calendar crunch, by introducing a bigger Club World Cup and a bigger World Cup (48 teams from 2026), it is not alone.
UEFA has introduced the Nations League, and from next season is increasing the number of teams and matches involved in the Champions, Europa and Conference leagues.
And, of course, as FIFA’s statement mentions, any opportunity that clubs get, they will fly to any given destination on the planet for an utterly meaningless and usually boring pre- or post-season friendly, so long as it makes them money – and they never seem to complain about the impact that has on players.
FIFA types have also pointed to a recent study by the CIES Football Observatory which suggests that clubs aren’t actually playing more matches per season these days. Anecdotally, however, most players will tell you that they feel more overworked than ever before.
It’s a hard square to circle. Something has to give, and soon, it will.
Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.