Is this the beginning of the end for International Football?
By Ryan Rothon
On 8th October 2005, a brutal civil war was ripping Ivory Coast apart. Countrymen once united under a single flag were now divided between the rebel held north and the government controlled south.
Almost 4,000 miles away, eleven men from Ivory Coast stood side by side on a Sudanese football field. Victory in this match, and frustration for Cameroon against Egypt, would send their divided nation to its first ever World Cup.
Didier Drogba and his men did their part, winning 3–1 against Sudan. The game in Cameroon was entering the final minutes with the score line balanced at 1–1. The Ivory Coast national team huddled together around a radio. Drogba from the south, and the Toure brothers from the north stood united in hope. Then everything came crashing down. Cameroon was awarded a penalty in the final minutes, which if converted would send them to the World Cup at the expense of Ivory Coast. Pierre Womé stood forward to take the penalty, the entire nation of Ivory Coast holding a collective breath. Perhaps through divine intervention or a bad case of nerves, Womé struck the post, sending Ivory Coast to their first ever World Cup.
The people of Ivory Coast erupted with joy.
“The whole country — every person, every house — was happy. That day we all forgot the country was still divided,” says Hassane Omar, a then 20-year-old student speaking to the BBC.
As the Ivory Coast players celebrated, cameras snuck into the dressing room and captain Didier Drogba saw his opportunity. He grabbed the microphone and addressed his fellow Ivorians:
“Men and women of Ivory Coast. From the north, south, centre, and west, we proved today that all Ivorians can coexist and play together with a shared aim — to qualify for the World Cup.”
“We promised you that the celebrations would unite the people — today we beg you on our knees.” (On cue, the players sank to their knees.)
“The one country in Africa with so many riches must not descend into war. Please lay down your weapons and hold elections,”
This short video clip played relentlessly on local media and became a clear message to the fighting factions within the country. While this video alone did not stop the fighting, it is seen by many as a major catalyst for the negotiations and ceasefire that soon followed.
As beautiful as this image may be, it illustrates the genuine power and unity that can be formed through international football.
One Christmas night at the height of World War I, German and Allied soldiers put down their weapons, collectively rose from their trenches and spontaneously played a game of football.
Football is a worldwide language that has the power to bring unity in the moments that our words fail.
Considering the social importance of international football, it is surprising that there exists a sentiment among top football club officials that international games are a risk that need to be reduced.
Club owners have invested millions into their paying squads and are scared that their star players could be injured in international matches and thus miss the extremely lucrative champions league or national league games.
This article will seek to determine whether there is a possibility that international football could be side-lined by the powers that be within football. It will consider the legal position of football clubs and the economic benefits they enjoy from allowing players to compete in international football.
The Background — Pissed Off Pep and Agitated Investors
In football management, the pressure to win trophies and gain qualification for the Champions League grows every year. With this constant pressure, managers want to avoid injuries in pointless friendly games smack bang in the middle of the season.
With the recent increase in internationals and the formation of the UEFA Nations League, European managers have become vocal critics of the current state of international football.
“UEFA and FIFA kill players because it is too much. We have not had a week off since we started”
Those are the words of Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola, and his frustrations are likely shared by every top manager in Europe.
While managers, and some fans, may be the loudest critics, recent events have highlighted the true ambition of club owners, and it may be bad news for the international game.
Cast your mind back a few short weeks to the highly controversial European Super League. With UEFA reeling from the betrayal of Europe’s top clubs, they threatened to ban all players of super league clubs from competing in international football.
That would have meant a Euro 2020 without Cristiano Ronaldo, Paul Pogba or Harry Kane.
Not that the owners of Juventus, Manchester United or Tottenham would have cared. According to rumours, some within the boardrooms of the ‘Super 12’ welcomed the possibility of an international ban.
In their minds they have invested a lot of money to train, pay and purchase their players. They intend to see a return when that player either helps win a major trophy or gets sold on for a profit (in some cases, both).
Should that player be injured in a friendly game or at the World Cup, the investor is stuck paying millions of euros to a player no one wants, and who can’t win them any trophies.
After all, how would you feel if someone borrowed your Ferrari before your big date and then crashed it into a tree? (the investors perspective not mine)
So, if football managers want to reduce the strain of international fixtures and the richest people in the sport want them to disappear, then could the massive earthquake of the Super League really spell the beginning of the end for International football?
The Laws of Football
The short answer is no…
But the long answer is a little more nuanced.
Club owners will argue that their ‘purchase’ of a player entitles them to full control over where and when they play football.
This is technically correct; a professional footballer is banned under FIFA regulations from playing for more than one team. They can be loaned to a total of two other clubs per season (three team limit) but cannot play for more than one at a time.
This does not mean that owners or managers have the ability to prevent players from joining up with a national team.
Annex 1 of the FIFA regulations on Status and Transfer of Players outlines that clubs have an obligation to release their players to the relevant national team, so long as the call up is for a period of time listed in the international match calendar.
I know what you are thinking… but no, clubs are not able to force players to sign a contract stating that they promise to miss international matches, such an agreement is highly illegal.
The only ways for a player to miss international duty is for them to refuse of their own free will or retire completely from international football.
This obligation to release a player for international duty is so strong, that it is written into every standard Premier League contract. (article 6.1.0)
So, clubs will find it incredibly difficult to prevent players from attending international matches without breaching FIFA rules.
But that doesn’t mean that these matches are completely safe.
The Super League kerfuffle may have ended in failure, but the league still exists, and we would be foolish to believe that the teams in question are finished with their attempts to alter European football.
The ‘big 12’ feel that their growth potential has reached a peak within current national leagues. TV companies are starting to see dips in audience figures and most experts agree that football revenues will drop over the coming years.
The obvious solution for these investors, is to group together the most popular clubs into one league and then sell that competition to the highest TV rights bidder.
Such a league would see a huge revenue boost for the 30 or so teams involved, and the investors argue this is the natural progression for European football.
There is a massive FIFA and UEFA shaped hole in these plans. Both organisations make huge amounts of money from competitions such as the Champions League and the World Cup. Any new league that threatens to devalue their own competitions and draw audiences away, is something they will always look to destroy.
The ‘big 12’ want full control over any new league and would rather that UEFA and FIFA are not taking a cut of their profits. UEFA and FIFA would obviously reject such a league and if this power struggle is to continue for many more years, it is hard to see a future where the current global football structure remains the same.
Should these clubs find themselves involved in a league that is not part of FIFA, then they would have full rights to ignore any FIFA regulations and thus exclude their players from international football.
While such a breakup is still unlikely, recent events would suggest that it is not entirely impossible.
The economic benefits of International Football.
Considering that a mass exodus is unlikely, are there any unseen economic benefits that may encourage football club owners to fall in love with international football?
Clubs have no direct economic benefit from international football. They still have to pay the players wages for the time they are away and receive no fee for providing the players services.
Even so, international competitions can be incredibly lucrative for some clubs. If a club wishes to pay off debts, make new signings or improve infrastructure, they often sell players to generate funds.
The investor will be looking to get the maximum value out of the player, especially considering the large sums they have paid on wages, training and development.
This is where a International tournaments can be incredibly useful.
The World Cup is the prestigious and popular sports event on the planet, if the player in question produces top-quality performances on this platform, their desirability and transfer value will go up dramatically.
Take James Rodriguez as an example. At the start of the 2014 season, the promising young midfielder was worth around €35 million to then club AS Monaco. After a truly breath-taking 2014 world cup campaign with Colombia, where the 22-year-old attacker ended as the competition’s top scorer, Real Madrid were willing to part with over €60 million euros for his signature.
Kylian Mbappe’s transfer value was sky-high when the incredibly talented forward joined up with his French teammates for the 2018 World Cup. PSG were thought to be able to command around €120 million for him in January 2018, but after a brilliant campaign that saw him help France recover the World Cup trophy, his value is said to have hit €150 million.
It’s not just established stars that increase in value through international matches. Clubs can use these tournaments as shop windows for offloading unwanted talent at a higher price. Chelsea will be hoping that fringe players such as Kepa Arrizabalaga get into the national squads for EURO 2020 and impress, so they can find someone willing to take him off their books.
With FIFA giving international football such an untouchable status, the World Cup and International friendlies seem safe. That being said, there is growing tension between club owners and the sport’s governing bodies, with clubs looking to take back control over the business side of the sport. This power struggle will become even more unstable as clubs look for new ways to service their incredible debts. While international football has some economic benefits to clubs, we simply cannot ignore recent events.
With relationship destroying sanctions being threatened and fighting talk echoing through the halls of power, it is clear that nothing is off the table anymore.
