LOVED FOR its visual appeal and ability to unite communities, the “beautiful game” of football has once again been sullied by its association with authoritarian regimes. The recently attempted takeover of Premier League* club Newcastle United, involving a consortium spearheaded by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund**, fell through after the Premier League expressed concerns about the Saudi Crown’s potential influence on the day-to-day running of the club. Many viewed the Premier League’s decision as a victory against Saudi Arabia’s attempts to sportswash*** their appalling human rights record. This rejection may mark a new page in the controversy-filled history of the league and the sport in general.

A hotbed of corruption and political propaganda

   Following its investigation in April earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Justice found that Russia and Qatar had bribed several officials from the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to secure the rights to host the World Cup in 2018 and 2022 respectively. Representatives of both countries had bribed up to five members of FIFA’s top board before the vote for the right to host the tournament back in 2010. Prior to these findings, more than half of the people involved in the voting process had been accused of wrongdoings, including former FIFA president Sepp Blatter. Once it was announced that Qatar would be hosting the 2022 World Cup, suspicions of bribery were rife. This is not surprising given that Qatar, a tiny country in the Arabian Gulf, has little to no footballing tradition, legacy, or support.

   Even more surprising were the findings concerning Russia’s World Cup bid. The indictment made by the U.S. Department of Justice stated that Jack Warner, a former football official, and Rafael Salguero, a Guatemalan football official, had both received millions of dollars in exchange for voting for Russia. Moreover, when FIFA investigated the alleged bribes for the 2018 World Cup, Russian authorities responded that the computers used for the bid had all been destroyed. While the collection of bribes is enough to damage the integrity of the sport and its governing institutions, the sources of these bribes are equally as worrying, since both countries do not fare well when it comes to human rights. Russia is ranked 114th out of 162 countries in the 2019 Human Freedom Index, an index that presents the state of human freedom in the world based on a measure of personal, civil, and economic freedom. Qatar, on the other hand, has been accused of exploiting its migrant workers in the construction of stadiums and facilities for the 2022 World Cup, with some earning as little as $45 a week****.

   Russia and Qatar’s hold on the game is not limited to hosting the sport’s major tournament. Russian oligarchs are at the helm of some of the top clubs in world football: Chelsea’s Roman Abramovich, for example, has close ties with Putin; like many other oligarchs who made their fortune in post-soviet Russia, his means of acquiring his wealth are suspicious. The most visible symbol of Russia’s soft power, however, is the use of state-owned gas company Gazprom to sponsor the Champions League, the most prized competition in club football where Europe’s giants go head to head. As for Qatar, they completely own Paris Saint-Germain, France’s best team, and sponsor other European teams such as Roma and Bayern Munich. Moreover, the Paris club’s chairman is also a member of UEFA’s***** executive committee, indicating that Qatar’s influence has even permeated European football’s governing body.

Turning a blind eye

   The reason why clubs, leagues, and governing bodies have disregarded ethical funding is because football has evolved into an excessively lucrative business with huge financial considerations. These actors are unwilling to speak out against the wrongdoings of their sponsors or any political controversies for fear of losing out on large sums of money. In December last year, Arsenal Football Club’s player Mezut Özil sent a strong tweet condemning the treatment of the Uighur Muslim population in China. Arsenal, who possess a series of commercial interests in China, insisted on their Chinese social media accounts that the club’s and the player’s opinions are not mutual, and that Arsenal does not involve itself in politics. However, Arsenal’s self-justifying response makes their kneeling at the start of every match in support for the Black Lives Matter movement seem disingenuous and hypocritical. The fact that no knees were taken for the Uighurs in Xinjiang implies that football clubs are prepared to support a cause only when it would not cost them financially.

   The substantial sums of money that circulate within the sport not only deter the clubs from speaking out about certain political issues, but they also have rendered clubs vulnerable to unvetted and disastrous foreign investments. The Premier League, by virtue of its profitability, entices shady investments in England’s lower leagues. Wigan Athletic, a team relegated from England’s second-tier last season, is a prime example of massive overspending and dubious ownership. The club was initially in the hands of professional poker player Stanley Choi from Hong Kong, who, despite having never attended a game, invested up to £44.5 million into the club. Wigan was then transferred to the New Leader Fund, registered in the Cayman Islands, a tax haven. Finally, the club was handed over to Hong Kong-based owner Au Yeung, who ended up withdrawing his support on a whim and attempted to liquidate the club before placing it in administration******. All these transfers of ownership were sanctioned by the English Football League******* despite it requiring an Owners and Directors Test, which now appears to be only for show. Many speculate that Wigan’s placement into administration was orchestrated in the interest of Far Eastern betting groups who gambled considerable sums on the club getting relegated (a club placed into administration is docked 12 points from the league table). Wigan’s tragic tale is only the latest episode in a long-running history of regulatory incompetence. Foreign owners have frequently invested in the Championship, England’s second tier, hoping that they reach the “promised land,” the Premier League, and the riches that it offers—where the lowest finishing teams in the tier earn £100 million from television rights alone. Lisa Nandy, shadow foreign secretary and Member of Parliament for Wigan, has declared Wigan’s fate a “global scandal” and has demanded government intervention.

*                 *                 *

   People are right to be concerned. Football is far more than just a beautiful game—people’s livelihoods are at stake, and we cannot afford to jeopardize them in favor of dubious funding for greater entertainment. However, given that current FIFA president Gianni Valentino is under investigation for alleged corruption, and that the 2022 World Cup is set to go ahead in Qatar despite all the controversies, it is bold to suggest that football is on its way to cleansing itself of its dirty money.

*The Premier League: English football’s top division and most-watched league in the world

**The Public Investment Fund: Saudi Arabia’s business arm chaired by the Crown Prince and de-facto ruler, Prince Mohammad Bin Salman

***Sportswash: A term coined to qualify the usage of sports and events by corrupt or authoritarian regimes to gloss over their wrongdoings and bolster their image internationally

****The Guardian

*****UEFA: Union of European Football Associations

******Administration: Insolvency process which involves a company being placed in the hands of an insolvency practitioner whose aim is to sell the assets to pay back creditors

*******English Football League: The governing body of England’s second, third and fourth-tier football leagues