Written evidence submitted by Guy Oliver
I have listened with interest to the workings of
your Select Committee with regard to football governance. As you
can see from the enclosed book, which I produce annually, I have
a fair amount of knowledge as to the workings of world football.
I believe that I can bring a different perspective to the advice
that you receive with relation to England's position in the world
game and how English football should go forward in the future.
Although my Almanack bears the moniker of FIFA.com,
I am not an apologist for FIFA and they do not exert any editorial
control over my work. I do, however, find extraordinary the sheer
volume of invective thrown in their direction from this country.
I feel it is of critical importance to ask why England is the
only country in the world subjecting FIFA to this continuous barrage
of criticism under the banner of "corruption". I am
not in a position to say whether the workings of the FIFA Executive
Committee are corrupt or not and that is not the point of this
letter, but I believe that as the only country in the world slinging
mud in their direction we are seriously undermining our position
in world football and our capacity to effect change within FIFA
from a position of any strength or influence.
I write to you also hoping to give you some historical
perspective. The calls from the BBC and other quarters for us
to leave FIFA simply beggar belief but as you will see it is nothing
new. England, as inventors of the game of football have always
adopted a rather haughty attitude to FIFA and the rest of the
world. We were not interested in getting involved when FIFA was
founded in 1904 and instead it was the French who drove world
football forward. The World Cup, the European Championship, the
Champions League - all of them were the creations of the French
and all were subject to fierce criticism from these shores. It
seems crazy now but the English refused to take part in the first
three World Cups while Chelsea were forbidden from taking part
in the first European Cup by the Football League, who objected
to what they saw as a "foreign" intrusion into "their"
game.
In many ways little has changed, despite the outstanding
efforts of the international department of the FA under Jane Bateman.
The globalisation of English football has been almost one way
traffic. Yes, we enjoy the talents of the many foreign footballers
who play here but we rarely ask - or are interested to ask - as
to the football they left behind. England is just one of 208 nations
recognised by FIFA but you could be forgiven for thinking that
football in England, Spain, Italy and perhaps France is the only
football that matters - or that fans around the world care about.
This is simply not true. Each of FIFA's 208 member nations has
a unique football culture that matters very deeply to people within
that country.
The fact that I can write a review of the events
of the year in my Almanack for all those 208 nations is a tremendous
credit to FIFA and the work they do. They have built new football
association headquarters for all of the world's poorer countries
along with technical centres to improve the skills of players,
referees, coaches and officials. Everyone of those 208 countries
is now able to field a national team at all age groups for both
men and women as well as running leagues and cups for both men
and women - something that was unthinkable even 20 years ago.
The effect FIFA has had on the women's game has been particularly
profound. FIFA has done more than any other organisation to open
up football to half of the world's population where before it
had been a no go area and was even banned by most associations
around the world - including the FA.
For that alone FIFA should be lauded and yet the
media here portray the money spent by FIFA as handouts to cronies
and a callous manoeuvre by Blatter to make sure they re-elect
him as president.
I don't know whether the members of the FIFA Exco
are corrupt. Personally, I have never come across it. It is certainly
a very political organisation but as one member of the Exco said
to me when I questioned him on the matter, it is very difficult
to be corrupt when there are only 24 members. He believed that
unlike the IOC where there are more members, the spotlight shines
more intensively on the FIFA Exco which he believes is a massive
disincentive to be corrupt.
What I can be sure of is that the everyday working
of FIFA by their hundreds of employees is anything but corrupt.
Indeed, I have never dealt with an organisation that does everything
quite so strictly by the book. This is where the real work of
FIFA is done and to ask if FIFA is fit for purpose to run football,
as many MPs have done, this is where you should be examining and
not the Exco.
The bottom line is that as a nation we need to change
our attitude towards FIFA by at least acknowledging the tremendous
good they do around the world. Only then will we be able to look
at what it does in a more objective light.
The 2018 World Cup bid has been central to the criticism
of FIFA especially the mechanism to chose the host. I put it to
you that any system used will be subject to fierce debate, be
it one person or a small clique left to decide, the 24 people
currently used, or all 208 nations having a vote. I am not sure
that any one mechanism has a critical advantage over another.
There will always be losers.
The most important question that needs to be asked
is why did England not win. I have listed the key points below.
1. Russia had the most compelling bid
Russia had never hosted the tournament and FIFA decided
on December 2nd that it should explore new frontiers and help
the game in Russia develop. This was a very sound philosophy and
one that should be applauded. It is interesting to note that after
about a week when this had finally sunk in here, the focus of
the criticism towards FIFA shifted to the 2022 decision and Qatar.
I feel that the attitude to the Qataris has bordered on outright
racism. There were only ever two serious bids for the 2022 tournament
as Japan, Korea and the USA had hosted the tournament very recently.
I would have chosen Australia in a bid to raise the level of the
game there but Qatar was seen as a vote for football in the Middle-East
and there is sound logic behind the decision, despite the logistical
and technological challenges that lie ahead.
2. The Premier League's 39th game plan
This was effectively a suicide note for the 2018
bid. The most shocking of all Lord Triesman's revelations was
the admission that Peter Scudamore of the Premier League would
support the bid if the FA supported the 39th game proposals. This
would have put the FA in an impossible position when the Premier
League's support should have been unconditional. The fact that
it wasn't would be considered treasonable in any other country
in the world.
The best way I can describe the negative impact of
the 39th game proposal is to have you imagine that you are Julio
Grondona, president of the Argentine FA, a FIFA vice-president
and owner of one of the clubs in the Argentine top division. Is
he honestly going to welcome a game between say Manchester City
and Aston Villa being played in Buenos Aires? How can he regard
it as anything other than poaching by greedy English clubs out
to undermine the local clubs? It shows a staggering disregard
for the local football culture in Argentina and we wonder why
Grondona didn't vote for us! For Buenos Aires read Tokyo, Seoul,
Doha, Asuncion, Bangkok, New York, Mexico City... all with representatives
on the Exco. Indeed, I'd say we did pretty well to get two votes
on December 2nd.
3 - The arrogance of English football. English football
has few friends around the world now and that is something we
really should care about. We do nothing to endear ourselves to
the football communities in other countries and that is reflected
in the attitudes of fans and administrators towards us. If we
want to play a central role in the organisation of world football
and to host a World Cup in the future, we must start engaging
with other football nations around the world by acknowledging
and trying to understand better the different football cultures
that exist in different countries. I used to travel the world
filming football and by showing an interest in the local clubs
and players and the history of football in the countries I visited,
I created an immediate warmth and friendship that opened so many
doors. This has to be the top priority in English football as
we move forward.
Perhaps the saddest aspect of the 2018 decision was
the sheer lack of grace the English showed in defeat. The only
person who stood up and congratulated the Russians and Qataris
was David Beckham. People used to admire the English for their
sportsmanship but now we are just regarded as spoilt and arrogant.
As someone who has to deal with football people from all over
the world, quite frankly it is embarrassing to be English right
now.
I would like to help change attitudes within football
and I really do think that I could advise you and other MPs as
to the best way forward for the game in this country.
Guy Oliver
11 May 2011
| 
