The decision of Fifa it can be the password for a change in the way SAFS (Anonymous Society of Football) are viewed from now on: after all, which owner wants to risk seeing his team excluded from the most important competition of clubs in the world?
There are experts who point out that the decision of the maximum entity of world football can even do the UEFA Change your mind about the rigidity of the rule that allows or not that teams that have the same owner participate in their competitions. And then it would be a ripple effect.
At the end of last week, FIFA decided that Leon and Pachuca could not participate in its World Cup at the same time. The reason? The two Mexican teams have the same owner. This rule does not directly affect all SAFs, but a specific type of them, which in English takes the name of Multi Club Ownership, which in Portuguese translation means exactly the same person to own a club network.
Also read:
Imagine, for example, that Botafogo could be excluded from this World Cup if Lyon was classified for the competition. After all, the two are in the Eagle group by the American John Texor. Bahia would be prevented from the dispute for a similar reason, as Salvador’s team belongs to the city group, which already has Manchester as a representative.
Álvaro Martin Ferreiro, master’s student in International Sports Law and Lawyer at CCLA Advogados, explains that the decision is not so simple and depends a series of criteria established by FIFA, but admits that Brazilians would take risks in this scenario.
Continues after advertising
“Potentially, yes, but it depends on the percentage of property and if FIFA determines that there is effective control and decision -making power over both clubs. If City Group holds a significant participation and is seen as an influencer of important decisions in both teams, FIFA could exclude one to avoid conflicts of interest. The same logic would apply to Botafogo and Lyon if the Eagle Football Group would have been controlled effective about both, ”analyzed the expert for the Infomoney.
Also read:
In addition to the question much recently discussed that it says more about the sports side, there is a constant debate about financial fair play when it comes to MCO. After all, if the team has the same owner, he can make athletes’ transfers among his teams putting the value he wants in the operation. This completely circumvents any financial control that a competition can have.
Continues after advertising
In France, there is already a debate on how Lyon has acted in recent seasons. Involved in financial fair play problems and with the possibility of being relegated for this, the textor team uses Botafogo’s transfers to circumvent possible vetoes from the French League. Among the competitors, there is the possibility of a clause that has been called a “anti-textor”.
FIFA has been following the debates closely and knows it will need to intervene to try to control the issue. After all, each country has legislation and the MCOS try to surf in the breach of each one.
“With the growing criticism of competitive imbalance and the evasion of financial fair play, FIFA is under increasing pressure to strengthen MCO regulations. More strict criteria around property limits, independence of governance and financial transparency will probably be part of the discussion,” said Blackler, which already suggests a way of protection while the maximum football entity does not define the limits.
Continues after advertising
He mentions that alloys can protect themselves by adopting a clear regulatory structure that addresses the risks of shared property. This includes requiring full transparency of property structures, setting limits on the percentage of property that an entity can have in several clubs within the same league and restrict voting rights or executive functions in cases of overlapping interests.
“In addition, alloys can establish independent compliance bodies to monitor these relationships and impose rules that prevent clubs shared from influencing competition integrity or important league decisions,” he added.
Of course, owners will be able to keep their teams under the same umbrella, but with regulation the advantage of having a club network can decrease considerably from now on, in a similar effect to what was seen in the drastic reduction of the number of betting houses in Brazil after the sector regulatory by the federal government.
