G-14’s lack of feeling for game highlighted

EUROPE’S powerful and exclusive G-14 clubs’ committee last week took a step nearer to imposing a charge on national associations for the use of their players in international matches.

In the process, they highlighted their total lack of feeling for the game at large.

The G-14 committee is representative of all the top clubs in the European game Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Manchester United included.

Remorselessly they drive on to fulfil their ambitions of usurping control of the game from football's governing bodies and establishing a network designed to perpetuate their elite status.

The influence they exert is already all-powerful. Nothing illustrates that more than the dilution of the once-magnificent European Cup competition to the elongated, overweight, league competition it has become.

A glance at the quarter-finals of the current competition points to the weaknesses in the format. There are three Italian clubs left, Juventus and the two Milan clubs as well as three Spanish, Real Madrid, Barcelona and Valencia.

The changed format was forced on UEFA by the demands of the G-14 clubs to produce more matches, more television income and greater profits for the select few. This latest move to push for national associations to contribute to their income is driven by the same narrow, sectional interests.

The issue surfaced again at the weekend when the G-14 clubs met with FIFA representatives in Zurich.

The clubs gave unanimous approval to the co-ordinated international match calendar as drawn up by FIFA and the European, South American and African confederations.

In return FIFA agreed: (1) the Copa America (equivalent to the European Championship) will be held on a four yearly basis rather than every second year as at present; (2) while the 2006 World Cup qualifying competition proceeds, the South American nations will not demand the release of players for friendly matches outside Europe; (3) the African nations will use the World Cup qualifying ties as qualifying ties also for their own African Nations Cup; (4) a date set aside in April for friendly internationals will be abandoned from 2005 onwards; (5) FIFA accepted clubs did not want to release players for the new Confederations Cup competition they plan to hold in France this year.

They urged "closer co-ordination" between clubs and national associations and urged national associations to field "strong teams" in France. (How they can be expected to do this is the clubs refuse to co-operate is not explained).

(6) FIFA urged clubs to reconsider their attitude to the club world championship which was held once, disastrously, in South America several years ago when Manchester United opted out of the FA Cup to compete.

In essence, it appears to me that FIFA agreed to every request made by the clubs and were given very little, if anything, in return. Most damaging of all, however, was

FIFA's agreement to further consider the possibility of the national associations contributing to paying players' wages while on international duty.

How short-sighted can you get ? The clubs are saying they want to get their hands on money the national associations use to develop the game at grass-roots level. How outrageous.

Not content with grossly over-paying their players, the clubs now want the weakest sections of football to support those wages.

Mark my words, it will happen.