These are critical times for Argentine football. While most eyes this past week have been firmly set upon on-field matters, not to mention River Plate's flamboyantly extravagant post-Marcelo Gallardo's arrival spending spree, under the surface a conflict is brewing that could tear the nation's game down the middle.
The current tension centres around the latest presidential decree issued by Javier Milei. Contained are orders to drop the existing statute which forbids Argentine football clubs to compete as a private concern, rather than as non-profit trusts in the hands of members as the current system stipulates. The Argentine Football Association (AFA), a body independent of government influence – something which in theory must remain valid to avoid contravening FIFA laws – must thus drop those by-laws against private clubs within a year, potentially opening the door to the entry of new teams or even the takeover of some of the country's most beloved football institutions.
Dismantling these trusts has become a near-obsession for Milei, whose administration's roller-coaster battle with the economy and alarming poverty levels have proved no obstacle to dedicating the government's time on this particular sporting battle. In keeping with his unsubtle manner of diplomacy, neither has he made any attempt to hide his contempt for the current model.
“No more poverty socialism in football,” the head of state fired in a tweet sent hours before the Copa América final in July, in a tirade that questioned why all of the members of Argentina's triumphant team in the United States were currently playing at privately run teams. “If the AFA is opposed to Sporting Limited Companies,” he pondered, “why would it let the first team come from these businesses?”
This argument obviously falls apart the second it is subjected to closer scrutiny. Argentina's stars may be employed in the biggest European clubs, many of which are run by private owners or consortiums (though, as in the case of Germany's 50+1 laws which demand partnership with fans, it is not as black and white as a superficial analysis might suggest) but to a man they were developed in member-run institutions operated on non-profit, community-led lines, first at local neighbourhood clubs and then the academy ranks of bigger sides. And the same holds for Lionel Messi, in case you were wondering: Barcelona are also owned by their members, as are Real Madrid and Athlétic Bilbao, a trio which contributed 10 of the Spain squad that lifted the Euro 2024 crown.
Another common assertion in favour which also fails to hold water is that private capital will lead to a signing-filled golden age in Argentine football. The cold facts are that whoever is in charge, the precarious state of the local economy means that Liga Profesional de Fútbol clubs will not be able to compete dollar for dollar with sides from Brazil and Mexico, much less Europe, the United States or the Middle East. Supporters of the initiative may dream of cash-laden Sheikhs promising the earth; realists fear the entry of leveraged wide boys coming in and gutting their beloved clubs piece-by-piece, starting with the non-professional activities which hundreds of thousands of kids and adults use every week, before slipping out and leaving behind a hollow wreck.
All of which is not to defend Claudio ‘Chiqui’ Tapia and the AFA, as the binary thinking of many would have us do. As this column has pointed out on countless occasions and will continue to do, the body's management is often shambolic and in detriment to the game, and the mooted plan to once more expand the top flight to 30 teams would be little short of a catastrophe. But, in this fight, Chiqui and his cronies are on the right side.
And a fight it is likely to be, against an administration bent on imposing its dogma of freedom even if it has to do so by force. Suspension by FIFA and even a possible absence from the next World Cup is the nuclear scenario, but as AFA treasurer Pablo Toviggino stated this week, a plausible one if the government resorts to intervention in order to impose a model that up to now the association and clubs have been united in resisting.
With Milei equally defiant, we may be arriving at a breaking point which could cause irreparable damage to football in the home of the reigning world champions.
Comments