IT WAS very convenient that the news of Clearlake Capital’s relationship with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund was made public. It added some fuel to put on the fire and also attempted to “out” Chelsea as a Saudi puppet club. The fact is Clearlake may well be managing PIF’s money as investment companies invariably do, but that is very different from any claim that Saudi Arabia “own” Clearlake.
In all probability, within the gordian knot that is international finance, Saudi Arabia will pop up in almost every major company’s portfolio. For a day or two, it made for a good tabloid story and invited fans of Chelsea’s rivals, to sling a few insults around social media.
Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, like Abu Dhabi’s and Qatar’s, is not good, and this has become the stick with which opponents of middle eastern encroachment on football choose to beat them. Hypothetically, of course. We either elect to stand-up for human rights, or we look the other way and pretend that Saudi Arabia is a long way away from home.
At the same time, we don’t like their ways and, in many respects, we fear them. Just like the domestic front, fans do not like new pretenders to the elite and we also consider countries that are “not really football nations” with lots of money as a threat to the status quo. We may not like to admit it, so we use the human rights problem as the reason for disliking their entrance into the market.
There are plenty of organisations that monitor and report on the human rights abuses of the middle east, but when it comes to football, the governing bodies are neither strong enough or smart enough to rein-in the tactics of Saudi Arabia. There is a real danger that Saudi could create another Manchester City, a super-club that proves to be way ahead of most of its competitors. Football being the way it is, this will occupy more minds than the deplorable activities that have taken place in Saudi.
This would add to the imbalance the world of football and move the dial further away from sport and into business. Furthermore, with Abu Dhabi already reaping the benefits of their City Football Group project and Saudi Arabia making a lot of noise, Qatar and some other states will undoubtedly dip their toes deeper into the water. If fans are complaining now about the death of “their game”, the prospect of a new type of football industry emerging from a desert-driven paradigm shift will create a veritable tsunami of disruption that will be even less palatable.
Saudi Arabia were, up until June 23 2023, favourites to win the bid to host World Cup 2030. There is now talk about them withdrawing, claiming that a European country should be hosting 2030. On the face of it, this may be a reaction to the growing storm of criticism about Saudi’s behaviour. Secondly, it may be another subtle piece of “sportswashing” that demonstrates that Saudi acknowledge the power base in global football.
Saudi Arabia’s upsurge of interest in football is recognition of the financial power of the game, even though the world’s biggest clubs have the balance sheet and financial power of a small-to-medium sized enterprise. The middle eastern countries have a huge economic reliance on oil, but as we look [hopefully] towards the end of the fossil fuel age, there is an urgent need to diversify the economies of the region. Some countries have difficulty trading with the west, partly due to their human rights, partly due to instability. Football is popular the world over and is a currency in itself, so getting a foot in the door is important – hence, “sportswashing” tries to clean-up the reputation of countries with poor records regarding inclusivity and equality. Saudi may have some skeletons in the cupboard, but there is a deep-rooted desire to be loved by the international community.
If Saudi are the bad guys, then why has FIFA been so keen to ingratiate itself with the leaders of the state? As ever, money talks in football and values are easily sold down the river if the coffers are filled to the brim. There is a strong belief that Saudi money is ultimately behind the European Super League, a competition that threatens to fracture the eco-system of football. They are also advocates of a Club World Cup that wants to expand to crowd-out the fixture programme for European clubs.
The antics of the Public Investment Fund have also created anxiety in the football market. They own 75% of four leading Saudi clubs and 85% of Newcastle United. One could compare their aggressive stance as similar to China’s investment programme of a few years ago, but the difference is Saudi have the money and desire. Football forms part of their Vision 2030 programme that aims to diversify their economy.
What worries people most about PIF? Multiple stakes means manipulation might be possible regarding transfers and player movement perhaps via convenient offloading to avoid financial fair play issues. Domestic competitions could also be “rigged”. Saudi Arabia hopes that its Pro League will become a top 10 competition in the future, but there’s a considerable distance to go. At present, it is a retirement home to a large degree, with 30-plus players seeing it as a good place to top-up the pension fund. They may have failed with Lionel Messi, but their next target will surely be Neymar. History tells us that buying-up ageing stars does little for the long-term future growth of the league concerned. There will be a rise in interest, but it will not make the Saudi Pro League a significant league.
We may be at the start of an explosion of investment that changes the face of football and creates a new hierarchy. Abu Dhabi have shown the rest of the middle east what can be done and by the time the summer is over, Saudi Arabia may have taken it all a step further. And if Qatar do actually succeed in buying Manchester United, it may be too late to do much about it.
GAME OF THE PEOPLE 
One thought on “Saudi Arabia scares Europe”