Saudi Arabia recently announced a bid to host the 2034 World Cup, officially marking the next step in the country’s plan to establish itself as a major presence in the soccer world. A strong wave of unexpected transfers into the Saudi Pro League (SPL) drew reactions from players, coaches, and fans alike, starting a discourse over the growing influence of Arabian countries in global soccer.
Earlier this month, Jordan Henderson gave an unexpectedly candid interview to The Athletic, his first since his £12 million ($15.4m) transfer from Liverpool to Steven Gerard-managed Al Ettifaq in the SPL.
Henderson’s vehement defense of the move came as a shock to many. The former Liverpool and England captain has become the first of the plethora of players that have made the move to Saudi Arabia to discuss his reasons for accepting the offer.
The trend started with Cristiano Ronaldo’s January move to Al-Nassr, one of the biggest stories in soccer history. Many suggested that Ronaldo’s transfer was borne out of an aging career that couldn’t find any paths forward in Europe. The Henderson transfer would back up that perspective.
However, the rest of this summer’s array of transfers shows that moving to the SPL is anything but a last resort, which props the league up as a genuine threat to the power Europe holds in the transfer market.
The SPL have consistently made headlines throughout a transfer window that included some massive news in the traditional major soccer markets.
In fact, the influence Saudi Arabia had in the transfer market this summer drew calls for investigation and even an embargo on the transfer into the SPL:
The main dish is the not-so-underlying discourse among fans in regards to their favorite players making the choice to play in Saudi Arabia. A discourse that began with the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, many are hesitant to see Middle Eastern cultures grow influence in the game as the soccer world tussles with the concept of inclusivity.
The controversy started when Qatar initially won their hosting bid back in 2010. Qatar beat out bids from the United States, Australia, Japan, and South Korea, to the shock of fans around the world. Critics opposed and even protested the bid, accusing FIFA of corruption for awarding a bid to a country with a history of human rights violations.
Among the initial concerns was in regards to the lack of infrastructure. Qatar ended up using the 12 year head start, the longest of any host in history, to build entire cities and stadiums. This massive construction project gave way to the next stage of concerns.
Investigations into the construction projects related to the World Cup reported unsafe working conditions resulting in several injuries and fatalities among the migrant workforce.
The infrastructure even caught flack during the tournament itself, with some visitors critical of the accommodations available for those attending games. These concerns spiked in the first few days of the tournament, but seemed to die down as the World Cup went on.
However, the clash of cultures has been one of the biggest points of contention, from that initial World Cup bid through this summer’s transfer window. The most prevalent cases of this conflict came in the lead up to the 2022 World Cup in November.
The first of the two came to the forefront just two days before kickoff when tournament officials announced that alcohol would not be sold in stadiums. Alcohol remained available in fan zones and other festive sites for fans traveling for the tournament, and even in the VIP suites of the stadiums.
The alcohol ban had a bigger effect on FIFA itself than the fans at the stadiums, as it shook up the relationship with major sponsor Budweiser. The famous American beer company announced they would ship what couldn’t be sold to the winners of the tournament, which put a cap on the discourse once the tournament actually started.
More serious concerns grew over the alleged human rights violations inflicted by the Qatari government before, during, and after the tournament. The construction before the tournament and maintenance during and after have reportedly taken a toll on the population of migrant workers used by Qatar, from unpaid wages to unsafe, fatal work environments.
As the tournament grew closer, many had concerns over the wellbeing of fans in the LGBTQA+ community and the treatment of women. Concern spiked when FIFA announced that they would punish players that brandished a rainbow armband, placing a conversation on inclusivity and respect of cultures at the forefront of the discourse surrounding the entire tournament.
The decision came as a shock to many, seeing as FIFA had been ramping up its own campaigns to show support for the community in the build up to the tournament. Fans and journalists alike showed their support by sporting rainbow clothing over the four weeks, with some reportedly being confronted by security officers.
Defenders of the decision stated to the AP that the ban could help protect fans, and that while “LGBTQ couples would be welcomed and accepted,” there is opposition to the “overt promotion of LGBTQ freedoms as symbolized by the rainbow flag.”
These defenses are covered by an overarching idea that the rise in progressive advocacy within the existing soccer institutions threaten to disrespect and undermine certain customs and cultures within countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, especially as the influence of these Arabian countries in the global soccer market grows.
As Arabian influence grows, the discourse continues. Many players who had built passionate followings in Europe and were in varying stages of their careers made the move to Saudi Arabia over the summer. These followings consist of fans that are part of or closely attached to the communities that voiced their concerns, and it can be difficult for these fans to not associate these transfers as endorsements of the discrimination within these countries.
Meanwhile, fans in the Arabian peninsula are celebrating having more access to some of the best talent at all levels from Europe, having been an area in the world that previously did not gather as much attention on the global soccer stage despite producing a lot of talent throughout the years.
The general tone of the reactions do little to suggest that there can be any level of compromise in regards to the cultural aspects. Can FIFA really, genuinely continue to grow their pride marketing while also trying to grow the presence of the Middle East in the soccer world? Would fans on either side of the issue follow FIFA in doing so?
In the time that it takes to sift through weighing how much fans in the Middle East deserve to be a part of a major soccer market over ensuring the protection of rights for groups of fans that would be unsafe there we are left ignoring an arguably more tangible issue in this movement.
The sporting and economic lens looks at the threat of sportswashing that comes with the increasing financial power of these countries within the global soccer market. What started with ownership of European clubs like Manchester City, PSG, and Newcastle United has turned into growing ownership of the product on the field itself.
This issue isn’t exclusive to the Middle East, as the late 2000s and early 2010s saw an influx of Russian money with similar focuses of approach. Roman Abramovich changed Chelsea FC for the foreseeable future, Russian side FC Anzhi Makhachkala had two weird years where they had names like Roberto Carlos, Samuel Eto’o, and Willian on their team sheet, and the World Cup itself came to Russia in 2018.
Buying influence in the global game isn’t new, and it’s been heavily affecting the local communities where most of the passion for the game starts. The ease with which the groups with unfathomable amounts of wealth can so quickly change the global outlook of the game is worrisome for those defending the foundation of the global game.
Soccer is as close to a cultural denominator as humans have when it comes to recreational activities, and so often serves as one of the primary avenues through which people of a community can both express their own cultural identity and learn more about others. While money helps bring results and success to potentially build bigger and bigger communities, it threatens the growth of organic communities that build and support their clubs based on local history and principle.
If the entire sport gets washed into representing the interest of one overly wealthy community, it erases the foundation that the cultural discourse has to stand on. To protect any chance for growing support for the LGBTQ community and the women’s game, or potentially give the Middle East the opportunity to have an organic presence in the soccer world, it cannot be so easy for money to be as influential as it has been.
But for now, it is. And as it stands, it serves to the detriment of all fans of the game.
