#FIFA: Lonely Champagne at empty FIFA presidential debate

After two FIFA president candidates pulled out of a debate scheduled on 27 January at the European Parliament in Brussels, a panel, including candidate Jerome Champagne, was left to address the broken debate, write Jane Booth & Giacomo Fracassi

In place of the “The Future of FIFA — Presidential candidates forum” that was to be co-hosted by NewFIFANow and the European Parliament Sports Intergroup, a press conference was held with statements by members of the two groups, as well as the only candidate to show up, Jerome Champagne of France.

Candidates Prince Ali Bin al-Hussein of Jordan, Tokyo Sexwale of South Africa, Gianni Infantino of Switzerland, and frontrunner Sheikh Salman Bin Ibrahim al-Khalifa of Bahrain all declined to attend, fearing it would be in violation of FIFA’s campaign regulations. Indeed Prince Ali and Tokyo Sexwale were both schedule to appear together with Champagne, while Infantino was supposed to send a video.

On Monday, both al-Hussein and Sexwale announced that they won't participate in the debate. Their decision was irrevocable. Champagne decided to attend anyway, and the meeting was confirmed for Wednesday.

Damian Collins, co-founder of NewFIFANow and British Member of Parliament said the chairman of the FIFA Audit & Compliance Unit, Domenico Scala, could have cleared whether it was a violation or not.

“While it is not the responsibility of FIFA to advise candidates on how they run their campaign they can give clear guidance on whether or not taking part and debating in the European Parliament would be in breach of FIFA rules,” Collins said before adding, “It would be ridiculous to believe that a debate at the European Parliament could constitute political interference.”

Emma McClarklin MEP said that this is a backwards step for FIFA while they try to show people that they are working on reform. She questioned how the planned to be more open, transparent, and accountable if they couldn’t even show up.

“I have to say that we are deeply disappointed in the others for not even turning up to the pitch today and taking advantage of the opportunity that we have given them,” McClarklin said. “This platform here, a democratic platform, an open platform for them to really tell us how they plan to reform FIFA.”

Ivo Belet MEP stated it is not sending a promising signal to fans around the world.

“The fact that the other candidates other than Jerome Champagne have cancelled their participation is really really a bad signal. Bad because it proves that the old FIFA is still alive and kicking,” Belet said. “It’s a terrible signal to the football fans who deserve much much better.”

Champagne joked about the paradox of his candidacy. He has been involved with FIFA longer than any either candidate after serving for eleven years from 1999 to 2010. While he is part of “old FIFA”, he was the only candidate to attend the debate dedicated to “new FIFA.”

Champagne didn't go into details about his candidacy or his programme. Instead he made a programmatic discourse calling for more football and more inclusion.

“Football,” he said “Is the only language we have in common in a more and more fractured world”.

One of the reasons he is running for president is because he wants to discuss some issues, including the demagoguery of some other candidates who were just promising money.

Champagne argued that FIFA is divided into four different FIFAs. One FIFA is the president, the other is the executive committee controlled by the other confederations. Then, there is the FIFA of the executives, in which Champagne himself proudly worked, and finally the FIFA judicial body.

“I was the first one to point my fingers at the dysfunctional nature of FIFA executive committee, not FIFA overall, but the executive committee. I was the first one to point my finger on the need to separate the governmental responsibilities from the commercial activities”

Champagne claimed that most of the major topics discussed now for the FIFA election, including the need for transparency, he had already discussed during his first candidature for FIFA president back in 2014.

One of the points of his programme that Champagne extensively discussed has been the creation of a compensation scheme, that he explained in some detail. In the case of a transfer instead of the current system in which money goes “from a club A to a club B”, Champagne would like to create a compensation chamber that “would take the money directed to the club B and redistribute immediately to smaller clubs in Europe, in Africa, in South America”.

This scheme is part of Champagne's goal of fighting the growing inequalities of the game. He recalled how next to his house there are more football fields than in the entire Democratic Republic of Congo and that the top 21 clubs in the world have a cumulative annual income of 6,8€ billion, while more than half of the world federations survive with less than 2€ million'.

It's not only the inequalities between Europe and Africa that has become a problem, said Champagne. Also, within Europe the gap between the top clubs and the rest is expanding rapidly. Champagne recalled how until 20 years ago there was a fairer competition between European clubs, while today this is not possible anymore. He mentioned the final between Real Madrid and Videoton in 1986, when the Hungarian minnow defeated in succession PSG and Manchester United, a feat basically impossible today.

Champagne advocated for a change to bring back the soul of the game, and hoped that football will not became like basketball where 'only money matters' and club competitions are more important than national competition.

Despite this passionate speech, Champagne is not the front runner and probably won't be the winning candidate for the FIFA presidency, and the absence of any other candidate in this public event, sponsored and hosted by a neutral organization like the European Parliament, speaks to the lack of interest in having a more open and transparent FIFA.

Share this article: