The role of the Sports Media in reporting unethical ownership
Manchester City, Paris Saint German and Newcastle United. A trio of massive football clubs all with one common denominator; state ownership.
City were the first major example of state involvement in football when Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan’s Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) completed a takeover of the Citizens on September 1st, 2008.
Qatar’s purchase of PSG swiftly followed, with Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the Emir of Qatar, taking control of the Parisians in 2011 through Qatar Sports Investments (QSI). Newcastle United were then ‘blessed’ with financial freedom in October 2021, after a consortium led by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) ended Mike Ashley’s sour 14-year rule.
Manchester United are the latest side to be linked with a life changing takeover with Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani, of the Qatar royal family, officially submitting a bid for the Red Devils. Should Qatar’s attempt for United fail, West Ham United are reported to be next on the wish list.
State ownership is becoming an increasing threat to the sport. The clubs in question are rich beyond their wildest dreams, putting them far beyond any sort of level playing field which sport should be played on and there are serious off-the-field issues which need addressing. Whilst fans of these clubs are in dreamland, others feel aggrieved.
What is it and what is the problem?
State-owned clubs are, despite the name, not officially owned by states apart from PSG which is openly owned by the state of Qatar. They are usually owned by funds or companies which are in turn controlled by these select states.
While this is legal, the problem resides in sportswashing.
Defined by the Cambridge dictionary, sportswashing is:
“The practice of an organization, a government, a country, etc. supporting sport or organizing sports events as a way to improve its reputation.”
For example, hosting the World Cup in Qatar in an attempt to gloss over the lack of rights for the LGBTQ+ community and migrant workers or the Saudi funded attempt to fly the Magpies to the top and draw attention away from human rights violations.
It can be hard to define ethical ownership as if you dive deep enough, questionable links or decisions made by the unlikeliest of people can be discovered, especially with the line of ethics being so paper thin.
West Ham’s current ownership involving David Sullivan and the late David Gold was founded from the porn industry and new Czech investor Daniel Kretinsky has links to Russia. Is that ethically sound? Probably not but there is a difference in comparison with ‘state owned’ clubs.
There are major human rights issues with Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi, which tarnishes the games integrity and from a footballing sense, the financial gap between these clubs and the real world is what will kill the sport.
Manchester City’s owner is worth £17 billion and their current squad is worth £933.9 million according to TransferMarkt. Newly promoted Luton Town, who must pay £10 million in stadium renovations to even play in the division, have a side worth £35.85 million – City paid almost three times that amount for Jack Grealish.
Enough said.
The sports media’s role
So what role does the sports media have to play in all of this? Perhaps it is the biggest of all.
The Athletic’s Manchester United reporter, Carl Anka, had this to say.
“It’s important to report about who owns a football team as those persons/groups doing it are looking to own football clubs for particular reasons,” said Carl.
“There’s the question of what kind of wealth an owner brings. Where is the money coming from? For what reason? Is the money a loan? Did the owner pay in cash or in stock options?
“Some groups want to burnish their own image. Others wish to distract from things happening in different parts of the world. If you don’t report on the whys, you are telling an incomplete story.”
The issues behind takeovers from these states must be brought to light to ensure fans of these historic clubs are provided with the necessary information to form their own opinions and have a say in their club’s future.
The reporting on the proposed European Super League provided fans with the grim facts and gave them the voice to protest which ultimately led to its downfall. If potentially unethical owners were set to take over a club, the sports media has a duty to inform the public and by doing so they can help prevent it by giving people the power to speak up.
But fans can be divided. Say Qatar’s bid for Manchester United, supporters seem to be split between the thought of returning to the trophy ladened glory days and the prospect of being owned by a state for which they have mercilessly ridiculed their rivals about for years.
Win titles and become hypocrites or take the moral high ground? Decisions decisions.
“In United’s 1-0 defeat to Brighton, a fan in the away end unfurled a “No to Qatar” banner. When I reported that, fans online said that wasn’t a true United fan who didn’t want best for the club,” said Carl.
“After United beat Chelsea 4-1, I saw a banner that read “full sale only” – implying they didn’t want Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s bid and wanted Qatar ownership. The fanbase is in agreement that they want the Glazers out. They are split on who they want to run the club.
“Some have legitimate concerns about Qatar ownership and accusations of sports washing. Others rightfully point out SJR’s businesses with Ineos and how his ownership of United could be “greenwashing”.
“The issue of sportswashing is difficult is because it asks people to apply a moral framework on something they have a deep emotional connection to. To rationally disengage from something you have an irrational enjoyment of is difficult.
“People have inherited their sports fandom. Spent the majority of their lives following a team. Their fandom can form a core part of their personality.”
It is a difficult position to be in. In reality, especially for the fans against the Qatari bid, they will have very little say in the matter as protesting can only take you so far, particularly if a fanbase is divided.
State owned clubs could be the grim future for the sport but as Jonathan Liew rightly states, it is embedded in the sport and “everyone is essentially trying to cheat all the time”.
The independent regulator for English football cannot come quickly enough, there needs to be a PROPER ethical background check on all potential owners of football clubs to ensure the game’s integrity remains. Until that point, the media must do their very best to continue to shine light on the dark truths of the game.
