James Dostoyevsky: Straight talking, misleading reporting

Sometimes you say something and it turns out that the something you’ve said is something you never said … But then this something that you’ve never said finds itself (re-)published in an “independent Indian medium”, as is the case here, in India’s ‘Morning Express’.

Tone and context of everything you did say has disappeared; changed to fit an editorial agenda – or the inability of the writer to jot down the interview the way it was given and broadcast.

On Dutch NOS TV, a headline announcing an interview, says: “Ceferin kritisch over voetballen in Saudi-Arabië: ‘Het draait niet alleen om geld’. Which in half-way decent English means: “Čeferin critical about football in Saudi Arabia: It’s not only all about money”. But the Morning Express says:

 ‘UEFA President attacks Saudi Arabia. – Shopping will not improve your football’. You don’t believe me? Have a look for yourself: https://tinyurl.com/ynmdmk5c

Čeferin, UEFA’s recently re-elected president, commented about something that should be obvious to everybody in football, and he said it in his usual direct language; he doesn’t mince words.

But to some, calling a spade a spade appears to be the same as denying the existence of the ‘original sin’: the believers will hear what they want to hear, no matter what the narrative really is. Some call it bollocks.

The Indian headline twists the English/Dutch original backward. It’s a bit along the lines of believers who think that buying a slim-fit pair of jeans will hide their obesity.  UEFA’s top man pointed out the obvious: in football, shopping a fading Ronaldo won’t lift up your game. What it will do, is make your efforts look ridiculous, just like the fat man who squeezed himself into slim-fit jeans (that he didn’t say; I do).

When Messi chose the lesser of two evils a short while ago to consider a move to Inter Miami versus a few hundred million $$ in the Saudi top league, some people started to wonder – and many couldn’t get it:  how can the guy shove hundreds of millions aside and only get tens of millions when his star is rapidly fading? I won’t attempt an explanation but I will say this: maybe money is not everything when everything you’ve amassed is already money galore. Apparently, Benzema needs more money than Messi. So be it.

None of the things Čeferin said on NOS TV were surprising or aggressive, or indeed novel. He made a few logical points, also about the budgets available to clubs, some of who can outspend others by triple-digit millions.

With reference to Saudi Arabia, he did say this: “ I think it’s mainly a mistake for Saudi Arabian football. Why is that a problem for them? Because they should invest in academies, they should bring coaches and they should develop their own players. The system of buying players who almost ended their career is not the system that develops football.”

He didn’t attack Saudi. What he did do is offer (unwelcome?) advice, what he did, was to highlight a reality of modern (European) football. And what he really does, is warn the Saudis not to fall into a trap by buying fading stars for crazy money and neglect their own nationals in the process by creating spectacles where academies would/should do the job over time.

Most of our readers won’t be aware of India’s Morning Express, and only some will have seen the interview on Dutch TV. Therefore, I don’t want to dwell more upon a something that is really nothing, except that the nothing is something that now qualifies journalism, and too often throughout all markets and territories.

I think it is but a matter of fairness and honesty (both seem to have gone completely astray) that we publish what was said, and not what we think should have been said. 

The man didn’t attack Saudi Arabia – why should he?! He didn’t say “shopping will not improve your football” – although that is probably true What he did say is “It’s not all about money”.  And that is more true than ever:  just look at the arrogant incompetence of the new Chelsea owners who, after hundreds of millions of pounds spent (wasted), only managed to end up at a miserable mid table position – but that’s another sad story of throwing money at something because all you have is money, and no (footballing) sense.

Money, while useful, a Club does not make.

Look at Newcastle United – a Saudi property! They excelled with an English coach and pretty much a British squad without many stars nor spending idiotic amounts of money. If they can do it in England, why not do it at home? That’s what it should be all about, yet isn’t.

For Saudi Arabia to follow Qatar’s example and spend insane amounts of money on sportswashing appears to be the choice. This writer thinks that it is not a smart choice. Sportwashing, greenwashing and all sorts of other types of laundromats don’t lead to recognition nor respect. They don’t contribute to one’s standing. Not a country’s in any case. For more than a decade, Qatar was accused of everything humanly and inhumanly possible running up to its World Cup, and to this day. And the accusations, allegations, some false claims and many concerned questions won’t stop soon.

After billions of pounds spent on a toy that promised glory to its leaders, what has remained are nagging questions that don’t seem to be going away: law suits, enormous legal fees and a football that has not developed much.

Saudi, instead of copying what was faulty at best, should consider another way. And money doesn’t buy friends. It doesn’t buy respect, although it can buy status. But is that enough?

James Dostoyevsky was a Washington-based author until the end of 2018, where he reported on sports politics and socio-cultural topics. He returned to Europe in 2019 and continues to follow football politics – presently with an emphasis on the Middle East, Europe and Africa.