FIFA Considering Ban on Domestic Fixtures Being Played Overseas

On February 27th, soccer’s worldwide governing body FIFA held a meeting to discuss the potential of banning domestic league fixtures from taking place in other countries.

For example, if Liverpool wished to play Manchester United in a league fixture in the United States of America as opposed to Anfield.

According to ESPN, Article 73 of the FIFA Statutes is what is being revisited. Article 73 states that domestic matches played outside of the league or club’s own country can only take place under ‘exceptional circumstances’ and under authorisation from ‘member associations, the respective confederation[s] and by FIFA’.

We have seen this happen sporadically in the past, especially in the UEFA Champions League and Europa League competitions. It’s usually a result of fans overstepping their boundaries and believing they’re bigger than the game itself.

This actually happened again very recently during Bayern Munich’s 6-0 away win at Hoffenheim on Saturday. In the second half, a group of travelling Bayern fans held up expletive signs directed at Hoffenheim owner Dietmar Hopp.

Bayern players and coach Hansi Flick ran across the pitch and pleaded for the signs to be taken down. The fans weren’t exactly keen to accommodate their requests.

The game was temporarily stopped in the 77th minute before players eventually returned to the field. In their own protest against the actions of those fans, both sides refused to play for the remaining 13 minutes, instead kicking the ball amongst one another and conversing in the middle of the pitch.

After the final whistle, all players and coaching staff from both teams stood at Hopp’s side in front of the Hoffenheim fans and everyone applauded the German billionaire.

These kinds of incidents aren’t seen every day in the soccer world and we can be thankful for that. But when these incidents do happen, consequences are laid out for both fans and club alike.

Often, future fixtures are played in empty stadiums. A recent example of this was after the farcical scenes that took place in Bulgaria during their national team’s 6-0 loss to the English.

Bulgaria’s next home match against the Czech Republic was played in an empty stadium as punishment, as well as a measly 75,000 euro fine.

The full story on this can be found here:

https://www.rferl.org/a/bulgaria-soccer-racism-fined–empty-stadium/30242707.html

However, domestic games being played outside of the home country are rare if ever.

FIFA has decided to look into this following two attempts from Spanish top flight La Liga to host domestic league fixtures in the United States of America.

La Liga is partnered with Relevant Sports, a soccer events and media business based out of California. In an attempt to promote the game on the Western front, they have requested to have games played there in recent times.

Both attempts didn’t come to fruition and now FIFA is stepping in to ensure that there is no ‘third time lucky’.

From a business perspective, it makes sense as the game would attract a lot more attention, being a fixture played for league points. The best players would be there, giving their all. The stadium would be completely filled out and it would more than likely be a successful venture.

Imagine if it was an ‘El Clasico’ between FC Barcelona and Real Madrid. Except instead of taking place at the Nou Camp or the Santiago Bernabeu, it was played at AT&T Stadium in Dallas.

Soccer fans across the Americas would flock to see the likes of Lionel Messi, Luis Suarez, Sergio Ramos and Karim Benzema play for league points.

The FIFA committee has recommended that this ban be implemented and now it may just be a matter of time before it’s a reality.

However, whether it’s on or off the field, soccer is a funny game and anything can happen. The decision is expected to be finalised on the 20th of March.

What are your thoughts on the potential ban of domestic fixtures being played overseas? Let us know on social media @Soccersceneau

As always, don’t forget to subscribe to our weekly newsletter for more content just like this.

 

 

 

Previous ArticleNext Article

APL and PFA remain without agreement as bargaining tensions continue

The Australian Professional Leagues (APL) and Professional Footballers Australia (PFA) remain without a new collective bargaining agreement, with negotiations continuing less than three months before the start of the 2026–27 A-Leagues season.

The APL presented the players’ union with a new one-year interim proposal on August 5, which included an increase to the A-League Women salary cap and a commitment to establish a pathway towards full-time professionalism for the women’s competition within 12 months.

The proposed agreement would provide an interim framework while the two parties continue discussions over a longer-term collective bargaining agreement.

APL chief executive Steve Rosich said the proposal reflected the league’s commitment to reaching a sustainable agreement with players following eight months of negotiations.

However, the PFA criticised the APL for publicly announcing the proposal shortly after presenting it to the union, arguing that the approach had further damaged trust between the two parties.

PFA Chief Executive Beau Busch also said players had overwhelmingly rejected the APL’s previous final offer, citing a lack of trust in the league’s ability to ensure its future.

Full-time professionalism for the A-League Women remains a key priority for the PFA, with players seeking improved conditions and greater investment in the competition.

The A-League Men and A-League Women seasons are both scheduled to begin on 16 October 2026.

With the new season approaching, both parties face pressure to resolve the dispute and establish the framework governing player conditions across the A-Leagues.

 

 

Jeff Bezos consortium set for $2.7 billion Liverpool investment

Liverpool could soon welcome one of the world’s richest men into its ownership structure.

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is part of a consortium in advanced talks to buy a 30% stake in the club.

The proposed deal values Liverpool at around $8.6 billion (4.5 billion pounds). Bezos has a personal fortune estimated at $363 billion.

The investment would give Fenway Sports Group (FSG) a major financial return. It would also allow FSG to keep control of the club, which they bought in 2010.

The proposal has attracted attention across football. It has also created concern among sections of the Liverpool fanbase.

FSG set for major return

FSG bought Liverpool for $573 million (300 million pounds) in 2010. The ownership group later provided further funding through loans. In the last 16 years, the club has undergone major growth.

Liverpool ended a 30-year wait for a league title in 2020. The club also won the Champions League in 2019. Another Premier League title followed in 2025.

Stadium redevelopment and a new training centre have also increased the club’s value. FSG could cash in on $2.7 billion (1.4 billion pounds) if the 30% share is sold.

The deal would therefore represent a huge return on its original investment. However, whilst the investment would provide a massive cash out for the owners of Liverpool, due to Financial Fair Play there won’t be increased investment in the transfer market.

Why Bezos wants Liverpool

Bezos has explored sports investments before. He has been linked with major American franchises such as the NFL’s Seattle Seahawks.

Liverpool would give him a stake in one of football’s biggest global brands. The club also has a large following in the United States. The New York Times has also reported Liverpool has 26 million fans in America.

That makes the investment attractive for investors looking to expand their reach in global sport. American businessmen Eduardo Saverin and Amit Bhatia are also reportedly involved in the consortium.

The deal would add to the growing American influence across English football.

Fans remain cautious

Liverpool supporters have not automatically welcomed the proposal.

The club’s previous experience under Tom Hicks and George Gillett still influences the fanbase.

Supporters also want greater clarity over the consortium’s intentions. Questions remain over board representation, control and the long-term purpose of the investment.

For many fans, ownership must involve more than financial ambition. The Bezos proposal could strengthen Liverpool’s commercial position. It could also deliver a huge payday for FSG.

But until the consortium reveals more about its plans, supporters are likely to treat the deal with scepticism.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend