Is grassroots soccer more important than the elite level?

It’s easy to live in the present, to enjoy the moment, the times that you live in. It’s even easier to keep your concentration solely on your priorities in the present. 

But what the great businesses and organisations do differently is what sets them apart from everyone else. Their ability to adapt and look forward to the future, to those who will define their business/organisation when they’re long gone. 

In the case of soccer clubs and the FFA, to keep a sustained and vested interest in grassroots is what is going to hold them in good stead in the next 20-30 years. Planning for the long term, strategically, is critical to the success of anything. 

And it all starts at that level, grassroots. Junior soccer participation numbers are at optimum levels and soccer, as a sport, has never been more popular. The A-League, for all its divisiveness, has grown exponentially and has begun attracting attention from across the world. The NPL, the second division of Australian soccer, has grown in recent years and has risen from the ashes of the NSL. 

Combine this with the fact that the Socceroos haven’t missed a World Cup since 2006, Australian soccer is in a perfect position to capitalise on youth. To motivate them to want to play soccer in the future. To try and turn Australia into a soccer powerhouse. 

It all begins at the grassroots level. Why? First impressions. It’s always about the first impressions, especially with children. The soccer ability of children needs to be nurtured at a young age, in a way that helps develop them as a player, but more importantly as a person. If done successfully and in a way that doesn’t demotivate them, the sky is the limit. 

Take for example, Paris-Saint Germain wonderkid Kylian Mbappe. At 19 years old, he won the FIFA World Cup with France, had played Champions League football, became one of the world’s most expensive players and had comparisons to the great Thierry Henry. How many 19 year old boys can say that they had a net worth of seven plus figures at the same age?  

I certainly can’t say that. And I’m 367 days older than Kylian. But what most likely differentiates him from everyone else is that he had the talent as a junior. That talent was then nurtured correctly, allowing him to unlock his potential as a soccer player. His career would be nothing without the hard work he puts in, obviously. But at a young age, his ability was recognised and then allowed the blossom under the guidance of the right people. 

And sure, meeting Thierry Henry at a young age would’ve motived him to no end. It would motivate anyone, really. But all that motivation would culminate in him understanding how hard he needed to work to get to the top. Nothing comes without hard work, that’s a fact. But through his upbringing, coaching and talent, he has been able to do what very few can. 

On the flip side of all that, we have those who had the talent, but not the work ethic. Casual fans refer to these players as ‘flops’. It’s a very harsh word to use, but they’re on the right track. 

Take Ravel Morrison. I’m sure Manchester United fans know this name all too well. Once described by Rio Ferdinand and Sir Alex Ferguson as the next big thing, Morrison always had the talent. Plus, playing for Manchester United and under Ferguson would’ve been the dream for a young player wanting to make a name for themselves. 

But Morrison, as the soccer world has come to know, didn’t have the desire to work hard. Loaned out more times than we could count, sold off to different clubs, Morrison saw his career go from hero to zero. 

After being sent out on loan by Italian club Lazio to Mexican club Atlas, Morrison decided to permanently move closer to home, signing a contract with Swedish club Ostersunds. But to say it’s a huge fall from grace would be the understatement of the year. And it’s barely March. 

Morrison could’ve been anything. An England great, a United great, a Champions League winner. He had the soccer world at his feet. But he lacked the one thing he needed most to attain all those accolades. 

The desire to work hard. 

And here we are. He’s 26, supposed to be in the prime of his career. Yet, he couldn’t be further from it. And for how much people will say he’s the definition of a ‘flop’, it’s actually quite sad. He would’ve had dreams, wanting to be the next superstar, just like any other young star. But it hasn’t come to fruition. He still has time to turn it around, but we’ve been saying it for so long now, it’s almost like beating a dead horse. One can hope. 

But he does show one thing, if nothing else. The grassroots level is critical to the development of soccer players, mentally and physically. If a player has the talent, it needs to be nurtured. If nurtured properly, it becomes a case of wanting to do the hard yards all day, every day. Some will turn out to be Mbappes, some will turn out to be Morrisons.  

But everything has a beginning. And the beginning is the most integral part of the entire process. 

Previous ArticleNext Article

Manchester City must pay the ultimate price for financial cheating

Manchester City’s financial scandal has reached boiling point. On the 29th of September, an independent commission found City guilty of all charges relating to serious breaches of the league’s financial rules across nine seasons, from 2009/10 to 2017/18. The commission also upheld three of four charges concerning the club’s failure to cooperate with the Premier League investigation.

The Premier League says City used sham commercial arrangements and disguised owner funding to inflate revenue and reduce costs by more than $1.7 billion (£900 million). Abu Dhabi United Group funded $1.58 billion (£830.69 million) that appeared in City’s accounts as sponsorship money from Abu Dhabi companies. The commission concluded that City’s accounts concealed the true financial position from auditors and regulators.

The 115 charges cover inaccurate financial information, player and manager payments, financial rules and the investigation itself. City has lodged its appeal against the guilty verdict, but for such a serious sporting scandal, attention has already turned to the potential punishments. In a Premier League era where foreign investment is king and revenues have skyrocketed, we should be asking questions. How did Manchester City get away with this for so long, and how can the punishment act as a deterrent to keep the reputation of football’s biggest league intact?

The hack that exposed the story

The most uncomfortable part of this saga is how the authorities discovered it and how most likely City never would have been exposed. In 2018, German publication Der Spiegel published leaked internal City emails and documents obtained through Football Leaks. Rui Pinto, the Portuguese hacker behind Football Leaks, supplied material that alleged City had disguised owner investment as sponsorship revenue and manipulated arrangements to satisfy financial regulations.

The Premier League investigation began in December 2018. City were formally charged in February 2023, after a four-year investigation, and the hearing finally began in September 2024. That timeline is nothing short of extraordinary; eight years between the leaks being exposed and charges being brought to Manchester City does significant sporting damage.

Man City won eight major titles during the alleged period, including three Premier League titles. Recalling titles in any sport leaves a sour taste in any sports fan’s mouth. The fans of opposing sides given titles feel robbed of the special moment, and Manchester City fans could feel rightfully deceived. But it goes beyond even this as we look at who Manchester City signed during those seasons. Players such as Ilkay Gundogan and Kevin De Bruyne played vital roles in City’s later titles beyond the 2017/2018 season. Would they have joined if this had been uncovered earlier? It’s impossible to say, but it shows how City’s early investment from 2009/10 still contributed to their titles in the 2020’s.

The Premier League’s credibility

That delay is not just embarrassing for City; it damages the Premier League. The league is the most competitive and commercially powerful domestic competition in football. Its rules are supposed to create a framework in which clubs compete on sporting merit while remaining financially sustainable. If a club can allegedly distort its accounts by hundreds of millions of dollars and the process takes years to reach a verdict, despite City’s potential obstruction, every other club has a reason to question whether the system works.

The irony is obvious: if Football Leaks hadn’t shared what they found on Manchester City through its hack, the scheme never would have been uncovered. If financial rules were designed to stop clubs gaining an unfair competitive advantage, then the Premier League may need to change how it investigates how its clubs’ finances are being managed. If anything should be gained from this, it may be that financial regulation needs to be improved as the Premier League and its clubs spend billions.

As for Manchester City, punishment cannot simply be a fine that becomes another operating cost.

Relegation is the only serious answer

If the verdict survives the appeal, Manchester City should be removed from the Premier League and those three aforementioned league titles removed. A fine would be inadequate and, depending on what points deduction City got, would punish the club in one season while leaving the historical record largely intact. Nottingham Forest received a four point deduction for a charge of Profitability and Sustainability rules in 2023-2024. City’s 114 charges will see much greater punishment then that.

Even if City are relegated they would almost be guranteed to be promoted the next season so even that feels like a slap on the wrist. Despite their investment during the nine seasons being questioned their five titles subsequent to that period will be expected to remain in their hands. My solution is to relegate City to the Championship without the potential of promotion for three seasons, one for each title won during that time.

City fans will call that harsh but their is strong reason to come down hard and that’s because this is bigger than Manchester City. Foreign ownership has brought huge investment into English football, but investment cannot mean exemption from the rules. Owners, executives and clubs must know that the Premier League’s financial regulations carry consequences that cannot be negotiated away.

The league has a choice. It can impose a manageable punishment and move on, or it can demonstrate that competitive integrity matters more than the commercial power of its biggest clubs. If City’s appeal fails, the answer should be clear: relegation, a reckoning over the titles and a message to every owner that the Premier League’s rules are not optional.

Football must set financial rules of engagement following FIFA Forward Enterprise crisis

Never before has football had such deep access to capital, or faced such complex questions about what that means for the future of the sport.

Private equity firms are investing in clubs, institutional investors are moving into stadiums and sports infrastructure, and clubs are looking beyond broadcasting and matchday revenue towards property, hospitality, entertainment and technology.

The question is no longer whether football needs investments. It’s what happens when investment starts influencing the way the game is run.

The issue came sharply into focus this year when FIFA proposed creating FIFA Forward Enterprise, a new FIFA-owned subsidiary that would bring together its commercial and event operations. The concept would effectively place the World Cup, the crown jewel of global football and FIFA’s blue chip stock, inside an investable structure. 

The proposal envisaged raising up to $6 billion by selling minority, non-controlling stakes in the subsidiary to external investors, based on an initial valuation of $29 billion. FIFA said the additional capital would help increase development funding for its 211 member associations.

The proposal triggered a governance crisis, while major questions about Gianni Infantino’s tenure as FIFA President continue.

UEFA, CONCACAF and (to a lesser-extent) the AFC were among the confederations to object, variously stating they had learned about the proposal through media reports rather than through FIFA’s own consultation process.

Amid a firestorm of criticism, the proposal was ultimately abandoned.

Now, Gianni Infantino has proposed an independent review of the organisation’s governance framework for major strategic initiatives, including how responsibility is divided between the president, Bureau, Council and Congress.

That makes this bigger than one investment proposal.

It’s a debate about who should control football’s commercial future.

Capital isn’t the enemy

There is an obvious argument in favour of private investment.

Football is an expensive business.

At club level, the relationship between capital and football is becoming increasingly sophisticated and complex.

RC Lens recently brought infrastructure investor Entrepreneur Equity Partners into its ownership structure, with the club saying the investment will fund development around the Stade Bollaert-Delelis and help create new revenue opportunities beyond matchdays.

Alas, there is a cost that comes with the capital. 

Investors ultimately expect a financial return. This won’t always conflict with supporters’ interests, but it can create different priorities.

Whereas a supporter might value affordability, identity and competitive success, an investor might instead look at property development, hospitality, commercial growth and the long-term value of an asset.

Neither perspective is inherently wrong.

But problems begin when financial objectives and football objectives stop overlapping and start pointing in different directions.

The ownership question

Chelsea provides a useful example of how quickly football ownership can change.

Clearlake Capital has now taken full control of the London club after acquiring the stakes previously held by Todd Boehly and Mark Walter, in a transaction that values the club at around $9.5 billion including debt. Todd Boehly only invested in the club four years ago.

That does not mean Chelsea’s new ownership structure is better or worse than before.

It demonstrates something important about modern football.

Football is becoming an asset class

That is perhaps the biggest change.

Football is no longer simply something wealthy individuals buy because they love the sport.

It is increasingly being viewed by institutional investors as an asset class with multiple potential revenue streams.

That means the investment opportunity can extend beyond owning a club.

There is private capital in stadiums, infrastructure, media rights, technology, sponsorship businesses and surrounding property.

It also explains why the FIFA proposal was so significant.

FIFA was effectively exploring whether the enormous commercial value of its competitions could be packaged into an investable structure.

FIFA argued investors would hold minority positions and would not receive control over sporting decisions or governance. It also argued the additional commercial value could increase funding available to football associations around the world.

That is a legitimate commercial proposition.

But once an asset is valued in the billions and external investors are being invited to participate, questions about control inevitably follow.

Who decides which commercial opportunities are pursued?

What happens when investors want one thing and football stakeholders want another?

And perhaps most importantly, who ultimately gets the benefit from football becoming more valuable?

The danger isn’t investment. It’s misalignment.

Football should not pretend it can grow without capital.

Football today requires enormous amounts of it.

The challenge is ensuring investment strengthens the sport rather than gradually redefining what the sport means to fans.

There are good reasons for clubs to develop their stadiums, diversify revenue and attract institutional capital.

There are also good reasons for supporters, players, federations and communities to ask what they receive in return.

FIFA’s recent episode demonstrates how quickly these questions can become political as well as financial.

The fact FIFA is now considering an independent governance review following such backlash shows the debate is not simply about whether the investment proposal was commercially sensible, but also about how decisions of that scale should be made.

That may be the most important question for football’s next financial era.

Private capital is here to stay. The tap isn’t turning off.

So, it’s critical football determines its rules of engagement before the next billion-dollar proposal lands on the table.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend