The Spanish Football League (LFP) has taken legal steps to "overturn a decision" by the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) to suspend matches from May 16 over a "dispute with the government on a new law on TV rights," according to Iain Rogers of REUTERS. The RFEF's pledge to halt matches "threatens to throw the final weeks of the season into chaos." The "decisive last two matchdays" in La Liga could both be hit as well as the Copa del Rey final between Barcelona and Athletic Bilbao. LFP President Javier Tebas, whose relationship with RFEF President Ángel María Villar "has deteriorated, said the suspension would harm the image of Spanish football." Tebas: "The damage would be terrible and widespread. Even from China they have expressed concern about the consequences this could have for our sponsors. If the government submits to this blackmail we would be taking a step backwards in the regeneration of Spanish football." The TV rights legislation was signed off in the cabinet last week. But both the RFEF and the Spanish Footballers' Association (AFE) "have come out against it and the two groups have backed halting competition across all Spanish football." After a board meeting on Wednesday, the RFEF accused the government of a "lack of respect" and complained it had "not been consulted properly on the TV law." In a statement on Wednesday, the LFP "hit back" and said the RFEF's decision was legally "invalid" and that it had initiated "the appropriate action with the pertinent administrative and legal bodies" to overturn it (
REUTERS, 5/7). The PA reported the LFP, which will hold an extraordinary general assembly on Monday "in the hope to avoid the proposed strike," said in a statement, "Regarding the decision adopted by the RFEF's General Assembly to indefinitely suspend all football competitions at every level, the LFP states that it has taken the corresponding legal actions in defence of the rights and legitimate interests of the clubs, as well as the rights of the competitions that it organises and that have been grossly affected by the aforementioned decision by the RFEF. The RFEF's decision is null and void by law ... given that the sports law and the current co-ordination agreement attributes to the LFP the right to organise professional competitions and approve the sporting calendar of those competitions." Spanish Superior Sports Council (CSD) President Miguel Cardenal "defended the new law on Thursday and said the federation's threatened strike can't be justified." He said, "I ask the federation to read the law carefully, take time to think, and return to the reasonable work of fostering amateur football." Under the proposed legislation, "which still needs the approval of the country's parliament," the RFEF would be awarded 4.55% of revenue from the Spanish government, a figure the federation "deems inadequate." Villar, president of the RFEF since '88, has "repeatedly been at issue" with Cardenal and Tebas over "measures taken to curb violence in stadiums, the auditing of federation finances, and public funding of sports" (
PA, 5/7).
FINE PRINT: In Madrid, Arnau Baqué reported the passing of the legislation regulating the centralized sale of TV rights was a moment "anticipated by many." But "once analyzed in a detailed manner, it presents many doubts and is not as fair as the LFP and the Spanish government hoped." The "majority of club presidents have congratulated themselves for reaching the agreement, but the truth shows that some surely are more content than others." Among the clubs benefiting the most are Rayo Vallecano, Levante, Athletic Bilbao, Villarreal and Málaga. The new law "will also guarantee Barça and Madrid minimum revenue that in no case would be less than what they currently receive." The "most counter-productive aspect is for the hypothetical -- but more than probable -- application of the exemption in article 5.5 of the law, which would mean less revenue for other clubs with the goal of compensating Real Madrid and Barcelona, which would again be detrimental to the so-called medium and small clubs." It is a law with "a lot of fine print, a bigger pie than before, but not fairly distributed." It is a new "scenario with many sporting questions that will negatively affect clubs with the most debt" to the Spanish tax authorities (AS, 5/7).
RFEF'S ARGUMENTS: MUNDO DEPORTIVO reported there are four "principal points behind the RFEF's move to call for a strike." The first is the RFEF's opposition to the law regulating the centralized sale of TV rights. The RFEF said that it was "ignored" by the government in the process of creating the law, "calling the government's attitude 'disrespectful.'" The second is "frustration with the distribution of 4.55% of the revenue from the quiniela lotteries." The CSD established in '14 how the RFEF must distribute the 4.55% of quiniela revenue it receives. The federation is required to allocate the money "to athletes of the future" and to "activities promoting non-professional football." The RFEF was informed in February that it would lose this sum from '14. Third, the RFEF opposes the "Ley de Emprendedores," which requires football clubs at all levels to regulate the "working conditions of all employees." The RFEF argued that this would "suffocate many youth teams." Finally, the RFEF "also refuses to return money demanded by the CSD." On Jan. 31, the CSD opened an investigation into the RFEF for "not justifying some of the spending of revenue from the quinielas." The CSD then demanded that the RFEF "return this money." The RFEF "said that this money was already spent and justified, and that there was no reason for the investigation" (MUNDO DEPORTIVO, 5/7).
CARDENAL SPEAKS OUT: FOOTBALL ESPANA reported Cardenal described the strike called by the RFEF as "incomprehensible" and "an insult to democracy." He said, "It is incomprehensible that the RFEF wants to stop football. It's based on ignorance. [Villar] believes the government has to pay attention to him. What he's doing is an insult to Spanish democracy and the rule of law. ... [The TV rights law] gives money where there wasn't any, to, for example, the women's game and the Segunda and Segunda B" (FOOTBALL ESPANA, 5/7). In Madrid, Enrique Marín reported when asked if he believes there will be football played on May 16, Cardenal said, "I expect and hope so. There is no reason for there to be no football and I expect logic to prevail. The doors of the CSD are always open, but as I don't know the reasons for calling this strike, I don't know in what manner we can work [with the RFEF and AFE]. ... This Real Decreto is good for the footballers, also for those in Segunda B and women's football. They have money they did not have before and they will have better salaries" (EL CONFIDENCIAL, 5/7).
CLUBS OPPOSE STRIKE: In Valencia, Pablo Tarancón reported La Liga side Valencia "said that it is totally against the strike." For its part, Levante -- despite not making an "official statement" -- expressed that it was "totally against the strike and in favor of the Real Decreto" (SUPERDEPORTE, 5/7). The EFE reported Villarreal President Fernando Roig met with his team to explain the new legislation and "the club's opposition of the strike." The meeting, attended by coaches and club employees, took place at Villarreal's training facility before practice and "lasted half an hour." Sources said that Roig's objective "was to explain firsthand the law and how it would benefit the club and its players" (EFE, 5/7).
PREVIOUS STRIKES: The EFE reported Spanish football has previously faced six strikes called by players over their rights ('79, '81, '82, '84, '10 and '11). Four of them "culminated in success." Spanish football has also faced strikes called by referees, the last coming in '97. In '10, the AFE called for a strike from April 16-18 if a "pact for Spanish football" was not reached to solve its economic problems, primarily in the third and fourth tiers. But the strike was called off on April 13. On Aug. 3, 2011, the AFE rejected the LFP's unilateral decision to "create a guaranteed wage fund" to guarantee players their salaries in case clubs went bankrupt. Games scheduled for Aug. 21 were suspended, but an agreement was reached on Aug. 25, and play resumed the following weekend (EFE, 5/6).
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?: The BBC's Andy West wrote essentially, "the suspension is the result of a power struggle over who runs Spanish football." More specifically, it is the "climax of a long-running dispute" over the distribution of TV revenue. The RFEF has shown its disapproval by "taking the ultimate step of picking up the ball and refusing to play, suspending all competitions at all age levels." It is "the government and the league against the players and the federation, making it much more difficult to find a quick solution." Real Sociedad's Esteban Granero said, "Footballers are on the side of our union. Everything should be solved without conflict and I think there will be an agreement." Espanyol's Álvaro González tweeted, "All my support for the AFE. We are with you!" Even the RFEF's "showcase occasion" of its own competition -- the Copa del Rey final between Barcelona and Athletic Bilbao -- is "now under threat."Another danger, and an "explicit threat in the RFEF's action, is that governmental interference in football's administration is prohibited by the game's global body, FIFA." The RFEF is suggesting that the Spanish government is "doing just that, which could, in a worst case scenario, see Spain banned from international competitions." The prospect of FIFA's involvement "is made more likely" by the fact that Villar "also happens to be" a FIFA VP and a long-time ally of FIFA President Sepp Blatter. The LFP has "already called an extraordinary meeting of all clubs next Monday to discuss the crisis, but what really needs to happen is for everyone involved to sit around the same table together." And "as yet, there's no sign of that happening" (BBC, 5/7).
