Hacker News Reader

Comment by polotics | Hacker News Reader

Since Electronic Arts righteously dumped FIFA like a ton of rotten bricks, why don't they organise a football world cup instead? Less corruption money must mean more leftover for the players and staff involved. Also instead of some nebulous process for the host country selection, get game owners to vote, they're already very securely identified. The time to ride on the complete stink the air conditioned slave-labour edition will produce is now. Get your lawyers to review the contractual structure of leagues and clubs, it can't be that the whole international set of deals is failsafe, players can probably just walk.

View on HN

> Since Electronic Arts righteously dumped FIFA like a ton of rotten bricks

It wasn't righteous, it was over money (FIFA asking for too much).

> why don't they organise a football world cup instead

Because FIFA is the organising body of football, all regional (UEFA, CONCACAF, etc.) and country Football Associations are under FIFA's jurisdiction (and are members of FIFA). Countries couldn't participate in a rival event even if they wanted to, because many of the smaller association basically only exist on FIFA subsidies, and of course there are exclusivity deals. And i doubt many countries and players would prefer the glory of the "EA Cup". The World Cup has never been about money, and the prize pool is already significant.

Does FIFA own a copyright on the word "football"? no Does shipping 20 players from 50 poorer countries cost a lot? no does FIFA even owns a copyright on the words "Football World Cup"?

EA could very well setup "The EA Football World Cup" and invite the world's football associations to participate in it, with substantial prize money as a reward. But even if the countries could participate (they couldn't, unless they sent their Under 21s or other development/reserve players, see my other comment) and even if they did participate (many wouldn't) the tournament would be seen as an inferior knock-off and wouldn't gain the support from the fans that would be required to make it worthwhile.

How do you know this? A size 140 Arsenal jersey wearer I know would beg to differ, the Quatar catastrophe being clear for any age to understand. How do you think it would be inferior? The rules of football would be respected, and also it would match EA's official console football game!

If your Arsenal-supporting friend sincerely believes that a rival World Cup would go anywhere at all, then they're a little bit naive and don't really understand the game. Qatar could end up being (more of) a catastrophe, and heads may roll at FIFA but the FIFA World Cup isn't getting replaced any time soon.

They... is a kid. so point taken, still one can dream, right?

Ah sorry I did not get the "size 140" reference, it's in a sizing format I'm not familiar with!

As a former-kid who had his own dreams (Scotland winning the World Cup) which have had to be progressively scaled back as I grew up (Scotland qualifying for the World Cup) I sympathise, and I hope your Arsenal pal gets to see the tournament they dream of :)

You just need to look back at Arsenal's (and others') last year's proposal for an European Super League and the massive backlash resulting, which made them not only drop it (for now) but also, hilariously, also agree to pay fines to UEFA for conspiracy to treason or something.

EA dumping FIFA is a good thing to kickstart the mere idea of competition against FIFA's monopoly (and by extension continental bodies), but any actionable outcome is still decades away.

Do all clubs people want to watch have contracts with FIFA? Yes

Do all the manufacturers of sports clothing, shoes, balls, goal posts, etc. have deals with FIFA? Yes

Does FIFA use bribes and any means necessary to prevent anyone from disturbing their racket schemes? Yes

Don’t forget you’re dealing with a lot of very powerful and dangerous people here that make really big money, are deeply intertwined with governments, and have a history of doing anything it takes to earn more money. You’re not going to cut them out of the deal, that simply won’t happen.

What clubs have contracts with FIFA?

Clubs are members of their local association, which is a member of and regulated by FIFA.

OK that's both wrong (FIFA isn’t involved in regulating the confederations or the members or the clubs) and not what you originally said. I think you just made a mistake in understanding what FIFA does. Same with this:

> Do all the manufacturers of sports clothing, shoes, balls, goal posts, etc. have deals with FIFA? Yes

FIFA will have a relationship with sponsors of FIFA events (the dozens of brands you see during the World Cup or the Club World Cup) and will select who provides the official ball during these events (usually Adidas) or who makes FIFA-branded merch (lame stuff, relatively small market). But each individual player chooses their own boots + equipment, each national team or club negotiates their own sponsors and kit providers. At Qatar you'll see a wide variety of them - Nike, Adidas, Puma, Hummel, Marathon, Majid, Le Coq Sportif, Kappa, New Balance - FIFA weren't involved in the selection of any of them. And I'm not sure what to say about the goal posts - they'll just be whatever is already in the stadiums in use at any given World Cup.

FIFA is a corrupt enough organization, we don't need to pretend they're also some sinister dictator controlling every level of the global game. Not least because it lets the different confederations and national football associations off the hook for their own mixtures of incompetence and corruption.

I think you're mistaking me for the original person you responded to.

However, this is flat our wrong:

> FIFA isn’t involved in regulating the confederations or the members or the clubs

Of course it is. It makes the rules that are implemented by the federations (stuff like 5 subs, the new loan regulations), and it also is the one providing the main funding for the majority of smaller football association (so even if it didn't have any de jure power over them, and it absolutely does, it would have still had de facto power with financing).

> stuff like 5 subs

No this is flat out wrong, since the laws of the game are governed by IFAB, of which FIFA is a member alongside the Football Associations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. And even then it seems they're flexible in some regards - for example the Scottish FA permitted five subtitutes before IFAB updated the laws and the English FA had a similar trial in the past permitting four subs - both have fiddled with extra stuff like VAR.

I'll grant that FIFA have brought in restrictions on international loan signings - though that's hardly controlling the game the way the original comment implied

> Get your lawyers to review the contractual structure of leagues and clubs, it can't be that the whole international set of deals is failsafe, players can probably just walk.

I think you're mixing up two things:

1. domestic club competitions - Serie A in Italy, the Bundesliga in Germany, The Premier League in England etc - where players have contracts with clubs and where the most successful teams in each league will compete things like the Champions League.

2. the national game - where country-level football associations select teams based on various national eligibility criteria to compete with other countries in continental competitions (European Championship, CONCACAF Cup etc) and the World Cup.

FIFA are not really involved with #1, it is primarily concerned with the nation-level competitions. It does have a club-level competition between the winner of each confederations' Champions League equivalent, but only the non-European participants really care about that. Additionally, players can and do "just walk" at the national level - some choose not to play either because they don't want to be injured playing for their country in a 9-0 victory over San Marino when their domestic club is in a tight race for the title or they're on a Champions League run. Players also refuse to play for personal reasons - like due to a falling out with a coach (Roy Keane for Ireland in 2002) or with an association (like Duncan Ferguson for Scotland in the '90s). So they know they can refuse to play, but they continue to do so.

There is not a snowball's chance in hell that an alternative World Cup would gain any sort of traction at all. Fans would be dismissive and the various national football associations would not take it seriously either. Additionally, the footballing calendar is already quite full so you couldn't run it in parallel with the existing tournaments, meaning that you couldn't slowly develop and grow the competition gradually, you'd need to replace the world cup from day one.

As shitty as FIFA are, they're here to stay.

Huh? Why should a video game company organize a football world cup?

Football is too traditional to play EA Cup it already sounds like a McDonald's league.

Yeah the "EA Cup" sounds like the name they'd use in a non-licensed football game to avoid being sued

No-one plays in the World Cup for the money.

Don't know why you're getting downvoted, this is correct. There's maybe some bonuses and appearance fees for national teams ... but all the big names people care about earn their money playing for their club.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com