The so-called Arab Spring was the beginning of the end for autocrats in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. Syria, Yemen, and others may yet follow. Another leader with a tight stranglehold on power, Sepp Blatter, President of FIFA, is, perhaps too, starting to feel his empire crumble. Rumors abound that he may relinquish power to UEFA chief Michel Platini before the end of his fourth term as president. With evidence of widespread corruption mounting under Blatter's watch, a change at the top would seem to offer the chance for the globe's most popular sport to rescue its reputation. However, with the huge financial risks and rewards resulting in such high stakes, is it even reasonable to expect one man to "govern the world's game"? Perhaps we should instead consider a committee, possibly comprising of representatives from the world's biggest leagues and/or clubs. Remember, of course, that it is those clubs that pay the vast majority of players' wages. For example, in the fiscal year ending mid-2009, Manchester City's payroll was $127 million, out of the club's gross revenue of $133 million! Such a committee would likely reduce financial corruption simply by distributing power amongst leagues or clubs, who have both competing and complimentary goals (pardon the pun). The committee approach might also improve the quality (by reducing the quantity) of International games. This would result from the clubs' increased influence (at the International level) and desire to reduce damage to prized assets (i.e., player injury).
We don't need to change the rules of the beautiful game, but maybe we can improve it by changing the puppet masters.
