UP breaks The Athletic; What piracy reveals about fan engagement; The Dan Snyder Effect; WIFA is the real open door; We have the ear of the CMO; JayMoh, voice of a generation; Infinite Athlete

Overthinking the sports business, for money

Aug 24, 2023

This week’s UP Newsletter is sponsored by our friends at the Institute of Sports Humanities and Loughborough University London.

ISH and Loughborough University recently launched the new Leadership in Sport Master’s course, running from Autumn 2023.

Students on the MA Leadership in Sport programme will join an amazing ecosystem of sports experts – Loughborough University has been ranked the #1 university for sports-related subjects for the past 7 years. So the world’s top sports university is working in tandem with a unique sports network at ISH.

The new intake starts in October 2023 and applications are currently open.

Find out more at www.sportshumanities.org ISH and Loughborough University recently launched the new Leadership in Sport Master’s course, running from Autumn 2023.

A big week for our piracy series. Final episode drops tomorrow. Catch up on the first four here.

Matt Slater of The Athletic wrote a piece, based on the YouGov Sport research we commissioned for episode 4.

The piece garnered the most comments of any story on The Athletic site this week.

A week after we announced his arrival, ‘Unofficial Partner’s Matt Cutler’ has got a nice ring to it.

Matt’s point gets to the heart of why piracy is such a toxic issue for this generation of sport administrators.

For the last thirty years, football has been a gravy train.

And media rights are the engine.

Vast fortunes have been made.

And the distribution of that wealth has been indiscriminate.

The money just comes in, confusing acumen with luck.

Let’s call it the Dan Snyder Effect.

There are plenty of Dan Snyders out there.

The opinion of fans is paramount, right up until it isn’t

Sports fans have been on the other side of this equation.

They’ve taken a double hit.

Not only has the price rocketed, they’ve had to put up with being patronised by the sports industry’s fan engagement mantra, which pays lip service to their views while plundering and selling their personal data.

Piracy reveals this hypocrisy; the fans are talking, but they’re saying all the wrong things.

"Supporters have always been the lifeblood of football and Premier League fans are known around the world for their passion and enthusiasm. It is vital we ensure the voices of supporters are not only heard in the stands, but also when it comes to having a say on key issues relating to their clubs.”

This quote is attributed to Richard Masters, Premier League CEO, on the launch of the leagues’ Fan Engagement Standard last year.

Richard might want to read the thread below Matt Slater’s story in The Athletic.

This is a tiny, but representative sample:

WIFA is the alternative to Infantino’s open door

Infantino’s ‘open door’ speech was one of the most cynical things I’ve heard in many years.

Spend time with the leadership team of Women In Football, or take just the merest glance at their vital new research, and you’ll agree with me.

Or talk to Moya Dodd. In 2016 she told Infantino that women should be part of the decision making process. A year later she was gone from FIFA Exco, replaced by someone who couldn’t answer basic questions about the game.

The gap between the rhetoric and the reality are stunning.

And the stakes are very high.

The decisions made today will shape the sport for generations. From top to bottom.

There are many, many great people working for FIFA. They have done extraordinary work, away from the lectern and the spotlight, to move the women’s game forward.

They should be identified and applauded, and thanked.

But I’m left wondering what they think of their own CEO.

He’s there because the culture of the organisation put him there. Rewarded him.

So, what is FIFA?

Is it them, or him? The body or the head?

Can the women’s game truly prosper within FIFA?