THE ownership and governance of the Premier League and its teams has reached a stage where geopolitics, capitalism, and imperialism are colliding and colluding, resulting in a league which is merely a high-profile tool in the quest of various entities for increased global power.

The Premier League, ultimately the group of clubs within it, is being used by the British government as well as by other countries for sportswashing and political manoeuvring by countries and individuals.

It’s no surprise that a country with a long list of human rights abuses to its own name is able to turn a blind eye to those of other countries if the price is right.

The British government is in cahoots with these countries, just as it was with Russian oligarchs prior to the invasion of Ukraine, and has actively backed and encouraged their investment in property and in prominent cultural institutions such as Premier League clubs.

Whereas the Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to sanctions on those Russian oligarchs, Saudi Arabia’s role in the humanitarian disaster in Yemen and other human rights issues seem to have been ignored.

A report by The Athletic last week revealed that British government emails ahead of the Saudi takeover of Newcastle United spoke of the “risk” that the Premier League may look to block the deal, and as a result harm Britain’s relationship with the country.

With the inclusion of Conservative Party donors the Reuben brothers as part of the new ownership group at Newcastle, this takeover was partly a Tory one, or at least a British government one, from which both they and Saudi Arabia will benefit. It’s becoming increasingly clear the government is actively pushing such takeovers for political purposes.

In the meantime, the Premier League has attempted to show its ability to govern itself by handing over two of its clubs — Manchester City and Everton — to independent investigations related to the league’s profit and sustainability rules (the domestic equivalent of Uefa’s financial fair play) and, in the case of City, other financial issues.

More cynical observers noted the timing of these investigations to coincide with announcements related to a proposed independent football regulator, which could potentially have the ability to overrule the Premier League on certain matters, including ownership.

Even with an independent regulator in place, the focus when it comes to ownership is likely to be more on the financial stability and security of the potential buyer, so might not stop the introduction of rich owners to the Premier League for political reasons.

The British government’s desperation to separate the Saudi takeover of Newcastle from the Saudi Arabian state itself, in order to push the takeover through, is being exposed by that recent reporting from The Athletic, but also by the Saudi Public Investment Fund’s (PIF) actions in another sport.

Having set up a golf tour to rival the existing PGA tours, called LIV Golf, PIF has found itself in a legal battle with the PGA Tour.

In golf, PIF is claiming to be a state-owned sovereign wealth fund, with the argument that getting PIF officials, including Newcastle chairman Yasir bin Othman Al-Rumayyan, to testify in this US court case would go against the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act where a foreign sovereign can be immune from the jurisdiction of US courts.

In football, PIF is claiming to have no links to the state, as states are not permitted to own Premier League clubs.

It’s reaching the point of farce, but PIF figures being forced to testify in the PGA case would work in Newcastle’s favour. Even so, the fact they are making one argument in golf, and another in football, shows the convenient vagueness of how these things work currently in the UK.

The fact the British government was so keen on the Saudi takeover of Newcastle itself hints that this ownership group is not merely a private investor and that the move is geopolitical, related to the state, rather than simply a private foreign investor.

The other power at work among all this is that of capitalism itself, in its imperialist form. It is using sports to not only broaden the influence of a state or country but also to further impose the system itself. It has exported itself as an imperialist power.

Sometimes referred to as hyper-capitalism, it has engulfed top-level football to the point where it is close to controlling it.

Ideas such as the European Super League could be seen as a final push to take total control of the game, creating a safe unpredictability in the sport so that owners are always rewarded.

The push in the game for a salary cap is similarly favourable to owners, as that would mean a limit on what workers can be paid and there would be more guarantee of dividends to be had.

Something similar already exists in closed leagues such as Major League Soccer where there are salary caps and no risk of relegation.

This is to the detriment of players in terms of their pay, and to fans in terms of sometimes distant links to the club they support. This was evident in last weekend’s column on LA Galaxy.

Sometimes a team will look to do nothing more than exist, banking the returns from the league and club income for its shareholders.

American capital is already established in the Premier League and it is perhaps no surprise that those with a background in US sports, including owners at Liverpool, Arsenal, and Manchester United, were among the proposed leadership group of the European Super League. But this money has no real nationality, and capitalism itself is the coloniser.

In the example of Abramovich, the nature of his money hadn’t changed since he bought Chelsea in 2003, but his ability to do business did. Once it became bad for business to have a Russian oligarch owning a large portion of London, including a cultural institution such as Chelsea Football Club, he was ousted from the cartel.

It is likely that one of the replacements will be Qatar, whose Qatar Investment Authority or its linked companies already own prominent London properties such as Harrods and The Shard.

In 2017 the Daily Telegraph reported that Qatari investors owned more of London than the British royal family.

Investors from Qatar are regularly linked with English Premier League clubs, and the Saudi takeover of Newcastle only increased such activity as these two countries, along with the United Arab Emirates, expand their portfolios to include football teams — for geopolitical as well as business purposes.

Manchester United is the latest English club to be linked with a takeover from Qatar, with anonymous British government figures telling Politico earlier this month they would welcome such an investment. 

It remains to be seen whether it gets full approval to the point where a takeover is encouraged in the same way the Saudi takeover of Newcastle was, and whether or not it sits comfortably alongside existing relationships.

The Premier League has become a tool not only for rich nations as they look to sportswash themselves just enough to be able to access the global corridors of power and the backrooms of money, but also for the ailing British government as it seeks to welcome them (their money).

Sportswashing is more about geopolitical manoeuvring than it is about convincing fans or media of anything. It’s handy to have some media onside, though, and Britain’s Establishment media would no doubt oblige at the government’s request, just as the Premier League seems to be doing. Top-level football’s role in this political game might have already reached the point of no return.