Privatization of football clubs
By Biplav Gautam
(2001)

Every time a Nepali football club celebrates its birthday and ads another year to its history it is also adding to the number of years it lags behind club teams around the world. Nepali club teams have been stale for quite some time, thus allowing their global counterparts to develop at an exponential rate. Except for a very few number of enterprising advances by an even fewer number of clubs, apathy runs rampant at the headquarters of Nepali clubs.

While club chairmen the world over confuse “fantasy” for their club sides as “ambition” – in Nepal, chairmen seem not to even have the slightest bit of the former except for some vivid dreams of escapades to unknown lands on someone else’s account or visions of millions of Rupees flowing into their coffers from grants meant for young underprivileged Nepali footballers.

How backwards are Nepali football clubs and their officials? Ponder this – as clubs like River Plate in Argentina rue about their dwindling membership from 80,000 to 32,000 in less than 20 years and Barcelona of Spain boast about their membership which is well over 100,000 – one has to break an arm and a leg, not to mention one’s bank account, to gain membership in any football club in Nepal.

Why? Nepali law states that any member of a club can run for a board position at the respective club, which obviously includes the coveted position of ‘club president.’ With the fear of losing their tight grip on power and all the perks that come with it in the back of their minds, club officials are reluctant to give out membership, thus obtaining membership into a club has become a tougher feat than convincing the National Sports Council (NSC) that the All Nepal Football Association (ANFA) should be an autonomous sports body. 

Membership, which perversely is a boon for Nepali football clubs if held to a low figure, is not the only area in which football clubs are lacking. From a proper club logo, budget, training field and administration to the even more important human qualities of dedication, determination and drive, Nepali clubs are training on a barren pitch.

As money is pouring into football these days – with massive television contracts, clubs sides being purchased for huge sums of money and players being sold at astronomical rates, one should reckon that Nepali clubs, especially the ones with greedy officials would try to cash in on the bonanza. However logic is an expensive commodity in Nepal and clubs are content with their current state of affairs.  There are several reasons for their carefree attitudes.

Cynics may cite stupidity as the primary reason and they might actually be somewhat close to the real truth, but there are two other factors. First is a psychological one. In Nepal the “government is supposed to do everything” philosophy still prevails and clubs are reluctant to do anything unless governmentally linked institutions such as ANFA and the NSC financially back their every move.

The other reason is that Nepali football clubs are tied to government statutes, which categorize sports clubs as non-governmental organizations (NGO). That is to say that they are non-profit organizations and not businesses, therefore there is little incentive for the club bosses to invest in the club. They have little to gain financially by endowing the club, as it is an entity that does not belong to them.

There are several countries where clubs are subject to the same statutes as their brothers in Nepal – the only difference is that club officials in those countries have much more of a social conscience than their counterparts here.

In Brazil a law titled “Pele’s Law” was passed which forced clubs to run themselves like businesses. Many club officials who were masters at manipulating the old system were up in arms over the new law and consequently there has been much debate about the law.

In Nepal such a law might be the only way to move football forward.

Many of the football club presidents are successful businessmen, yet none of them have bothered to build their club like their businesses. The main reason is because their club is really not theirs.

If clubs were private enterprises that have to run like businesses, their owners would then be forced to commit themselves to the club or risk a loss on investment. Moreover, the rewards of owning and running a successful club that yields a high turnover would make most club bosses eager to invest in it and run it in a professional manner.

There is a precedent for “privatizing” clubs as Nepali schools used to also be classified as NGOs, but subsequently the laws were changed so that schools could be private, and afterwards they had to pay taxes and were categorized as businesses.

The NSC and ANFA need to play their part if similar changes are made on the status of football clubs. Among other things, they would have to protect the rights of football clubs with regards to club autonomy, player contracts and transfer fees.

It is common knowledge (perhaps not in Nepal as of yet) that clubs and not the government are the keys to bringing about a strong footballing tradition to a nation. Yes, a strong and dynamic national football governing body is also important, but without strong clubs and a league that supports the clubs, there is little scope for football in a given country.

In countries such as Norway and Turkey even just one or two strong clubs have carried their nations forward football wise. Also in nations where clubs have recently started proper national leagues like Japan, Korea and the USA, football standards have increased by many folds in a short period of time.

This shows the importance of clubs and club football and in a country like Nepal perhaps the only way to develop clubs might be by amending the government statutes and making clubs private institutions.