Sports analyst questions timing of club ownership transfer to PIF

Saudi sports analyst Saud Al-Sarami has questioned the reasons behind transferring ownership of four major football clubs—Al-Ittihad, Al-Nassr, Al-Hilal, and Al-Ahli—from the Ministry of Sports to the Public Investment Fund (PIF) at this particular time, and whether the move coincides with the challenges currently facing FIFA President Gianni Infantino.

Speaking in an interview with Al Arabiya FM, Al-Sarami commented on the recent statement regarding the dissolution of non-profit club boards, clarifying that it would be more accurate to say their terms had ended, as several officials had already left their positions before the decision was announced.

He added that, in his view, transferring the clubs' ownership to the PIF is a smart and professional move by the Ministry of Sports. He explained that the ministry had been facing increasing public criticism over high spending on clubs, and that transferring ownership to the PIF would ease some of this pressure.

Al-Sarami also suggested that the move could serve to divert attention from the controversy surrounding the Saudi Football Federation elections, especially after several candidate lists were excluded, leaving only one list to contest the elections.

He continued: "After the Ministry of Sports' statement regarding the 25%, they gave it up, and now the discussion is not what it used to be," referring to previous debates about the percentage of non-profit ownership and club governance.

Al-Sarami raised questions about the timing, wondering if the Kingdom took advantage of the "legal troubles" facing Infantino and FIFA, particularly amid ongoing controversy around the FIFA president, to announce the transfer of the four clubs to the PIF.

He explained that the 25% club ownership stake was previously proposed to avoid conflicts with FIFA regulations, and questioned whether the current removal of this percentage is linked to recent developments at FIFA.

View the post on X

Al-Sarami concluded by emphasizing that his comments are intended as questions and analysis, expressing hope for a clear explanation regarding the specific timing of the decision.