FIFA president Sepp Blatter has again hit the headlines with controversial plans to reduce the number of top flight team in Europe’s major leagues and to force clubs to use more homegrown players.

In an interview with German magazine Bild, Blatter outlined his vision of bringing the size of Europe’s top leagues down to 16 teams as he feels “the market and the players cannot cope with so much football.” The issue will be put forward to be discussed at the 2007 FIFA Congress and would be sure to cause an outrage amongst some of the lower ranking clubs with the Bundesliga currently having 18 teams, while the top leagues in Spain, England, Italy and France have 20.

Mr. Blatter, however, believes the majority of clubs are tired of playing so many games and sees a reduction in the league size as the main way to combat it. He also indicated that even if the clubs and federations were unwilling to change that a decree from FIFA could still be enforced.

“FIFA can stipulate it and it is the wish of many clubs, but the FIFA need to order it otherwise it will never happen.”

Previous calls by Blatter to reduce the size of domestic European leagues were rejected in 2003.

In the same interview Blatter also put forward a proposal to reverse the movement towards foreign players overtaking homegrown players in European leagues. With the problem rife amongst German and English clubs, Mr. Blatter offered the idea that a minimum of six homegrown players in the starting eleven should be enforced in an effort to protect the major countries’ national football future. With cut price foreign players often preferred to more expensive domestic players there have been occassions when clubs such as Arsenal have turned out teams completely full of foreigners, a situation Sepp Blatter rightly views as “dangerous”.

How the European Union would view the restrictions would be another matter entirely and would pose an interesting battle of legal minds if the EU and FIFA did ever square off in the courtroom to decide the issue.

(submitted by an anonymous retail figure)

How often do we hear fans say that ?ticket prices are too high?? Yet, if fans want to support their team and pay 15 million pounds for a world class striker, then to a degree should understand why they have to pay the high prices.

However, when the fat Football Club chairmen of our country walk away with huge profits it still makes me angry. A supporter should be treated as such, and not see their team?s Circus like chairmen playing golf together in Barbados paid for by them!

The Football Club shop is piled high with merchandise, some good, some bad, but as long as the Ring Leaders of the Circus are making their outrageous margins on the cheapest versions of merchandise they can get from far away shores then they are happy!

Working for a merchandise supplier, we make sure that products are produced to the highest quality in the United Kingdom, giving our customers the best product possible. Chelsea, Ajax and Real Madrid sell our products in their shops and the choice is there for all clubs to take our shirts.

Unfortunately, the Circus Ring Leaders choose to make cheap versions of the products and pass them off as the real thing, letting the fans only support their deep-filled pockets.

UEFA chief executive Lars-Christer Olsson fears European football could be “taken hostage” by a criminal element if it fails to rewrite its own rule book.

Olsson is anxious to beat the con-men who are draining money from the game with the help of legislative loopholes and in the process putting players and clubs at risk. He hopes that an Independent Review of European Football will help trigger the much-needed changes.

The inquiry, chaired by Portugal’s sports minister Jose Luis Arnaut, hopes to present a dossier of concrete findings to the heads of European Union states and FIFA before the end of the year and, in doing so, tackle a number of hot topics including the ownership of clubs, match-fixing and corruption, the roles of agents and the destination of transfer money.

Olsson said: “We have no idea how much money is lost into this black hole which surrounds transfers but we are talking about millions of pounds. This is something we’d like to find out in the review.

“Transfer sums and commissions should be open and list who gets what. It’s possible to introduce.

“The French government for example are worried that some players’ agents are involved in money-laundering. So we need a better system of following transactions and comparing contracts with financial transactions.

“It’s so easy that football could be taken hostage by those who have criminal activities.”

Olsson said: “There is a need for a player to have an advisor, somebody to talk to and help him in negotiations for example. But there is an absolute need to develop the quality of the agents and their knowledge of what they are dealing with.”

With English football already at red alert over the bung scandal re-ignited by Luton Town manager Mike Newell, it was only a matter of time before the higher authorities were forced to put the whole of the football house in order.

Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore says the planned transfer bung inquiry may involve football’s world authorities and even the police.

Due to the seriousness of the allegations and the implications they hold for the game in general Scudamore feels that it may be necessary to go to FIFA to resolve any charges and, if necessary, to involve the police if any criminal activities have taken place.

“The inquiry intends to refer cases of wrongdoing that fall outside FA rules to Uefa, Fifa or the appropriate statutory body,” he said.

When asked if that could include the police, he said “Yes”.

The Premier League had appeared to be dragging their feet in appointing someone to head the bung inquiry but they have said that they are merely trying to ascertain the availability of the eight main candidates they have for the post, with an eminent QC being seen as the most likely appointment.

Richard Scudamore has called for the inquiry following allegations from Luton Town manager Mike Newell that he had been offered bungs in several transfer deals he had been involved in and sees the process as one of clearing the air rather than a witch hunt,

“I don’t believe this is an endemic issue,” Scudamore added.

“The inquiry will enable the chair to make a statement as to how good the clubs are.

“It will also come out with recommendations as to how we can improve our business practices and fight all these ‘reputation’ issues that are damaging us.”

FIFPro secretary general Theo van Seggelen has hit out at the current transfer system, insisting the huge activity by some clubs during the January window states a case for a return to the original year-round policy.

As the worldwide representative organisation for all professional footballers, FIFPro feels that the current rules that state transfers are only allowed during the close season and during a single window in January, have not provided the stability that FIFA set out to provide.

The fact that UK sides Portsmouth and Heart of Midlothian bought nine players and eleven players respectively during the January 2006 transfer window raises serious questions as to the need for a separate transfer window at all.

Van Seggelen told PA Sport: “Our concern is that, for example, one team bought around nine players and from a sporting point of view that is not a good thing.

“The second thing is that at the last moment clubs are buying and selling players without realising what they are doing and seem to be in a little bit of a panic.

“We came to the conclusion that the old system may be even better than the system we have now.

“It’s not that we are in favour of the old system, but it seems to be better than having two periods where clubs are panicking.

“We are not only responsible for what the players are doing but also the football industry in general and you must come to the conclusion that the old system was not so bad after all,” he added.

“With the current attempt at stability, that limits the freedom of movement of a player for sporting reasons and to guarantee the competition, we said maybe give it a try on a international level. But it seems to me that maybe it has worked for a couple of years but, with this window in particular, it has not provided that stability.”

With the furore surrounding Sol Campbell and his obvious personal problems which became apparent after his dismal first half performance for Arsenal against West Ham this week, there has been a glut of eager rumour mongers bombarding football websites, blogs and forums as well as the gossip columns with their own half baked explanations for Campbell’s troubles. While it may be the current football scandal on everyone’s lips or fingertips it raises serious questions as to who should become liable to prosecution if blatant lies or unfounded opinions are written concerning someone with as high a professional profile as an England international footballer.

As the messageboards rush to delete any such rumours on their forums and threaten the people responsible with bans, it becomes a muddled grey area when the definitive responsibility for accepting blame for the accusations is to be decided. British football is no stranger to libel cases involving players, managers and chairmen and there are more than a few amateur webmasters who are very concerned about finding themselves in the dock because of an offhand malicious comment from one of their website’s visitors.

Traditionally it has been the print media which has allowed itself to get into deep water with allowing allegations and insinuations about certain football people, mostly with the simple intention of gaining some notoriety and selling some newspapers. While it is often the red tops such as The Sun, Daily Mirror and Daily Star which have these types of cases brought against them, a local North London paper, the Highbury and Islington Express, found itself being sued for libel in the High Court in London in 2000 following an inyterview it had printed with a former schoolmate of ex-Arsenal star Charlie George. In the interview scriptwriter Lawrence Marks made the claim that if Mr George, who went to the same secondary school as he did, had not been such a talented footballer, he would have “ended up in prison”.

As George’s family, friends and himself all still lived in the Islington area, he took great offence at being drawn into Marks’ illustration of the area they had grown up in and resented the implication that he may have had criminal tendencies. As a result of the original piece Charlie George had lost invitations to speak at several footballing award dinners and decided to take the newspaper to court to reclaim his good name. The newspaper subsequently apologised and made it clear that it had no intention to cast any aspersion on Mr George’s reputation or character as an adult and paid him damages and covered his legal costs.

On a larger scale, the News of the World, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News International, was taken and forced to pay substantial undisclosed libel damages in July 2005 to Northern Ireland star Keith Gillespie after an article in March 2004 had alleged that he and two teammates had raped one woman, attempted to rape another and tried to intimidate a third into not telling the police about an incident that was supposed to have happened at a Leicester City training camp in La Manga, Spain in February 2004.

Gillespie was released on bail in March 2004 and the criminal proceedings were dropped in May. The women’s appeal was finally dismissed in December and the allegations described as “entirely untrue”. Keith Gillespie also was awarded damages from the Daily Star in July 2005 for an article alleging that he slept with prostitutes that they had printed while the winger was jailed without bail in Spain at the time of the rape allegations. Once again the British gutter press was willing to throw a innocent man’s reputation into the gutter in order to increase their own tawdry circulation.

While players are the main newspaper sellers when it comes to scurrilous rumours, there is nothing to stop footbal chairmen getting an unfair coverage either in the press as Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe’s High Court libel case against The Times newspaper in late 2005 shows. Lowe had objected to claims by The Times chief football writer Martin Samuel that he had behaved “shabbily” in suspending former manager Dave Jones over child abuse allegations in January 2000. Jones had been subsequently cleared of any wrongdoing in the case and went on to manage other clubs including Cardiff City while The Times were forced to pay Mr. Lowe over ?250,000 in libel damages.

Lowe had sued the Times over an August 2004 column by Samuel at the height of the sex scandal at the Football Association during which Lowe had advocated fundamental reforms in how the FA was run. The article about the FA, headed Men who would be kings are a ghastly alternative, referred to Mr Lowe as a “chairman whose idea of crisis management was to remove his manager over a court case that collapsed within 24 hours”. It went on to ask: “How would Lowe approach the issue of an England player accused of breaking the law, when he so shabbily handled the case of David Jones, his manager?”

During the hearing, Mr Lowe told the court he felt the article was a “real blot” on his character and that in deciding to sue he had a duty to “the whole Southampton family”, including shareholders, supporters, its football academy and sponsors. “The article was factually incorrect and I felt the way it had been written put a particularly nasty slant on myself as a person,” he told the court. Martin Samuel, who is also chief sports writer for the News of the World, said in evidence that the article represented his “honestly held opinion”. The court were unconvinced and found in Rupert Lowe’s favour.

Such cases illustrate the problems the media and those who write for it have in staying between the lines of what they believe to be the truth and what is actually the truth. As Martin Samuel found out in the Rupert Lowe case, having an opinion on the matter holds no sway with the courts when a plaintiff feels they have been the victim of a particular slur. While it is unlikely that any small, independent website would be censured for printing the opinions of any of their members in this latest particular case is another matter but it is hardly one to risk when the damages given out by the British courts are rightly so severe.

There was a time, not too long ago, when FA Cup Final day was one of the pinnacles of the British sporting calendar. These days the top clubs dominate it despite fielding weakened sides in the earlier rounds and fans are staying away from matches in their thousands. The League Cup is similarly ignored with the Premeriship big guns such as Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester United turning out reserve sides until the later rounds when they hedge their bets in a tilt for the diminished glory of lifting the trophy.

The problems stem directly from the growth of the Champion’s League and UEFA’s overpowering promotion of their cash cow during the 1990s. The day clubs and fans starting talking about the domestic cups as simply a way into European competition,and a path to the money on offer there, the death knell was sounded. If the winning of the trophy itself is no longer seen as the ultimate prize worth competing for then the competition itself can be deemed worthless and it’s glamour fades.

Along with the FA Cup losing it’s appeal, we also lost the European Cup Winners Cup as the Champion’s League siphoned off not only the actual League Champions of each country but up to four of their top clubs as well. The quality of sides competing in the European Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup was instantly downgraded resulting in the European Cup Winners Cup being eradicated and the UEFA Cup undergoing countless format changes and the ignominy of having to accept first group stage losers from the Champion’s League. What value does any cup competition have that accepts the losing sides from another competiton? Answer - increasingly none.

Even in the money men’s dream ticket of the Champion’s League we see attendances at pitiful levels for some of Europe’s top clubs including Juventus, Chelsea and AC Milan until the knockout stages. It’s not that the fans aren’t as passionate about their clubs, it’s just that a glut of pretty much meaningless group games hold no pulling power and don’t seem to be worth the entrance price. When the fans start getting tired of something then it’s time for a change.

In the pursuit of money, UEFA have created a monster, in the shape of the Champion’s League, which has destroyed the the value and credibility of all other cup competitions, both domestic and European, and is now in danger of eating itself. To redress the problems, UEFA and the domestic associations need to implement hard measures and finally get back to working in the best interests of football as a whole rather than subjecting themselves to the whims of the G14 clubs.

While there are many options available in doing this, State of the Game has put together some proposals which we feel might help address the issues:

Champion’s League - rename it the European Cup, only allow league champions entry into it and make it a straight knockout competition.

UEFA Cup - 2nd, 3rd and 4th domestic league places and FA Cup winners, make it a straight two legged knockout competition.

FA Cup - any club who declines entry once can NEVER play in the competition again (i.e. entry is mandatory to all English league clubs). Manchester United and their cohorts in the FA and FIFA did as much to devalue the competition as anyone when they were allowed to not enter so they could participate in the World Club Championships. This decision was catastrophic to the integrity of the FA Cup.

League Cup - a fixture congesting irrelevance to Premiership clubs who shouldn’t have to play in it. Maybe open it up to Scottish, League of Wales and Irish League clubs as well and make it a British Trophy.

Whatever happens, there will have to be huge changes if we ever want to see young fans looking at the FA Cup in awe again rather than thinking only of the UEFA Cup ties in Eastern Europe that it will bring.

Despite the January transfer window usually being the quieter of the two transfer windows in the English Premiership there was a flurry of late activity to add to the transfers already completed during the month as virtually every Premiership side attempted to strengthen your squad for the run in of the 2005/2006 season.

Below is a run down of each club’s dealings during the January 2006 window:

ARSENAL

IN
Vasiriki Abou Diaby - ?2m from Auxerre.
Emmanuel Adebayor - undiclosed fee from Monaco.
Theo Walcott - ?5m from Southampton.
Mart Poom - joins on a permanent deal after being on loan since August from Sunderland.

OUT
Quincy Owusu-Abeyie - undisclosed fee to Spartak Moscow.
David Bentley - undisclosed fee to Blackburn Rovers.
Jeremie Aliadiere - On loan to Wolverhampton Wanderers.

ASTON VILLA

IN

OUT
Stefan Postma - free transfer to Wolves.
Wayne Henderson - ?35,000 to Brighton and Hove Albion.
Steven Foley - ?20,000 to Bournemouthl.

BIRMINGHAM CITY

IN
Chris Sutton - short-term contract until the end of the season from Celtic.
Martin Latka - on loan.
Dudley Campbell - initial fee of ?500,000 from Brentford.

OUT
Asa Hall - on loan to Boston.
Walter Pandiani - ?1m to Espanyol.
Peter Till - on loan to Boston.
Andrew Barrowman - free transfer to Walsall.

BLACKBURN ROVERS

IN
Florent Sinama Pongolle - on loan from Liverpool.
David Bentley - undisclosed fee from Arsenal after a successful loan spell.
Martin Olsson - nominal fee from Hogaborgs BK.

OUT
Matt Jansen - free transfer to Bolton Wanderers.
Garry Flitcroft - free transfer to Sheffield United.
David Thompson - free transfer to Wigan Athletic.

BOLTON WANDERERS

IN
Ali Al Habsi - signs from SFK Lyn.
Matt Jansen - free transfer from Blackburn Rovers.
Oscar Perez - released by Cordoba.

OUT
Martin Djetou - released.
Chris Howarth - on loan to Stockport County.

CHARLTON ATHLETIC

IN
Marcus Bent - ?2m from Everton.

OUT
James Walker - on loan to Hartlepool.
Dean Kiely - undisclosed fee to Portsmouth.
Jonatan Johansson - on loan to NorwichCity.
Danny Murphy - ?2m to Tottenham Hotspur.

CHELSEA

IN
Maniche - on loan from Dynamo Moscow.

OUT
Steve Watt - free transfer to Swansea.
Wayne Bridge - on loan to Fulham.
Joe Keenan - on loan to Willem II.

EVERTON

IN
Alan Stubbs - free transfer from Sunderland.

OUT
Marcus Bent - ?2m to Charlton Athletic.
Per Kroldrup - ?3.5m to Fiorentina.
Laurence Wilson - on loan to Mansfield.

FULHAM

IN
Simon Elliott - free transfer from Columbus Crew.
Tony Warner - free transfer from Cardiff City.
Antti Niemi - ?1m from Southampton.
Wayne Bridge - on loan from Chelsea.
Michael Brown - ?1.7mfrom Tottenham Hotpsur.

OUT
Ricardo Batista - on loan to Milton Keynes Dons.
Liam Fontaine - on loan to Bristol City.
Robert Watkins - on loan to Gravesend and Northfleet.
Zeshan Rehman - on loan to Norwich City.

LIVERPOOL

IN
Robbie Fowler - free transfer from Manchester City.
Jan Kromkamp - part exchange with Josemi from Villarreal.
Paul Anderson - swap deal with Hull City with midfielder John Welsh.
Daniel Agger - ?5.8m from Bronby.
David Martin - undisclosed fee from Milton Keynes Dons.

OUT
Josemi - swap deal to Villareal.
John Welsh - swap deal to Hull.
Neil Mellor - on loan to Wigan Athletic.
Darren Potter - on loan to Southampton.
David Raven - on loan to Tranmere.
Florent Sinama Pongolle - on loan to Blackburn Rovers.

MANCHESTER CITY

IN
Georgios Samaras - ?6m from Heerenveen.
Tuomas Haapala - free transfer from MyPa.
Albert Riera - on loan from Espanyol.
Matthew Mills - undisclosed fee from Southampton.

OUT
Kasper Schmeichel - on loan to Darlington.
Robbie Fowler - free transfer to Liverpool.
Jonathan D’Laryea - nominal fee to Mansfield Town.

MANCHESTER UNITED

IN
Nemanja Vidic - ?7m from Spartak Moscow.
Patrice Evra - ?5m from Monaco.

OUT
Chris Eagles - on loan to Watford.
Mads Timm - on loan to Walsall.
Liam Miller - on loan to Leeds.
David Bellion - on loan to Nice.
Sylvain Ebanks-Blake - on loan to Royal Antwerp.
David Fox - free transfer to Blackpool.
Tommy Lee - on loan to Macclesfield.

MIDDLESBROUGH

IN

OUT
Szilard Nemeth - nominal fee to Strasburg.

NEWCASTLE UNITED

IN

OUT
Laurent Robert - free transfer to Benfica.

PORTSMOUTH

IN
Benjani Mwaruwari - ?4.1m from Auxerre.
Emmanuel Olisadebe - on loan Panathinaikos until the end of the season.
Sean Davis - combined ?7.5m deal with Mendes and Pamarot from Tottenham Hotspur.
Pedro Mendes - combined ?7.5m deal with Davis and Pamarot from Tottenham Hotspur.
Noe Pamarot - combined ?7.5m deal with Mendes and Davis from Tottenham Hotspur.
Dean Kiely - undisclosed fee from Charlton Athletic.
Wayne Routledge - on loan from Tottenham Hotspur.
Andres D’Alessandro - on loan from Wolfsburg.
Ognijen Koroman - on loan from Terek Groznyi.

OUT
Kostas Chalkias - released.
James Keene - on loan to Boston United.
Gary Silk - on loan to Boston United.

SUNDERLAND

IN
Kevin Smith - free transfer from Leeds United.
Rory Delap - free transfer from Southampton.

OUT
Matt Piper - released.
Dan Smith - on loan to Huddersfield Town.
Carl Robinson - ?50,000 to Norwich City.
Alan Stubbs - free transfer to Everton.

TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR

IN
Hossem Ghaly - undisclosed fee from Feyenoord.
Danny Murphy - ?2m from Charlton Athletic.

OUT
Sean Davis -signs for Portsmouth in a combined ?7.5m deal with Mendes and Pamarot.
Pedro Mendes - signs for Portsmouth in a combined ?7.5m deal with Davis and Pamarot.
Noe Pamarot - signs for Portsmouth in a combined ?7.5m deal with Mendes and Davis.
Philip Ifil - on loan to Millwall.
Reto Ziegler - on loan to Wigan Athletic.
Wayne Routledge - on loan to Portsmouth.
Michael Brown - ?1.7m to Fulham.
Mounir El Hamdaoui - on loan to Derby County.

WEST BROMWICH ALBION

IN
Jan Kozak - on loan from Artmedia Bratislava.
Williams Martinez - on loan from Sporting Defensor.
Nigel Quashie - ?1.4m from Southampton.

OUT
Riccardo Scimeca - free transfer to Cardiff City.
Darren Moore - ?500,000 to Derby County.
Lloyd Dyer - free transfer to Millwall.
Robert Earnshaw - ?3.5m to Norwich City.

WEST HAM UNITED

IN
Yaniv Katan - ?100,000 from Maccabi Haifa.
Dean Ashton - ?7.5m from Norwich City.
Lionel Scaloni - on loan from Deportivo La Coruna.

OUT
Gavin Williams - ?300,000 to Ipswich Town.
Moses Ashikodi - free transfer to Rangers.
Petr Mikolanda - on loan to Rushden & Diamonds.

WIGAN ATHLETIC

IN
Paul Scharner - ?2m from Brann Bergen.
Neil Mellor - on loan from Liverpool.
David Thompson - free transfer from Blackburn.
Reto Ziegler - on loan from Tottenham Hotpsur.

OUT

David O?Leary has said that he has never encountered it in his career. Arsene Wenger has also, rather predictably, seen nothing of the phenomenon during his time in English football and had little to say regarding the matter. Two high profile managers at two of the biggest clubs in one of the richest football leagues in the world and they have seemingly had no experience whatsoever of a bung culture permeating throughout English football. Forgive my sceptism but in the wake of Luton Town manager Mike Newell?s revelations last week of the depth of the bung problem in the game I find it highly suspicious that no senior club manager in England seems to have come across this problem or have any idea in which direction to point the finger of blame for allowing it to continue.

Of course there is no implication that the current managers of Arsenal and Aston Villa would have any first hand knowledge of such goings on but their categorical denials of ever having encountered anyone involved in either giving or taking bungs seems to set the standard for all other top chairmen, managers and players to plead the 5th and not be the first to step away from the football version of the mafia?s omerta ? the unspoken code of silence that stops the problem being outed and the perpetrators sufficiently dealt with by the courts.

Since George Graham was sacked by Arsenal and banned from football for twelve months back in 1995 for taking a ?425,000 bung from rogue agent Rune Hauge for the transfers of Pal Lydersen and John Jensen, there has a deafening silence from within football to out further recipients and payers of bungs to help sweeten transfers at all levels of the game. While the charges against the late Nottingham Forest manager Brian Clough, who according to Sir Alan Sugar allegedly ?liked a bung?, were dropped due to his ill health, his assistant Ronnie Fenton was given a slap on the wrist and suspended. A seemingly better planned investigation by the FA into 20 of John Gregory?s transfer dealings during his time as manager of Aston Villa was recently dropped, the reasons unknown.

The FA and Premier League have been quick to pay lip service to clearing out the rogue agents who Sir Alan Sugar has said he believes are orchestrating the whole sordid scheme but there are few within the game or influential onlookers who actually believe there will be significant action taken as a result of any investigation and practically zero chance of any custodial sentences being handed out as a result.

The fact that the latest investigation will need a more high profile informant than the courageous Mike Newell is obvious if it is to have any likelihood of succeeding in it?s proposed mission but the odds of finding anyone in a high enough position who would consider putting their own head on the block is slim. There are far too many men in the upper echelons of English football with far too much to lose if the truth is to actually come out and in such circumstances the proverbial drawbridge is usually brought up.

As obviously sickened by the questionable morality at the heart of English football as Mike Newell is, one has to wonder as to how much his managerial career will now suffer as his colleagues at clubs around the country find that their lucrative counter-culture is put under threat by his allegations and whether the FA and the Premier League actually have the bottle and the will to do anything about the scourge at all levels of the game.

Will Mike Newell?s intervention lead to a root and branch clean up as most not directly involved would call for or will we just see another expensive round of sweeping it under the carpet much like the failed Premier League bung inquiry in the mid to late ?90s? For a successful outcome maybe some of those top managers and agents should look to their hearts before they think of their own back pockets.

It?s been a little over a year since London based businessman Kia Joorabchian astounded Brazilian football by paying a record $22m to prise Argentine superstar Carlos Tevez away from Boca Juniors and into the waiting clutches of Sao Paulo?s best supported football club, Corinthians. Having bought the club and pumped in $35m (not including the ?present? of Tevez) through Media Sports Investment, the investment group he headed, Joorabchian had made an instant name for himself in a country which was more used to bankrupt clubs and selling it?s biggest stars to Europe than signing the most exciting young prospect from their deadly South American neighbour?s own top club side.

It didn?t take long for the comparisons to Roman Abramovich to spring up in the media, both being 30 something year olds with no previous football experience who had bought up big clubs in foreign countries and immediately splashed the cash on record transfers amid promises of making their teams the best on their respective continents. For some however the comparisons aren?t enough and the rumours that Joorabchian?s investors are headed by Abramovich himself just won?t go away. Spanish newspaper As in fact claimed at the time of the Tevez purchase that Abramovich holds a 15% share of Media Sports Investment and is using the front of Joorabchian to make his move into the virtually untapped Latin American football market.

Roman Abramovich?s old friend and exiled oligarch Boris Berezovsky is another Russian billionaire with reputed links to the shadowy MSI group which is based in an accountancy firm?s offices in London and whose membership Kia Joorabchian is going to great lengths to keep secret. He has denied any links with Chelsea FC and also said that his only dealings with Berezovsky in the past have been the sale of an 85% stake in the Moscow newspaper Kommersant to a group in which Berezovsky had a financial interest although he has lately admitted that he and Boris Berezovsky were in fact good friends. The alleged involvement of the two Russians has led to many rumours of potential money laundering and with MSI having pumped $50m into Corinthians to buy overseas players in the first six months they were in charge, it is certainly a cause for concern.

Brazilian football with it?s much vaunted financial problems has long been prone to corruption and a ?bung? culture amongst it?s clubs and federations and with the history Mssrs Abramovich and Berezovsky bring from their days acquiring privatized Russian state companies with the help of former Russian President Boris Yeltsin it is understandable that long term supporters of Corinthians and Brazilian football watchers alike would be getting nervous.

In January 2005, the Brazilian government told Joorbachian that he didn?t actually have the necessary paper work to do business in Brazil. MSI quickly reacted by putting Corinthians vice president Paulo Angioni on their board giving him the title ?Director of MSI Brazil?.

Given the allegations flying around, Brazil?s anti?organised crime task force summoned a confused Angioni to answer the allegations and to prove once and for all where the money was coming from. In a bizarre 4 hour testimony Angioni disclosed little in the way of information. ?He didn?t help in any way, shape or form? said District Attorney Jose Carneiro. ?He displayed a complete ignorance of both his precise role in the company and the workings of an investments fund?. ?There are certain indications of money-laundering, but also a lot is still to be investigated?I can?t give a deadline for closing this case?.

The question of where the money is coming from is obviously beyond even the Corinthians vice president who has been stood up as a puppet for Kia Joorabchian. With more questions than answers and a continued denial of collusion with the Russians from Joorabchian we appear to be no closer to finding out the real truth behind the Corinthians windfall and the identity of their backers.

If the Russian pair are involved it may be more likely that they are more interested in putting some geographic distance between their multi-billion dollar fortunes and Russia before the winds of political change lead to them becoming the next Mikhail Khodorkovsky and political pawn of the Kremlin. Maybe Joorabchian is completely free of any such skeletons in his investment closet and is merely trying to turn a well supported but financially poor Brazilian team into the next Real Madrid with a large influx of transfer capital in the hope of financially exploiting the fanatical Brazilian fanbase? Maybe?

One thing is for certain and it?s an undeniable fact shared by both Roman Abramovich?s Chelsea and Kia Joorabchian?s Corinthians. Money can buy you any trinket you desire as last season both clubs won their respective leagues. What is not clear however is how much of a pawn, in a much shadier game than football, both famous old clubs have become by selling their souls to foreign investors.