A lawyer representing FIFA in the ongoing antitrust lawsuit filed against it by a New York-based sports promoter argued in federal court Thursday that a rule change that would allow domestic championship matches to be played abroad could take place “before the end of the year”. »
The statement was made during a hearing on the antitrust case filed by Revelent Sports against FIFA and the United States Soccer Federation; a rare public appearance by lawyers from all sides in their years-long legal dispute that could significantly change the business of club soccer in the United States.
Required reading:
Last month, Relevent and FIFA said they had reached a settlement agreement that, among other things, would remove FIFA from the role of co-defendant in the legal matter “without prejudice.” Little has been shared publicly about the details of their arrangement.
Thursday’s hearing was supposed to be a status conference for the case, but there appeared to be confusion in the courtroom, with attorneys and even Judge Valerie E. Caproni repeatedly asking, ” Why are we here?
If FIFA were to change its rules prohibiting domestic league matches from being played on foreign soil, then the premise of the antitrust battle could be moot. Indeed, the rules that US Soccer said it followed that prevented overseas matches offered by Relevent in 2018 may no longer be an issue.
“I expect that before the investigation is complete, a separate set of rules will be in place,” FIFA lawyer H. Christopher Boehning said in court Thursday. When asked by Caproni when these changes might come, he said they could happen “before the end of the year.”
FIFA did not provide details beyond what was said in court Thursday afternoon.
Christopher S. Yates, the lawyer representing the USSF, said in court that he did not know the details of the agreement reached between FIFA and Relevent, nor whether the agreement prevented the players from being penalized for their participation in matches abroad. He said: “It seems like a waste of everyone’s resources… if FIFA is planning to change the rules. »
There remains, however, a question about what damages are owed, said attorney Adam Dale, who represents Relevent. He said the promoter was opposed to dismissing the suit altogether because, even if FIFA was removed from the suit and its rules were changed, his client still believed the USSF owed him damages for matches that could have been played since the start of the dispute. .
US Soccer stands to “lose millions” fighting this dispute “to the benefit of a billionaire owner,” Yates said, referring to Stephen Ross, the billionaire who co-founded the sports organizer. Ross also owns the NFL’s Miami Dolphins.
“We’re a nonprofit that’s trying to grow soccer,” Yates said.
After the brief conference, Caproni gave the parties a week to determine whether they wanted the court to become involved in their stipulations. She will then decide how the case will proceed. At this time, the case remains unresolved and discovery is still ongoing. The next status conference is scheduled for October, with several deadlines before then.
GO FURTHER
Relevent Sports’ lawsuit against FIFA and US Soccer explained
(Photo: Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images for Premier League)