Breaking the Rules: How the USSF is in Violation of FIFA Mandates for Equality and Anti-discrimination

“Objectives:
to use its efforts to ensure that the game of football
is available to and resourced for all who wish to participate,
regardless of gender or age”
– FIFA

“FIFA’s position on the issue of racism is unequivocal:
racism or any form of discrimination simply have no place in football. FIFA is actively committed to fighting all kinds of discrimination within football and within society as a whole.”

– FIFA

Editor’s Note:  Calls of discrimination are not to be taken lightly.  Racism, sexism, and even classism are the types of deep seated prejudices that are rarely if ever self evident to the naked eye, often displayed over time in ways that cannot be resolved to make whole those who are injured, and are always institutionalized so profoundly that they are not only accepted norms, but will be defended by the most ardent of fans as “the nature of business / sport.”  Regardless of your political ideology, or whether you decry the advocacy of equality as political correctness run amok, the issues about opportunity, compensation, disparity in treatment, and social engagement are essential elements of the game of soccer.  There is no situation where someone should be told to “shut up and play.”  There is no situation where someone should be told to “stick with sports” or “leave politics out of the game.”  Soccer is a social structure that relies upon a shared experience with the fans.  It is more than statistics, more than attendance numbers, more than business metrics, and more than “just a game.”  It is a community, and part of that bond that we share as fans, journalists and players, is knowing that if one of us is wronged because of prejudice, it is the responsibility of everyone else, to defend them.  With this being said, Issac Payano has gone to extraordinary lengths to not only detail the rules and mandates behind equality from the governing bodies, but how they are failing to be met by current leadership.  In this article, we will ask a lot of you.  We are requesting that as readers you keep an open mind, avoid becoming defensive, follow the links and details for the article, consider the impact that is being felt right now by those who are being disenfranchised, imagine yourself in those positions, and what you would do to work towards a resolution.  Go grab a couple of coffee (or if it’s socially acceptable, an adult beverage of your choice), sit back and take some time to follow along.  Thanks for participating.

Definitions:
1) Discrimination – the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different individuals or groups of people or things, largely based on the grounds of race, age, sex, or wealth, instead of the fair and ethical valuing of them principally based on their individual merit.

2) Equality – the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, opportunities, and treatment.

3) Disenfranchise – to deprive rights, power, that negate equality and fairness.

4) Inclusion – the action or state of including or of being included within a group or structure.

The simple truth is this:  the United States Soccer Federation (USSF), a national governing soccer body since 1913, is presently causing grave harm to the majority of its affiliated members across the USA by not adequately helping facilitate equal representation and the development of the sport. The affected include (1) millions of underserved players in diverse lower to middle class income communities that are not being properly engaged, who in time with the right vision and preparation (like Germany) can together help rebuild the US national soccer team at various levels to become a top global competitor; (2) thousands of devalued clubs that seek equal financial opportunity for growth; (3) numerous of suppressed leagues due to the existence of the arbitrary and discriminatory USSF Professional League Standards (USSF PLS) which violate FIFA statutes; (4) dozens of neglected and disunited state associations that represent the foundation of soccer throughout the 50 United States, some of which formed the USSF over a century ago; (5) countless of marginalized investors (99.98% of the US population) who are dismissed for not having enough zeros in their bank accounts to pay exorbitant franchise fees ($150 million dollars) for FIFA national D1 which is supposed to be earned under merit of play through promotion and relegation and not bought; (6) multiple out-priced coaches who are locked out of participation and development that are essential to the growth of the game; (7) Overlooked States, Cities, and Metro Areas in the USA for not being big enough in population size for D1 recognition in the eyes of USSF; and ultimately, (8) millions of disillusioned fans of the sport who more and more each day seek reform in order to unlock the sport’s true potential in the USA. These individual and much in common disenfranchised groups, which make up the vast majority of the USSF’s national affiliates within a 320 million+ US population, are not being authentically represented to the fullest extent by USSF. This is due to USSF’s (1) own structural inefficiency, (2) gross neglect, (3) discriminatory stipulations and policies, and (4) preferential narrow focus on a selected few – Major League Soccer (MLS) and Soccer United Marketing – who have benefited billions of dollars from monopolistic privileges obtained through conflicts of interest, by members who simultaneously and unethically hold USSF, MLS, and SUM positions, all at the detrimental expense of the equal growth of the game. Yes, “Soccer is growing, but not for everyone”. This unfortunate lack of authentic FIFA mandated equality is visibly affecting the upcoming USSF Presidential election. The USSF is flagrantly out of compliance with its international governing body, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), as USSF is egregiously violating, on numerous levels, FIFA statutes: (a) Definitions – Part I. General provisions – Article 4 Non-discrimination, gender equality and stance against racism; (b) Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 15. Member Associations’ Statutes; and (c) Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 14. Member Association’s Obligations. At this point, due to its financially lucrative self-serving agenda (with MLS and SUM) and overwhelming negligence towards the majority of its constituents, the USSF is in danger of losing its status as the representing football association in the USA both by its members and by FIFA.

Before we address every major point of this significant issue within USSF, let’s briefly look through highlighted key statements from FIFA itself specifically about Equality and Discrimination, which USSF as a member association to the international governing body must abide by:

Reference 1

From FIFA’s Diversity and anti-discrimination at FIFA document:

“Introduction
…FIFA recognises its responsibility to…abolishing all forms of discrimination in our game…

FIFA’s position on the issue is unequivocal: there is no place…for any form of discrimination in football, as clearly described in the FIFA Statutes and several of FIFA’s regulations and codes. We are committed to fighting discrimination in football in all its forms.”

Reference 2

From FIFA’s FIFA Good Practice Guide On Diversity And Anti-Discrimination Guide

“1. Foreword
…Some 1.6 billion people are involved in football, directly or indirectly, including players, referees, coaches, officials and fans…That is why football is, and must always be, for all – regardless of nationality, skin colour, gender, ethnic origin or religion…For the Game. For the World.”

“2. Diversity and anti-discrimination as an integral part of social responsibility and sustainability – an introduction

FIFA believes that football should treat everyone involved in the game fairly and equally…”

“2.1. Anti-discrimination as a central pillar and a holistic issue

FIFA considers diversity and anti-discrimination to be…central pillars…of social responsibility and sustainability.

…anti-discrimination should be viewed as an integral part of all areas of social responsibility. The mutual respect of association employees should be based on a common agreement that there must be no discrimination based on a perceived race, or due to skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason…

…Wherever people get together to kick a ball and thus ensure that all of this can happen, it is essential that individual diversity is respected and recognised in equal measure. The role model here is actually the ball itself, which could not care less who performs tricks on it and plays the perfect pass that leads to a goal.”

“2.2. Foundations of anti-discrimination as sustainable social responsibility

…
– [FIFA requires] all football bodies [e.g. USSF] at all levels to ensure racial equality in the employment, appointment and election of individuals in all areas of activity and to work with ethnic groups to involve them more closely in football activities;”

(Note: See FIFA’s memorandum: Extraordinary FIFA Congress ratifies resolution agains racism, which reaffirms this statement with the words “FIFA” and “requires”, making it a binding mandate.)

“2.3 Football as a tool to promote diversity and anti-discrimination in society

…The game…will become even more successful if it targets and integrates people equally…

…FIFA sees its member associations and their clubs as partners, whose commitment to progress in the areas of diversity and anti-discrimination is essential.”

“3. Principles and objectives of the FIFA Good Practice Guide on Diversity and Anti-Discrimination

3.1. Background and motivation behind this FIFA Good Practice Guide

…Many millions of people see football as an important part of their lives and thus want to become involved in it in the best possible way. To ensure that they can play a full part in the social and economic aspects of the game, any barriers to their participation need to be identified, examined and removed…”

“7. Diversity and anti-discrimination through regulations
7.3. Employment and recruitment policy

Article 3 of the FIFA Code of Conduct provides an example for ensuring that all employees are treated equally. Among the 11 core principles…“integrity and ethical behaviour”, “respect and dignity”, and “zero tolerance of discrimination and harassment”…

“After all, if an association were to pursue a policy that imposed limits due to [discrimination of] a supposed race, or due to skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason, it would only serve to narrow down its pool of talent. As a result, the association’s national and international competitiveness would be restricted. Conversely, if an association sets equal store by personal backgrounds and abilities, then it will only enrich its own working methods.”

 

The Issues in USSF

Let’s now address the most prominent discrimination problems within USSF that violate FIFA principles and laws.

Affecting: Players, Clubs, Leagues, State Associations; Current and Potential Investors; Cities, States, Metro Areas in the USA; Coaches; and Fans

1) Problem: The lack of nationwide equality in all levels of US national team selection (for men and women). This includes
1A. Properly scouting for and selecting players from all family income classes and cultures from all sectors of the United States.
1B. Properly selecting players based on their skills and not simply by their affiliation to Major League Soccer (MLS) or the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL).

2) Problem: The suppression of growth (for more than half of the US population found in lower-income communities) through the withholding of FIFA mandated Solidarity Payments.

3) Problem: The discrimination through the implemenation of the arbitrary USSF PLS and its structure (which include unreasonable demands for metro area (state / city) size, location in various time zones / league footprint, large league quantity, large stadium size, ultra-high networth individual and combined ownerships,and international playing fields.)

4) Problem: The marginalized representation of state associations in USSF in comparison to the MLS+USL+NWLS+SUM conglomerate.

5) Problem: The inequalities caused by the enormous licensing fees for coaches which in turn affect the development of the sport.

 

Explanation of Each Issue

1) Problem: The lack of nationwide equality in all levels of US national team selection (for men and women). This includes
1A. Properly scouting for and selecting players from all family income classes and cultures from all sectors of the United States.
1B. Properly selecting players based on their skills and not simply by their affiliation to Major League Soccer (MLS) or the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL).

To commence, the USSF has a serious problem with the US national soccer teams, which can no longer be blindly ignored. Contrary to what current USSF President Mr. Sunil Gulati stated with regard to not needing wholesale changes after the US Men’s National Team (USMNT) unfortunately failed to qualify for the 2018 FIFA World Cup, a tournament that the USMNT did not miss entry to in over three decades, the US national soccer team program does need a concentrated systemic evolution in various areas that can bring benefits both in the short and long term. Aside from the men’s team not qualifying for several years in various tournaments, and the women’s team (USWNT) recently suffering tournament losses due to the realistic growing development and competition around the world, the holistic problem that the USSF is facing from the national team program is the USSF’s inefficiency to ideally facilitate national inter-club youth and adult networks, which can be inspired by the United Nation’s Inter-Agency Network on Youth Development. This would allow for greater interdependent connection and shared resources throughout the country with multiple affiliates like the state associations, that are a massively underutilized asset, instead of inappropriately attempting to overwhelming centrally control and micromanage the development of the sport at the youth level, with millions of players, all on their own. The national soccer association’s job as a facilitator of the growth of the game, and not as a business regulator, is to properly scout for and select players from all family income classes and cultures stemming from all sectors of the United States. Simultaneously, the USSF is supposed to be a resource partner for youth and adult clubs and associations across the country that can together help develop and train current and future national team players for them. The key in the name of the USSF is United.

There is a big socioeconomic inequality problem going on in the USA with regard to soccer, and its called Pay-to-Play. If you want to play youth club soccer, you must first pay for it. This business model, is utilized by different organizations around the country which charge families thousands of dollars for players to participate. Those that can afford it are mostly found in suburban communities or within upper middle to high income households. Meanwhile, this system simultaneously alienates millions of people, mostly found in urban areas, within low to middle class income households who can not afford such luxuries simply to kick a ball. While in a free market economy like the United States, Pay-to-Play in soccer can exist (think of private universities that charge tens of thousands of dollars for an education), the underlying issue is not with the existence of that system, but with the lack of competition (think of state and city colleges with scholarships and free tuition, based on household income) for it to create a true open market which everyone can participate in. Moreover, it falls on the USSF’s inefficiency and negligence of not implementing the FIFA mandated mechanisms, called Player Solidarity Payments (which we’ll discuss ahead) to combat this problem and create a fair open market. The critical issue here, that fuels the very nature of this problem (1A), is USSF (a non-for profit organization that is supposed to be neutral and fair for all of its representatives under FIFA statutes for Equality, is continuously favoring one system. Through its proprietary US Soccer Development Academy (USSDA), USSF is being an enabler, proponent, and economic beneficiary of the elitist system called Pay-to-Play, that is financially cost-prohibitive for the majority of families around the country who are below or struggling at than national median household income.

This socioeconomic disparity directly affects racial inequality. The majority of the wealth in the United States is held by individuals of European / Caucasian descent. Meanwhile, Minorities, which is a term that is not only defined by population size but also relatively by financial wealth accumulation due to education and job access, are made up mostly by Latinos, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, and Native Americans.

The USSF, through its centrally controlled US Soccer Development Academy and its support of Pay-to-Play, while not facilitating the mechanism for equal opportunity and growth by way of Solidarity Payments which can provide for unlimited scholarships, is neglecting and by extension, discriminating against families based on income and in turn ethnicity. This has led to the unfairly unbalanced economic background and racial composition of its own national teams. Whether USSF has realized it or not, looking at it from a holistic standpoint, this unquestionably violates FIFA statutes: Definitions – Part I. General provisions – Article 4 Non-discrimination, gender equality and stance against racism. FIFA is absolutely clear on this issue: “any form of discrimination simply have no place in football.” The USSF is out of compliance.

Furthermore, with the existence of the USSDA on a national scale – but limited, as shown above, to a certain group of potential players – and not proactively connecting more with independent economically and ethnically diverse youth clubs across the country to develop players, the USSF is not properly and fairly, without discrimination, tapping into the enormous player pool within the 320 million+ USA population that it has in front. To add on, USSF no longer has a USSF Diversity Task Force to help identify and address this concern. Like FIFA says: “if an association were to pursue a policy that imposed limits…it would only serve to narrow down its pool of talent…the association’s national and international competitiveness would be restricted….Conversely, if an association sets equal store by personal backgrounds and abilities, then it will only enrich its own working methods.”

With only one, yes one, full time USSF player scout available to select players from within 320+ million people, the USSF is ineffectively doing its mandated job by FIFA to be equal and free from discrimination. The USSF, with Pay-to-Play, is blindly failing FIFA, failing itself, and failing the US national teams.

This damaging issue is compounded by problem 1B: Properly selecting players based on their skills and not by their affiliation to Major League Soccer (MLS) or the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL), which is financially backed by the USSF.

For the past several years, the majority of players selected for the 1^st teams of both the USMNT and USWNT teams have come from MLS, the NWSL, and from leagues abroad. Very few have been selected domestically outside of these player pools.

Back in July of 2017, then USMNT Head Coach, Mr. Bruce Arena was asked whether players from the North American Soccer League (NASL) or United Soccer League (USL), two professional soccer leagues in the USA affiliated to the USSF and in turn FIFA, would ever have its players featured in the USMNT, Arena bluntly said “Maybe not in my lifetime.”

Before becoming the USMNT coach in 2016, Arena worked closely with MLS as a head coach for numerous teams since 1996. He also served as the USMNT head coach between 1998 and 2006. As an experienced and well respected Head Coach of the USMNT he was a definitive voice in the USSF. As a leader, he spoke on behalf of the federation and knew of its mindset, as he currently still sits on the USSF Technical Committee. Both MLS and the USSF have an “inextricably linked”  / “joined at the hip” working relationship, as Mr. Don Garber (who is the Commissioner of Major League Soccer (MLS) and CEO of Soccer United Marketing (SUM) – the joint marketing arm of MLS and USSF; as well as a top USSF BOD member; the USSF Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee of the USSF BOD (which votes on the ethics, governance, and nominations of USSF); and the USSF Pro Council leading representative (who, along with MLS, has the majority of votes on the issues relating to professional club soccer in the USA)) describes. This type of relationship creates a conflict of interest, which is even affecting the upcoming USSF Presidential election. USSF, through its ties with MLS is purposely and favorably selecting players from MLS, as opposed to properly scouting and choosing players from across the country. This undoubtedly is a form of discrimination which FIFA condemns.

Don Garber, whose clear goal is financial benefits of MLS above USSF’s purpose to represent all affiliates equally, once said: “My job is to do everything that I can to grow Major League Soccer and ensure MLS is going to be a driver of the growth of soccer in the U.S.”. Don Garber, as an important member of USSF, places the priorities of MLS above that of USSF, which in turn affect the selection of the USMNT, which in turn discriminates against millions of people across the US who are overlooked.

Arena, of course, would eventually lead the USMNT, mostly and arbitrarily filled with MLS players, to their first elimination from attending a FIFA World Cup in 30+ years, since 1986.

By selecting USMNT players and USWNT players (who face comparable issues) mostly from MLS, NWSL, and foreign leagues, while admittedly overlooking the pool of players from other US leagues as well as the vast network of players throughout the country, USSF are not giving all players in the USA an equal and fair opportunity to join or represent their country. These players are being inexcusably discriminated against. This in turn leads to inherent biases against the clubs, leagues and / or state associations they play in, who miss out from their players joining the USMNT and the potential attention and financial boost they in turn can receive (as Don Garber self-servingly said, in comparison: “Regardless as to what our national team coach might want to do, we will do what we need to do to ensure we have the best possible [USMNT] American players here [in MLS], because we [MLS] have to be a league of choice for everyone who cares about the games – players and fans”; it discriminates against the current and potential investors of clubs and players who can’t get a return on investment because their investment is not fairly looked at or valued; it discriminates against the cities, states, and metro areas where these clubs, that groom and train these players, operate which in turn lose out on the movement of local, regional, and national (inter-state) currency that can be captured through tax dollars; and of course it discriminates against the fans of the sport who want to see the game grow locally or who may want to play or who may want to support a family relative or friend close by, but crushingly know that they are all treated as second-class citizens. As “FIFA’s position on the issue is unequivocal: there is no place…for any form of discrimination in football.”

2) Problem: The suppression of growth (for more than half of the US population found in lower-income communities) through the withholding of FIFA mandated Solidarity Payments.

We briefly touched upon this issue through the juxtaposition of Pay-to-Play. Let’s now dive deeper into what Player Solidarity Payments really mean for soccer in the USA akin to the rest of the world.

Player Solidarity Payments are monetary compensation, mandated by FIFA, that are owed and given by a club that signs a new player to the clubs that helped developed the player. In many instances, the player was on scholarship in the youth club(s) that brought them in and trained them. The new club that signs the player, compensates the development club for their training. These funds given to the development club go towards finding new talent, from all socioeconomic classes, and growing their program. This is fundamentally different from the Pay-to-Play model that wraps around US youth soccer, which requires most players (families’) to pay large fees (in the thousands of dollars) to join a private team or club. It is an elitist system of financial haves and have-nots where many poor kids don’t have the financial support to join independent youth clubs in different areas across the US, creating social and economic unfairness.

While Player Solidarity Payments is a world-wide lucrative business for clubs affiliated to FIFA via their member national associations, USSF does not enforce such payments. Therefore, the majority of youth clubs in the US do not receive solidarity payments and are not compensated for their training. Their main stream of revenue is from charging the young players and their families thousands of dollars. This extremely reduces the quantity of players from all sectors of the country that can join a youth club based on scholarship and talent because little or no financial compensation would be returned.

It’s important for amateur and professional clubs to develop players via their academies as a means to develop the sport throughout the country. It’s even more important that Player Solidarity Payment is made available in the US and supported by USSF so clubs can earn an important financial resource to help them provide scholarships to develop players from all social and economic backgrounds based on talent and merit, and not simply Pay-to-Play.

USSF is not acting on its mandated job under FIFA to enforce solidarity payments to its affiliated members. It’s using an excuse based on the US court case Fraser vs MLS, in which USSF claims that they are not allowed to under a stipulation or deal made with the court. Yet, by not helping facilitate Player Solidarity Payments, USSF is suppressing the financial growth of professional and amateur clubs, as well as the development of underserved children across the country while allowing children of a certain financial class and the majority of a single ethnic group to participate but only via enormous payment. This is unfair for all parties involved, and it is anti-competitive and unproductive for the sport. This forces a development club that wants to strictly operate on a scholarship based model, particularly in a lower-income community (like many around the country), and eventually receive solidarity payments, to instead work as a Pay-to-Play organization which would financially box out many impoverished children. These clubs need and seek a return on investment in order for them to properly flourish and create spaces for all soccer youth.

Here is the FIFA mandate, from FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players: Chapter VII. Training Compensation and Solidarity Mechanism:

While USSF tries to conveniently shield itself by citing Fraser vs MLS as its prohibitor, FIFA needs remind USSF of its duty and responsibility as a member association. FIFA needs to force USSF to act in favor of all its affiliate members, especially for the current and future generations of soccer players.

Multiple US clubs are already making their cases against USSF for Solidarity Payments. Meanwhile, USSF, who are not enforcing the mandate, are strangely allowing MLS to compensate: “MLS took 100% of the transfer fee, including the portion meant for his youth clubs, and the federation said it could not intervene due to U.S. law, according to documents sent to FIFA.”  The same MLS where Don Garber is Commissioner of. The same Don Garber who is the CEO of SUM, which has helped USSF garner a $150 million (USD) surplus and “guranteed annual revenues”. The same Don Garber who is also a top USSF BOD member; the USSF Pro Council leading representative; and, most relevant, the USSF Chair of the Nominating and Governance Committee of the USSF BOD (which votes on the ethics, governance, and nominations of USSF). Don Garber is controlling the narrative of what is ethical and appropriate for USSF which ultimately means what is ethical and appropriate for MLS.

As an organization operating in the US, the USSF is first bound by US laws before FIFA laws. The USSF must abide by all FIFA laws / FIFA statutes, but must do so “to the extent permitted by governing law [US laws]”, as stated within USSF Bylaws. Meaning, USSF, fully understanding that they must recognize US laws first, must comply with all FIFA statutes that do no interfere with US laws. In other words, US laws supersede FIFA laws. USSF’s grand argument is that Player Solidarity Payments interfere with US Anti-trust laws as the USSF can’t force a business to do something.

That said, while the USSF is partially correct, they are also partially wrong. As I established that the mandated implementation of Promotion and Relegation in the US does not interfere with US Anti-trust laws, guess what, Player Solidarity Payments also do not interfere with US Anti-trust laws. USSF is a member association to FIFA is bound by their laws, as a business / organization, which mandates that all USSF affiliates also comply with FIFA laws as they knowingly signed up for it (the membership of FIFA as well as all present and future mandates so long as they are affiliated to it, as shown in FIFA statute Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 15 Member Associations’ Statutes: e) all relevant stakeholders must agree to respect…the Statutes, regulations and decisions of FIFA…). All currently existing USSF affiliates, including clubs, are working with USSF with the clear and informed understanding that they too must abide by all FIFA laws, which they signed on to. With that said, USSF has every right to obligate signed affiliates who are bound to them to follow these rules. What USSF can’t do is mandate Player Solidarity Payments on clubs that are not in any way shape or form affiliated to USSF. That would be Anti-trust. Furthermore, what USSF can do is reinform every US affiliated club that does not want to pay Player Solidarity Payments that they will be in violation of USSF and FIFA statutes and therefore will be free to disassociate and independently do business as they choose in the free open market, but must pay what is owed upon exit. That puts USSF free and clear of US Anti-trust laws regarding this issue, because USSF won’t be forcing any club that doesn’t want to comply to pay as they would be free to do business on their own. Case closed. USSF has a bound duty and responsibility to uphold FIFA laws. USSF has no more excuse to not be in compliance with this issue. If USSF can’t be in compliance then they would be in danger of losing their status as the official member association to FIFA.

 

3) Problem: The discrimination through the implementation of the arbitrary USSF PLS and its structure (which include unreasonable demands for metro area (state / city) size, location in various time zones / league footprint, large league quantity, large stadium size, ultra-high networth individual and combined ownership,and international playing fields.)

In a document titled, How the North American Soccer League (NASL) can truly win against the United States Soccer Federation (USSF), I thoroughly dissected and established the framework how the USSF Professional League Standards (USSF PLS) violate US Anti-trust laws. Comparatively, the USSF PLS are also simultaneously violating FIFA statutes of Discrimination.

The USSF PLS are a set of standards arbitrarily imposed by USSF since 1995, and updated various times over the years, on professional leagues to follow in order for them to receive FIFA / USSF national closed D1 or D2 or D3 sanction (without merit of play through promotion and relegation, but based on multi-million dollar payments which violate FIFA laws. If the professional leagues don’t submit to these rules and comply, then they won’t receive these labels. So far, this design has allowed for MLS, which is deeply linked with USSF, to maintain a concerted monopoly, as no other leagues have been able to meet these ever changing designs. Here are the current D1 standards by USSF for a professional league.

Every single one of these USSF PLS standards are arbitrary and discriminatory, which violate FIFA laws, including “Definitions – Part I. General provisions – Article 4 Non-discrimination, gender equality and stance against racism.”

Let’s briefly address every one of the current USSF PLS standards:
1. 75 percent of the league’s teams must be in metropolitan areas with at least 1 million persons.

Under these discriminatory standards (as shown through population charts of state and metropolitan areas within the document How the North American Soccer League (NASL) can truly win against the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) (pages 5-19))

a) six (6) US states and four (4) US territories (for a total of 10 areas) are discriminated against from obtaining USSF D1 or being viewed as D1 because they do not have a million people, and neither do any of their cities or metropolitan areas.

b) 329 metropolitan areas with major cities, together totaling 96 million people, are discriminated against from obtaining USSF D1, because none of them individually have a million people.

According to USSF, these places can’t be recognized as or have, by USSF standards, USSF division 1 leagues or division 1 clubs on their own within their boundaries. It also means that these places are viewed as less in value by USSF. This in turn triggers lack of investments and loss of potential jobs, earnings or revenue streams for these areas from investors who would otherwise invest with the availability of the arbitrary USSF D1 label or not invest with the lack thereof.

Metropolitan areas and cities IN ALL 50 STATES, a total of 86% (329 out of 382 major metro areas), are being discriminated by the USSF PLS.

No member association to FIFA has the right to devalue and call a US state, city or metropolitan area or in turn a US league or club a non-division 1 state / city / metro area / league / club simply based on the population size of their surroundings. The USSF is devaluing the commerce of the states, metropolitan areas, and the cities within them, and in turn the leagues and clubs, as well as the investors players and fans in these ares that are blocked from participation. USSF is directly discriminating and devaluing these combined groups by creating anti-competitive markets in favor of a few sectors of the countries, usually associated with top US TV markets that are generally relative to population size. Rather than apply the global standard of FIFA where any club or city or metro area can rise to the top of the FIFA International Pro/Rel Pyramid under FIFA mandated merit of play, the USSF, influenced by MLS leadership, is instead following an NFL mentality which is the foundation of Mr. Don Garber’s vision for MLS and soccer in America.

USSF is not supposed to be a business regulator. It is supposed to be a resource and facilitator of the growth of the game.

This glaring form of discrimination is a violation of FIFA statues.

2. Location in the Eastern, Central, and Pacific time zones in the continental United States.

3. Minimum of 12 teams to apply. By year three, a minimum of 14 teams.

4. All league stadiums must have a minimum seating capacity of 15,000.

Plain and simple, clubs and leagues should have the right to choose where they play and in how many time zones they operate. The majority of the top leagues around the world play in one time zone. The US leagues should be free to do the same in order to be successful like England, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Spain, among others. There is no reason why they should be forced to play on a national scale with four time zones, as doing so does not truly define a league to be professional.

Furthermore, a league should decide how many teams it wants to have, whether it is 4, 8, 10, or 20. Leagues should be free to efficiently grow under FIFA. In addition, there is nothing in the Laws of the Game or FIFA statutes that outright state how many seats a club or league needs in order for either of them to specifically be called amateur or professional. These rules are barriers for leagues, and in turn clubs, and in turn players who can potentially participate in these organizations. As FIFA says: “any barriers to their participation need to be…removed.”

5. Principal owner with an individual net worth of at least $40 million USD.

6. Combined owner net worth of at least seventy million US Dollars.

Among all of the USSF PLS standards, the metro areas and net worth are the two most harmful stipulations for the entire growth of the sport. Through a series of caculations (as shown in the document How the North American Soccer League (NASL) can truly win against the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) (p21-22)) regarding individual net worth in the USA, it’s been established that only 0.02% of the US population satisfy these demands while 99.98% are discriminated against. Furthermore, 98.5% of all US millionaires, who are potential investors of the sport are arbitrarily disqualified from USSF D1 for not having enough zeros (0) in their bank accounts.

This ludicrous requirement is limiting the attraction and growth of the sport by not fairly allowing the overwhelming amount of investors in the different states, metro areas, and cities, who have a net worth less than $40 million USD, to invest.

7. Playing surfaces for all teams must be at least 70 yards by 110 yards and be FIFA approved.

Of all the USSF PLS standards, this is certainly the least harmful, but still problematic. The particular issue here is that it is not a FIFA league standard. Under FIFA’s Laws of the Game, this is a standard for international matches only and not for league games which actually require a minimum of 100yds x 50yds. How is this discrimination? Real estate or the proper availability and accessibility of land to play on, especially in urban developed areas, is one of the hardest things to find. The bigger the pitch, the more land is required. By arbitrarily increasing the size of the pitch, USSF is also increasing the quantity of land a club or even a community must acquire. This means that US pro clubs and leagues would not be recognized as D1 and would have less opportunities to play together simply because their pitches are not big enough for USSF, despite actually meeting FIFA standards.

 

*USSF defines professional leagues as follows*:

““Professional League” means a professional sports organization that has professional soccer teams competing against each other.”

So by definition, a pro league in the US is recognized in the USSF by simply being a league that has pro soccer teams competing against each other. It has nothing to do with the USSF PLS which are completely separate and arbitrary to decide which league has arbitrary USSF D1, D2, and D3.

Moreover, in FIFA’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players: Chapter II. Status of Players – Article 2 – section 2 / par. 2:

“A professional is a player who has a written contract with a club and is paid more for his footballing activity than the expenses he effectively incurs. All other players are considered to be amateurs.”

In other words:
a) A professional club is one that has a written contract with all of its player where the players are paid more for their footballing activity than the expenses the players effectively incur. All other clubs are considered to be amateur.
b) A professional league is one that only has professional clubs (See A).

*Both USSF and FIFA agree that a profesional league is one that simply has professional clubs / teams in them. That is the very definition of what professional leagues are. It is also part of the reason why USSF must recognize US professional leagues that do not want to abide by the USSF PLS (as I previously explained to the NASL) as the USSF PLS actually contradict FIFA Article 9 for Principle of Promotion and Relegation, while violating Article 4 and 15 regarding Discrimination, as well as Article 14 regarding Member Associations’ Obligations*

FIFA Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 20: Status of clubs, leagues and other groups of clubs also says the following:

 

“Clubs, leagues, or any other groups affiliated to a member association shall be subordinate to and recognised by that member association. The member association’s statutes shall be define the scope of authority and the rights and duties of these groups. The statutes and regulations of these groups shall be approved by the member association.”

a) “Clubs, leagues [e.g. the NASL] or any other groups affiliated to a member association [e.g. USSF] shall be subordinate to that member association.”

Meaning – Just like USSF must be subordinate to FIFA and comply with all statutes, clubs, leagues affiliated to USSF must also be subordinate to the USSF and comply with its statutes which in turn are bound by FIFA laws and can not contadict any one of them. (Note the USSF PLS contradict Article 9: Principle of Promotion and Relegation, and violate Article 4 and 15 regarding Discrimination, as well as Article 14 regarding Member Associations’ Obligations).

b) “Clubs, leagues [e.g. NASL] or any other groups affiliated to a member association [e.g. USSF] shall be recognised by that member association.”
The USSF PLS are designed to give arbitrary USSF D1, D2, and D3 sanction (which contradicts merit of play). Meanwhile, the USSF PLS has nothing to do, as I’ve mentioned before, with leagues or clubs being “recognised”, ergo sanctioned, whether amateur or pro, by USSF. The USSF must recognize a club, whether pro or amateur, under FIFA statute article 20, as a “club’s entitlement” is also to Article 9. – which is to participate in the FIFA International ProRel Pyramid.

Individually and collectively, these USSF PLS standards are violating FIFA statutes for discrimination and are harming the growth of the game. Under these USSF “standards”, that are incongruent to the norms of the entire FIFA world, clubs like SD Eibar (Spain) and Bruk-Bet Termalica Nieciecza (Poland), whose stories are prevelant around the USA through thousands of similar clubs (see Kingston Stockade FC), would never have the equal and fair chance to become D1 through the USSF matrix because their

a) cities aren’t big enough and don’t have at least a million people
(Sorry to the entire country of Iceland who are actually in the 2018 World Cup and the USA is not)

b) league isn’t in multiple time zones
(Sorry to the entire country of Germany for winning four FIFA World Cups while playing in one time zone with the most attended soccer leaue in the world called the Bundesliga. Meanwhile the USA has zero World Cups while playing in four time zones, and the USSF’s D1 league – MLS – only accounts for 7% of the entire US TV soccer market while other soccer leagues from around the world playing in one time zone shown in the US account for 93%, but more time zones somehow equals more improvement)

c) league doesn’t arbitrarily have 12 teams as opposed to 20 or 8
(Sorry Trinidad and Tobago, with your TT Pro League that only has 10 teams. You are not good enough. Oh, wait a minute…)

d) stadium doesn’t have 15,000 seats
(Sorry to the 700 or 5,000 or 10,000 people in your small town community, but you need more empty seats so your team can somehow magically win games on the field)

e) individual and combined ownership is not among the 0.02% in the USA.
(Sorry to the entire 99.98% of the USA population. According to USSF, you are not individually worthy of being D1 owners. Sorry to the 98.5% of US millionaires. You’re not rich enough.)

f) home field does not have the dimensions for international games
(Sorry to all the clubs in the US who are amazing on the field, but are not amazing enough to be D1 because your field isn’t big enough to play an international game once a year or ever).

Everything about these standards is about having more. It’s like the popular comedy skit from Saturday Night Live (SNL), the USSF has a “fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell” – “I gotta have more cowbell” please .

These USSF PLS “standards are insane!

US TV soccer analyst Taylor Twellman said it best, after the USMNT (representing 320 million+ in the USA) catostrophically lost to, yes, Trinidad and Tobago (representing less than 1.4 million people):

“The definition of insanity is doing the exact same thing knowing the result. And if we [the entire US soccer community including USSF] don’t change it, then what are we doing?!…What Are We Doing?!”

USSF needs change. It needs reform at all levels. Part of that problem are the USSF PLS which are discriminatory and in violation of FIFA laws of discrimination, as well as US Anti-trust laws. They should absolutely be eliminated for the greater good of the game.

4) Problem: The marginalized representation of state associations in USSF in comparison to the MLS+USL+NWLS+SUM conglomerate.

The USSF has various affiliates. The majority of them are state associations that represent adult and youth development across the country (91 State Associations: 55 youth state associations and 54 adult associations, of which 18 are joint state associations). The state associations are the true sleeping giant in American soccer. Some of them were even the founders of the USSF in 1913. What many of them don’t realize is that together, as a unit, they are the most powerful force in all of American soccer – bigger than the MLS+USL+NWSL+SUM machine that is influencing USSF (and its upcoming election), and bigger than USSF itself. They are the ones that FIFA truly depend on for the organic growth of the sport. Yet, somehow, the voices of the state associations have been suppressed by comparison within the national association. They are neglected, sometimes forgotton, and disunited to a point where there are talks of eliminating them.

Part of the problem was exacerbated in 2006, with the reduction of the USSF board of directors from 40 to 15. This happened on the same day, in the same USSF Annual General Meeting (AGM), when Sunil Gulati was simultaneously elected as USSF President (while still being the President of Kraft Soccer, which owns part of MLS and SUM. By then, there was less representation for the states, as MLS was consolidating its power within USSF.

For the past several years, MLS alone has grown in wealth with SUM, which is now valued at $2 billion dollars (USD) thanks to its lucrative TV partnership with USSF that exploits the US national soccer teams, while the state associations have been undervalued, undercut, and simply left out of the equation, and their clubs receive no Player Solidarity Payments. With a country that has 320 million+ people, the USSF alone can not possibly develop the sport and choose the best players for the USMNT, as proven above with youth soccer. The state associations are the foundation of the 50 United States. The geographical and population size of various US states are comparable to European countries. Each state association has the potential to create its own D1 league and make millions if not billions of dollars, but the current USSF PLS prevents them from doing it to shield MLS interest. Even more, the state associations have not benefitted one dime from the paltry $150 million dollar (USD) surplus that the USSF sits on, in comparison to the $2 billion dollars of SUM, at the expense of the state associations that helped formed the USSF to be its equal representative, and which also represent thousands of clubs nationwide.

The current formation of USSF is no longer acting in equal favor of the state associations, but in preference of MLS and SUM which controls it. As Don Garber said, “My job is to do everything that I can to grow Major League Soccer and ensure MLS is going to be a driver of the growth of soccer in the U.S.…we will do what we need to do to ensure we have the best possible [USMNT] American players here [in MLS], because we [MLS] have to be a league of choice for everyone who cares about the games – players and fans”. In other words, Don Garber will do what he needs to do, inspite of his top leadership rank in USSF which officially binds him to FIFA mandates, to favor MLS interest above everyone elses, including the state associations who up to now have not benefitted and won’t, as there are talks to eliminate them. Remember the words described in the book Star-Spangled Soccer: The Selling, Marketing and Management of Soccer in the USA, “Every dollar that went into a soccer property other than MLS was a dollar lost.”

This is another form of discrimination that violates FIFA statutes, when USSF, through its leadership and in concert with MLS and SUM, is favoring one group above everyone else.

On Saturday, the state associations together have the real power to vote for a USSF presidential candidate that will give them true recognition, unity, and pathways to real growth that will connect them to the FIFA International ProRel Pyramid. The state associations should wake up and see what’s happening and what their real potential is with the right leadership. The power is in all of your hands.

 

5) Problem: The inequalities caused by the enormous licensing fees for coaches which in turn affect the development of the sport.

The last subject I’ll address are the astronomical licensing fees for coaches in the US. The USSF provides various courses. These licenses, costing in the low thousands have been a major obstacle for many aspiring coaches who are unable to afford them to train. In turn, these individuals have been left out of the next level of participation and development of the sport which are essential to the growth of the game. Similar to the issue previously addressed with Pay-to-Play, the cost of licensing has also limited the socioeconomic classes that can afford them. This creates another level of discrimination, while jeopardizing the need for equality and progress.

In Europe, both Germany (Deutscher Fussball-bund and Spain (Real Federación Española de Fútbol, respectively the 2014 and 2010 FIFA World Cup winners, have the lowest cost for coaching licenses, while the USA (USSF), with no World Cups ever won, has one of the highest costs in the world. One of these country’s national football / soccer associations is doing something wrong The USSF sits on a $150 million surplus that is not being reinvested back into the game in ways to reduce costs and create more access for coaches which in turn would benefit players, clubs, leagues, and the sport as a whole.

By having more coaches with higher licenses and education, there is a greater chance for the game to keep growing. Yet, the game can not expand if the costs for participation are too high. There needs to be change.

Special Bonus
(which deserves its own platform)

6: Problem: Equal pay for equal labor.

The USWNT are without a doubt, the crown jewels of soccer in the USA, winning three FIFA World Cups, with their most recent achievement in 2015. What the men have never able to do in nearly 90 years since the first FIFA World Cup in 1930, the women have done three times over in less than 30 years.

 

Meanwhile, these ladies have helped boost soccer interest from current and new fans. They’ve also recieved countless of honorable recognition and coverage nationwide, including a nationally televised celebrated New York City Ticker Tape Parade down the Canyon of Heroes. In addition, the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup Final, which the USWNT headlined, broke various records with 25.4 million views nationwide, making it the most watched soccer game in the history of the USA for women and men.

Despite all of their accolades, the USWNT have been faced with a gender doublestandard. While they win World Cups and get millions in viewership, and the men lose and miss out on World Cup tournaments, the women are paid far less than their male counterparts. This caused the USWNT to fight a case against the USSF  for equal pay. The women were even exclusively interviewed on the well respected Sunday news program 60 Minutes. Eventually, the USWNT and USSF came to an agreement which made improvements to their overall salaries. However, it is still lower in comparison to the men. This is another form of discrimination. Hopefully, in the near future women can be treated fairly and equally as men based on their merits and not on their gender.

 

Now that we’ve analyzed all the major problems regarding equality and discrimination, here are the exact FIFA statutes that the USSF are violating in this entire analysis:

FIFA statutes:

FIFA statutes are firm about the prohibition of discrimination from its member associations, like the USSF:

“Definitions – Part I. General provisions – Article 4 Non-discrimination, gender equality and stance against racism

Discrimination of any kind against a country, private person or group of people on account of race, skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, disability, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion.

a) Through their own strutucture that supports Pay-to-Play, and their inefficiency to select players from all socioeconomic sectors of the country irregardless of leagues and their directly affiliated youth programs, the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

b) Through their suppression of growth for more than half of the US population found in lower-income communities through the withholding of FIFA mandated Solidarity Payments, the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

c) Through their implementation of the USSF PLS, which do not at all define a professional player, club or league in the eyes of FIFA; which discriminates against states, cities, metro areas, players, clubs, leagues, state associations, current and potential investors of the sport, and ultimately fans, the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

d) Through their gross negligence of the state associations, and lack of financial rewards for them versus their preferential treament towards the needs of MLS and SUM due to inextricable conflicts of interest, the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

e) Through their enormous licensing fees for coaches, who are essential to the growth of the game, which has created similar inequalities within youth soccer with Pay-to-Play, the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

f) Through their gender inequality regarding equal pay for equal labor, the the USSF is discriminating and is out of compliance with FIFA.

As this mandate states, the USSF is in danger of “Suspension or Expulsion” from FIFA for being out of compliance.

 

FIFA statutes furthermore require that FIFA member associations, like USSF, must have good governance in their own statutes and must follow them:

“Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 15 Member Associations’ Statutes
– Member associations’ statutes must comply with the principles of good governance, and shall in particular contain, at a minimum, provisions relating to the following matters:

a) to be neutral in matters of politic and religion;
b) to prohibit all forms of discrimination;
c) to be independent and avoid any form of political interference;
d) to ensure that judicial bodies are independent (separation of powers);
e) all relevant stakeholders must agree to respect the Laws of the Game, the principles of loyalty, integrity, sportsmanship and fair play as well as the Statutes, regulations and decisions of FIFA and of the respective confederation;
g) that the member association has the primary responsibility to regulate matters relating to refereeing, the fight against doping, the registration of players, club licensing, the imposition of disciplinary measures, including for ethical misconduct, and measures required to protect the integrity of competitions;
i) to avoid conflicts of interests in decision-making;”

USSF is violating Article 15, sections / pars. a, b, c, d, e, g, and i which are all relevant to each other.

 

FIFA statutes are clear about the obligations from its member associations, like the USSF:

“Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 14 Member Association’s Obligations

1. Member associations have the following obligations:
a) to comply fully with the Statutes, regulations, directives and decisions of FIFA bodies at any time as well as the decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) passed on appeal on the basis of art. 57 par. 1 of the FIFA Statutes;
b) to take part in competitions organised by FIFA;
d) to cause their own members to comply with the Statutes, regulations, directives and decisions of FIFA bodies;
f) to ratify statutes that are in accordance with the requirements of the FIFA Standard Statutes;
i) to manage their affairs independently and ensure that their own affairs are not influenced by any third parties in accordance with art. 19 of these Statutes;
j) to comply fully with all other duties arising from these Statutes and other regulations.

2. Violation of the above-mentioned obligations by any member association may lead to sanctions provided for in these Statutes.

3.Violations of par. 1 (i) may also lead to sanctions, even if the third-party influence was not the fault of the member association concerned. Each member association is responsible towards FIFA for any and all acts of the members of their bodies caused by the gross negligence or wilful misconduct of such members.

In addition, as Article 14 and 15 demonstrate, the USSF and all of its members are officially bound by FIFA laws.

 

 

FIFA statutes are ultimately clear on Suspension and Expulsion of its member associations:

“Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 16 Suspension

1. The Congress may suspend a member association solely at the request of the Council. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Council may, without a vote of the Congress, temporarily suspend with immediate effect a member association that seriously violates its obligations. A suspension approved by the Council shall be in effect until the next Congress, unless the Council has revoked such suspension prior to such Congress.”

“Definitions – Part II. Membership – Article 17 Expulsion
1. The Congress may expel a member association only at the request of the Council if:
a) it fails to fulfil its financial obligations towards FIFA; or
b) it seriously violates the Statutes, regulations or decisions of FIFA; or
c) it loses the status of an association representing association football in its country.”

As demonstrated in a recent documents, (exhibit A and exhibit B), for its combined “gross negligence”, as characterized in Article 14 and demonstrated in this analysis, the USSF is in danger of Suspension or Expulsion from FIFA which the international governing body must act upon rectify in order to uphold its own good governance and leadership that is being closely watched around the world by other member associations.

FIFA celebrates diversity and unity around the world

As FIFA says, “football is, and must always be, for all – regardless of nationality, skin colour, gender, ethnic origin or religion…For the Game. For the World.” “FIFA recognises its responsibility to…abolishing all forms of discrimination in our game.”

The United States of America, of all countries – whose name starts with unity and whose deeply rooted ethos, the American Dream, is defined by “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” – must always be a leader and champion for equality, especially within its own country. The USSF is the official national association under FIFA in the USA. By vested FIFA law, and through the laws and ethos of the US, the USSF must always be a leader and champion for equality for all its members.

The USA has the potential to become a powerful soccer nation on the field across all levels, just like Germany. But it’s missing one key ingredient. Everyone’s equal participation and voice. Right now, USSF is not helping the USA in achieving its full soccer potential.

Anthony DiCicco, who is the son of legendary USWNT coach and World Cup champion Tony DiCicco, profoundly shares with regard to the current landscape of soccer in the US that, “People in positions of power have to decide that the best use of their power is to provide a voice to those who have been marginalized through the process.”

Unquestionably, millions of soccer voices in the US have been marginalized. But the days of being quite are no more. It’s time for real change. The USSF needs to evolve for the greater good of the game and for all the people playing and supporting the sport in this country.

 

As portrayed in the opening image, FIFA promotes the words:

“Make Equality A Reality”

Furthermore, “FIFA sees its member associations and their clubs as partners, whose commitment to progress in the areas of diversity and anti-discrimination is essential.”

The USSF needs to listen, and all of its members need to act in unison in order to take back control of the game in the USA. We all have a chance for a new beginning. It starts this Saturday at the upcoming USSF Presidential election.

I make a formal request to all voters who love the game, who remember what it was like to play the sport in their youth, who see their families growing up in the sport, and who want the game to be shared for generations to come by players, clubs, leagues, state associations, investors, coaches, referees, and ultimately fans from all parts of the country. I ask that you Vote for Equality. That’s who I am endorsing – Equality for all of us!

Like FIFA expresses, we should all stand, unite, speak up, and lead the way to

“ensure that the game of football
is available to and resourced for all who wish to participate”

because

“any form of discrimination
simply have no place in football.”

#USSFReform     #FIFA4Equality

#ProRelForUSA

Sincerely,
Isaac Payano
Economist, Urban Planner, and Educator
@ReimagineNYC