FIFA president Sepp Blatter is famous for his laughable hypocrisy and ridiculously obvious bias against the actions of English sides and for sides like Real Madrid on the continent. In 2005, Sep Blatter condemned greed in football and said FIFA were committed to stopping this new trend:

“The majority is fighting with spears, while the greedy few have the financial equivalent of nuclear warheads. It is simply insane for any player to ‘earn’ £6-8m pounds a year

What logic, right or economic necessity would qualify a man in his mid-20s to demand to earn in a month a sum that his own father - and the majority of fans - could not hope to earn in a decade?

What we are faced with is a football society of haves and have nots.  This cannot be the future of our game. Fifa cannot sit by and see greed rule the football world. Nor shall we.”

In the above 2005 interview with the Financial Times, Blatter condemned the ‘pornographic amounts of money’ being spent by some clubs in this new era of football. Yet when the extravagant sums of money aren’t being spent by the noveau riche in England of Chelsea or more recently Manchester City, but by Real Madrid, yes, that footballing institution, it seems Blatter has changed his mind.

Is it any wonder that Blatter is an honorary member of Los Blancos? Suddenly, the opinion of Blatter has changed to the belief that huge amounts of money being spent in the game only prove that interest in it is at an all time high. Surprised? Blatter’s comical views were once again aired as he spoke about Cristiano Ronaldo’s transfer to Real Madrid earlier in the summer:

“Ten years ago there was painting from Picasso’s Blue Period was sold by Sothebys in London at that time for over £100 million. And what happened to this painting by Picasso? They hid it somewhere so no-one could take it away. Nobody can see it.

But a football player, you can see him once or twice a week, he is there, he is a star, he is being billed as a star. It is not the money he is getting; it’s the money between the clubs. Okay, you might say it is too much, but you have to put it in context of what football in our society is worth and what other things in our society are worth.”

Of course, Blatter continues to scamper up and down from what he perceives to be the moral high ground, as he had his say on financial fair play. The FIFA president criticized the increasingly common foreign ownership of English clubs by billionaires.

“There are big associations, like France, Germany and Spain where there is a by-law that the owners of the club must be at least 51% from the club. They must be members of the club or partners from the same country. This does not exist in the Premier League and it is a problem we have to address.”

While one is inclined to agree with Blatter’s view in this instance, there is a growing belief amongst critics that success is the most important desire of a fan, instead of the nationality of the ownership, given the fact that players have also long alienated their fans by earning extortionate sums of money for having well co-ordinated feet, meaning new ownership may not be any different.

After the Glazers took over Manchester United, they was initial outrage and a small group of fans even formed their own side, but eventually as a trio of Premiership titles and a European Cup arrived in the trophy cabinet amongst other pieces of silverware also won, any remaining dissenting fans soon forgot about the foreign ownership of their club.

Furthermore, while debt is a major issue, with reports emerging that the total debt of EPL sides reaches sums close to £3bn, if it is manageable, as it is in the case of many sides, it is not much of an issue. Yet when wages and transfer fees form over 50% of a club’s turnover, there is an issue. Stricter financial controls must be implemented in that sense, as they are in the Bundesliga, instead of attempting to change the law regarding foreign ownership.

Of course, FIFA and Blatter have no power over changing UK law, but could affect a change but bringing in sporting penalties for clubs struggling with debt. Yet, instead of promoting more sensible ideas such as these, Blatter seems to want to make an example out of several English clubs as immoral and unsporting, specifically ignoring the €1bn loan facility taken out by Real Madrid purely for signings.

Is that not against what Blatter perceives as ‘financial fair play’? Paying huge sums when the world economy is experiencing a downturn is totally against what Blatter’s quotes state, but his ties to Madrid mean he won’t utter a sound against Real. Madrid also negotiates their television deal separately and will earn a reported €1.1bn from Media Pro over seven years, signed in 2006.

When Culture secretary Andy Burnham MP calls for Premiership sides to share their wealth, he should have looked abroad to find real inequality in La Liga. The financial disparity between La Liga sides is far worse, especially when Madrid, a cultural institution and a part of Spanish society will have no bank willing to pressure them for loan repayments any time soon.

If Blatter was looking for the polar opposite of a level playing field, Real Madrid are the perfect example. Furthermore, when the 50% tax rate is in action for a few seasons, England will look a far less rosier destination for several prospective targets, who will choose the financial benefits (and warmer climate) of Spain instead, where tax is set at 23% for foreign nationals in the first five years of their residence in Spain.

Will Blatter mention ‘financial fair play’ when the Premier League’s star looks to be on the decline? It looks highly unlikely. Perhaps, if Blatter didn’t spout his verbal idiocy so frequently, karma-influenced incidents such as in the video below, might not happen that often: