Sports News of Wednesday, 24 June 2015
A former chairman of the Ghana Football Association (GFA), Nana Sam Brew-Butler, says monies earned by the Black Stars from tournaments as appearance fees and prize money must be shared by the government and the FA of who are shareholders in all national teams.
However, he disagrees that all the World Cup money, for instance, be taken over by government because it is necessary that the football controlling body enjoys a good share of the money for development of the game.
The Ebusua Dwarfs director said even though national teams were properties of the state but being managed by the FA, it was important that a good working arrangement was reached over the disbursement of such monies accruing to the teams from tournaments, such as the FIFA World Cup, to ensure that both government and the FA benefited from dividends of investment by the state in the teams.
Sharing his thoughts on the Government’s White Paper on the report by the Justice Dzamefe-led Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Ghana’s 2014 Brazil World Cup campaign, the football veteran administrator and business tycoon stressed that the government invested in the Black Stars throughout the qualifying campaign and not just the money advanced to the FA as appearance fees for the players and technical staff, therefore, it was only proper for the government to benefit from dividends from its investment.
“National teams belong to the state and are state properties. They [teams] represent Ghana and that is why the full national anthem is played when the national teams play.
“The government pays for virtually everything from preparation of the team to qualifying matches and the use of facilities and other expenses borne by the state, hence the World Cup money is part of the dividends that accrue to Ghana and not the FA. But such dividends must be shared by shareholders of which the state is the biggest investor,” Nana Brew-Butler, who headed the FA between 1993 and 1997, told the Graphic Sports yesterday.
He debunked recent claims by some prominent football administrators that the national team belonged to the FA, stating that the argument was “flawed and ridiculous” as the FA by its structure was only managing the teams on behalf of the state. “In the strictest sense, the GFA is not an entirely independent body of which government plays no part,” he observed.
Instead, he called for a more harmonious working relationship in which the state and the FA would play complementary roles, such as exists in a public-private partnership (PPP), in which shareholders decide on how to share dividends and profits.
“However, as shareholders the government [which represents the state] and the FA must agree on how to share such benefits. Even as the biggest shareholder you don’t want to take all the profit to deprive the body of money to run the business.”
Government officials, he noted, were equally guilty about the lack of a smooth working relationship with the FA due to their posture when it comes to such matters.
“The two bodies must co-exist but a line must be drawn as to what government can do and what it cannot do in the administration of football,” Nana Butler added.