The European Leagues, chaired by Pedro Proença, along with FIFPro, has filed a complaint with the European Commission against FIFA, accusing the governing body of world football of abusing its dominant position by expanding the international competition calendar.

The complainants argue that the overload of matches endangers players' health and undermines the economic viability of national competitions.

Gonçalo Almeida, lawyer and founder of Almeida & Associados, analyzes the main arguments in this dispute and the potential legal consequences for global football.

-What are the main arguments presented by FIFPro and the European Leagues in the complaint filed with the European Commission against FIFA?

Gonçalo Almeida (GA): The European Leagues and FIFPro filed a complaint with the European Commission against FIFA, accusing it of abusing its dominant position by imposing an overly congested international football calendar.

The primary argument is that recent tournament expansions, such as the 2025 Club World Cup and the increase in teams for the 2026 World Cup, result in match overload. The complainants argue that this poses a serious risk to the health and well-being of players and threatens the economic sustainability of national competitions.

 Additionally, they claim these decisions were made unilaterally by FIFA without properly consulting leagues and player unions, thus violating FIFA’s own principles of good faith and consultation, as well as European Union competition rules.

- What is the difference between FIFA's and UEFA’s roles in regulating the international football calendar?

GA: FIFA acts as the world governing body of football, setting the international calendar for all global competitions.

UEFA, as the European Football Confederation and a major stakeholder in the football industry, always contributes to FIFA’s decisions, including those regarding the international match calendar. The complaint suggests a lack of involvement by UEFA, which oversees European football, in setting this calendar.

It's worth noting that UEFA’s interests, as an organizer of continental tournaments (Europe) that affect European players, coaches, clubs, and national teams, may conflict with those of FIFA, which organizes global tournaments.

- How could the saturation of the international calendar impact players' health and safety? What was presented to justify this claim?

GA: Match overload is a central concern, as it increases the risk of injuries and physical and mental exhaustion for players. The European Leagues and FIFPro argue that the constant expansion of the international calendar directly harms athletes’ well-being by forcing them to compete under conditions that disregard their physical limits.

Numerous players, such as Rodri and Heung-Min Son, have publicly expressed concerns about the amount of football played and the negative health effects, a stance I find entirely understandable and legitimate.

- What is the importance of consulting stakeholders in setting the international football calendar, and how does FIFA position itself in this context?

GA: The complaint accuses FIFA of making decisions almost unilaterally on expanding the international match calendar without properly consulting national leagues and players’ unions, which represent key players in the football industry, including clubs and players.

In my view, transparency and consultation are absolutely essential for "fair" regulatory processes. If confirmed, this alleged lack of dialogue could well be considered an abuse of a dominant position, exacerbating existing tensions between FIFA and other football stakeholders.

- What does the accusation of abuse of dominant position by FIFA mean, and what are the potential legal consequences of this complaint?

GA: FIFA is accused of abusing its dominant position by using its dual role as a global regulator and competition organizer to make decisions that favor its own commercial interests.

This situation creates a potential conflict of interest and could lead to violations of European Union competition laws. If abuse of dominant position is found, FIFA could face sanctions from the European Commission, such as fines and a requirement to review its organizational practices.

- What are the implications of a possible victory for the European Leagues and FIFPro in the European Commission for the structure of global football?

GA: If the European Leagues and FIFPro succeed, it could lead to a significant restructuring of the global calendar.

FIFA might be compelled to more actively consult other stakeholders before making substantial changes, potentially limiting the number of international competitions and strengthening player labor rights by ensuring more control over match volume and rest periods.

- How could the complaints about match overload affect the dynamics between clubs and players, especially regarding contracts and workers’ basic rights?

GA: The overload of international matches inevitably impacts the relationship between clubs and players, particularly because exhausted players find it harder to meet club expectations, which could even lead to labor disputes.  Moreover, injuries that result from this overload obviously affect any employment relationship.

Labor rights are also at stake, with player well-being at the center of the dispute. Players demand fairer working conditions, such as adequate rest periods between competitions. A favorable outcome could emphasize the importance of protecting players' rights contractually.

- Why are players resistant to accepting the current competition calendar? What specific changes are being requested?

GA: Players resist the current calendar as they consider the volume of matches unsustainable, harming both their performance and career longevity.

Requested changes include reducing the number of international matches and creating a calendar that allows more physical and mental recovery time for athletes.

- What legal steps should the European Commission take following the complaint?

GA: Regarding timelines and legal procedures, a preliminary investigation phase will begin, which could last up to 12 months. Upon completion, a decision is expected on whether to initiate a formal investigation.

This process is essential to assess the accusations presented and determine if there is grounds, through evidence collection and hearings, to support an alleged antitrust violation.

- How does the 2025 Club World Cup factor into this dispute? Is there a real risk that the tournament will be postponed or canceled due to this legal action?

GA: The 2025 Club World Cup is a central element in the dispute, as its expansion could further worsen the saturation of the international calendar.

Although it is currently scheduled, the legal action could, at least theoretically, force FIFA to reconsider the tournament’s format and schedule. However, the risk of postponement or cancellation is not certain or highly probable and will depend on the findings of the European Commission’s investigation.