Saudi Arabian Clubs Face Legal Challenges Over Alleged Violation of AFC Champions League Ownership Rules
Cristiano Ronaldo’s Al-Nassr and two other Saudi Pro League clubs, Al-Hilal and Al-Ittihad, are facing potential expulsion from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League due to accusations of breaching the competition’s ownership regulations.
These clubs, all owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF), have qualified for the AFC Champions League, but they are now confronted with legal challenges for seemingly disregarding the AFC’s regulations against multi-club ownership. Similar to UEFA, the AFC prohibits teams with the same owner from participating in its Champions League tournament to safeguard the competition’s integrity. Several leading Asian clubs from other countries are preparing legal action against the AFC and its chairman, Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim al-Khalifa.
Currently, multi-club ownership is only prohibited in the AFC Champions League when there is a “material risk” that it could potentially “jeopardize the integrity of an AFC club competition and/or any match.” The responsibility lies with the participating clubs to demonstrate why they pose no such risk.
For instance, Mumbai City and Melbourne City, both owned by the City Football Group (CFG), are allowed to compete in the competition simultaneously because there is a minimal chance of them facing each other, especially since the competition is initially divided into two regional zones.
However, all three PIF-owned clubs are in the same zone and could potentially encounter each other early in the competition. Consequently, the AFC is facing demands to clarify why it has seemingly disregarded its own regulations.
According to reports, the AFC is making significant concessions to appease the Saudi clubs, as they pledged “financial support” in exchange for hosting the Asian Cup (Asia’s equivalent of the Euros) in 2027. Last year, the AFC altered the rules on the quota of overseas players allowed in the AFC Champions League, increasing it from three to five. Some AFC members believe that the decision to overlook multi-club ownership regulations is indicative of their eagerness to accommodate Saudi Arabia.
