Introduction

The invention of FIFA history

In the 1960s, the headquarters of the Federation International de Football Association (hereafter, FIFA) occupied a residential house around Zurich. Compared to the contemporary facilities, the place was modest. Situated in a relatively remote neighborhood, it was a European mansion, which could be the home of a Swiss millionaire. Anyone who passed by would confuse Helmüt Kaser, the secretary general of the entity, with the owner of the house, were it not for the small sign in front of the main entrance. In fact, Käser used to live there. Of the three floors: the first floor lent itself to the meetings of FIFA and of the Executive Committee; the second level served as the presidential cabinet; the third was exclusively the address of the secretary. Elias Zaccour, then one of the greatest businessmen in the world of soccer, visited the old building in February of 1974. His testimony is peculiar:

[…] the secretary [Helmut Käser] was there. He gave me a list. And then I hit my finger like that, there was so much dust on his desk. […] The dog lived with him, his daughters were all up there. So full of dust. This was [February of] 1974. Havelange arrived in [June of] 1974. The new headquarters of FIFA were inaugurated. [until 2007]2

Figure 1: The old FIFA headquarters, 1950s. FIFA Archives, Zurich.

On June 11, 1974, Brazilian João Havelange defeated Englishman Stanley Rous and became the seventh president of FIFA and the first (and so far the only) non-European. Zaccour’s speech describes the event, traversed by metaphors. The reference to the dust of the table of Käser is not occasional. It has a double effect. The first is to refer to something that is old or even archaic. Zaccour alludes to the ruins of the European colonial order. The environment of FIFA is identified as a place of relative abandonment, of precarious organization, where family relations subsisted (“the daughters were all up there”). The meaning of the allusion to the family is related to the exclusivity: FIFA belongs to Europe. More than Stanley Rous, Helmut Käser, who has long been regarded as the European opposition to Havelange itself, is evoked as the very symbol of this exclusivity. The figure of Käser is confused with that of his “dogs” (“the dog lived with him”) as the own guardians of the European domain. Here, Zaccour’s speech can be complemented by that of Peter Pullen, an advisor to the Brazilian Confederation of Sports in England, who was also in the building. Pullen remembers “two German shepherds” living in the environment, almost as if to say that the first guard dog was, in fact, Käser himself. One of the first acts of João Havelange at the presidency was to expel the secretary of the entity building. In order for him to step down, it would take another seven years.3

The second effect of Zaccour’s image is to refer to the parable of the creation of the world. In 1974, the “arrival” of Havelange inaugurated a new time. The characterization of a “dusty” environment, which metamorphosis completely into a brand new one, evokes the narrative of the creation of the world. From the dust left by Helmut Käser, from the wreckage of the “old colonial order”, a new world breaks out. Havelange is the architect of this metamorphosis. When he arrived in 1974, it was a low-cash entity, dominated by Europeans. As Havelange himself likes to say, he had found FIFA in a penury “with only twenty dollars in cash”. Thanks to his managerial skills, Havelange was able to transform a modest family organization into a transnational company, whose balance reached (in 1998) almost 400 million dollars. Through Havelange hands, dust became gold.4

Figure 2: FIFA headquarters inaugurated in 1979. FIFA Archives, Zurich.

This is what can be identified as FIFA’s “official history.” In the words of anthropologist Clifford Geertz, “it is a tale that they tell themselves about themselves.”5 The strength of this representation in both the media and the historiography of soccer was largely due to João Havelange’s own skill and that of the agents who profit from his victory and the construction of a history of FIFA that was consistent with this event. In addition to mitigating the conflicts related to the Federation itself, this narrative eclipses the roles of several political agents within the entity and props up Havelange as the star of FIFA’s politics and history. In this sense, this narrative erases the fact that FIFA was already a vibrant, relatively globalized institution in the 1960s. Much like the International Olympic Committee, FIFA picked up steam with Europe’s post-war rebuilding effort and accelerated economically and politically throughout the Cold War and decolonization processes. For almost half a century Havelange and his allies sponsored books, magazines, and even movies that reproduced and reinforced this narrative. By analyzing different sources from a historical perspective, the main purpose of this book is to show how and why these agents succeeded in producing a narrative that placed them front and center of FIFA history.

Was 1974 a historical turning point in FIFA history?

In fact, the election of Havelange was a singular event. Havelange defeated the incumbent, Englishman Stanley Rous, an outcome that has yet to be repeated. Besides American Avery Brundage, who took over the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in 1952, Havelange was the only non-European to control either of the world’s two major international sports entities (FIFA and IOC). More significantly, Havelange’s victory, which was won with a vast majority of votes from countries in the Middle East, South America and the Caribbean, Africa, as well as Mexico and dissidents in Europe and Asia, was thus an outlier in the institution’s history. Notwithstanding, it was a nailbiter: 62 to 58 and four abstentions in the first round. The difference was slightly larger in the second round: 68 to 54 and two abstentions. Once president, Havelange solved FIFA’s main geopolitical problems: he reinstated the People’s Republic of China as a member of FIFA, expelled South Africa definitively, and allocated Israel to UEFA from the AFC. In 1976, Havelange signed FIFA’s first contract with Coca-Cola to finance football development projects. Nevertheless, his campaign was probably more impressive than his term. Taking advantage of political divisions within the organization, Havelange embarked on a global tour from 1971 to 1974. Sizing up the campaign effort, sociologist Alan Tomlinson estimated Havelange's campaign spending at around £500,000. This is the same amount reported by Gianni Infantino in 2016. However, the main question stands, was 1974 a historical turning point in FIFA history?6

Certainly, the election of Havelange to the presidency of the entity is the “foundation myth” of contemporary FIFA. In this sense, it is symptomatic that Zaccour made no distinction between Havelange’s triumph (in 1974) and the opening of FIFA headquarters (in 1979). The election and the new headquarters are seen as products of the same historical event. The problem begins when this image stretches beyond the frame of the official discourse. As ingrained as it is recurrent, this narrative pervades both academic literature and journalistic production on football, not to mention those who, like Zaccour, were directly engaged in the campaign. Thus, it is almost a consensus that Havelange's victory over Englishman Stanley Rous divided the historical chronology of FIFA and, more broadly, the world of football into two eras.

Even those who opposed Havelange failed to come up with an alternative history of the entity. Juca Kfouri, a Brazilian journalist and critic of the former president confirms this account: “Until 1974 […] FIFA was an entity predominantly focused on the interests of European football. […] it is undeniable that it was the Brazilian [Havelange] who was responsible for the change, which transformed FIFA into a transnational company.” Another journalist, Andrew Jennings was even drier and sharper: “Goodbye Sir Stanley. Greetings to a new time. 1974 was the watershed in FIFA's history.” For Jennings and Kfouri, 1974 was the year that football was corrupted by excess money circulating through FIFA. Although disenchanting, the universe created by the Brazilian was certainly new. Capable of creating a world in the image and likeness of its creator, Havelange's election to the FIFA presidency was definitely a turning point.7

This underwhelming version of Havelange's election began to be written less than five days after the election in a letter where Stanley Rous could not conceal his grudge: “As you may have seen...