Russia was the elephant in the room as Chelsea took a significant step towards a Champions League quarter-final with a win over Lille last night.
On the day a senior cabinet minister declared “the invasion of Ukraine has begun” and Boris Johnson announced sanctions against Russia, an English super-club built by a Russian oligarch played in a competition funded by Russian state money for the chance to compete for a trophy in St Petersburg.
Branding for Gazprom flashed around the ground on electronic advertising hoardings, while UEFA’s own sloganeering declared the ‘Road to St Petersburg 2022’ had begun.
Hours before kick-off, the Prime Minister said he had “misspoke” in Parliament after claiming Roman Abramovich was “already facing sanctions”, when asked directly about the Chelsea owner.
For all the claims of leading clubs and organisations that they are apolitical, being at Stamford Bridge yesterday was to experience an occasion when the game felt firmly entrenched in geopolitics.
Following high-profile calls, including from the Prime Minister, UEFA are expected to move the Champions League Final from St Petersburg, Vladimir Putin’s home city, on May 28, while the governing body face pressure to cut ties with Gazprom, the Russian state-owned energy company and one of their leading sponsors.
Stripping Russia of the showpiece is surely an inevitability as the threat of war looms, with logistics for travelling supporters as significant as the disastrous optics of handing a lucrative event to Putin’s regime.
In the context of sporting sanctions, taking away one match feels like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, given St Petersburg’s Gazprom Arena staged matches at UEFA’s European Championship in the summer and FIFA allowed Russia to host the 2018 World Cup — four years after Putin ordered the illegal annexation of Crimea.
Gazprom has been a UEFA sponsor since 2012 and the deal is worth £33million a season, underlining the crucial role Russian state money has played in growing the Champions League. The pressure on Abramovich, who has vehemently denied any links to Putin, is not new.
The Chelsea owner has previously had visa issues, while in February 2021 a group of MPs called for Chelsea and Everton to be banned from official Government projects promoting Britain overseas because of their links to Abramovich and Alisher Usmanov, respectively.
Abramovich and Usmanov, who sold his 30 per cent stake in Arsenal in 2018 and has ties to the Toffees, are both on what is known as “Navalny’s list” — a group of 35 individuals who Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny believes should face sanctions from the West.
An English super-club built by a Russian oligarch played in a competition funded by Russian state money
Both Abramovich and Usmanov have been named in Parliament by more than one MP in the last 24 hours and lobbying for the Government to include them in sanctions is likely to continue.
That pressure threatens to hang over Chelsea. It is not the type of uncertainty likely to filter down to dressing-room level but it might lead to discomfort in the boardroom, raising questions over Abramovich’s wealth, backing of the club and long-term future.
It has often felt easy or convenient to turn a blind eye to Russian influence in elite football, particularly with Abramovich now part of the furniture.
One expert yesterday warned the game had been “sleepwalking” into the current situation for the past 15 years but last night in west London ignoring the impact of Russian money and the Russian state on European football did not feel like an option.
At the very least, the crisis in Ukraine should prompt the same level of scrutiny on the role of Russian money as that of sportswashing projects launched by Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi at Newcastle and at Manchester City, respectively.
