FIFA & Aramco sponsorship explored

·19 min·1 clip

FIFA's new sponsorship with oil giant Aramco raises alarms about environmental impact and Saudi Arabia's human rights record.

This episode examines FIFA's new sponsorship deal with the state-owned Saudi oil company Aramco. Hosts Kylie Lindsay and Natasha Dowie speak with guest Emma, a campaigner with Team Action FC. Emma is involved in a petition against the sponsorship, arguing it conflicts with the values of women's football. The Aramco deal grants sponsorship rights for the 2026 Men's World Cup and the 2027 Women's World Cup. The campaign highlights the company's role as a major fossil fuel producer and its association with Saudi Arabia's human rights record. Emma calls for FIFA to take more responsibility in selecting sponsors, suggesting the women's game has an opportunity to avoid problematic sponsors common in men's football. She references the NWSL in the United States as a positive example of brand partnerships. The discussion notes that 135 players from 27 nations have signed the petition, including Vivianne Miedema. A parallel campaign highlights the average WSL salary of £47,000 compared to £8.2 million in the Premier League. Emma argues the women's game has a tradition of activism where players and fans "have always had to fight to be heard." She suggests the sport's earlier development stage allows it to forge a different commercial path than the "inflated" men's game. The conversation explores the tension at lower levels, where clubs need sponsorship money and "can't really afford to be too fussy." Emma cites the 51% fan-ownership rule in Swedish and German clubs as an alternative model. She also mentions Lewes FC as a blueprint for paying men and women equally. The hosts question why official bodies like the PFA are not more prominently supporting the campaign. They discuss the complexity for players who may criticize Aramco while playing for clubs with other questionable ownership ties. Emma contends it is "always better to say something rather than not saying anything," even if it invites accusations of hypocrisy. The episode concludes with directions to the petition at actionfc.org/aramco-campaign. The tone is conversational and advocacy-focused, blending interview questions with personal reflections from the hosts. The style is educational, aiming to inform listeners about the sponsorship issue and the activist response. This episode will appeal to fans interested in the politics, ethics, and commercial development of women's football. Listeners seeking pure match analysis or tactical discussion might find it less relevant.

As heard by us

A sponsorship dispute that opens into a broader debate about money, ownership, and women's football.

The Offside Rule treats the sponsorship dispute as more than a single controversy. It follows Team Action FC's petition against FIFA's sponsorship agreement with Aramco, a deal running through 2027 and tied to the 2026 Men's World Cup and the 2027 Women's World Cup, then…

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

You want the sponsorship fight without losing the football context.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from The Offside Rule