Initially scheduled in Saint Petersburg, the 2021-2022 edition of the Champions League final was urgently relocated to the Stade de France, in Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis), due to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. As the independent panel – made up of lawyers, academics and representatives of supporters’ associations – of the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) noted in its investigation report, “It was President Macron who accepted” the request issued by UEFA, on February 24, on the first day of the offensive of the armies of Vladimir Putin, that the Dionysian enclosure “can host the final, a decision which has been ratified” the next day “by an extraordinary meeting of the UEFA Executive Committee”.
“The decision was formalized during a conversation” between Emmanuel Macron, a great football fan, and the Slovenian president of UEFA, Aleksander Ceferin, specify the rapporteurs who underline “the absence of a call for candidates” while such “call for tenders” is usually launched “about three to four years before game day.”
In the early hours of the war, “there were a very limited number of options, and it was just a matter of determining who was available and whether the host state and federation were ready to undertake this task at such short notice” three months, acknowledged UEFA Deputy General Secretary Giorgio Marchetti.
The latter added that a ” process ” standard of applications “would have further reduced the time” preparations for this rescheduled final at the Stade de France where, according to the rapporteurs, “access issues” and of “serious difficulties of interoperability with the police authorities”, “rooted” and to be “considered as such”had been noted by UEFA, from 2006, during the previous Champions League final organized in the setting of Saint-Denis.
“Inappropriate” choice
Considered by the rapporteurs as a ” aggravating factor “This “The late change of venue amplified the imperative for effective interoperability and communication between stakeholders, and the need to verify that all layouts were sound and fit for purpose.” The panel considers that “this shortened planning period was a key factor in the failures surrounding the event (…). Compromises could be made in many areas of the event, but safety and security were not one of them”.
You have 49.46% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.