Israeli analyst Grigory Kritser discussed the ongoing debate about whether the Russian Football Union (RFU) might move from UEFA to the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) and what that shift would imply for Russia’s footballing future. The conversation around the word Championship was used to illustrate how national associations, leagues, and players could be affected by a realignment of continental affiliations. Kritser’s perspective centers on how a change in continental home could ripple through scheduling, governance, sponsorship, and national pride, turning a theoretical move into a practical question for teams, fans, and officials alike.
He suggested that as long as Russia remains outside European competition, the issue will linger in the background, a diplomatic and sporting question that resists a simple resolution. Should RFU pivot to AFC, critics and supporters alike would frame the decision within a broader regional strategy, arguing that Asia offers potential regional tournaments, growing markets, and new competitive landscapes. Yet critics worry about the cultural and historical ties tied to European football and the responsibilities of long-standing members who have built rivalries, training pipelines, and youth systems within the European framework. The implication is that a switch to Asia would not just be a branding change; it would recalibrate rivalries, travel logistics, and the calendar in ways that touch every level of Russian football, from grassroots to the national team.
It is noted that FIFA and UEFA have already taken the step of excluding the Russian national team and all Russian clubs from competitions overseen by these bodies, a sanction that has sent ripples through planning, development programs, and the ambitions of clubs awaiting restoration. The decision underscores the reality that international sport operates within a web of governance, diplomacy, and security concerns, where actions by global federations can redefine eligibility, sponsorship, and broadcast revenue. In this environment, a potential move to AFC would not be simply a geographic rearrangement but a strategic reorientation of how Russian football engages with its peers, aligns its development priorities, and negotiates with global partners over investment, footage, and exposure in markets that are rapidly evolving.
In 2022 the Russian side engaged in three friendly matches with Asian teams—Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan—an arrangement that reflected both practical travel considerations and strategic outreach to neighboring football ecosystems. These fixtures provided brief windows into how Russian squads could adapt to different playing styles, climates, and tactical approaches while continuing to maintain a presence on the international stage during a period when European participation was restricted. The outcomes of these games fed into broader discussions about the RFU’s long-term competitive plan, youth development pipelines, and the balancing act between national pride and pragmatic diplomacy in international sport.
Valery Karpin’s squad, meanwhile, had their last official competitive appearance in November 2021, during the 2022 World Cup qualifying campaign against Croatia, a match that ended 0-1. This result, like many in the period, is viewed through a multifaceted lens: it marks a point in history for the national program, signals the challenges faced by the team on the field, and becomes part of the larger narrative about how Russia navigates international football amid shifting alliances and sanctions. Analysts and supporters alike weigh the significance of that game in the context of ongoing discussions about governance, development priorities, and the evolving structure of international competition in the region.
Additionally, Aleksander Čeferin has emerged in recent discussions as a prominent figure in European football governance, with observations about leadership and direction being central to the debates around UEFA’s future. The conversations about leadership, policy, and reform ripple beyond the ballot box, influencing how national associations, including those with ambitions in or beyond Europe, frame their strategic choices regarding alliance, participation, and policy alignment. The discourse underscores how leadership decisions at the top of football’s international hierarchy can set the tone for years to come, affecting decisions at the federation level, club sponsorships, and national team programs across continents.