When Sandro Rosell was bothered by the actions of Joan Laporta, he resigned from that board as a sign of protest, in the belief that though he could stay and work from within, that might imply agreement with that president’s direction and his actions. Bartomeu and Freixa have the same problem, of being unable to criticize or distance themselves from the actions of their predecessors, because they were part of parcel of those actions.
But sitting tight worked for Bartomeu. He became president, presided over a treble and looks in the catbird’s seat. But if he stands for something different than Rosell, what is it? No idea. If it is more of the same, no soci should be in favor of that direction. But there is the uncertainty. Bartomeu hasn’t done anything wrong or bad during his tenure, and the team has accomplished good things. People scoff at him taking some credit for the treble, but it’s every bit as valid as Laporta taking credit for the good that happened under his watch. Like it or not, there is the very real possibility that Bartomeu might not be a horrible president, even as it is easy to cast him as Rosell Jr.
The shirt will return to tradition next season, and Bartomeu is discussing sponsors that are not Qatar, even as it disappoints me that he is discussing any sponsor at all. Has he learned from the errors of the past? Another excellent question. I’m unwilling to risk the future of the club that I love on the answer to that one being “No.” http://futseller.mobi/