RFEF Moves to Oust Camps, García Caba and Rivera

RFEF Negotiates Three Dismissals After Oliva Summit

Can a group of footballers empty the leadership of a federation? The RFEF is about to answer yes, at least in part. Trinc the meeting between Víctor Francos and the Spain national team players, the federation is working on the immediate dismissal of three officials specifically named in the players' statement: General Secretary Andreu Camps, Head of Integrity Miguel García Caba, and Marketing Director Rubén Rivera. This is not a future threat; these departures are already in preparation.

Which Roles Are on the Way Out

The document made public by the players last Friday listed five demands: restructuring the women's football hierarchy, restructuring the presidential office and general secretariat, the resignation of the RFEF president, restructuring communications and marketing, and restructuring the integrity department. Pedro Rocha had asked for time. That time has run out through fait accompli actions.

The three flagged departments already have associated names, and those names appear on the exit list. Alongside them, the federation has already removed two other key figures — Rubiales and Jorge Vilda — and appointed Elvira Andrés as chief of staff and Marisa González as head of Equality. The overall package is presented as part of ongoing negotiations to resolve the conflict. As this discussion closed, Andreu Camps' removal appeared directly as breaking news.

Who Can Appoint and Remove Officials in the RFEF?

It is the clubs, albeit indirectly, that elect the federation's leaders, not the players. This is the core institutional argument: the RFEF is not a section of women's football but the framework for all registered football. Furthermore, the relationship between international players and the federation is not an employment contract. They hold a federation license, just like any other registered member, and are only linked during call-ups: when the competition ends, they return to their clubs, and their status reverts to that of any regional-level player.

Against this stands the opposing view: in practice, it is the combined pressure from players, the government, and the cost of international image damage that decides who falls now. Hence the repeated antiestéticar across various sectors that each concession will trigger the next demand. In parallel, legal action looms: some anticipate a complaint for coercion and defamation against the players. Regarding the dismissals, there is a financial warning: if executed without cause, a labor court could declare them unfair.

Women's Football and the Money That Sustains It

All revenue flowing into the federation comes from men's football. Based on this, one line of analysis argues that women's football would not be self-sustaining and that its growth depends on de facto subsidies. The practical consequence drawn from this: without ticket sales, merchandise, or broadcasting rights covering the structure, the capacity to make demands has a hard ceiling.

Translating this asymmetry is straightforward. If no one pays for the product, every euro allocated to the women's football structure comes from the men's coffers, and whoever signs off on this internal transfer expects something in return, even if only social peace. This is the most common argument raised when asking who foots the bill.

From the other side, critics respond that the debate over funding is used as an excuse to change nothing, and that visibility and sponsorship gained after the scandal have economic value even if they don't appear on the balance sheet. What no one disputes is that the power struggle is being fought with someone else's money on the table.

The 32-Team World Cup and Other Uncomfortable Figures

The tournament that sparked all this was played with 32 participating teams out of more than 200 countries. This imbalance is cited as proof that the competition is an artificial construct antiestéticaturing very low-level teams. It is an opinion, not a measurement: no one has compared those teams to a men's fourth division using data.

What is confirmed is the gap in audiences and revenues between men's and women's football, along with boycott calls circulating among sponsors. When you ask someone to pay for admission, the tone of the conversation changes.

The Conflict Extends Beyond Football

In the final stages, the discussion moves away from sports. Political interpretations emerge — who places whom in the hierarchy — alongside labor-related derivatives: anecdotes about hiring women in companies, generalizations lacking statistical backing, and claims about alleged internal slogans.

It is important to separate fact from impression. Regarding the presence of women in staff positions, there are only isolated personal accounts, with no supporting figures. Barroom talk, said with full respect for barrooms.

There is a consolation for the offices: if the criterion for deciding who is surplus becomes who is more likable, the next organizational chart will be signed by the calendar. And the calendar, unlike a general secretary, does not file appeals.