Feyenoord Board Criticized for Botched Transfer Window
The knives were out for Feyenoord’s leadership on Monday. On De Telegraaf’s podcast Kick-Off, journalists Mike Verweij and Valentijn Driessen tore into technical director Dévy Rigaux and general director Robert Eenhoorn, accusing them of mishandling a crucial transfer window and bowing to the interests of the Friends of Feyenoord.
“They did something wrong in this transfer window”
Verweij pointed straight at Rigaux, who had previously criticised former director Dennis te Kloese.
“Rigaux has taken a huge swipe at his predecessor Te Kloese,” Verweij said. “But now it turns out that Te Kloese, with the money for Hadj Moussa included, had 40 million.”
According to Verweij, Feyenoord left major money on the table.
“There was a bid of 25 million for Ueda, who was sold far too cheaply to Lille OSC. And Read could almost have risen to 35 million. And Hull City bid 20 million for Targhalline.”
The conclusion, in his eyes, is brutal.
“If they had simply done their job and sold the right players, Feyenoord would for the time being have had a great deal of financial resources. That same Te Kloese put together a squad there that was worth around €120 million. So I think Rigaux and Eenhoorn did something wrong in this transfer window. If they had sold Read immediately, they could have been much more effective in the transfer market.”
Friends of Feyenoord back in the spotlight
Driessen then widened the lens from individual deals to the club’s ownership structure.
“It all comes back to the Friends of Feyenoord again,” he said. “They have 49 per cent of the shares. And the moment Feyenoord pay €17.5 million, they lose 25 per cent. And in two years' time, again.”
The key, he argued, lies in the obligations tied to transfer profits.
“Feyenoord are also obliged to buy part of the shares if they post a positive transfer balance in a transfer window. And they certainly would have done that if one of those transfers had gone through. Then that transfer balance would have been so high that they would have been obliged to buy part of the Friends' purchases.”
That, in Driessen’s view, is where sporting ambition and shareholder interests collide.
“Eenhoorn is simply an extension of the Friends”
Driessen then made his sharpest allegation yet, claiming the Friends of Feyenoord actively resisted being bought out and that this shaped the club’s stance on outgoing transfers.
“The Friends of Feyenoord do not want out. And Eenhoorn came in at the request of the Friends. He is their favourite, and became director. So he is not going to go against those Friends,” Driessen argued.
According to him, that dynamic directly affected the failed move of Hadj Moussa to Al-Ittihad.
“Eenhoorn allowed himself to be influenced into not letting the Hadj Moussa transfer go through,” he said of Feyenoord’s technical director.
The official explanation for the collapse of the deal – a rejected bank guarantee – does not convince Driessen at all.
“It concerns a €40 million transfer. It concerns Saudi Arabia, just ask Ajax. They have always had the money and are solvent.”
“Hardly reachable by phone”
Driessen painted a picture of a club that, at a decisive moment, simply did not want a mega transfer to happen.
“Feyenoord were also hardly reachable by phone, it was very difficult to get in touch with them. It was dragged out for a very long time, and in the end the medical could no longer take place.”
He then returned to the central accusation: that Eenhoorn’s loyalty lies with the Friends of Feyenoord rather than with maximising the club’s transfer power.
“Robert Eenhoorn is simply an extension of the Friends of Feyenoord. He is their mate. The moment someone puts you forward and you can serve their interests, that happens nine times out of 10. He has previously made it known that he is not exactly eager to buy out the Friends. And then you remain stuck with those Friends,” Driessen concluded.
The numbers, the missed bids, the aborted Moussa deal – for Verweij and Driessen, they all point in one direction: Feyenoord had a window to cash in and strengthen, but internal power lines and shareholder politics slammed it shut.
