FIFA CAREFULLY BALANCES SPONSORS, SANCTIONS

MOSCOW— The World Cup rulings in Fifa’s disciplinary court have not always been easy to comprehend.

Sweden was slugged 70,000 Swiss francs ($70,700) for players wearing nonapproved socks, and Croatia was hit with the same monetary penalty when a player took a nonsponsor’s drink onto the field.

Yet a Russia fan’s neo-Nazi banner and a Serbian World War Twoera nationalist symbol waved inside venue drew only 10,000 Swiss francs ($10,100) fines, paid by their national soccer bodies which are responsible for fan misconduct at games.

Commercial rules can seem to be enforced more strictly than bad behavior, and Argentine great Diego Maradona appears to enjoy a unique code of conduct of his own.

Maradona, a paid Fifa ambassador, uses Facebook to explain away allegations of racism and offensive behavior from VIP seats, charges that have previously led soccer’s world governing body to ban players.

At times, the priorities and consistency in Fifa decisions can look a curious form of World Cup justice. Even before the World Cup, Fifa was criticized by the antidiscrimination group Kick It Out for prioritizing commercial gain over eliminating racism from the sport.

But sports law expert James Kitching says Fifa’s approach makes some sense, because the World Cup depends on sponsors and broadcasters paying for exclusive deals.

“A financial sanction is always heavy in a commercial case because exclusivity is something Coca-Cola or Adidas pays millions of dollars for,” Kitching, the former head of sports legal affairs at the Asian Football Confederation, said.

The $70,000 fines imposed on Sweden and Croatia followed repeated warnings from Fifa.

“It’s a sensible solution,” Kitching said of the heavy fines. “If they are not seen to protect it (sponsor exclusivity), they put everything at risk.”

The money due to settle disciplinary cases is added to Fifa’s development budget totaling hundreds of millions each year.