‼️If you wish to publish an Italian translation of this article, any of our other articles, or ANY PART OF THEM, please cite the original source. PLAGIARISM IS ILLEGAL ⛔️
Opposition to the International Volleyball Federation’s proposed international calendar reform is gaining momentum across Europe.
Gino Sirci, president of Italian champions Perugia and the driving force behind the #NoClubsNoVolley campaign, claims that he is now in contact with 30 European clubs that share his concerns about the changes being considered for the 2028–2032 cycle.
The announcement marks a further expansion of the movement launched on October 29, when Sirci initially referred to the support of 25 clubs. Although a complete list of the 30 organisations has not yet been made public, the growing number suggests that resistance is no longer confined to a handful of Italian teams.
The campaign has received another significant boost in Italy, where Padova officially announced its support on November 3. Club president Fabio Cremonese expressed strong opposition to the proposed reform, arguing that a prolonged interruption of domestic championships in the middle of the season could have serious consequences for professional volleyball.
“I cannot see a single positive aspect in this reform. The time has come for clubs to speak with one voice,” he declared.
His concerns focus on the potential impact on relationships with supporters, television broadcasters and sponsors, as well as the sporting imbalance that could emerge between players involved in national team competitions and those remaining at club level. While international players would face demanding tournament schedules, others could spend extended periods without official matches, creating different competitive conditions within the same championship.
Padova joins an increasingly broad Italian coalition that already includes Piacenza, Milano, Verona, Modena and Trentino, alongside Perugia. The clubs share the view that any major restructuring of the international calendar must take into account the economic sustainability of professional teams and the physical demands placed on players throughout the season.
The movement also has support beyond Italy, with Bulgarian champions Levski Sofia and Neftochimic 2010 Burgas have officially joined the initiative, confirming that concerns about the proposed changes are being discussed across different European volleyball markets.
Levski co-president David Davidov confirmed that the Sofia club had carefully examined the arguments presented by the organisers before deciding to support the campaign. Neftochimic president Ognyan Tomov also acknowledged receiving a personal invitation from Sirci and subsequently sent an official letter expressing the Burgas club’s support.
Modena has likewise backed the initiative, placing particular emphasis on player welfare and the potential consequences of disrupting the established balance between preparation, competition and recovery. For clubs already operating demanding domestic and European schedules, the prospect of additional interruptions raises questions that extend well beyond the organisation of individual tournaments.
The expansion of the movement has coincided with another public exchange between Sirci and Sebastian Świderski, president of the Polish Volleyball Federation. Their disagreement reflects two fundamentally different approaches to the future of the sport: while Sirci believes the proposed changes risk weakening professional clubs, Świderski argues that a restructured calendar could create a more balanced season for volleyball as a whole.
In a new video message released on November 4, Sirci directly addressed the Polish federation president and questioned whether the interests of players were receiving sufficient consideration.
“I believe that President Świderski, the Polish clubs and the Italian clubs should first and foremost behave like responsible fathers within a family. In my opinion, we are squeezing these players like lemons,” Sirci said.
The Italian businessman also challenged one of the central arguments supporting the reform: that the new calendar would provide more time for club competitions. According to his calculations, the number of weeks allocated to club volleyball would vary considerably throughout the proposed four-year cycle.
“Let President Świderski not tell me that the championship will be longer. In the 2028/29 season, the time allocated to clubs will remain 33 weeks. In the second year it will be 36, in the third 31, and in the fourth once again 31 weeks.”
For Sirci, these figures undermine the suggestion that the new structure would consistently improve the organisation of club competitions. He also argues that combining demanding domestic schedules with additional national team commitments could place even greater pressure on elite players, rather than offering them the relief that the reform is intended to provide.
“I believe that clubs will be seriously disadvantaged and will not be able to accept a calendar imposed by the FIVB, an organisation that is, in effect, a direct competitor of the clubs,” the Perugia president added.
Świderski, however, remains firmly on the opposite side of the debate. The Polish federation chief has defended the proposed changes, arguing that the current system creates excessively long periods of separation between players and their clubs while leaving national teams with insufficient opportunities for official competition during much of the year.
His calculations suggest that the revised structure could increase the time available for club competitions from approximately 29–30 weeks to as many as 35 weeks, allowing matches to be distributed more evenly and reducing the need for congested midweek schedules.
The disagreement is particularly significant because Poland is home to one of Europe’s strongest and most commercially successful domestic leagues. Nevertheless, according to Sirci, Polish clubs have not yet joined the group of 30 European organisations with which he is in contact.
This difference in approach highlights an important aspect of the controversy. National federations must consider the development of international volleyball as a whole, while professional clubs are directly responsible for their commercial operations, domestic competitions and the day-to-day management of their players. Finding a solution that accommodates both perspectives will be one of the FIVB’s biggest challenges.
For now, the #NoClubsNoVolley campaign has succeeded in turning what initially appeared to be an Italian protest into a broader European discussion. However, growing support does not automatically translate into negotiating power. The clubs will need to move beyond individual declarations and establish a common position if they hope to influence the federation’s final decision.
The next crucial step will therefore be whether the 30 organisations can coordinate their efforts, present a unified proposal and engage directly with the FIVB. Sirci has indicated that a decision on the calendar project could come around mid-November, leaving the clubs with a limited window in which to make their voices heard.
What is increasingly clear is that the debate is no longer simply about moving international tournaments to different months. It concerns the distribution of power, responsibilities and financial resources within modern volleyball, as well as the question of who ultimately bears the cost of an increasingly demanding international calendar.
With the number of clubs opposing the reform continuing to grow and the disagreement with Poland becoming more pronounced, the FIVB faces mounting pressure to demonstrate that its proposed changes can genuinely serve the interests of the entire volleyball community.
__________________
👀|QUICK LINKS
• All International news 🗞️
• Multimedia
• Facebook
• Instagram
__________________