Sign up to FREE email alerts from Football London - Arsenal Subscribe Thank you for subscribing See our privacy notice Invalid Email

Ahead of the 2019 Europa League final Arsenal and Chelsea fans have one question: Just why did UEFA choose to host such a showpiece event in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan.

As criticism grows of UEFA's decision to host the Europa League final in Baku - along with concerns over travel arrangements and ticket allocations and player safety concerns - football.london takes an in-depth look at the main issues surrounding the match.

Loyal supporters of the North London side, many of whom have forked out more than £1,000 on flights to reach the venue in Asia, will also be dismayed to learn that the showpiece event could have been held at Seville's Estadio Ramón Sánchez Pizjuán in Seville, Spain or Beşiktaş Arena in Istanbul, Turkey.

After Atletico Madrid's state of the art stadium, the Wanda Metropolitano, beat Baku's Olympic Stadium to host this month's Champions League final, UEFA restarted the bidding process for the Europa League final which saw the 68,700 capacity stadium in Azerbaijan beat off Seville and Istanbul

However, serious questions are raised as to whether Baku is fit to host such an important football match - let alone whether their bid dossier was sufficiently scrutinised by UEFA.

For example, in the 'mobility' section of the document, Baku’s bid for the Europa League final reads: “Due to its geographical location, most foreign spectators would arrive in Baku by air, resulting in high demand for flights. Heydar Aliyev International Airport is the only international airport within easy reach of Baku. The in-and outbound airport capacity meets the requirements.”

Whereas the same section detailed in their ill-fated bid for the Champions League final contains a subtle but vitally important distinction when it states: “The in-and outbound airport capacity theoretically meets the requirements.”

Note the use of the word 'theoretically'.

In practice it beggars belief how such an airport could handle many tens of thousands of fans jetting in from London. Did UEFA drop the ball in their hunt for a venue in a city with an airport that cannot cope with any more than 15,000 arrivals?

If you factor in the low number of direct flights from large European airports and is in a timezone which will see the match kick-off at 11pm local time. If the game goes to extra time and penalties proceedings may not finish until around 2am local time - with many fans facing a race to the airport to make their connections.

Fans also require a visa to enter the country, which costs £18 and takes three days to process, although some travel agencies are charging anything up to £100 to facilitate the paperwork.

There has also been an issue with Azerbaijan rejected visa applications from British-Armenian Arsenal fans.

The Arsenal Supporters Trust (AST) has been contacted by a British-Armenian season ticket holder who had his visa rejected. There are fears as many as 20 other fans could be at risk.

Meanwhile Henrikh Mkhitaryan is unlikely to travel to Baku due to the ongoing conflict between Azerbaijan and his native Armenia.

Gunners attacker, Mkhitaryan, by dint of hailing from Armenia is banned from entering next-door Azerbaijan. The countries have twice gone to war and technically a state of war is still on their statute books.

The reason the pair do not have diplomatic relations is due to a territorial wrangle over a disputed state called Nagorno-Karabakh that has seen innocent civilians as well as military personnel lose their lives in a series of flashpoints over the years.

Armenians - such as Mkhitaryan - are banned from entering Azerbaijan after the government issued a declaration stating: "Citizens of the Republic of Armenia, as well as citizens of any other country who are of Armenian descent, are forbidden entry to the Republic of Azerbaijan. If a person's passport shows any evidence of travel to Nagorno-Karabakh, barring a diplomatic passport, they are forbidden entry to the Republic of Azerbaijan."

European football's governing body UEFA - as well as FIFA - have fudged the issue by making sure the pair will not be drawn together in Euro, or World Cup fixtures. UEFA also kept them apart in last year's Nations League draw.

The political solution is the Azerbaijan government granting exceptions to the rule.

For example, four years ago, Mkhitaryan featured for his then Bundesliga side Borussia Dortmund when they played Gabala from Azerbaijan.

The Azerbaijan authorities insisted Mkhitaryan would be granted a visa but the player did not travel after Dortmund were not convinced his safety would be guaranteed.

However, Arsenal are expected to follow Dortmund's lead and keep Mkhitaryan at home even if he is granted a visa because, similar to the German side, the Gunners have concerns regarding the fact that UEFA and Azerbaijan can't wholly guarantee his safety.

(Image: Jan Kruger/Getty Images)

football.london spoke to the respected Armenian sports journalist Hrach Khachatryan of VbetNews.

"As you know Azerbaijan have banned Armenians from entering the country over tensions between the bordering rivals. If a person’s passport shows any evidence of travel to Nagorno-Karabakh, barring a diplomatic passport, they are forbidden entry to Azerbaijan. Moreover, the citizens of any countries having Armenian surnames have almost no chance to travel to Azerbaijan.

"So you can have a UK passport, but if you have an Armenian surname, you will be not allowed to pass the border. So we can't even cover that match. I'm little bit surprised. At first, I thought that Azerbaijan government and Football Association of Azerbaijan will do anything to provide security guarantees for Arsenal and Armenia national team midfielder Henrikh Mkhitaryan.

"It would have been a great way to show themselves from the positive side. I don't think that there is an issue to get Azerbaijan visa.

"There is only one problem - Henrikh's safety. For me, it's strange, because if they took responsibility to hold this kind of event, so they must guarantee also players and other staff safety too regardless of his nationality.

"If they can’t, the final should not take place in Baku. We can't let politics impact the integrity of the sports world. I realise the seriousness of all this. I think it would be a good move from him to travel Baku and try to raise the UEL Cup for the second time.

"It's not a group stage match, it's the final game. Henrikh is professional. He trained and worked hard the whole year and deserves to play in that Final. Not everyone gets a chance to play in this kind of matches. Here in Armenia, some people want him to travel but there are also some, who are afraid and don't want him to travel because of safety fears."

(Image: David Price/Arsenal FC via Getty Images)

Which is an extremely sad state of affairs that also raises far more hypothetical questions than answers.

Such as, why should a football team not select a player due to political tensions? What if Arsenal had four or five Armenians playing for them - would they be 'rested' too?

Or what if Mkhitaryan, as talented as he is - albeit maddeningly inconsistent and ineffectual at times - was the club's most influential/best player?

Would Arsenal still opt for him not to travel?

Talking of travel, the club issued a strongly-worded statement on Thursday morning sharing their views on UEFA's ticket allocation of 6,000, saying they were 'bitterly disappointed' .

The club pointed to the fact that due to transport limitations UEFA can only make a maximum of 6,000 tickets available to Arsenal for a stadium with a capacity of more than 60,000.

"Time will tell if it is even possible for 6,000 Arsenal fans to attend the match, given how extreme the travel challenges are," an Arsenal spokesman said.



"We have 45,000 season-ticket holders and for so many fans to miss out due to Uefa selecting a final venue with such limited transport provision is quite simply not right."

Uefa admitted this in a statement explaining why Arsenal and Chelsea would only get 6,000 tickets each, putting it down to Baku’s inability to handle more than 15,000 travelling passengers.

“Offering more tickets to fans of the participating teams, without any guarantee that they would be able to arrange suitable travel to reach Baku, was therefore not a responsible option,” a statement read.

(Image: Stuart MacFarlane/Arsenal FC via Getty Images)

All of which raises the question posed at the start of this article: Just why did UEFA chose Baku to host the 2019 Europa League final when it quite clearly is not fit to do so...

For all your latest Arsenal news, opinion, analysis and transfer gossip, click here

Keep up to date with the latest news, features and exclusives from football.london via the free football.london app for iPhone and Android .

Available to download from the App Store and Google Play .