Feyenoord Leadership Criticized for Transfer Window Mismanagement

The knives were out for Feyenoord’s leadership on Monday. In 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 transfer window that, in their eyes, should have transformed the club’s finances.

“They had the money – and the offers”

Verweij argued that Rigaux’s criticism of his predecessor Dennis te Kloese has backfired.

“Rigaux has taken a huge swipe at his predecessor Te Kloese,” Verweij began. “But now it turns out that Te Kloese, with the money for Hadj Moussa included, had 40 million.”

Then came the list of missed chances.

“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.”

For Verweij, the conclusion is simple: Feyenoord left serious money on the table.

“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,” he said. “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.”

The power of the Friends of Feyenoord

Driessen then zoomed out from individual deals to the club’s ownership structure. For him, the story always circles back to one group.

“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.”

According to Driessen, that financial construction directly influences transfer policy.

“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.”

In other words: big sales don’t just fill the club’s coffers, they trigger obligations towards the Friends of Feyenoord. And that, Driessen suggests, makes people cautious.

Heavy accusation against Eenhoorn

Then came his sharpest claim. Driessen openly linked Robert Eenhoorn’s position to the wishes of the Friends of Feyenoord.

“But 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 stated.

According to him, that relationship directly affected the fate of a major outgoing transfer.

“Eenhoorn allowed himself to be influenced into not letting the Hadj Moussa transfer go through,” Driessen said of Feyenoord’s technical director.

The official explanation that a bank guarantee had been rejected does not convince him 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 then painted a picture of a club that, in his view, did little to push the Hadj Moussa deal over the line.

“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 didn’t stop there. In his eyes, Eenhoorn is not an independent operator at the top of the club.

“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.”

According to Driessen, Eenhoorn’s stance on the ownership situation has been clear for some time.

“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 accusation is stark: Feyenoord, in a window that could have reshaped the club’s budget, chose political comfort over maximum sporting and financial firepower.