Feyenoord Leadership Under Fire: Transfer Mismanagement
The transfer window has closed, but the storm around Feyenoord’s leadership is only getting started. On De Telegraaf’s Kick-Off podcast, journalists Mike Verweij and Valentijn Driessen tore into technical director Dévy Rigaux and general director Robert Eenhoorn, accusing them of mishandling a crucial summer for the Rotterdam club.
“They had the money. And they blew the window.”
Verweij didn’t bother with a soft opening. As the conversation turned to Feyenoord, he immediately contrasted Rigaux with his predecessor 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.”
Then came the numbers. Hard, specific, and damning.
“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.”
In Verweij’s eyes, that was the core of the problem. The options were there, the market was there, the bids were there. Feyenoord, he argued, simply chose the wrong path.
“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 continued. “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 accusation is clear: poor decision-making at the top has left Arne Slot’s successor with fewer tools than the club’s position and squad value should have allowed.
The shadow of the Friends of Feyenoord
Driessen then zoomed out from the transfer list and went straight for the structure behind the club. For him, the heart of the issue lies not only in sporting choices, but in the power balance inside De Kuip.
“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 financial construction around the Friends of Feyenoord, the powerful investor group, weighs heavily on every major decision, Driessen argued. A strong transfer surplus doesn’t just mean more room to buy players; it also triggers obligations towards those investors.
“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.”
So every big outgoing deal this summer would not only have filled the club’s coffers, it would have forced Feyenoord to take another step in buying out the Friends. That, according to Driessen, is exactly what certain people inside the club did not want.
“Eenhoorn is an extension of the Friends”
Then came the sharpest line of the broadcast. Driessen directly linked Eenhoorn’s actions to the wishes of the Friends of Feyenoord.
“The Friends of Feyenoord do not want out,” he stated. “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.”
The Hadj Moussa saga became Exhibit A in his argument. A €40 million move to Al-Ittihad never materialised, officially due in part to issues around a bank guarantee. Driessen doesn’t buy that explanation.
“Eenhoorn allowed himself to be influenced into not letting the Hadj Moussa transfer go through,” he said of the technical director. For him, the idea that a bank guarantee from Saudi Arabia would be the stumbling block simply doesn’t hold.
“It concerns a €40 million transfer. It concerns Saudi Arabia, just ask Ajax. They have always had the money and are solvent.”
Driessen painted a picture of a club that, at a decisive moment, became strangely unapproachable.
“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.”
In his view, that wasn’t coincidence or clumsiness. It was a tactic.
“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.”
A window that raises bigger questions
Strip away the emotion, and the picture painted by Verweij and Driessen is stark. Feyenoord had concrete, high-value offers on the table. Accepting them would have transformed their room to manoeuvre in the market, but also accelerated the process of buying out a powerful shareholder group.
The club chose not to. Players stayed, money didn’t arrive, and the Friends of Feyenoord kept their grip.
The transfer window is over. The debate about who really runs Feyenoord is not.
