Italian media say Pirlo’s Azzurri appointment collapsed over his contract with Russian bookmaker Fonbet

Italian sports outlets spent the last few days on a very specific kind of football drama: Andrea Pirlo was reportedly close to becoming head coach of Italy, then the deal was pulled back because of his contract with the Russian betting company Fonbet. For anyone watching high-risk payments, this is the useful part of the story: betting sponsorships and public appointments can collide fast, and the payment-side optics matter.

1. After Italy failed to qualify for a third straight World Cup, the FIGC went through a major reshuffle. Gabriele Gravina resigned as president of the Italian Football Federation, Gennaro Gattuso resigned as national team coach, and Giovanni Malagò ended up leading the federation. Paolo Maldini was appointed technical director, with former Milan and PSG sporting director Leonardo as his assistant.
2. The federation initially looked at Pep Guardiola, who left Manchester City this year, but he reportedly asked for a salary of €20 million, which FIGC could not afford. By 23 July, Italian media were saying Guardiola was close to turning the job down, leaving Andrea Pirlo, Roberto Mancini, and Antonio Conte in the running.
3. On 24 July, La Gazzetta dello Sport reported that talks with Guardiola had failed and that Pirlo had agreed in principle. The paper said negotiations with Pirlo were continuing and described the appointment as “revolutionary,” with a contract expected to run until the 2030 World Cup. It also said Maldini’s rebuild plan would start with players aged 12–13 and take 8–10 years.
4. That same day, journalists Guido Gentili, former editor of Il Sole 24 Ore, and Andrea Papaccio posted on social media about Pirlo’s contract with Fonbet, the Russian bookmaker. According to the Italian coverage, that sponsorship became the obstacle that derailed the appointment.
5. Italian reports also put the money in perspective: Pirlo’s salary as Italy coach was expected to be no more than €1.5 million, while Mancini would have been satisfied with €2 million. In other words, the federation was not just choosing a coach; it was managing a public-facing commercial conflict around a betting brand.

For PSPs, acquirers, and banks that work with betting brands, the takeaway is plain enough: a sponsor contract can stop being a side detail the moment the partner ends up anywhere near a national-team role. The payment relationship may be clean on paper, but in practice it can become the headline.