6 + 5 = 2012

[Parky]

Hogwash. The principle of free movement of labour is a little more than an inconvenient regulation...

 

Free movement of persons is one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by Community law. It is perhaps the most important right under Community law for individuals, and an essential element of European citizenship.

 

For workers, this freedom has existed since the foundation of the European Community in 1957. It is laid down in Article 39 of the EC Treaty and it entails:

 

the right to look for a job in another Member State;

the right to work in another Member State;

the right to reside there for that purpose;

the right to remain there;

the right to equal treatment in respect of access to employment, working conditions and all other advantages which could help to facilitate the worker's integration in the host Member State.

 

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/freemovementofworkers.htm

 

Not hogwash at all. The EU was perfectly happy for many member states to effectively ditch that principle (for a time at least) when some of the new Eastern European nations joined and it became an inconvenience to allow their citizens full movement and employment rights.

 

In this respect Blatter is perfectly correct, laws can be changed. The only question is wether the EU is prepared to change them or not. At the moment it seems as though not but who knows what 'arrangements' might be worked out over the next few years.

 

Not the same thing at all.

 

The new members joined the EU under the 2003 Treaty of Accession and that was where the provisions for temporally restricting the movement of their citizens was agreed, when they signed up to that treaty, they agreed to those restrictions. They are only temporary restrictions agreed out of political expediency in order to make enlargement a smoother process. No such agreement exists relating to the existing member states.

 

The only way for something similar to be arranged relating to the citizens of the existing member states, would be for a similar treaty to be signed by them. This is simply not going to happen. To draw up a whole treaty for the "benefit" of a handful of EU citizens would be a ridiculous waste of time and money and would almost certainly never be agreed by the member states anyway. For a start it goes against the founding principles of the EU and secondly it would be challenged in the European Court of Human Rights and probably be defeated anyway. Why would they do that simply because Sepp Blatter wants them to!?! There's a big difference between adding something like this, as a small part of the terms of a treaty representing the introduction of an important and massive change, and going back and retrospectively rewriting the existing rules of the EU.

 

Blatter's right; laws can be changed, but if he thinks that he's got any chance of the world's biggest economy; representing,  27 nations and 500 million people, changing one its absolutely fundamental and founding principles, simply because he stamps his foot and demands it, he's seriously mentally ill!!

 

'the World's biggest economy'...you need a reality check son !

The EU is one of the most regulation-bound economies in the civilised world - China & India are already peeing all over your so-called economic powerhouse and their dominance will continue to grow, not to mention that a Recession-hit USA is STILL the world's largest economy.

 

You have been listening to far too much propaganda from your teachers(either that or you are a LIb-Dem MP..!!)

I could reel you off a list of reasons why the EU will collapse within 20 years - only Germany has a strong

economy of the major nations and they are already regretting ditching the DM in favour of the Euro because they are limited by the weaker economies of nations also in it ; the two nations with the best level of prosperity in Europe are Switzerland and Norway, neither of whom are members...

 

As I have said before, this is a footie site, so I'll leave it at that - don't even get me started about resources - even Germany is dependent on the goodwill of Russia for her gas...France is amost 90% nuclear(I bet the Greenies love that !)and the UK is now an IMPORTER of oil & Gas...

 

Here in Oz, we have enough Gas for hundreds of years, Iron Ore going to China by the thousands of tonnes, new oil being discovered and a cpuntry almost as big as the USA with 22m people - do the math and tell me who has got the brighter future..why do you think the FIFA conference was held in Sydney this week....!!

 

Australia will be nuked if it plays up. FACT

[OzzieMandias]

Oh, and in terms of GDP per capita, Australia ranks a lowly 22nd.

 

 

[OzzieMandias]

Meanwhile...

 

June 1, 2008 12:00 AM

Sepp Blatter is pressing on with his plans for a quota to be imposed on foreign players, even though the European Union, which governs the part of the world where restrictions will have most impact, has unequivocally declared them illegal.

 

'Where there is a will there is a way,' the Fifa president has said, conveniently ignoring the fact that the only will being brought to bear at the moment is his own. While most football supporters might vaguely wish there were fewer foreign players around and more of the homegrown product, there is no universal desire to turn the clock back and absolutely no agreement on how this might fairly be done. Few people think sending an arbitrary number of foreign players home would improve England's chances of winning a World Cup. If more and better English players were being produced there would be fewer foreigners in the Premier League already. The supply chain is more important than the product in the shop window. If not enough quality English players are being produced, as seems to be the case, then a quota of six per team would only promote mediocrity and reduce overall standards. English players might be in a minority in the Premier League, but the ones that are there have proved they are good enough to compete with the best in the world.

 

You can tell Blatter understands this really, because his main hope of ducking under EU employment legislation is by insisting that clubs will still have the right to own as many foreign players as they like, as long as only five of them are on the field when the match kicks off. 'With substitutes it could be 3+8 by the end of the game,' he explained. That is, three home players and eight foreigners. In other words, not much would change, except teams might start making more substitutions before half time. Uefa's plan to beat the EU regulations is subtly different. Their definition of a homegrown player is someone of any age or nationality who has trained at a club for three years between the ages of 15 and 21. In other words catch 'em young, as most major clubs now do, and field as many nationalities as you like. If the two administrative bodies do not seem to be treating this issue as seriously as they might, it is because even without the complication of EU law there is no enthusiasm for quotas within the game. Wild horses would not drag Sir Alex Ferguson back to the situation he faced in 1994 when he had to leave out a fit Peter Schmeichel and play Gary Walsh in goal at Camp Nou. British clubs will tend to suffer from quotas more than most, as Ferguson has admitted. He thought Schmeichel, Cantona and Kanchelskis were his most important foreigners that season, but soon realised he also had to factor in Hughes, Giggs, Keane, Irwin and others.

 

The real reason Uefa and Fifa are talking about limiting foreigners is because they are aware most of them are coming to England, and English clubs are beginning to dominate the Champions League. Franz Beckenbauer has just kindly pointed out that our own players were not good enough to reach Euro 2008, so the money and the foreigners swilling around the Premier League must be having some distorting effect.

 

Well, he's right there. It is just that the money is a much bigger problem than the foreigners. The Deloitte review of football finance published a few days ago makes this abundantly clear. German clubs are the most profitable in Europe, it seems. They make much more money than their Premier League counterparts, mostly by not paying it all out to the players in wages, and play fair by their fans by keeping gate prices low. Highest placed German Champions League team this year? Schalke, reached quarter-finals. What about Bayern Munich? Beaten by Zenit St Petersburg in the Uefa Cup semi-finals.

 

Some German clubs are campaigning for what they see as restrictive limitations on private ownership of clubs, though they might think again when they see what is happening over here. Chelsea's wage bill of £132m for the 2006-07 season was not only three times the Premier League average, and more than four times as high as Reading's or Bolton's, it represented 70 per cent of their turnover. Manchester United's was the next highest at £92m, though at least the eventual champions could be congratulated on a much healthier wage/turnover figure of 44 per cent. So could Arsenal, on 50 per cent. There are some real scare stories near the bottom of the league (for the previous season, remember, not the one just finished) with Portsmouth paying out 90 per cent of their turnover in wages and Wigan 100 per cent, though as both those clubs enjoyed relatively successful seasons in 2007-08 perhaps the juggling is not as dangerous as it looks. None the less, the fact to remember is that Chelsea spent £40m more than United on wages last season, yet United won the league. As a differential, that is a lot between two teams in the same echelon. To put it into perspective, you could fit the annual wage bill at a club of the stature of Everton or Middlesbrough into the gap between Chelsea and United.

 

What this means, Mr Beckenbauer, is that with spending power on such a scale, England's top clubs will not be at all constrained by limitations on foreigners. If they have to have fewer, they will make sure they have the highest quality. If you are Michael Ballack or Cristiano Ronaldo and you wish to play in Champions League finals, Chelsea and Manchester United would still be your best bet. And those two clubs are already supplying most of the England team. What quotas might do is oblige smaller clubs such as Wigan and Manchester City to fill their teams with sub-standard English players, thereby reducing the attractiveness of the Premier League and increasing the inequality within it. That could be just what Blatter and Michel Platini are hoping for, but why would anyone here vote for it?

 

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/06/01/quotas_wont_cure_money_worries.html

[Rob W]

I seem to remember that the dollar has collapsed this year against  the Euro no? 

 

And AUstralia - another degree or two of global warming and they'll all be living in Dubai style enclaves along the coast begging for water

[Mr Logic]

UEFA president Michel Platini

 

Sunday May 25,2008

By John Richardson

 

UEFA president Michel Platini has warned about football’s mountain of debts following Wednesday night’s Champions League final between Manchester United and Chelsea, who are in the red to a combined sum of £1.5billion.

 

United’s latest financial figures show them owing £764million, while Chelsea have £736m outstanding.

 

Such debts are not allowed in France or Germany and UEFA would like the Champions League to follow suit.

 

Platini insisted: “This success is being built on an unsustainable level of debt, which makes it an unfair playing field for all clubs.”

 

Struggling to find much about this on the net but I did read more detail in a daily rag, it was likened to dope-fixing in racing.

 

Irrespective of any real or imagined agenda to break a current English monopoly on Champions League final standings this could have interesting effects on the EPL. If they find some way to restrict the amount of debt allowed it levels the playing field a bit and loosens the top 4's hold on the league.

 

Certainly it is unfair if some competitors in a competition have constraints placed upon them which does not apply to all, from which ever direction you look at it. Not sure what they could implement to change it though, money talks unfortunately.

[Guest FlapjackJoe]

I don't know if EU free-movement-of-labour regulations would affect this, to be honest. Clubs could still employ whatever players they wanted; the FIFA rule would only affect who they could play in any given match.

 

Surely that's got to be the case.  FIFA rules currently affect which players are eligible to play in Euro 2008 (you have to be from that country, or be assimilated to it via the granny rule or whatever).  If someone rules that it's illegal to make such rules, it means ANY country in the EU can call up ANY uncapped player in the EU to their national team.  Which will basically be the end of national teams, because they will all pretty much turn into club teams then.

 

That'll be fun, actually.

[Guest optimistic nit]

I don't know if EU free-movement-of-labour regulations would affect this, to be honest. Clubs could still employ whatever players they wanted; the FIFA rule would only affect who they could play in any given match.

 

Surely that's got to be the case.  FIFA rules currently affect which players are eligible to play in Euro 2008 (you have to be from that country, or be assimilated to it via the granny rule or whatever).  If someone rules that it's illegal to make such rules, it means ANY country in the EU can call up ANY uncapped player in the EU to their national team.  Which will basically be the end of national teams, because they will all pretty much turn into club teams then.

 

That'll be fun, actually.

 

i'm pretty sure thats not the case like

 

 

 

 

 

 

looks like the issue has been put to bed now anyway, or platini wouldn't be talking about club debts (although i think in this case, he has a point).

[johnnypd]

there is an exception to the freedom to work rules concerning cultural activities, so it is possible (tho unlikely imo) that football could be granted a cultural exception.

 

also merlin, the EU is the world's largest economy, and is over twice the size of china's and over four times bigger than india's.

[Kasper]

 

Six-plus-five plan given green light by independent report

 

 

Fifa's controversial six-plus-five plans do not break EU rules, according to an independent report.

 

Football's world governing body are keen to impose regulations which restrict the number of foreign players that can take part in domestic fixtures.

 

The idea has been overwhelmingly approved by 155 of Fifa's member nations, but has come in criticism from the European commission and most EU governments.

 

There are fears that the plans amount to discrimination at work and restrict freedom of movement for workers.

 

However, a report commissioned by Fifa and carried out by the Institute for European Affairs (INEA) claims the idea does not fall foul of EU regulations.

 

"There is no conflict with Europe law," INEA chairman Professor Jurgen Gramke told a press conference in Brussels.

 

He insisted the report, although commissioned by Fifa, was entirely independent: "We took no instructions from Fifa. INEA accepted this commission on condition that our requirements of complete independence were met".

 

The report says that, under EU law, the "regulatory autonomy" of sporting associations is recognised and supported: "The key aim of the six-plus-five rule in the view of the experts is the creation and assurance of sporting competition.

 

"The six-plus-five rule does not impinge on the core area of the right to freedom of movement. The rule is merely a rule of the game declared in the general interest of sport in order to improve the sporting balance between clubs and associations".

 

Fifa are hoping to have the six-plus-five rule, which states clubs must field six players eligible for their country's national side in their starting XI in any one game, by the start of the 2012/13 season.

 

INEA see no reason why the proposal should not be pushed through by then, as they feel no direct discrimination is taking place.

 

"It is not directly based on the nationality of professional players," read the report.

 

Instead it "merely considers entitlement to play for the national team concerned, and any possible indirect discrimination can be defended on the basis of compelling reasons of general interest".

 

Quotas are currently barred from club football as a result of a European Court ruling in 1995 in the Bosman Case.

 

It declared that systems in operation throughout many national leagues and Uefa competitions, which only allowed three foreign players in a team, were illegal.

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_4976214,00.html

[brummie]

Sounds like a great idea to me.

[Kasper]

Sounds like a great idea to me.

 

Im sure it does

[brummie]

Sounds like a great idea to me.

 

Im sure it does

 

*finger pointing, winking emoticon*

[Guest quklaani]

I was thinking about this earlier, especially with regard to the unique status of British football federations.  It was incredibly annoying in the early 90s when Giggs, Hughes and McClair were considered "foreign," despite them being from the same nation state as english players.  Then I realised something, which relates to one of the oddities of our system.  If this were to become part of the rules (and despite Blatter's lawyers I imagine the EU will still slap it down) and there wasn't some twisting of it to recognise the nature of British football, then Cardiff City if they got promoted would have to play with a minimum of six English players every week.

[Gash]

Fucking hell

[oldtype]

I was thinking about this earlier, especially with regard to the unique status of British football federations.  It was incredibly annoying in the early 90s when Giggs, Hughes and McClair were considered "foreign," despite them being from the same nation state as english players.  Then I realised something, which relates to one of the oddities of our system.  If this were to become part of the rules (and despite Blatter's lawyers I imagine the EU will still slap it down) and there wasn't some twisting of it to recognise the nature of British football, then Cardiff City if they got promoted would have to play with a minimum of six English players every week.

 

Have to say, the interaction between this and the British "special status" is interesting to say the least.

 

The thought of Welsh, Scottish and N. Irish players suddenly becoming "foreign" I suppose that might actually breathe some life back into their "domestic" leagues

[Guest Heneage]

Surely this will fall down with the infringing on human rights act?

[merlin]

Had forgotten about this topic because I was back in debt-ridden UK when most of my posts were answered..I'm glad someone has re-posted because after all that has happened in the last 12 months - and esp the last 3 - some of you EU-Lovers must be eating Jumbo sized slices of HUMBLE PIE !!

The debts of Eastern European countries now threaten to split up the Eurozone because the Germans(quite rightly)don't want to pick up the tab for bailing them out...read Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in today's Telegraph IF you can tear yourselves away from the Grauniad/Independent(NOT) and Sobverser.!

 

As for Oz, we have had far less impact on the economy(despite the best efforts of Mr Rudd & Co) than Europe or US because the banks here are better regulated and don't give loans away with cornflake packets like Northern Crock...

And as for your climate rubbish, apart from a week in Adelaide & Melbourne, we have had a LOVELY summer, thank you, with lower than av temps in much of the country and Queensland has had RECORD rainfall...go and spout your Al Gore propaganda somewhere where they might believe you - but then, plenty of schools in the UK have fallen for this tripe..

 

No wonder a once-great country has gone down the tubes....

[ikri]

Had forgotten about this topic because I was back in debt-ridden UK when most of my posts were answered..I'm glad someone has re-posted because after all that has happened in the last 12 months - and esp the last 3 - some of you EU-Lovers must be eating Jumbo sized slices of HUMBLE PIE !!

The debts of Eastern European countries now threaten to split up the Eurozone because the Germans(quite rightly)don't want to pick up the tab for bailing them out...read Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in today's Telegraph IF you can tear yourselves away from the Grauniad/Independent(NOT) and Sobverser.!

 

As for Oz, we have had far less impact on the economy(despite the best efforts of Mr Rudd & Co) than Europe or US because the banks here are better regulated and don't give loans away with cornflake packets like Northern Crock...

And as for your climate rubbish, apart from a week in Adelaide & Melbourne, we have had a LOVELY summer, thank you, with lower than av temps in much of the country and Queensland has had RECORD rainfall...go and spout your Al Gore propaganda somewhere where they might believe you - but then, plenty of schools in the UK have fallen for this tripe..

 

No wonder a once-great country has gone down the tubes....

 

Did you just reveal yourself as Jeremy Clarkson?

[merlin]

Had forgotten about this topic because I was back in debt-ridden UK when most of my posts were answered..I'm glad someone has re-posted because after all that has happened in the last 12 months - and esp the last 3 - some of you EU-Lovers must be eating Jumbo sized slices of HUMBLE PIE !!

The debts of Eastern European countries now threaten to split up the Eurozone because the Germans(quite rightly)don't want to pick up the tab for bailing them out...read Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in today's Telegraph IF you can tear yourselves away from the Grauniad/Independent(NOT) and Sobverser.!

 

As for Oz, we have had far less impact on the economy(despite the best efforts of Mr Rudd & Co) than Europe or US because the banks here are better regulated and don't give loans away with cornflake packets like Northern Crock...

And as for your climate rubbish, apart from a week in Adelaide & Melbourne, we have had a LOVELY summer, thank you, with lower than av temps in much of the country and Queensland has had RECORD rainfall...go and spout your Al Gore propaganda somewhere where they might believe you - but then, plenty of schools in the UK have fallen for this tripe..

 

No wonder a once-great country has gone down the tubes....

 

Did you just reveal yourself as Jeremy Clarkson?

 

No - because unlike Clarkson, I WOULDN'T have apologized...!!

The truth hurts.....but I don't need the job now ; he does...

[merlin]

there is an exception to the freedom to work rules concerning cultural activities, so it is possible (tho unlikely imo) that football could be granted a cultural exception.

 

also merlin, the EU is the world's largest economy, and is over twice the size of china's and over four times bigger than india's.

 

Population of India & China ? Whose economy is growing(or not shrinking) at the fastest rate..??

Why are the Germans placing car plants in China..??

Would the EU like to take on either country(let alone the USA)in a military contest? They can't even let their troops out to do soldiering in Afghanistan,,,

 

Whose population is ageing fastest and have a huge demographic Pension problem???

IF you look at realities, you begin to see why Disraeli talked about 'lies, damned lies & statistics'

Oh, and who did Hilary Clinton rush off to see first? wasn't the EU...

[merlin]

Oh, and in terms of GDP per capita, Australia ranks a lowly 22nd.

 

 

 

With a population of 20m that lives in a land mass almost as big as the Continental USA and has been a nation for just 108 years with masses of mineral resources...now I wonder where Oz will be in another 50 years...!??

[timnufc22]

Why punish managers?

 

If there were more top class English youngsters coming through the ranks, we'd see them. But the problem is the poor coaching we have for kids, thats the problem area, to put it on the door of foreigners is cheap & lazy, & plain wrong imo!!

[Kasper]

there is an exception to the freedom to work rules concerning cultural activities, so it is possible (tho unlikely imo) that football could be granted a cultural exception.

 

also merlin, the EU is the world's largest economy, and is over twice the size of china's and over four times bigger than india's.

 

Population of India & China ? Whose economy is growing(or not shrinking) at the fastest rate..??

Why are the Germans placing car plants in China..??

Would the EU like to take on either country(let alone the USA)in a military contest? They can't even let their troops out to do soldiering in Afghanistan,,,

 

Whose population is ageing fastest and have a huge demographic Pension problem???

IF you look at realities, you begin to see why Disraeli talked about 'lies, damned lies & statistics'

Oh, and who did Hilary Clinton rush off to see first? wasn't the EU...

 

China is even more fucked than EU & US because their economy is based on us buying crap from them

[Kasper]

Why punish managers?

 

If there were more top class English youngsters coming through the ranks, we'd see them. But the problem is the poor coaching we have for kids, thats the problem area, to put it on the door of foreigners is cheap & lazy, & plain wrong imo!!

 

The idea obviously is to force the clubs to improve the coaching for kids....

 

Will be bad for smaller national teams such as my own Finland....less chances to get players in the top leagues

[Guest quklaani]

To my mind there are two pretty big concerns about any ruling such as this.  Firstly the most obvious worry is that it will only cement the dominance of the wealthy.  To give an easy example, if this ruling came into being next season then Agbonlahor and Young would not be Aston Villa players for much longer.  Lescott and Jagielka would be ripped from Everton, hell, Spurs would lose half their squad.  Suddenly the prior "premium" on English players will seem a pittance.  All the best English players will be hoovered up by the rich clubs and due to the rules nobody else will be able to replace these players with either bargains from elsewhere, or quality English players because they too would be snapped up immediately.  This of course would also have a similar affect on the academies.

 

The second is what it means for the other national teams in Britain and Ireland.  Now this won't happen with everyone of course, but one can imagine a great many young Welsh, Scottish etc players will refuse to declare for their national teams because of the harm it would do to their chances of playing in Premier League.  Certainly it would bring an end to the use of the "granny rule."  A young Ryan Giggs would likely tell the welsh FA to get stuffed if his playing for them meant he'd be counted as "foreign" and therefore would significantly damage his chances of a top flight career.  I mean jesus, if this rule were to actually come into being, which Im still largely confident it won't, then Darren Fletcher would be considered a "foreign player" and Manuel Almunia would not.*

 

*Worth noting that my worries about who players will declare for are not at all limited to Britain, it's just more of a concern here.