Comments on: The Andy Webster Case and the End of G-14

By: Aldo Baldo

Aldo Baldo — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:36:06 +0000

Doesn’t anyone else think that the rise of the European Single Market has effectively revolutionised player rights in football? It seems that many years ago a player was very much owned by the club, and we could see this in many examples of the length of time a player was at a club. However the rise the of this Market has facilitated increased player rights, arguably to the detriment of clubs. Now clubs can be held ransom over their players in terms of negotiating new contracts. I can only see this going one way – lining the pockets of the best players in football.

Do you think there has been a revolution in rights in football and now players hold the reigns over clubs?

By: SpiralArchitect

SpiralArchitect — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 04:03:33 +0000

Iqnadirshah –

Fair point. Footballers do have to look out for themselves & plan for their own future. But there has to be a way to strike a balance between the two so that the sport doesn’t suffer too much under the weight of ‘absent’ talent. I just feel that compensation for clubs is not the way to go.

By: iqnadirshah

iqnadirshah — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:23:27 +0000

Spiral you do have a point. But the fact remains that club football is where the average footballer earns his daily bread. They pay his daily wages, his injury costs etc etc. While playing in an international tournament like Euro or ANC they are just playing for national pride(Think of Adebayor and the other Togo players who played for their dictator president and who eventually threatened to pull out because of less pay). International tournaments may help spread the game but the footballer lives because of club football.

By: SpiralArchitect

SpiralArchitect — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:21:39 +0000

Great article. I think everybody covered the basic points i had in mind anyway so i won’t rehash them here.

Just wanted to add that i see a big decline in international football in the future. The last World Cup wasn’t quite that entertaining & i just wondered about the dedication that the players have when playing for their respective countries nowadays.

I will reiterate this again, i feel that international football should take precedence over club football. Its the way this game grew & the World Cups are still the heart & soul of it that keeps it going. The fact that big clubs like Arsenal, Man Utd, Barca, Chelsea etc etc can demand compensation for losing a player to international duty is completely retarded. International football should not be held hostage to the European dominance that pervades it. How the hell are you supposed to develop football in other countries then, if all your best players just go off & play club football for a good salary & then don’t come back home to play & bring the level of the game up a notch?

This way we’ll have to contend with dull Asian Cups, African Nation Cups etc etc. This way all you’ll ever see is a European or South American team winning the World Cup again & again. I dream of the day when an African nation or an Asian nation can lift that beautiful trophy & show to the world that this is TRULY a global sport.

By: Steve Amoia

Steve Amoia — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:44:34 +0000

â€œThe Court finds that there is no economic, moral or legal justification for a club to be able to claim the market value of a player as lost profit.â€

Joseph, this was an excellent article. I found the above quote by FIFPro to be quite illuminating.

By: Anthony

Anthony — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:24:09 +0000

Thinking more so about the case of Fabiano, which I followed as a City fan, do you think this will really have such a massive impact?

Perhaps in some ways. Fabiano didn’t want to move anyway, so it wouldn’t even matter. I suppose if Real Madrid wanted to tap up somebody like Ronaldo or Kaka with the promises of lavish gifts, for instance (not at all insinuating this happens – hypothetical), it could have ramifications.

That said, it all depends on the player. I suppose the very big clubs should offer contracts to players almost annually in this event, which seems ludicrous. On the other hand, the contracts for players seem to be spiralling so much they wouldn’t be so far away from the market value of the players anyway…

It definitely raises interesting questions though, very intruiging article and thanks for sharing it.

By: Marco Pantanella

Marco Pantanella — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:04:07 +0000

This is a very interesting topic Joseph, the Andy Webster case in particular. As you said, this will be used to great leverage by players for contract renegotiations.

Basically clubs will be forced to renew their players’ contracts well in advance to avoid being subject to zero-revenue transfers (well not exactly zero, but peanuts in comparison to a real transfer deal).

By: iqnadirshah

iqnadirshah — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 09:59:18 +0000

Some noteworthy observations:
-the CAS f***ed up royally in allowing the player to move like that(this is in regard tothe monetary compensation). This is a dangerous precedent for many such moves involving players ( Cesc and C Ronaldo the obvious ones).
-FIFA is fast losing control over the big European Clubs(and in case of a full fight, you can expect the lesser clubs to align with the bigger ones rather than FIFA or UEFA)
-Just who is the ultimate authority in European Football? Does the CAS have power over the FIFA-UEFA bodies?
-This is not to contradict my first point, but the players should have a say in the way their careers go. They have around 15 years of playing and many at the twilight of their careers should have a chance to search for better playing options(with regards to pay or playing time). While a player who’s above 30 should have the option to move to a another club, it should be with a suitable compensation to the original club. As to how much it is, I dont know.
-One positive point. This will put an end to the 5 year and 6 year contracts that many clubs seem to be offering younger players nowadays.