restricted imports from next season

restricted imports from next season

I think it was Liverpool and Chelsea that have the least home grown talent at the moment with 8.

note that 'home grown' players includes the likes of Senderos

It's a nothing ruling
valeo2009-09-16 15:21:30

There will be a fair few "foreign-home grown" players but a the likes of Chelsea who have bought a squad recently and have a ban on buying for the next 2 transfer windows must be concerned. Liverpool, Arsenal, Man U etc have at least developed some young foreign talent. It will , no doubt, bring in a lot of young foreigners like the one that caused Chelsea so much greif.

That still leaves 17 players of any age and any natioanlity to make up your squad. Also the player doesnt need to have spent 3 years at your clubs academy just any academy in England or Wales

Good point. I only saw the "bash the big spending, big squad clubs full of foreigeners" point of view :-) It may effect the clubs with the bigger squads like those in European comps. How many players did the big 4 each use last season?

OK, so last season Liverpool had 62, Arsenal can call on 59 players, Manchester United 51, Chelsea 46. These are profesionally contracted players at the club. Sunderland has 47 when they were relegated. Everton currently have 31 and Hull City have 39.

The rule is already in place in the Champions League, so wont affect Chelsea, Liverpool etc too much

I think the squad size will. It'll mean a lot of fringe players will move else where and possibly strenghten lower level squads. I don't see many of the non-top 25 making other prem squads though so the main benefit will be at C'ship and below. Perhaps even overseas.

Thats debateable...like I said the squad size rule and the home grown rule are in existance in the Champions League. Those clubs get around the 'stockpiling' of players by sending them on season long loans.

thats a first team squad though, you can have nearly as a large a reserve squad, and nearly the same again academy/U18 squad. teams that don't have as many professionally contracted players tend not to compete in reserve leagues or youth leagues. eg Totenham no longer play in any reserve team leagues or competitions.

Still not good enough it should have been "Only Allowed 8 Imports"

This is why I wanted the Arse to buy Cattermole

From a different angle, West Ham, who have never had a shortage of home grown players wil now be able to capitalise on their academy graduates, but there needs to be caution that our coaching staff who are out there collecting European youngsters like they are going out of fashion, get them early enough so that they can qualify as home grown.

Does this work retrospectively. Say Giuseppi Rossi and Gerard Pique, who have both spent the required time at Man Utd to be counted as home grown, went back to Man Utd would they not count as imports rather home grown?

Some other arguments against this i have seen are that this might very well lead to the creation of Business's instead of clubs running academy's. they will then be talent farms selling young players from around the globe to big clubs in the UK, but there will also be unscrupulous business people that will charge young players and their family's to attend these academies so that they can qualify to play in england regardless of the little chance they have of making it.

Shooting Stars UK plc?

Although the proposal is very far from this scenario, I'd say most smaller countries (European ones at least) would probably welcome this given that it would result in their doemstic leagues getting stronger. Clubs from smaller countries had much more success in European competition in pre-Bosman days, and their international football certainly did not suffer for it.

Would it really though? A lot of these countries dont have the $$ to run a succesful competition,or to provide adequate coaching to improve their players to an international standard. Its all about resources,and the big countries have them. Therefore the only viable solution for countries like us is for our players to go overseas to recieve the best cpoaching and footballing experience,and theyr better for it.

Note that I said European countries - smaller European nations have all the facilities, coaching and infrastructure to produce top players, only the clubs don't have the cash to pay the wages that bigger clubs in bigger leagues can pay. Simple as that.

NZ is in a different situation though, because we have none of that here. Which means that people who have succeeded in professional football, succeeded because of hard work and persistance, rather than anything else. Which means that those with enough talent and drive to succeed will still get the opportunities to do so if they're good enough.

My point is that the rules the EPL have set up will do more damage than good.

Perhaps its a ploy to get them there younger so they qualify for their national side at a younger age...something to ponder

I agree Ubergunner a unerlaterial ban won't help anybody.

Ubergunner - Can't happen - can't descriminate on race, especially with EU regulations. So not paying tax on English players would be viewed as being decriminatory. As the EPL rule is not based on race it is therefore legal. What also must be noted is that Platini is going to tighted up the rules on signing young players from other countries. So both rules going hand in hand together should have the desired effect