New QLD teams allowed more overseas players

63 replies · 904 views

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

SiNZ wrote:

Oh, you're English. That explains it then.

Indeed - though I now I have dual nationality with NZ. And to be honest, I find it somewhat amusing when non-English fans of English clubs complain about proposals to make English clubs English again.

That's part of the problem - a failure of many 'English' fans to recognise the internationalisation of the league.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Good use of the smiley.... saves me pointing out that the other leagues in Europe would take issue with being marginalised.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Same old pommies, always whingeing.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Who you calling a pome? I'm English not Australian. They were the prisoners of mother England, we were the jailers. (And I read in the Herald a few years back that a small number of prisoners were dropped in Auckland instead of Australia, so technically there are some Kiwi pomes out there too!)

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Aucklanders are all criminals too.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

SiNZ wrote:

Football clubs in England are nearly always able to get players a work permit.

Not entirely true. The rules are that if the player is coming from a non-EU country he has to be coming from a country ranked in the top 70 on the FIFA rankings and he has to have played at least 75% of his countries international games in the 2 years prior to application for the work permit.

Mark Gonzalez is a good example of this.

The rules are clear although there have been a number of examples where the application of the rules by the Home Office is inconsistent.

Actually the Gonzalez case also highlights a significant flaw in the system as he was able to get a work permit in Spain, played there enough years to earn Spanish citizenship and as an EU citizen then walked into England without problem.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Malky wrote:

SiNZ wrote:

Football clubs in England are nearly always able to get players a work permit.

Or English clubs loan players to leagues like Belgium where they have far more relaxed laws (Man Utd for example with Dong Fangzhuo) where they either get a EU passport or in the time on loan meet the requirements of playing 75% of their countries internationals in that time frame (Again something that Man Utd might be doing with Manucho)

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Cheers Malky. I knew it was something like that, but didn't the proper criteria to hand. I did say "nearly always".

I hear of normal working people doing a similar thing to the Gonzalez example with NZ and Australia. To get residency in Australia is harder than NZ. It is quite common for people who don't meet Australian criteria to get residency in NZ, wait 3 years* for citizenship and then go to Australia. [I believe this may have been increased now?] I haven't encountered anyone admitting this as their plan for a few years now, but would often do so in the late 90s when we were still part of a multi-national.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Sadly all too true. In fact it's been in the papers just recently, see the attached article:
http://stuff.co.nz/sundaystartimes/4624831a6870.html

Mind you it's hardly a new practise. When my dad emigrated to NZ from England his plan was to eventually move to Aussie. That was in 1951.

I'm so glad he didn't, I would have hated being born an Aussie

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I wouldn't mind it if it were a temporary measure - say, 6 foreigners in V5, 5 in V6, then back to 4 in V7.

I'd also like to see NZer's not count as foreigners for the other 7 (or 9 as of next season), especially to create more opportunities for kiwis unsigned by the Phoenix, and less pressure for the Phoenix to sign them. That, and less Aussies complaining about any advantage we have by having an increased player pool to sign from.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

robbwatson wrote:

I'd also like to see NZer's not count as foreigners for the other 7 (or 9 as of next season), especially to create more opportunities for kiwis unsigned by the Phoenix, and less pressure for the Phoenix to sign them. That, and less Aussies complaining about any advantage we have by having an increased player pool to sign from.

The problem here is the AFC/Oceania division. My understanding is that NZ players can't be registered as domestic for Australian HAL clubs since they're from a different confederation.
Once NZ joins the AFC, the scenario you've outlined becomes possible and even likely I'd think.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

So long as what happens in the A-League with regards to foreign players is along the lines of what Robb suggested it would be fine and is probably what will happen. In terms of Blatter's ludicrous rule, I think that UEFA should just institute a non-EU limit of 4 or 5 in ALL European leagues (little details would need to be worked out however).

NZers in HAL...it's a difficult one because of the issues already pointed out. Perhaps FFA could seek an exemption for kiwis in the ACL, given that really the A-League is an AUSTRALASIAN league.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

james dean wrote:

Yes but protectionism isn't going to help those players who need to be playing at an elite level, why should Ryan Nelsen be forced into the A-League when he can earn ï¿½2m pounds a year? Why should anyone not be entitled to go to another country and work? The same principals as apply in ordinary worker rights apply to football. The 5 + thing is ridiculous, reactionary rubbish from Blatter who has no thought to what he states as FIFA policy. The FIFA suggestion came about as a result of Blatter stating (in his infinite wisdom) that England didn't qualify for Euro 2008 because they have too many foreigners. But that's their problem, why should anyone else care what England wants to do other than the English FA? Ill thought out rubbish. As is your post. Go away and have a think...

Yeah thanks for that...." Ill thought out rubbish"....nice level of debate

I repeat what I said earlier. The FIFA country vote on the 5 foreign players rule was a vast majority supporting the new rule( 170 odd to 6)...Countries want their players back playing in their domestic leagues.

Blatter is powerful but not even he could have pulled this off alone.

There seems to be a feeling coming out of England that this is an attack on the elite English clubs.....well get over it. The football world does not exist for the benifit of the English game. the world will not fall if this rule come in. Man U won the European Cup fielding 6 Englishmen.

The world elite players will still play for the elite clubs....maybe a bit more spread around.What it will do is clear out the dross from the lower leagues. These players should be playing in their home countries rather than swanning around playing League 1 in the UK. The A-League would be a much stronger competition if 50 or 60 pro Aussie/kiwi footballers came home(and I don't mean elite players like Cahill etc)

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

SiNZ, Blatter's proposals are simply unworkable and are a vast overreaction to one league, the premier league in one country, England. Everyone else seems to have their house pretty much in order so why any outside influence on the whole of football is need I don't know. All it will do is make millionaires out of the Englishmen in the league, who as it stands are all playing at the best clubs anyway. Their are far greater failings within English football, but of course you blame it on "jonny foreigner" instead of looking at the real problems. Your academy system doesn't work, there is no place for 18-21 yos who can't make first teams to play competitive football because the reserve league is so weak, you haven't got any technical youth development and there are no decent coaches.

And I you must be the first and only person to think that a pom is an aussie. It's not.

Zindinane, my probalem with your theory is that you presuppose that you can have many great leagues around the world but fundamentally there is a lack of infrastructure in these countries. For a lot of the African players playing in Europe they are earning 1000 times more in a week than they probably could in a year back home. For other players they may be the outtsanding player from their country but for them to go home they will be playing in a much inferior competition. How can it be workable?

I think if you look at that FIFA vote it was to pass a motion to explore the possibility of an introduction. In the world of fifa that is a very different prospect to voting in favour of bringing it in and numerous people feel it will lead to a tactical withdrawl by Blatter in favour of Platini's baby, the 10 home trained players in a squad (regardless of where they are from). Blatter does seem to be able to tell most countries outside of Europe to jump and they say how hi. Considering how much FIFA money is channeled to Africa through the goal project there is no surprise there.

European labour law is so firmly entrenched that you would have to pass special legislation for footballers, it can't happen.

james dean2008-07-25 22:43:00

Normo's coming home

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

SiNZ wrote:

[

You talk about an ordinary worker being able to move to another country and work. It's not that unrestricted. To accept a job offer in NZ, I had to undergo a points system analysis. The company had to write a letter to NZ immigration showing why they could not employ a NZer to perform the role I was being assigned. When I spent 2003 working in Thailand, it was even more stringent. People wanting to come to work in NZ from overseas get turned down all the time. The same thing happens going the other way. Football clubs in England are nearly always able to get players a work permit. Although it's supposed to be based on international appearances that is often circumnavigated. Just because the borders are down in Europe and the Premier League has absolutely no restrictions at all for non-EU players (unlike other leagues in Europe) does not mean that football should not apply the same rules as ordinary workers.

Football does have exactly the same rules as for ordinary workers, it is administered by the same agency and runs in the same way. The exceptions that are used to get players in who don't wualify under the top 70/80% rule exist in all professions.

Normo's coming home

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I like cake.

I like tautologies because I like them.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Cosimo wrote:

I like cake.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

james dean wrote:

It's not a reaction to one league. Domestic leagues outside of the elite countries are being damaged by the hoovering away of talent. I will ignore your disingenuous attempt to make this a point of xenophobia or the greater failings within the English structure that we all know exist.

It's not even just about Europe. If you think everyone else outside England thinks it all perfect, well, it's laughable.

You think the proposals are unworkable. I think you're wrong. They will need developing from the initial proposal, as with all things. The current situation has only been in place for 20-odd years. There used to be limits on players. You come across as one of these youngsters who think the game was only invented in 1992.

[QUOTE=james dean]And I you must be the first and only person to think that a pom is an aussie. It's not.

I wish I could claim to have thought of the point that the Prisoner of Mother England epithet applies more aptly to the Aussies than us, but I can't. It's a not uncommon response to being called a pom to point out we weren't the prisoners!

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

The suggestion is that leagues are all clamouring to get their star players back, but has anybody asked the star players if they want to come back. I'm 100% sure Ryan Nelson wouldn't trade his weekly salary for the equivalent in New Zealand per annum.

EXAMPLE

If i was one of the best (any given scientific field) micro-biologist's in the world and there is only 3 company's in NZ who employ high quality micro-biologists and the highest earning I could make was 200k per annum, Ii would be really pissed if there was a law that said I couldn't go work for one of the biggest companies in the world (that required my services) and earn 4 times as much money just because they already employed 2 foreigners and that their is a limit. With people whining that its the importing of foreign micro-biologists that make all the locals crap at it.

With football as with most professions if you concentrate talent in a specific region that expertise is often passed down to the training establishments in the region. If this isn't happening in British football, its the fault off the training systems and academy's not those who are already performing at the top level.

Why do one group of people argue that footballers should be treated equally like everyone else and not get any privileges (ie speeding up residency) and then argue that they should be excluded from the freedom to work where they like because of protectionism.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I like banana cake

E + R + O

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

It's a circular argument though isn't it. Put aside something exceptional like the Phoenix appearing, NZ or the equivalent country will always have an inabiliy to compete. I guess it's a bit different with NZ, with football not even being treated seriously here for so long

The suggestion is that there should be more balance - not an outright ban like we had not so long ago.

It depends on whether you want football to be run purely along corporate lines. The problem is that sport does not comfortably fit into that model. In business the idea is to create a position of competitive advantage, the greatest example being if you can put your competitors out of business and be in a monopoly. A football club that manages to do that will die. Sport needs balance in order to make the event it is selling as interesting and uncertainty in the winner. That's the struggle football has really had to deal with over the last couple of decades.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Read todays Guardian online(www.guardian.co.uk)

None other than the current English coach Capello says " I am faced with the worst possible conditions of any national coach in Europe".....only 35% of the players in the Premier league are English compared to 72% of Italians in the Italian 1st division"

I am more interested in debating this through a world not an English view but you can see how positive this 5 foreigner rule would be for England. Again I stress it would not stop the worlds elite players from playing for Chelsea/Man U etc....what it would do is get rid of the journeymen players clogging up the lower leagues.

The lower leagues should be full of up and coming locals learning their trade from the seasoned old pros who are drifting back down through the grades at the end of their careers. Its fine to have youth academies but the youngsters need game time. What good is it for the English game having the likes of say, a Mulligan playing for Sc**thorpe?

Legally the 5 foreigners rule may be possible. I have a Employment lawyer friend based in Paris who says that under EU employment law a club could employ any amount of foreigners it wanted. The interesting part comes from how the employer(the club) utilises it employees(the players). That is where football rules come in....its football rules that decide numbers in a team,replacements, size of squads etc....nothing to do with EU employment law.

Under football rules FIFA could say to a club you can have as many foreigners on your books as you want but only 5 can take the field at any one time. Everyone gets paid, there is no employment descrimination. End result is everone is happy(hopefully) Locals get more game time...clubs can employ the star players.

What it would do would spread the talent around. The top 4 would soon off load some foreigners rather than have them sit on the bench. That would keep the likes of Keegan and the other mid table coaches very happy.

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

The problem I see with the 6-5 on the pitch rule is that it doesn't mean clubs will only have a few foreigners, and it doesn't mean lots of young local players will get game time. British clubs could still have only a few brits playing regular first-team football and rotating the foreigners around. Really, I'd preffer a restriction in the teams registered players (they could, concievably fill most of the match-day bench with foreigners).

It also raises an issue with Britain as to what constitutes 'foreign', as England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland are effectively one country. Does this become players from an economic region or a 'nations' FA?

Permalink

over 17 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

All this debate is fine but restricting the number of foreign players either in a squad or in the matchday team doesn't address the root cause. It won't fix the thing that is broken in the English game today.

We wouldn't even be having this debate about English football if there was enough local talent being produced. The real problem is that if you take a look at the academy teams in England (and I have to admit that I'm really only talking about the top sides as I do not have the knowledge of other academies) the majority of players are not English. Why is that?

It's because, even as teenagers, the English players have priced themselves off the market. It has become cheaper for clubs to trawl the world bringing in kids from foreign countries than to develop local lads. If I take for example the Liverpool academy graduates who have a shot of breaking into the first team, Emiliano Insua (Spain), David Pacheco (Spain), Damien Plessis (France), Godwin Antwi (Ghana), Krisztian Nemeth (Hungary), Jack Hobbs (England), Nabil El Zhar (France), Sebastian Leto (Argentina). It doesn't make good reading if your looking at the future of English football.

The other issue is the gulf in standard between reserve team football and the EPL. The EPL is so competitive these days that a club cannot afford to wait to see if a young guy can make the adjustment. They go out and buy a foreign player and if the reserve team player can step up then they're on a winner. If he doesn't then no loss. That's why you see so many young players from big clubs out on loan so that they get first team football. I personally like the idea of allowing clubs to enter a reserve team in either the Chamionship or League One from the point of view of developing talent. It's not perfect as it will push more teams into non-League football but it has it's merits.

So, fix these problems and I'm sure you'll see not only the end of the foreign journeyman but an increase in the percentage of English players in the EPL. Do that and we won't have to debate quotas or foreign player limits.

Permalink