APPENDIX 13
Memorandum from Pro-Organ Sports Consults
(WP22)
1. No one could have imagined that sports 20 years
ago would have turned out to become an industry. It is a thing
of the past for governments to play a prominent role in the running
of sports' establishments. Now sports and football in particular
is a billion pound industry, employing a vast number of members
of the public.
2. We are going to be forecasting on the football
industry and at the same time be looking at the impact government
employment policies have had. Twenty years ago, no one complained
about the influx of foreigners in our game. The reason why, there
was nothing to complain about. Twenty years ago will be our reference
point throughout this article because it only looks like yesterday.
This was the period when the likes of Ipswich Town FC were a dominant
force within the British game. Yet the gap between this club and
the likes of Manchester United in the modern era is so much.
3. Twenty years ago there were less foreigners
playing professional football in the British game. Twenty years
ago, economically most countries in Europe and the rest of the
world were much better off. The economic factor is the major influence
in the gap evidence in the modern era between countries and clubs.
Talking about the economic factor, while the
British economy has been able to weather the storm of the last
20 years, the same cannot be said of the rest of the world.
4. A typical example is Nigeria, aside from
corruption on the part of the previous ruling class; the economy
of this country has gone on a landslide. This single factor is
responsible for the high number of not just footballers but also
other professionals wanting to migrate elsewhere, for what is
believed to be greener pastures. Twenty years ago, Nigeria could
hardly boast of more than 10 sports professionals abroad. But
20 years after, the country is on top in the league of countries
of sports professionals abroad.
5. Coming closer home, around Europe, the emergence
of the European Union has made Europe a united community. This
is in line with the practise in the United States of America.
Citizens of the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area
(EEA) are free to be employed in member states/nations. In football
sense, this has been a disadvantage to the British game. The question
we would like to ask is how many British footballers have played
professional football in all EU/EEA countries put together in
the last 20 years? No doubt, the number is much lesser than the
number of other EU/EEA nationals presently playing professional
football in our leagues today.
6. It will be difficult for Britain to change
their obligations within the European Union; it is obvious that
the employment aspect of the treaty favours other EU/EEA member
nationals than it does favour the British people. There are numerous
reasons why such conclusions have been drawn. For example, look
at the amount of money paid by British clubs as transfer fees
for players coming from EU/EEA member countries in contrast to
what they pay for British players moving in the opposite direction.
7. The EU/EEA situation has placed citizens
from outside the EU/EEA states at a disadvantage. Members of the
Commonwealth do not in any way enjoy the same privilege. We should
ask ourselves if the essential objectives of the Commonwealth
have been achieved? We believe that members of the Commonwealth
should enjoy the same privileges. It will be unfair to highlight
reasons for believing this is the case. Having considered these
situations, there is no doubt the practise of having both EU/EEA
and Commonwealth nationals gain employment freely within British
sports industry will jeopardise the development of the game.
8. On the other hand, we have to realise every
action has an opposite reaction. In some instances, both action
and reaction may be equal. And in other instances, it is not equal.
The same applies to government policies. What can be said about
government policies is that it has to be favourable to the majority
of the citizenry. The question is how do we measure favour? On
the criteria for issuing work permit to footballers of non EU/EEA
nationals, the policy adapted by the government can be considered
to be favourable to the citizenry or beneficial to the development
of the game in Britain. In this instance, there are two things
to be considered, what is favourable to the people and beneficial
to the development of the game in Britain.
9. From research, opposing policies supports
both considerations. In issuance of work permit without criteria
to footballers of non-EU/EEA nationals can be said to be for the
benefit of the game in one hand. In another hand can be considered
to be non-beneficial to the development of the game. The people's
view would be that foreigners are taking over employment within
the football industry to the detriment of our own players. It
is difficult to argue for or against the present policy in place.
10. To present a good argument though, let's
look at what is been used in other European countries. For instance
in Spain, the number of non-EU/EEA nationals that feature in a
team during any match is limited in top league clubs. Hence, a
team can only have a certain many of non-EU/EEA nationals on the
field of play at any point during the match. This is irrespective
of the number of non-EU/EEA nationals in the club as a whole.
This implies that there are no criteria for issuing work permits
to such players but there are restrictions to the number that
can be used during a match. This policy can be considered more
advantageous than the current practise in Britain. And at the
same time, domestic talents are given the opportunity to develop
their abilities. Some of the talents from non-EU/EEA nationals
are later transferred to create foreign revenue for their respective
clubs.
11. Still in Spain, non-EU/EEA nationals are
not allowed to feature in lower division clubs. This allows better
opportunity for the home grown talents to nurture their abilities.
However, in The Netherlands, the regulation is that for a club
to take on the service of a non-EU/EEA national, they have to
be prepared to pay the player in question a minimum amount as
wage. Looking at this policy, it is obvious that smaller teams
who cannot afford such minimal sum will continue to suffer. At
the same time, we should recall that players/footballers are the
most valuable asset of a football club.
12. Coming back home, let's consider what is
currently being practiced. The Government regulate the influx
of non-EU/EEA footballers based on the criteria of having to obtain
75 per cent of their country's national team grade A matches in
the last two years. Without any question of doubts, my opinion
is that this criterion is too strict or rather too stringent.
This criteria has its plus of mainly to encourage that only the
best are made available to play in the United Kingdom. And preserving
our home grown talents.
13. The other issue which might have been overlooked
here is that such rigid criteria has turned off some young talented
players who might not have had the chance to play for their country's
national team. These talents go to other European countries and
within a short time, obtain such country's citizenship and become
eligible as EU/EEA nationals. They are in turn sold to British
clubs for millions of pounds. The question again is how many British
players feature in other EU/EEA national leagues? But yet, our
clubs have to pay millions of pounds to obtain the service of
non-EU/EEA footballers (only a few years back). This is of course
explains why Manchester United have entered into an arrangement
with Royal Antwerp FC of Belgium for the grooming of young talents
from non-EU/EEA nationals.
14. The million pound question is what is the
best policy to adapt, which will be suitable for the development
of the game and as well as favourable to the people of Britain.
Reflecting on practices in other European countries and at the
same time considering the effects of the present policy, it is
advised that there should be discouragement for our lower division
clubs depending on the influx of non-EU/EEA footballers. If they
so wish to be involved in bringing this category of footballers,
rules should be put in place to decide which type and amount of
player they can have.
15. For me, these rules might look complex but
after full consideration, if it is believed this is the way forward
for the development of the football in Britain. The following
rules should apply:
RULE I: Division Two and Three clubs (as well
as any club in a division below this) are allowed to be involved
in the development of teenage players of non-EC/EEA origin. The
minimum age of such player should be 16 and the maximum age should
be 19. Before their 20th birthday, such players must have been
employed by his present club with a full professional status or
any other club in a higher league.
RULE II: Division Two and Three clubs described
above cannot have more than six non-EC/EEA teenage players under
their youth development programme within the football season.
RULE III: Only three of such players can be
involved in their first or/and reserve team matches at a time.
And only one non-EC/EEA player of over 19 years old can be employed
with a professional status during a football season.
RULE IV: During the period of development of
non-EC/EAA players between the age of 16-19 years old, the club
shall be solely responsible for them in all endeavours. Such players
shall be paid a minimum amount as pocket/allowance money until
they are offered a professional status either by the club or another
club in a higher league.
RULE V: Premier and first division clubs should
be allowed to employ the service of non-EC/EEA nationals but with
limit to the number of them that feature during the game. There
should be a minimum wage for these players.
RULE VI: Premiership and first division clubs
should not be allowed to employ or/and develop non-EC/EEA players
between the age of 16-19 years old. But can employ such players
only after their 19th birthday within the requirement stated in
Rule V.
16. These rules outlined above no doubt have
been well thought of. They favour the development of the game
in Britain and at the same time encourage young talents to interact
and socialise with their peers from outside the EU/EEA nations.
We should remember that these rules encourage the lower clubs
to be more involved in grassroot development both within the EC/EEA
communities and the wider society. Clubs in the lower division
two and three are encouraged to increase their revenue base by
being involve in marketing teenage talents to top teams.
17. These top clubs as well do not have to pay
millions of pounds to other European clubs to get the services
of teenage players. Such funds will continue to circulate within
the game, which in turn are invested in the development of the
game. There are needs to develop the minds of teenage players
in some form of academic work. The education sub committee can
draw up a programme for teenage players to be involved in academic
work when they are not on the field of play or during spare times.
For which they should gain qualifications for on completion.
Pro-Organ Sports Consults Limited
October 1999
| 
