By Tony Attwood
By and large the football media tend to support the status quo. And they do this to keep things simple – Fifa and Uefa in charge and doing their own thing without any annoying debate as to whether what they do is morally legitimate or actually legal. PGMO agree – because that means they can continue with no one questioning why they are a secret society. The media agrees because they don’t want to lose their free tickets to big European games.
But there have been challenges, and a new one is just about to explode.
An early challenge to utter secrecy and no commentary, came from George Eastham when he refused a new contract offer from Newcastle but Newcastle refused to transfer him. Ultimately Newcastle did transfer Eastham to Arsenal but Eastham and his union the PFA took Newcastle to court and the League was forced to amend the transfer regulations.
But not amend them very much, and so the next big jump was taken out of the system with the Bosman ruling by the European Court of Justice in 1995 and then later with the Webster ruling by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in 2008.
Those claims were made of course by players and were successful, and it is mimicking these claims about the system, but arguing from a club point of view, that Manchester City are now claiming that Financial Fair Play rules are actually somehow illegal!
But at the same time another case is hitting the courtroom, and interestingly the media has hardly worken up to this one. Lassana Diarra (whom you may recall) played his last game as a professional, on 20 October 2018. His case will be settled next week and if he wins that will result in more upheaval than all the other cases put together.
For in this case his lawyer is Jean-Louis Dupont, who represented Jean-Marc Bosman and who tore Uefa to shreds.
This case began 10 years ago when Diarra (who played seven times for Arsenal) was playing for Lokomotiv – who decided that it was ok to cut his salary as he wasn’t being picked for the first XI enough. Ultimately Loko ended his contract but then sued Diarra for breach of contract, and so the dispute started.
Fifa as is its habit, backed the club that finances Fifa (everyone knowing about where the butter is on the bread) and Loko demanded that Diarra pay them back the cost of his transfer fee which was €20m.
The notorious and indeed infamous Court of Arbitration for Sport, which threw out the last claim against Manchester City because it was “out of time”, agreed with Fifa (as usual) and told Diarra to pay up.
Then no one would take on Diarra because Fifa would not guarantee that any club employing him would not be sued for compensation. This of course was a clear and absolute restriction of trade, typical of arrogant Fifa and absolutely against European labour law. Fifa in fact ended the player’s career. Was Fifa acting lawfully? I’m not a lawyer, as I have said so often before, but it looks unlawful to me.
If Fifa lose the case they will have to change all their regulations. If only we had a free sporting press in this country Fifa would be so hammered that the FA would be pressurised into leaving Fifa. But we don’t and they won’t.
But Maciej Szpunar, advocate general in the European Court of Justice has said that, “There can be little doubt as to the restrictive nature of Fifa’s regulation on the status and transfer of players. By their very nature, the contested provisions limit the possibility for players to switch clubs … The contested provisions … necessarily affect competition between clubs on the market for the acquisition of professional players”.
“The consequences of a player terminating a contract without just cause are so draconian that it is highly unlikely that a player will go down this route. The contested provisions are designed in such a way as to have a deterrent effect and send a chill down each player’s spine.”
Now we must remember that European law does allow for sport to make regulations which in other situations would be illegal, because of the unique nature of sport in society. But sports have to show they are not just trying to get around laws just to suit themselves.
If Diarra wins, most serious commentators say the transfer system as it exists will end. The English media don’t agree, simply because they refuse to cover the case because it involves foreigners.
As s result of losing, Fifa would lose control of the transfer market, and that of course petrified them because Fifa and Uefa are based on entirely on the concept that they are in charge, can do anything they like, and are beyond challenge.
For years Untold and a few other websites have argued this is ludicrous, and of course we have been ignored by the UK media. They won’t recognise us now of course, but I hope you might excuse us if we find a few of our own trumpets to blow.
Especially if Uefa are thoroughly defeated.
Tony,
Whatever the outcome Football in the UK will find a way to continue as before. The media is in bed with the authorities so it’s hard to make a case against all the acronyms. Ban them all and start over. Well, it’ll never happen but still a pleasant fiction. The media don’t want to lose their perks and are resistant to change. The fans feel they have no advocate.
You should pray thru don’t lose!
If the transfer system ends so will the financial life blood of multitudes of smaller clubs!
As for the right of players to terminate contracts without a reason! What if Rice did that and Arsenal basically blew £105m for two seasons work! Disaster
Interesting article, spoiled by the usual fetish about the press.
Do you keep coming back to the press when you tell bedtime stories to your kids/grandkids etc?
Mr Banks I have explained my view over and over again to you (and of course all other readers) although the notion that I may be youung enough to have children who need a story telling to them made me feel rather good.
The point is that PGMO is not criticised or even exaamined at all by the media at large, and yet it is a fundamental part of the professional game in England.
So since the name of this site is “Untold” I picked up on it as an Untold story and the more I invesitgated the more concerned I became concerned about its secrecy – something that is the opposite of what we find in, for example, Germany, where referees do TV interviews. Here PGMO does not even have a website.
So given that when I started talking about PGMO very few people did this, I felt it was helpful to explore the issue more fully. Many readers responded positively to me about this stance so I have continued, and continued to find some statistics which I feel are a) interesting and b) not reported elsewhere.
What’s more because Untold is just one of thousands of blogs there is obviously no need for you to read – you can get supporters’ views elsewhere.
And yet – and this is the thing that fascinatees me the most – you keep on reading this site and then protesting at what you find. What I really want to know, which I have asked before, and you have as far as I know never answered, is why you keep reading Untold and then commenting on Untold, when you know that we are just about the only site to pick up on the issue of referees and the problems we perceive with it.
It’s a bit like me picking up the Daily Mail and writing to them to complain that their reporting is right wing. Of course it is, it is a right wing paper. Of course Untold comments on PGMO, because we recognise that no one else does this, and so we do.
By all means read Untold – no one is goiong to stop you. But why do you keep sending in the same complaint as if you didn’t know what we were about?
Tony
Andrew Banks has probably got a sad lonely life without much humour and so you are filling the gap and brightening up his boring days.
I suspect he is fully aware of the aims of Untold but he apparently seems to derive some amusement by constantly teasing you with his posts. You should feel proud that your patient replies are providing some sort of therapeutic relief for him.
I must admit I find your frequent duels with him most amusing, so maybe I need therapy as well.
By the way I can recommend Mr Men books for bedtime reading, my kids and grand kids loved them.
mick shelly
Andrew Banks has been asked on many occasions why he insists on reading a blog he clearly doesn’t like. As I pointed out once before, it’s like repeatedly going to a show you don’t like just so you can heckle the players all night long. I mean, he must know everyone else in the room is thinking, ‘you sad little man’. So why would you do that?
a) You are indeed a very sad individual?
b) You have nothing else in your life worth doing?
c) You are really a Spurs fan and this is better than reading about how ‘this is their year’, yet again?
d) You are 5 years old?
My guess is it’s all of the above.
Still, at least he’s keeping you entertained mick. I just think it’s childish drivel.
As one who studied psychology and in with continuing work with the Dyscalculia Centre, still make reference to psychology quite often, I find Andrew Banks case fascinating. He knows that his comments on this site will be seen by people who disagree with him, and he knows he will be criticised by me if no one else, for a total lack of evidence, and yet he carries on.
The word for this personality type is sysyphean. Although many people get this problem for a short while it is rare to see it last for so long and so I find his texts worthy of study.
Tony, you are a legend! And an educator, I had to look up dyscalculia and sysyphean.
Tony
Andrew Banks . A study in Sisyphean behaviour? Interesting.
I must admit I never saw him in such a light, more a study in self Flagellation.
The question for me is, is it a form of self punishment or does he get some kind of sexual gratification from torturing himself on an almost daily basis?
Lets see what twaddle he comes up with next.
Are you going to update this now given that the BBC reported on this. Or don’t you mention any press materials that you don’t like? Or that go against your conspiracy view of the press?
Like most blogs we don’t update articles because most readers don’t go back to old articles. Instead we will publsih a new article. Which in fact we just have
I can think of a few other FIFA rules that could do with some challenging.
So you think it would be good for football if players can just terminate their contracts if they so desire? Interesting. Please don’t bitch and moan when Saliba terminates his contract because Arsenal refuse to sell him to Madrid. Arsenal fans have been crying over Chido going to United. Be hilarious to see the reaction on here when players terminate their contracts because other teams offer them more money.