Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Premier League clubs vote for 'homegrown' quota system from 2010

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Premier League clubs vote for 'homegrown' quota system from 2010

    • 'Significant majority' of league's 20 clubs agree to rule
    • System may have financial incentives as encouragement

    David Conn, The Guardian, Wednesday 13 May 2009

    Premier League clubs will be required to include a specified number of "home-grown" players in their squads or first teams from the 2010-11 season, in a major reverse of the league's long-standing opposition to any such quota system.

    Richard Scudamore, the Premier League chief executive, announced yesterday that a "significant majority" of the league's 20 clubs have agreed to introduce a rule similar to Uefa's requirement for European competitions, that clubs must have eight "homegrown" players in their squads of 25. The league will decide at its annual summer meeting whether to adopt that system, the Football League's, which requires four "homegrown" players in a squad of 16, or to devise its own. The system may include financial incentives to encourage clubs to comply.

    The Premier League was bitterly opposed to "quotas" when Uefa first introduced its rule for the 2005-06 season, but criticism of the English league's fielding of overseas players has grown from Uefa president, Michel Platini, and Sepp Blatter, president of Fifa. Blatter is still pushing for club teams to have a "6+5" complement of domestic to international players. In *October the culture secretary, Andy Burnham, asked as one of seven challenges whether the national side could be "bolstered" and "a specified number of homegrown players" could be introduced into clubs' sides.

    Yesterday's move was a response to that question. Scudamore rejected Blatter's "6+5" rule, saying it would breach European laws, and argued the problem is not as severe as often presented. The England team has performed well overall since the Premier League was formed in 1992, he said, and this season, of 531 players who have played in Premier League matches, 203 – or 38% – are English.

    However, he accepted for the first time that young English players do have difficulty breaking into senior teams. "There is a leap at 18, when clubs decide if it is worth retaining a player or to buy one ready-made. Clubs see scope for doing something to ensure we are bringing homegrown talent through."

    European law, he explained, prevents clubs selecting players on the basis of nationality, so Uefa's definition of "homegrown" means players who have trained at a club for three years between 16 and 21. Critics – including the Premier League over the years – have pointed out that such young players are not necessarily English; Cesc Fábregas, for example, qualifies as homegrown at Arsenal.

    The clubs, Scudamore said, have a mix of motives. "Some say this is a way of making their investment in academies sweat a bit more; some that it will help the England team. Others see the politics, and say: if it gives us an easier ride, and if it helps, let's do it."

    On the most controversial of Burnham's questions, how to promote "competitive balance" and prevent the same clubs dominating every year, Scudamore offered no proposals. Burnham has long believed that earnings from Champions League participation cements the dominance of the big four clubs, and, here, that money should be shared more equally between the Premier and Football Leagues, but he has said the government will not intervene.

    He will feel the "homegrown" players move may have some levelling effect, and discussions are thought to be continuing about clubs reducing the size of their squads. It will, though, be up to the Football League and FA, in their responses, to call for a more even share of the game's riches. "Any redistribution of money is a matter for football," a government spokesman said. "But we will maintain discussions on these issues."
    "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
    -- William Blake

    #2
    Hmmm... more child trafficking then?
    And probably more overinflated prices for overrated mediocre English/English-based players?
    If the Prem really wanted to improve the chances of English players making it through, they might do better to have a proper competitive league for the reserves/trainees rather than the wimpy league they have now!

    Comment


      #3
      Hence the reason why Benitez wants Barry so badly

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by shelly View Post
        Hmmm... more child trafficking then?
        And probably more overinflated prices for overrated mediocre English/English-based players?
        If the Prem really wanted to improve the chances of English players making it through, they might do better to have a proper competitive league for the reserves/trainees rather than the wimpy league they have now!
        How would you ever go about making the reserve leagues more competitive though?
        "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
        -- William Blake

        Comment


          #5
          This is a really bad suggestion when looking at child trafficking. This will only mean that more and more 15 year old boys are taken in with the hope of making it, otherwise cut off from everything without education.

          There was a belgium documentary about this a few years ago, where they found loads of promising youngsters now living on the streets because they didn't quite make it.

          This suggetion will only help if enforced with making it illegal to sign players under the age of 18. It can easily be seen in the top clubs already, signing one 16 year old after another in the hope of hitting a fabregas - our club no better mind.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Darkon View Post
            This is a really bad suggestion when looking at child trafficking. This will only mean that more and more 15 year old boys are taken in with the hope of making it, otherwise cut off from everything without education.

            There was a belgium documentary about this a few years ago, where they found loads of promising youngsters now living on the streets because they didn't quite make it.

            This suggetion will only help if enforced with making it illegal to sign players under the age of 18. It can easily be seen in the top clubs already, signing one 16 year old after another in the hope of hitting a fabregas - our club no better mind.
            I don't think that is true at all. The thing about Belgium is that the countries relaxed attitude to work permits for non-EU encourages genuine child trafficing.

            For all the whinging the Briish regulations that say all young players under 16 (I think - the age may be different but the principle remains) have to come over for reasons other than football ensure that they either a/ have paid education or b/ their parents come over and get a job. This makes a huge difference. I think the proposed changes will make little/no difference on this front. The pressure is already on clubs to get the best players at young levels and a lack of grass roots investment and a culture of unenlightened youth coaching ensures that most of these come from abroad.

            I think a match day squad rule is probably a good idea - i.e. enforce the two new bench places or equivalent spots in the team are taken by players developed at the club. I think the idea should more be to encourage clubs to have an identity and to make their academies work, which should have a knock on effect at the level of the national team etc. Trying to impose some England-centric goals on the scheme is bound to fail IMO.
            "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind."
            -- William Blake

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by dww View Post
              How would you ever go about making the reserve leagues more competitive though?
              Sorry in advance for the long and rather rambling post.

              I should probably have mentioned that I don't mind the quota, I just have a feeling it's not going to level the playing field the way everyone expects, rather we are going to see more or less an accentuation of certain problems that we are facing right now, especially with the big clubs. I do think quotas are necessary, but I wonder if they will really help unless they are more restrictive..

              My first thought when I saw the article was yeah right, that's just going to make things harder to the young kids to break through because that just means that the big clubs are just going to 1) import them at a younger age and 2) go for quantity over quality in the hope that some of them will make it so they can be stuck on the bench for the quota.

              Hence the quick and sarccy response, but the problem of the reserve league is truly a sticky one, and requires some true thought to solve.

              Getting the reserves more competitive is a huge issue, IMHO. Simply because they don't seem to have very much incentive to do well.

              The obvious solution would be the B team system of Spain. However, I am not sure how long it would take to implement in England or if it would even work at all since the leagues are tiered and it would be obviously unfair to decide arbitrarily what a Liverpool or Arsenal reserve side level or say West Ham who obviously has a great academy, or a lower team would be at. They would have to start from the bottom to be fairest and compete their way up. But that would take forever and may defeat the purpose of the league tiers and be very unfair to the lower division clubs.

              Therefore I was wondering if it might possible to introduce more incentive to do well within the reserve competition. In other words, make it matter for the lads what the placing is.


              For example,
              if there was a reserve competition not restricted to England but Europe...
              The teams fight for a competition in Europe or something like that, ie Youth/reserve level european cup- that is club rather than country restricted. Although it's still reserves, there might be more prestige attached to it if it is at the European level and if the young guns have some incentive to make the reserve league a tad more competitive.
              You know - relegation, european places etc.. the fight could be their own rather than the parent club..

              Or maybe even let the winners of the reserve league play in say the championship or division one or whatever level and let them fight it out for the year. If they get "relegated" they go back to the reserves, otherwise they can stay and fight since they deserve their place and this way the reserves that are good enough can go into the main league slowly.

              You know - relegation, european places etc.. the fight could be their own rather than the parent club..

              Within the clubs they could send the reserves to play other teams - I know we just played Ajax reserves and Milan also send their kids to play games in Qatar, India etc. I am glad to see we do that. Maybe they can play against weaker "competitive" teams - like poorer National teams that never do well, or MLS or lower league teams sometimes too..

              It's just a random thought but of course I foresee problems with these suggestions as well of course. Obviously, the flipside is if they ARE given incentive to do well, then again the big teams can import a whole bunch of people again. So once again it would have to be carefully managed with proper quotas and other restrictions can apply here as well - size of squad, spending cap on players, etc. I think it is here that one can and will accept more restrictions since it can be argued that the restrictions are to "protect the youth". Also soon of the big clubs might not care as much for the youth development and it will be clubs like West Ham or Ajax with famous academies who strive to do well under these situations.

              One other possibility, and I don't know if it has been addressed, is this: would it be possible to make clubs spend a certain amount/percentage of their profit/spendings/revenue etc. on youth development? Make the clubs who are successful pay back directly into the grass roots and basics of football? I know the quota would go some way to addressing this since it forces the clubs to develop their academies but not altogether.

              Another possibility is to introduce a rule that during matches, say 2 or 3 out of the squad (on the bench or first team) MUST be from the academy/reserves team.

              That's the long answer with random thoughts and ramblings. The short answer is, I don't really know either, as you can tell. It's just that IMHO while the PL is the best league in the world, its youth development is nowhere near as good - unfortunately.
              Last edited by shelly; 14-05-09, 08:37 AM.

              Comment


                #8
                At the end of the day football is entertainment. We pay to see top class players, reduce the number of foreign players in the Premiership and our game will suffer. It's no coincidence that English teams have done so well in Europe since the influx of big name continental footballers. **** Platini and Blatter, and of course the teams not competing for the major honours would agree to anything which will reduce the strength of the top teams.

                Comment

                Working...
                X