Sadio Mané

[Norbs]

And will you give a **** if we win the title by a single point because our rivals suffered a similar fate?

[Exiled_red]

The calendar totally needs to be unified, the problem is FIFA don't give a **** about anything but money, the Qatar WC is proof of that (if proof were needed). I really hate international football but obviously it has to be accommodated. I think that periods of international fixtures should be grouped together so that there is one (long) season break for internationals and there are international tournaments in the summer, rather than a couple of games one month and a couple more the next month for much of the season. I think that benefits everyone, the players can focus on playing for both their club and their country at certain times of the year. The midseason international break could be long enough to hold a tournament such as the ACN meanwhile Europe and South America etc can hold a big batch of qualifiers for the WC or Euros etc. Aside from the summer when there are tournaments and this one long international break we could all focus on the real football.

[Doc_Piptorious]

Bout time International football was made an amateur sport with completely different players to the professional club ones. Makes no sense at all sending your prized assets to perform for someone else

Said it before, but make the various nations financially liable for any time missed by players due to injuries picked up on international duty, and you would see very different attitudes towards things like using players in dead rubbers.

A "you break it you buy it" approach.

Could even do something like the actual tournaments themselves are exempt, but any injuries during qualifiers or friendlies mean the nations have to pick up the wage tab, or a good % of it.

[S-RED]

i thought that was already the case, it certainly is with the home nations; would be amazed if there is not a FIFA (global) agreement/insurance on this or clubs would be even more reluctant to release players?

[Norbs]

Said it before, but make the various nations financially liable for any time missed by players due to injuries picked up on international duty, and you would see very different attitudes towards things like using players in dead rubbers.

A "you break it you buy it" approach.

Could even do something like the actual tournaments themselves are exempt, but any injuries during qualifiers or friendlies mean the nations have to pick up the wage tab, or a good % of it.

I thought they were. Remembering back to when Jamie Redknapp always seemed to come back from international duty with an injury, I thought there was insurance in place

[Fivex]

Said it before, but make the various nations financially liable for any time missed by players due to injuries picked up on international duty, and you would see very different attitudes towards things like using players in dead rubbers.

A "you break it you buy it" approach.

Could even do something like the actual tournaments themselves are exempt, but any injuries during qualifiers or friendlies mean the nations have to pick up the wage tab, or a good % of it.

Guess the counter argument there is Guinea would be diverting their funds to us for compensation rather than investing in their youth football to nurture the next batch Keitas.

[Doc_Piptorious]

i thought that was already the case, it certainly is with the home nations; would be amazed if there is not a FIFA (global) agreement/insurance on this or clubs would be even more reluctant to release players?

Do not think it covers the full amount of the club wages or maybe it only covers the medical expenses. Just remember reading that the club still takes the hit for the bulk of the wages if a player is out for a sustained period.

Guess the counter argument there is Guinea would be diverting their funds to us for compensation rather than investing in their youth football to nurture the next batch Keitas.

There is that arguement, but then again they (and any other nation) are not the player's employer and they do not suffer the same loss if a player is out injured or suffer the same financial outlay.

Also those nations are quite happy to cash in on players who are at marquee clubs through sponsorship deals etc so they get the dual benefit of having a star player without the wage expense and also get to make money off of the back of that player happening to play for a big name club.


Plus by not having the money for the next batch of Keitas, then they would be future proofing themselves from having a new batch of injured players that they would have to pay out on.

[Norbs]

To what extent does the international set-up of a country nurture talent anyway?

[Fivex]

quite a lot for small nations i'd expect

[Norbs]

quite a lot for small nations i'd expect

Perhaps for those without a decent league, I'd need evidence to back the claim up though

I think there are extensive scouting networks across Africa and the players are whipped off to minor leagues in Europe to develop from a young age

[frank the tank]

And will you give a **** if we win the title by a single point because our rivals suffered a similar fate?

Obviously not. But if anyone is being honest, then they would say "**** we were lucky there because City / Chelsea dropped points when 3 of their best players were in africa c-o-n"

So it devalues the premier league. There is no doubt

[The_weatherman]

To what extent does the international set-up of a country nurture talent anyway?

FIFA and UEFA money filters down to small clubs to strengthen youth coaching. I was involved in a small club in Iceland and the UEFA money was considerable for us, specially after Iceland made it to the EURO's. But every year there is some grant money that helps youth and kid coaching. Puts football way ahead of other sports really. The FA divides this money to the clubs.

[Buzzo]

Also smaller nations will lose revenue in ticket sales when fans realise they won't see the star players from their country. For lots of countries the reality is that every game is to an extent a dead rubber.

There is an arrogance that comes with expecting everything to bend to the wills of the clubs, and it is annoying. But look how passionate Sadio Mane (and Mo) is about his country, the things he has done to assist his home region. For the people that worship these guys, and grew up in the same country the only chance they are ever likely to get to see them play is in these games. The clubs benefit because of the global fanbase that these guys help create.

The only fair solution is less games, and a calendar that acknowledges the workload on elite players.

[Doc_Piptorious]

Also smaller nations will lose revenue in ticket sales when fans realise they won't see the star players from their country. For lots of countries the reality is that every game is to an extent a dead rubber.

There is an arrogance that comes with expecting everything to bend to the wills of the clubs, and it is annoying. But look how passionate Sadio Mane (and Mo) is about his country, the things he has done to assist his home region. For the people that worship these guys, and grew up in the same country the only chance they are ever likely to get to see them play is in these games. The clubs benefit because of the global fanbase that these guys help create.

The only fair solution is less games, and a calendar that acknowledges the workload on elite players.

How is it an arrogance?

The club pays for the player, the club pays the wages and medical stuff. The fans of the clubs pay to watch the players.


I agree that for some people the only chance to see certain players is at international games but wanting to see clubs come before country for meaningless games is not arrogance or entitlement at all. If anything it is simply wanting the player to be available as much as possible for the club.

As for the Global fanbase those guys make. I would argue that global fanbase comes about through the player being at a big club rather than the fanbase being created before the player gets to a big club. The player stays in his home country, plays in a small league there then I would bet good money that he does not get the same level of acclaim as a player who gets to play with a big club in a big league. The attention/publicity of being at a big club is what makes the players icons in their home countries for the most part.

[Buzzo]

How is it an arrogance?

The club pays for the player, the club pays the wages and medical stuff. The fans of the clubs pay to watch the players.


I agree that for some people the only chance to see certain players is at international games but wanting to see clubs come before country for meaningless games is not arrogance or entitlement at all. If anything it is simply wanting the player to be available as much as possible for the club.

As for the Global fanbase those guys make. I would argue that global fanbase comes about through the player being at a big club rather than the fanbase being created before the player gets to a big club. The player stays in his home country, plays in a small league there then I would bet good money that he does not get the same level of acclaim as a player who gets to play with a big club in a big league. The attention/publicity of being at a big club is what makes the players icons in their home countries for the most part.

Because the conversation is basically saying that contracted players should not play for their countries.

Take a guy like Naby Keita- no way could Guinea afford to cover his costs in the event of injury.

If, say, the costs were covered by FIFA, then fair enough.

With regards to the chicken and egg of club v country and status then it’s an impossible solution, take Salah he was an icon in Egypt before he came to us (granted that has increased ten fold), but it seems unfair to deny his countrymen and women the chance to see him play.

Broadly speaking a fairer compromise has to be reached without the Countries suffering.