Comments on: The 6+5 Rule Would Radically Alter Football, But Not in a Good Way

By: jonathan

jonathan — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 05:56:21 +0000

well if club football is about showcasing the talent of the local area then be prepared for a serious decline in european football. How about you force all these rich european clubs to give financial aid to their south american and african counterparts since God knows they too would want to find glory at their local clubs. Its terrible already to see that european players of equal or lesser skill make one thousand times the profit of some foreign players

By: Shane Roach

Shane Roach — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:48:30 +0000

My opinion on this matter stems from what makes an employee?

Can any of your bosses sell you to a competing business at a profit? This not being the case it is unfair to classify these professional football players as employees of the clubs, they are assets in the truest sense of the word and as such the employment rules of the EU should not apply.

I see nothing wrong with the 6+5 rule as a club from a country, better yet a particular area should be aiming to show case the players and potential of players from that area at least not ruling out those of the country.

By: JP

JP — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:20:53 +0000

It seems that INEA has declared to the EU Parliament that 6+5 does NOT violate EU law & is thus not illegal as the author would have you believe. 6+5 is coming, like it or not. Why the hell else would ‘Pool drop 18m on Glen Johnson? LOL

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/releases/newsid=1032676.html

By: Herbie

Herbie — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 15:35:37 +0000

If you’re good enough you’ll play – that is what it should be – regardless of where you are from.

Doesn’t the eligibility thing make no sense as Toure can get a British passport soon, Almunia likewise and a lot of Arsenal’s young players have been here for years regardless of where they were born – all of whom would be ‘eligible’ for the national team by passport but not by birth.

Bentley wasn’t good enough for Arsenal and isn’t even good enough for Spurs – why should the rule be that he has more chance of starting over a better player such as Arshavin or Nasri because of where he was born.

There are very few English players good enough for the top 4 teams – it seems like this is the fault of the FA, government, schools and grass roots football rather than clubs who try to bring players through such as Hoyte who wans;t good enough for Arsenal and was only on the bench for ‘boro.

The best teams across the continent will buy the best players from their respective countries – this has always been the case.

I think the ‘homegrown’ rule is much more workable and much more positive.

Blatter is just anti- England and Premier League dominance – not helped by Platini’s blatent petulence and hate for the English.

By: Jomar

Jomar — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 02:47:22 +0000

What a load of rubbish. Does anyone remember that only 15 years ago European clubs could only have three foreign players. It meant that they were forced to develop and purchase the best players from their own countries to fill the teams. The quality was just as good as today – just not as televised.
When a young player from Manchester who dreams of one day playing for Man U with all his heart and soul has no chance of ever achieving that goal surely something is wrong with the system. Judging by this article – nationality should not come into play – so why are teams classified by their country of origin?