Re: On another thread... maxim, thanks, that clears it up alot. I never knew Ivan G. was such a wise man. 1. Where's that thread? I'd love to see it. 2. I don't see how this addresses the problem of the FIFA rule. It just addresses the problem I've noted that an English club that signs Freddy now is making a lose-lose bet. (If he's no good, they've wasted alot of money, if he is good, another club can swoop in and sign him.) 3. I think it would be binding on Freddy if his mother co-signed. That's how NCAA letters of intent work if the signee is under 18. 4. That sort of gibes with something Chris Bergin reported a few months ago. He reported that Freddy planned to play in MLS for the '04 and '05 seasons, then go overseas after WC '06. I pointed out that he wouldn't be 18 yet, and Chris was like, yeah, but that's what the kid says.
Re: On another thread... In the thread about this in the Yanks abroad section after a lot of thought I was speculating much of the same. That given all the things that have been said, all the difficulties of him playing abroad, MLS desire to have him but inability to keep up finacially with what a foreign club could pay him, and Motzkin's previous expierence with the Landon Loan, I speculated that it all seems to add up to this... If a Euro club could find a way to 'legally' do what Ellinger suggested, paying Freddy a 3 million dollar signing bonus, but then loaning him to MLS until he was elligiable to be sold or to play with a Euro club then I would seem to make a lot of sense. Calling it the Adu Futures Market is dead on. The only problem is of course is that, could they do what Ellinger said, and if they could pay him a signing bonus, but have him play in his domestic side, isn't that just as against the spirit of the law as straight up having him play for the club that signed him? Also, this would not be a short term investment. As we understand the letter of the law right now, they'd have to wait almost 4 years to have this kid in a sellable or playable form for the big Euro club. I'm sure MLS would LOVE this development as it's better than having him not play at all. All this stuff is just maddening, very very curious indeed. It'll be very interesting to see how it turns out.
Just to switch the debate a little bit. Lets say that they were able to get around this rule by paying a youngster a big signing bonus, then by controlling his rights, but 'loaning' him to a club in his domestic country. How 'exploitive' is that, to the player involved, the domestic club, and the nation's domestic league or confederation? Seems to me as I've state before that in the Adu case it'd be a pretty fair compramise within the rules if it was allowed and would be a lot easier than trying to skirt or apeal the law entirely. However, if this situation was able to take place, wouldn't that just mean that young players instead of being 'slave commodities' that they'd then just be indentured servants. Because yes a club, whether it be an MLS or Brazilian one would still have the benifit of keeping the player, it would still be finacially taken advantage of. Possiably compensation could be given to the club/league/confederation, which all three might welcome but they still wouldn't have the ultimate advantage of selling the player when he was old enough to be sold. In terms of the player, a situation like this might be most benificial in that they're a lot more finacially secure, and don't have to be shipped around to a foreign land before they're old enough to legally vote in most countries. However, they still would be binding themselves to a very long countract, at a very young age. Question again being, if these clubs got on okay from FIFA to just do Landon Loan type set ups, how exploitive would this be?
maxim, are you saying that Chelsea could get around the rule by signing Freddy and loaning him to MLS until he's 18? If so, you're wrong. In order to "sign" Freddy, they would have to register him with their FA. And that's what the FIFA rules won't allow.
OK, this IS what you're saying. See my post above. No, they can't get around the rule like this. The rule is all about registration of the player.
I was just asking the question on a theoretical basis, putting aside that at the moment there's no way they could get that done with out some kind of appeal. I maintain that from what I've read I think there must be some kind of appealic process. So theoretically speaking, if he's not playing in England (and not taking any native's spot), and not playing abroad (being 'exploited.') Then theoretically, morally, basic commen sense would the law(s) if not in practice but in purpose still be working?
1. There's not. OK, let me take that back. If there is, can you point us to the FIFA reg that brought you to this belief? 2. What is "appealic"? I know it's not a real word, but I don't know what word you meant, or even what part of speech.
I made a grammar mistake, was referencing an 'appellate court.' Therfore, and appeallate process. Instead of blindly, ignorantly, and naively stating that, 'IT DOESN"T SAY YOU CAN. IT DOESN"T SAY YOU CAN.' You've got a guy who's on the god damned board that made the rule saying, "If he goes overseas, I'd encourage us to find ways to get around the rule." So apparently its within the realm of his possability that there would be the potentiality to find a way around the rule. Why don't you just drop your little technocrat jihad and answer my question instead of screaming about which Sub by-line may or may not apply to Adu's case. Besides... what part of this "The Arbitration Tribunal for Football (TAF) will in future regulate all conflicts arising between FIFA, the confederations, associations, leagues, clubs, players, officials and licensed match or players' agents" does Freddy's case not include. The only stipulations in there that it does not cover are. Violations of the Laws of the Game, and Suspensions up to four match bans. http://images.fifa.com/u20/2001/media/Art63-E.pdf
but just sense we're dealing with the understand of termanology. prec¡¤e¡¤dent (prs-dnt) n. An act or instance that may be used as an example in dealing with subsequent similar instances. Law. A judicial decision that may be used as a standard in subsequent similar cases: a landmark decision that set a legal precedent.
I can't get to the link but this comes up first when you do a google news search sorted by date for Freddy Adu. The description is very interesting. "Chelsea assemble legal team to beat Man Utd for Adu Tribalfootball.com, Australia - 11 hours ago Chelsea are assembling a crack legal team to explore whether they can bring American teenager Freddy Adu to London. FIFA rules state ... "
sd - you're one of the most linear thinking people I've ever come across on these boards. That's not an outright criticism, as I think there's value to the "show me where it says that" doggedness to which you adhere. We get it, there's a rule about signing 18 year olds. That said, you're asking for the impossible. No one here can show how a VERY new rule can be circumvented, mainly because it hasn't been tried yet. You're asking a group of FANS to come up with freakin' contract law hypotheticals. What you seem to be unwilling to accept is that there is a strong possibility that the millions and millions of dollars/pounds at stake are going to force the issue. I don't think that these EPL clubs are unaware of the rule, nor do I think they'd burn a bunch of time/resources negociating if it was such a brick wall. It's a huge sticking point, but clearly these clubs are looking into it. I'd put pretty good money down that these clubs are talking to their FIFA contacts and are getting vague answers. Vague enough that they continue to pursue the kid. And that brings me to the final point, which has nothing to do with FIFA regulations. This is a freakin' RUMOR people. The fact that some of you can jump to "I'll never forgive MLS" says a lot about your level of support and faith in the league.
I think that players can sign professional contracts in England when they're 17 - At least Wayne Rooney did. He could play before his 17th birthday in the EPL in theory but, regardless of the FA's rules, I don't believe any employment contract would be enforceable under English law until he reached the age of employment which I think is 16. To be honest the whole thing sounds like a minefield which, presumably, is the reason it hasn't happened with the other clubs.
Is there any precedent for Freddy Adu's situation? Any? Please name them. Otherwise, everything here is speculation ranging from informed (Ivan Gazidis) to internet message board rumormongering (Bigsoccer). If FIFA is going to make an exception to rules governing the signing of minors, I'd guess FIFA has to find a way that doesn't violate rule's intent. Furthmore, once FIFA establishes and exception process, how many underage players would be signed in a year? How do you write the rules so that only X number of underage players get signed per year (and X could be much less than one)? Feel free to come up with as many scenarios as you can.
Why do you believe that EPL clubs are actually looking into this or that they are "burning a bunch of time/resources negociating". This is pure speculation and pretty poor reporting. You can ask lots of clubs if they want Freddie and I'm sure most would say yes, doesn't mean they've looked into it, doesn't mean anything really. This is a freakin' RUMOR people.
Here's the rest of the article: The direct link: http://tribalfootball.com/september/englishnews6150903.html didn't work for me either. [I had to start at their home page and work down from there.]
People, step back for a second and look at this rationally. You’ve got a bunch of reports that are just pure speculation, you’ve got a number of FIFA rules that look like they’d prohibit this move, and most importantly you’ve got an agent who has less than 6 months left to maximize his client’s value. If Adu wants to play MLS next year he needs to be signed by Feb/March at the latest, if he wants to train with the team before the season opener. His agent is going to run with these stories as much as possible to try to get the most out of MLS. What’s he gonna say “Well there are big Euro clubs that want Freddie but he can’t go under FIFA’s rules so I guess we have to take whatever MLS offers”? I seriously doubt that his agent will hold him back from the MLS in hopes that they can get around all the FIFA rules. He will sign here for 2 or 3 years and get lots of endorsement money. Maybe FIFA changes their rules in the next couple years, but who knows. If I had to put my money on where Freddie will be in 6 months I’d bet MLS. The other scenarios bounced around here all sound pretty flimsy. But hey this is B(ig)S(occer).
He also said I don't see how this is a "conflict." There's a rule. Freddy wants to break it. Now, if Phil Anschutz bought QPR, and then somehow Home Depot transferred Freddy's mom to London, and Freddy signed with QPR the next day, and FIFA turned that down saying the move was football influenced...then you'd have a conflict for them to regulate. "I want to break the rule" isn't a conflict, as I understand the term. BTW, the "A" stands for arbitration. So I don't see how this fits.
That Tribal Football article is crap. The rule is 18, not 16. I'm a bit hurt that after all of my work, some of you would fall for this. (sniff) I need a hug.
It's not suprising you're such a narrow minded thinker considering you support a man who once argued that the word "is" had a vague defanition.
This posts is 100% correct... And the other thing you want to take into account is that the clubs want Freddy to know that they're interested in him. What better way to do it than to leak a rumor to the press? Yeah this is a typical BS caper of stomping around in the dark trying to hit rumors with a stick.
I haven't read the entire thread so I don't know if this has been posted yet or not. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/3107428.stm Basically reports ManU have dropped out of the race, leaving the door open for Chelsea. I'm sort of with SD on this one, until they find away around the rules, and he signs a Euro deal, I expect him to sign with MLS. Why would ManU drop out of the chase? Is it because they have figured its a lost cause? Surely can't be the price tag.
Um. This article didn't come out in a vacuum. There have been numerous articles leading up to and post U17 wc talking about where Freddy might land. Is it your opinion/position that big clubs are ignoring him? That they are simply hoping no one else goes after him because of the FIFA rule? Of course no one has officially, on-the-record, stated they've put out an offer. But that doesn't mean these clubs aren't looking into it. (And that, btw, means utilizing resources they could be utilizing elsewhere.) My point about this being a rumor was in reaction to people taking this one little nugget as if it were gospel. That's as goofy as assuming that there's absolutely nothing to all of the rumors. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth. The truth may very well be that superdave is correct: There's no way around the FIFA rule and that's why ManU threw in the towel.
For What it is worth... over the weekend during the Metro v. Revs match -JP Dellacamera and Shep Messing (the announcers) were talking about Freddy and they both said that they believed Freddy would be in MLS next year - JP said maybe he will be "loaned back" to MLS but Shep kind of shot this down A little backround on Shep - He owns (or at least is a partner in) a company that specializes in bringing foreign players into the US and he has many contacts within the international soccer business community....so I tend to follow his lead - he was also way ahead of the game on the Howard front.