Freddy Cap-tied Issue

[Parmigiano]

I spoke today, off the record, with a FIFA official and tried my best to get the low-down on the international eligibility of Freddy Adu.

My conclusion: he is NOT cap-tied to the United States.

Grant Wahl's reporting, quoting FIFA spokesman John Schumacher, was correct.

The main controversy has been the definition of an "A" level international match. Freddy's brief appearance with the US senior side in a friendly against Canada was indeed in an "A" level international match.

However, while my source acknowledged that there is indeed ambiguity in the wording of Article 15, sec. 3 (a) of FIFA's Statutes (the part that concerns this question), he stated firmly that the FIFA legal department has informed him that the player's appearance for the senior side must have come in an official competition, such as a confederation championship (Gold Cup) or FIFA World Cup qualifying.

As Freddy's appearance was in a friendly, he is still free to submit a request to change the Association for which he wants to play.

My source, however, did note that the final word on these questions rests with FIFA's Players' Status Committee.

But he also clearly reiterated (upon repeated questioning!) that, in the case I presented to him (that of Freddy Adu), the player on paper still has every right to change Association.

[Parmigiano]

I also posted this at the end of the Adu/Ghana thread.

I also realize that my source is anonymous, but he spoke only on background and I called him for the sake of getting this issue straight in my own head, not necessarily to write it up for any traditional publication. You can believe me or not, but I have given the essence of our conversation.

As for the source's identity, about the only thing I can only say that he is a more senior FIFA official than John Schumacher.

[nobody]

Until you have Sepp Blatter release an official statement to the press, you'r still gonna have people coming on here saying its wrong. And, then, they'd probably argue that they could overturn it on appeal.

But, nice to see someone put out the effort to put this to rest.

I'm still waiting for the results of that bone scan someone was demanding to see to tell how old Freddy really is.

[superdave]

The main controversy has been the definition of an "A" level international match. Freddy's brief appearance with the US senior side in a friendly against Canada was indeed in an "A" level international match.

However, while my source acknowledged that there is indeed ambiguity in the wording of Article 15, sec. 3 (a) of FIFA's Statutes (the part that concerns this question), he stated firmly that the FIFA legal department has informed him that the player's appearance for the senior side must have come in an official competition, such as a confederation championship (Gold Cup) or FIFA World Cup qualifying.

As Freddy's appearance was in a friendly, he is still free to submit a request to change the Association for which he wants to play.
1. I would point out that from time to time, Congress (well, Congressional staff) write a law badly, so that the letter of the law is different from what they intended. Until they rewrite the law, their intentions don't matter, it's the actual law that matters. Whether this applies to FIFA as well, maybe we'll find out.
2. This begs the question of why they wrote the rule in the manner that they did. If this was genuinely their intention, all they had to do was say that if a player has dual nationality at the time he is capped in an official U-x match, he can switch nationality up until the time he is 21, but this exception does not contradict other FIFA rules on cap tying. This would have been an EASIER rule to write than the one they did write. That's what is so odd about it...it's not like it's badly written because there are too few words, too little precision. It's not badly written because of laziness. If your source is right, the rule is badly written because there are too many words.
3. The problem for your source is that elsewhere, A matches are defined, and friendlies are included.
4. The rule is several years old. I'm wondering why FIFA hasn't corrected their mistake in all this time.

So basically, your source is saying (and I'm not saying he's wrong, just summarizing) that Freddy isn't tied because the rule doesn't mean what it says. Hmmm.

[onefineesq]

CAP ADU!!!!


Just had to be the first. ;)

[superdave]

However, while my source acknowledged that there is indeed ambiguity in the wording of Article 15, sec. 3 (a) of FIFA's Statutes

Did he use that word? I'm curious. The wording isn't "ambiguous," if Freddy is still a free agent.

It's "wrong."

[ironduke2010]

...

My source, however, did note that the final word on these questions rests with FIFA's Players' Status Committee.

....

seems to me this is sorta a catch-all "we don't care what else our laws say, our laws say we get the last word on all our laws, whatever those laws are!"

[Dogmatagram]

This is, of course, exactly what I and certain others have been saying for about a year -- prompting puerile ad hominems from Superdave and others. Like innumerable regulations and statutes, lawyers can make arguments as to the underlying intent (and Superdave is simply wrong when he says above that it is invariably the letter of the law, rather than the intent, that is enforced -- and I say this as an attorney). The point we were all making was that we don't know how FIFA will rule, but that it is inane to suggest that "Freddy is cap-tied," as though that were a statement of objective fact. Now we are getting the clear indication that, not only will Adu's lawyers be able to construct arguments as to the effect of the regs, but FIFA's lawyers are sympathetic -- and indeed agree with -- those arguments.

Hopefully this experience will remove some of the hubris (and offensiveness) from the approach that "certain posters" bring to this board.

[sidefootsitter]

This is no problem, as Ghana isn't going to give Freddy an official cap any time soon either ...

[drew_VT_6]

This thread raises a question I had from the other night: Why was Zizzo out there against Sweden and not Adu? Nothing against Zizzo, but we really ought to see Bob raising up Freddy for 2010. I'm pretty certain Freddy will be playing in that World Cup.

[toddk15]

My only thought is this, hypothetically, let's say Freddy isn't called into the next three friendlies but guys like Zizzo, Lee, Davies and Hill are called in. Specifically those four for the European friendlies. How would Freddy approach it if he was called into represent Ghana at the African Cup of Nations which his former homeland is hosting? Just something to think about. If he doesn't think he is getting a fair shake etc...

[tab5g]

Adu will become cap-tied to the US on June 2, 2010 if he fails to appear for Ghana before that date.

Adu can also be tied to either nation prior to that date by appearing in an official (non-friendly) Fifa event -- be that WCQ or something like the African Cup of Nations or perhaps the Confederations Cup.

[tab5g]

This is no problem, as Ghana isn't going to give Freddy an official cap any time soon either ...

you know this how?

if Adu has some great months at Benfica, why wouldn't Ghana invite him to join them at the African Cup of Nations?

Adu could of course say no to that invitation.

2008 African Cup of Nations
Tournament details
Host nation Ghana
Dates January 20 – February 10

[braun]

Does this mean now that even if Adu is played in all the upcoming friendlies he can still be cajoled into playing for Ghana while at Benfica up until his call-up for WCQers?
That does not sound like an impossibility, if Ghana really needs him.

[toddk15]

If your Ghana, I don't understand why you wouldn't do it.

[toddk15]

Does this mean now that even if Adu is played in all the upcoming friendlies he can still be cajoled into playing for Ghana while at Benfica up until his call-up for WCQers?
That does not sound like an impossibility, if Ghana really needs him.

I think if Freddy was called up for the next couple friendlies it would put him in the mindset that Bob is really interested in him, deserving of the call-up and that he is on the right track. But if he does not get called up for specifically the next couple of European friendlies, who knows what his mindset is going to be IMO.

[socmanq]

I am not going to jump into the fray regarding Adu being cap-tied or not; however, I think it would have been prudent for BB to have called him in to either the GC or CA this past summer, just to make sure. If all the aforementioned information is correct, then BB has made a big error in judgment. He should at least be called into several of the upcoming friendlies and into the first WCQ game...just to make sure.

[toddk15]

I am not going to jump into the fray regarding Adu being cap-tied or not; however, I think it would have been prudent for BB to have called him in to either the GC or CA this past summer, just to make sure. If all the aforementioned information is correct, then BB has made a big error in judgment. He should at least be called into several of the upcoming friendlies and into the first WCQ game...just to make sure.

He couldn't do that because Freddy was playing in the U-20's. Or you could argue that Michael played in the Gold Cup so why couldn't Freddy. Well that opens up a whole can of worms I'm not going to touch. :D

[FC Tallavana]

1. I would point out that from time to time, Congress (well, Congressional staff) write a law badly, so that the letter of the law is different from what they intended. Until they rewrite the law, their intentions don't matter, it's the actual law that matters. Whether this applies to FIFA as well, maybe we'll find out.



Legislative intent is looked at by the courts when there is ambiguity in a statute. In short, intent does matter.

[Bill Archer]

I spoke today, off the record, with a FIFA official and tried my best to get the low-down on the international eligibility of Freddy Adu.

My conclusion: he is NOT cap-tied to the United States.

Grant Wahl's reporting, quoting FIFA spokesman John Schumacher, was correct.

The main controversy has been the definition of an "A" level international match. Freddy's brief appearance with the US senior side in a friendly against Canada was indeed in an "A" level international match.

However, while my source acknowledged that there is indeed ambiguity in the wording of Article 15, sec. 3 (a) of FIFA's Statutes (the part that concerns this question), he stated firmly that the FIFA legal department has informed him that the player's appearance for the senior side must have come in an official competition, such as a confederation championship (Gold Cup) or FIFA World Cup qualifying.

As Freddy's appearance was in a friendly, he is still free to submit a request to change the Association for which he wants to play.

My source, however, did note that the final word on these questions rests with FIFA's Players' Status Committee.

But he also clearly reiterated (upon repeated questioning!) that, in the case I presented to him (that of Freddy Adu), the player on paper still has every right to change Association.


So then the only question remains: why the hell would he want to play for anyone else?

I mean, if he thinks Ghana is going someplace, he's delusional.

And if he decides to toss away the chance to play for the US in a couple yers because he is in a big big hurry for some reason and wants to play for ANYONE just so he can play, then he's too stupid to breathe anyway.

In any case, Nike does not give him the big money so that he can be the most famous player in Ghana. Frankly, Nike sales for the last decade in Ghana don't equal the average month in New Jersey.

So one suspects that Freddy's Nike deal specifies that he play for the US. He skips out t play for Ghana - for some unimaginable reason - thenhe gives that up. Nike is not stupid.

Bottom line: whether Adu is cap-tied or not, he's never going to suit up for Ghana. Makes no sense at all.