How much of your salary do you invest in the lottery? That's what Adu is. Statistically speaking, odds are pretty good that he'll be a garden variety player in 5 or 6 years. Odds that he's the next (insert soccer diety here) are less than the odds that he's out of the game. The amount of and quality of investment that the I/Os can make in the league with $3MM over the next couple of years far eclipse the risk/reward calculations regarding Freddy. You guys all talk like he's the messiah. Even if he is, passing up MLS now doesn't codemn MLS to perpetual damnation.
Plus, there will be the added benefit that, should Adu not pan out, Bigsoccer's paranoid fringe can look for bizarre anti-American conspiracy theories enacted by English and Russian agents. I hope he does pan out, but if the doesn't, those theories will be damn fun to read. Way more interesting than the deluge of "We should've hired a foreign coach to train Adu" threads that would otherwise dominate in that scenario.
Um, Greddy, Motzkin is Freddy's agent. He's not associated with either Chelsea or ManU. Fine, what's the "way." Tell me. Don't be vague. And the WP exception is a useless analogy. The appeal is written into the WP rules. There's no appeal exception written into the FIFA rules. It's also true that despite the 1 thousand times I've challenged people to name a player who has already skirted the rule, and nobody can. So either a) there's a way around the rule but nobody can say what it is AND no other player is special enough to warrant a club finding that way or b) there's no way around the rule. One other thing...has any person associated with a club been quoted by name? So far as I can remember, the only people quoted by name are Motzkin, who has an agenda, and Kershaw, who has shot this down, and Whitbread, who has been, um, unhelpfully vague. One other thought...you have to question the wisdom of Freddy's advisors if he goes to Chelsea. The new regime has no track record, and to me, it would be a foolish risk to be the guinea pig for them.
No, he's just wrong about that. With all due respect to Ellinger, the rule is clearly written, and it won't allow that. And to reiterate...if it DID allow this, name another player who has pulled this off. Plus, geez, it's pretty plain that this is EXACTLY what the rule is supposed to stop.
Well, he's already beyond garden variety for the MLS. I could see him being garden variety in a high level Euro league in 5-6 years, but he'll still be a US nat standout.
Why don't you name ME the last time you were an executive with a major soccer club. You don't have to be a condescending prick about this. You act like you're the be all and end all of logical knowledge on this situation. Do I think its curious and worisome that Freddy Adu and his advisors could be setting a precident here? Hell yes I do! You have high placed people stating that they think there might be a way around this rule, but to you that's inconcievable so you're just going to brow beat everyone on this thread and every other thread relating to this till they agree with you. Are there a lot of people rampantly speculating and jumping to conclusions? Sure there is and it's stupid. That doesn't mean that it is completely out of the realm of possabilities that he will in fact sign with a European club. Hell though, I hope you're right about this. If the world were as it should be you would automatically be right, but it's not. I also agree with you about Chelsea. But to me if you're looking to debunk this story about Chelsea, I for one have for a while placed some stock and faith in everything that Freddy Adu's family and camp has said and done in regards to his overall health and welfare. To me, going on what they have said, outside of his agent is the most compelling argument for as to why he's not going to sign with a Euro club. Not that there's some technicality which of course the never waivering FIFA has standing in his way.
Never. Unless you count Championship Manager, at which I totally kick ass. Nah, I don't have to, I just like it like that. It's not an act. They wouldn't be "setting a precedent." They'd be breaking a rule. A different thing entirely. You have a) Freddy's agent saying that. Wonder why? b) Zak's dad saying that, but not giving us a clue as to what that path might be and c) Ellinger saying something directly in contradiction to the rule might be a way around it. His statement is the equivalent of my dad saying, hey, why didn't that attacker just catch the corner kick and throw it into the net for a goal? Um, dad, only the goalie can handle the ball. For some reason, this doesn't exhaust me. I'm NOT trying to browbeat ANYone into agreeing with me. I'm trying to browbeat SOMEone into telling me how it can be done. A couple of posters have been up to the challenge. This is like a Michael Ricketts thread. Yeah, it would be great if Ricketts could play for us. But let's not wank off going on and on about whom Bruce should pair him with. Let's focus on how he can become a US citizen. What evidence is there that I'm wrong?
But to answer your question in a more direct way. http://images.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/disp_res_chamber/Verfahrensregeln_EFSD_2002.pdf I would be willing to bet that if they wanted to challenge this in Freddy's case they would do so under Disputes Capabable of Being Submitted to the Dispute Resolution Chamber. While not being specifically listed as one of their duties, they do rule over Player Status issues, which the law applying to this situation falls under. There are venues set up to mediate similar problems for clubs. It is notable that Freddy's agent mentions himself being a lawyer. And from what little law I know about when trying to get something done, or argue a case you look at the thing you're trying to get around, and try to convince someone to listen that it doesn't apply to you, and that you are protected under a different law that does. I would say that if there is a committee set up to dispute player's status, then this would be the place to argue for it. In fact, from a Fifa press release:http://www.fifa.com/en/display/article,33557.html from the end of the same press release: Another way that they might be able to appeal their case.
also, under the same regulations which we've been discussing. http://www.fifa.com/en/organisation/player/transfer.html I know this doesn't speak as to whether young players from another country would be elligiable for this. In fact would seem of course to have to abide by that regulation as well. However, when Ellinger talks about compensation it would seem that maybe this is what he is refering to, with the given that a club would have to find a way around or appeal the other part of Protecting Young Players reg.
They would get a little money if Adu moved on after the 3 years. I am not sure how it is calculated, perhaps its a set fee, but there is a FIFA rule that requires some compensation for a team that develops then looses a youth player. A couple of Canadians - Klukowski and Belotte - both moved on out of contract and their French clubs got some compensation. Now for you conspiarcy theorists, how about this: Adu and Family move to London, stay long enough to qualify to play for England, and opts for the newly minted, one time only, capped youth player can change countries before 21 (I think its 21) and plays for England!
Supposedly Adu wanted to play in MLS this season, but they said he was too young. They could have signed him and still given him a year at Brandenton before actually playing in MLS games. They would have had him wrapped up for several years. From the moment I heard that MLS was approached but balked, I thought they screwed up.
Only if FIFA changes the rule again. Freddy isn't locked into the US, but he's locked into either the US or Ghana. The rule is that a player can change if when he was first captied, he was eligible to play for more than one nation. But he can only switch to one of the nations he was eligible for when he was captied.
That's the first I've heard of this!!! Source? It doesn't make any sense, given the MLS schedule and the U-17 schedule.
If you look at this link, it reference Article 42 of the FIFA rules on player status. And Article 42 starts out How is what you're talking about a disupte between clubs and players? It's not, it's a dispute between FIFA and clubs, or maybe FIFA and a player. And the document you link goes on to specify 3 other things, 1. breaches of contracts, 2. compensation fees, and 3. pursuant to article 34, section 2. I'm not sure what that last one means; in the FIFA rules on transfers, article 34 has no sections, it just says that players under 12 don't need international registration certificates. So I think you struck out there. Clearly this isn't a breach of contract issue, nor a compensation fee issue, and unless there's another article 34 they're talking about, that doesn't fit either. How in hell would you argue this doesn't apply to him??? He's under 18, full stop. Also, you reference that the rules are going to be looked at in 2 years, which is coming up pretty soon. Maybe these clubs know something that we don't about how that's going. For example, FIFA may be considering amending the rules so that a club can get around it by paying the child an amount of money that precludes exploitation. That would make sense. If some club is willing to pay Freddy a million dollars a year for 3 years, he ain't gonna wind up screwed in the end. So maybe that's it. The G-14 type clubs might know that FIFA is considering amending the rules to give them a shot at Freddy. But even you would have to admit that if that's the plan, (big if) then I'm right and you're wrong about the rule. Last note...did you look at the date on that press release? Jan 2, 2002. IOW, this rule has been on the books for 20 months +, and of all the phenoms in the world, all of the great Brazilians and Nigerians and Argentinians and Ghanians, not a single one (so far as anyone knows) has been worth it for the clubs to try to find a way around the rule. It's only magical Freddy who is worth that. Probably the most basic, essential metaphysical question, is whether the Universe just happened, or there's some kind of intelligence that created it. One of the basic arguments in favor of the Universe being by design is the exquisite balance in our Universe. One of the basic counterarguments to that, is that if our Universe wasn't so exquisitely balanced, there wouldn't be any sentient life forms to ask the question.
I have no idea what you're talking about here. Ellinger seems to think a club can sign a player so long as he doesn't actually play for the club until he turns 18. I think that's what he thinks. Article 12, section 2. No, John.
Unfortunately I did get lost a little bit in the legaliese (sp) of all the FIFA regulations. My contention was though that although it doesn't specifically outline that this law or Freddy's situation could be appealed under the two different bodies I mentioned, just from a cursiory look at FIFA's appealic process that these could be two arena's in which they could at least try to have a case heard. In terms of in what refference to Ellinger said, you're right in that to my knowledge he's the only person I've read who presented some kind of situation like that. In refference to the review and revised part, you're right that it is notable that it hasn't been challenged yet before. However one possiable reason that it hasn't been challenged by a Brazilian, Argentinian etc could be that these confederations and nations appreciate the protection and therefore wouldn't come close to agree to challenging it. Secondly, they might not have the profile or power of the USSF, in that if the USSF want's to help Freddy get this done it might be a different story. My only contention is that reviewed and revised that would be a venue in which to possiably set precident. Moreover, I think from all the comments given in that Wahl article I think it's pretty clear that it's a fluid situation which has yet to be tested. It seems like it would be a pretty plain and simply rule. But still you have people openly debating in the press if it isn't so cut and dry. However, to echoe what other people have said in the past by the intent of the regulation being to prevent slave trade, this kid certainly isn't going to be a slave.
Right, that's your contention. But as I pointed out, Freddy's case would be outside the jursdiction. Are you admitting that or not? I'm not sure. I'm sorry, but what are you saying here? Are you saying that because CONMEBOL likes the rule, no CONMEBOL child/star would challenge the rule? That's what it looks like, but to me, that doesn't make any logical sense. What are you trying to say here? I don't get it. Why are you suggesting that the USSF would be willing to back Freddy on this? That makes no sense. As I see it, it would be completely counterproductive to the USSF's goals. Can you tell me what I'm missing? Right, it hasn't been tested in 20 months. A rule that, IMO, is crystal clear. A rule that nobody has pointed out a possible loophole that would allow a foreign club to sign Freddy immediately. What does that suggest to you? No you don't. You have Freddy's agent trying to maximize what MLS will pay him. And you have people saying things that are DIRECTLY contradictory to the rule. Point me to a sensible person coming up with a sensible way around the rule in the media. That's what I'm looking for.
also from the Wahl article I refferenced. That's probably the most plainly stated and well informed explination out there of this situation that I've read. Gazidis in essence agrees exactly with what you've been saying. I'd say it's notable that Gazidis says that MLS wouldn't raise any objections if that's what Freddy wanted to do. Whether or not his standing on that Chamber could force the issue into their jurisdiction is unknown, but without further examining the FIFA by laws, I'm just again saying that there must be a way to cut through the red tape to appeal this ruling. My quess would be with that Chamber or Committee. In regards to what I ment with USSF. Certainly, what Gazidis said is probably based a lot in public relations and negotioning. He certainly doesn't want to offend the Adu family by making them think that they'd essentially hold Freddy against his will. Furthermore if all these reports are complete bunk spread by Adu's agent, then Gazidis right there would be calling his bluff. "Go ahead, ship him abroad, he's not that important to us, at least not that important where we'd give him 3MM." I would say that although MLS would benift greatly by having Freddy Adu in the league, it's not the same type situation as if he was a poor Brazilian boy. In that because of his already relatively secure finacial status, and coming from a developed country he doesn't need to sign with a big club in order to have himself or his family survive economically. That is what I imagine the case to be in many nations, and is why the African and S. American confederations would not buck this rule because it's in order to protect them directly. Conversly if they did want to buck it I don't think that any of them would have an instance or would be powerfull enough to do so. If you recognize that the Adu situation is unique in that it doesn't apply to any 'Slave trade,' than the USSF if it felt inclined to help Adu go abroad might be inclined to do so and have the power to do so. As I mentioned before I would imagine that the USSF and MLS would NOT be inclined to do so, but they may be simply banking on the fact that they want this kid to develop into a world class star no matter where he plays. Or they would be banking on some type of Landon-esque loan situation where the end game wasn't simply MLS and the USSF getting screwed. Was that a little more clear?
On another thread... On another thread, there's a reference to an article that states that what Freddy's agent is selling is the "right of first refusal when he turns 17." At that age, Freddy would be able to sign professional papers with an EPL club. I guess you could interpret this as the Adu Futures Market. Is it legal? I don't know. Would it be binding on the 17-y-o Freddy? Another good question. But it does sort of make sense. Adu goes to MLS for a few years and joins Chelsea/Newcastle/Man U etc in June of 2006.