FIFA's 6+5 rule: In favor or against?

Doesn't really bother my club, though I think a team like Arsenal would be f*cked, so I wouldn't mind.

Possible line up:

-----------------Foster
-Hargreaves---Rio-----Vidic----Evra
---------Scholes--------Carrick
--Ronaldo--------Tevez-------Rooney
-----------------Foreign #9

 

I think this is a horrible idea, but this is what a potential 6+5 Chelsea would look like:

Cech
Bosingwa-Carvalho-Terry-A.Cole
Essien-Sidwell-Lampard
SWP-Drogba-J.Cole​

 

what's not to like?

 

Are you serious. The price of home grown players would dramatically increase futher. The top 4 would buy them all The rest of us would be stuck with mediocre players. The quality would decrease, viewership decrease and TV money would decrease. Each clubs fiancial status would be ruined and they will all go into debt etc. Worst case scenario of course. Its a quality not quantitiy issue. Improve numbers by improving the youth development. Lowering the boundaries just produces worse players. It's also against the law. BTW Newcastle could do it easily at the moment...but we would get relegated.

 

It would be great for the development of English players. Regardless of what any EU clown has to say football currently operates outside of the law in countless areas. Restriction of trade? What the hell do you call transfer windows and contracts that you cannot simply serve notice and walk away from? That is but two examples. Football exists outwidth the law and the EU will eventually be forced to give in, again.

 

I can't see it happening, and if it does, it won't do anything for development of English players. The top four will just buy up all the best English players, and everyone else will be stuck with Championship crap. It's not like there's a whole host of potential English talent just reading to emerge, but being blocked by those nasty foreigners.

 

Take Man Utd as an example. It it were in operation today then Foster would be playing regularly in goal, Simpson would be our right-back and the likes of Campbell and Welbeck would have more of a chance of breaking though. To successfully comply with the rule you would not need an obscene number of English players in your squad. To claim that the big bad clubs would simply buy everyone up is false. Obviously a certain number of the better English players would be signed by Arsenal and Liverpool but outside of that I don't see much change. If clubs are forced to field English players then there would be far more incentive to develop youngsters and to give them a chance. It applies across the board. You might not see any rapid change but eventually you would get a better quality of English player thoughout the league system because talent would be developed and players would get the chances they lack now. Take a club like Man City or Aston Villa or West Ham as examples of how good talent can come though in the right environment.

The only thing that is stopping us from doing it at present is Abramovic raising the bar of what is required to compete. How are we expected to challenge and integrate Simpson when our main rival has no problem spending over £40 million on right-backs in recent times? How is a player like Campbell (or to use a Chelsea example Sinclair) expected to get a chance when Chelsea have spent over £100 million on strikers under Abramovic? It's not an even playing field and it effectively closes the door to young talent unless they can be thrown straight in without any major impact. If everyone is forced to field a certain number of English players then it opens the door to them again.

You would eventually be looking at a minimum of 120 English players playing each week in the Premiership. Not only playing but developing because they can now get regular football at a high level. Obviously you would have your top tier players but then you would also have your top tier youngsters competing against each other. I can certainly see the appeal.

 

So you like the idea of your favorite club being weakened to support one of the biggest rivals of your national team?

 

My club would not be weakened at all and I would far prefer to see youth being given a chance. Unlike others I don't see the point in supporting certain players for the bulk of the season and then somehow hating them because they pull on an England strip.

 

I know what you are saying I had a hard time rooting against the Chelsea players on the England team but I managed to do so. I find it hard to 'hate' players and national teams especially. When it comes to clubs, I love rivalries and at times I do hate clubs but I'm not a hater generally.
I have a question for you.
How does a Scot start supporting Man United? Who are your local Scottish club? Do you support them?

 

My Dad has supported them for over half a century and was first at OT in the early 60's, so I was brought up supporting them. There wasn't a local team where I lived until 95 and to be honest I wasn't that interested in Scottish football because of the Old Firm dominance. In saying that I have had a season ticket for Livi since then. I also lived in Germany for a while and St. Pauli was my local side there.

 

So then why aren't Man United listed as your favorite club? If I were you I would proudly display my club's name on every post I make.

 

Completely in favour, good for the development of local players and the national squad (and I am not a big fan of club teams), teams will retain their identity. I share Teso's sentiments on the issue.

 

Mexico apparently has a better idea - A league rule stipulating that a certain percentage of playing time each game is given to Mexican players under 23 - It forces more Mexican players on the field AND forces the development of young talent

Instead having a rule to force clubs to develop Youth Academies, OR having a rule to allow only a limited number of foreign players, this rule would push younger national players onto the field and mature them and keep the game growing

In most countries the FA is also in charge of the professional leagues - In the US, USSF (under FIFA) would somehow have to be able to stipulate this rule

 

I have not used the club/team section for ages. Everyone one here knows who I support anyway and if you don't then they can ask. I'm all for less clutter.

 

how is being protected from the competition great for anyone's development?

transfer window is a minor issue. it's pretty new as well and hasn't changed football much since it was introduced.

the eu did look into football contracts a few years ago , and their first idea was that they were illegal and that any worker , football players included should have the right to leave their employer on a 3 months notice. fifa and uefa managed to convince them that this would destroy professional football and they backed off on that. they did make sure that players have the right to buy out their contracts,though .

again? when were the other times they have given in?

the two major interventions by the eu in football have been:

1. all eu citizens have the right to play anywhere in the eu
2. no transfer fees after the contract is finished

they haven't given in anything on those major issues , and those rules have been around for almost 15 years now.

 

i like this ideal, will hurt the MIckey Mouse, Babel Towers leagues.

 

Official FIFA media release regarding the 6+5 rule -> link.

 

I'm very happy about this rule.
That means that european teams will stop buying the mediocre/average brazilian players and our league will be stronger.
Now only the best will leave.

 

This part

could potentially cut the EU argument on the right of EU citizens to work anywhere.

It's not like there is a limit on contracts, there is a limit on players who can play in a single match. ie it's a perfectly legitimate sportive rule.

I like it.

Now let's hope platini manages to put a stop to teams running in huge debit to buy success and thus doping the competition.

two cornerstones which will make the future of football a lot better.

 

that is a silly argument.


a rule like this already exited before. back then it was 3 foreigners per team. that also didn't limit the number of contracts clubs could have with "foreign" plays.

it was ruled illegal by the eu.

now they're bringing it back with 5 instead of 3.

what makes them think the eu is going to allow it now?

 

Totally in favor, I would prefer a rule which included bench players too (not 6+5 but 13/11+5), though.

 

Arsenal is a team loaded with very good foreign players. David Bentley was in the Arsenal academy and reserves. He learned off these players but could never quite break into the first team. A wasted talent due to too many foreigners. NO. Via a loan spell at Norwich he moved to Blackburn where he played more, fulfilled his potential and his now one of the better premier league players and an England squad regular. The real talent always makes its way to the top. The many different nationalities only stop the mediocre home grown players getting through. Improve the youth systems if we wat to improve the national teams; lowering the boundaries only makes for worse players.

This will only help the smaller leagues keep their average players. This should be achieved by the work permit system currently in the UK. They must be deemed a special talent or must have made a lot of international caps for a top 75 nation. If not, stay at home!

 

Look, EU could declare it illegal with the same legal legitimacy they would have if they decided that offside rule is illegal because it limits the movement of the worker.
Or if they decided that playing only 11 vs 11 is illegal because it prevents others to play the game.

If EU declares it to be illegal is just because of the political pressure by top teams thru the national federations, not because they care about the rights of the workers nor because they have the good of football in mind.