Football and the Lisbon Treaty

Bob the Seducer

Reading this months World Soccer I came across a small article which basically puts it that we decide the future of the game in Europe depending on which way we vote.

From what I understand, passing it would give football's (or indeed any other sport's) governing bodies the room to weasel their way out of the standard European employment laws they currently have to adhere to. This would more than likely pave the way for limits on "foreign" players from other EU countries and the introduction of restrictions on young players leaving Spain, France, Italy etc... for the Prem before the age of 18.

Obviously rules like this would benefit certain countries but they could easily do more damage than good to the development of our players and the standard of the EPL.

Any thoughts?

Glico Man

As talented as these young players are, I feel they should be protected from signing on with Premier League teams at such early ages. Their influx has not only possibly stunted the progression of our young lads but I'm sure their talents are missed in their own leagues.

However, I for one will be against any form of limits on foreign players in the Premier League teams. It is their right to live and work wherever they wish, and any limit in my opinion would damage the game as teams field 5/6 local players for the sake of rules.

The limit would also see the big four teams in the Premiership buying up all the young talent out there, possibly ruining any chances for the so called other teams outside the big four.

mink_man

also for our own domestic game it would allow our clubs to have a better quality rather them going to england when they're 16, 17?

ArmaniJeanss

I think the theory is as follows.
Currently sport is subject to the exact same 'freedom of movement' rules as say Bricklayers or Accountants.

If the EU tried to change that, and make sport exempt then it would currently take the agreement of all EU members, and at the moment the Spanish and UK governments have declared that they will veto this.

However as we know if Lisbon passes there are certain 'things' that no longer need unaniminity, all it would take is a majority of EU members to pass them.

Whether the rules on freedom of movement are one of these 'things' that would only require a simple majority is open to debate, my understanding is this is not so. Also the EU have given Uefa certain latitude on the rules (allowing Uefa to insist on X homegrown players per squad) on the understanding that Uefa won't get too pushy and try to force the issue further.

However certain organisations like OpenEurope believe the above theory is wrong and that the EU could exempt Sports (or Bricklaying) from freedom of movement via a simple majority if Lisbon is passed.
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/pressrelease.aspx?pressreleaseid=91 See in particular bullet point4, paragraph4.

Bob the Seducer

That may be along the lines of what an Italian IOC member, Mario Pescante was getting at. Apparently there is a clause "recognising the specificity of sport" in the treaty. He's quoted in the article as saying that "This means you can decide to run your sport in a way which differs from the basic legal framework"

I guess the suggestion with that is that the treaty creates the scenario which allows the Italian FA, Uefa or whoever to decide as they see fit how to restrict the game without it going to Europe first

dannydiamond

I for one am disgusted by the financial clout of the wealthier countries scouting our most talented bricklayers.