Fifa Being Sued By Belgian Club "Bosman Part 2"

Chong

Charleroi case casts shadow over world football

Madrid: A new controversy in world football is brewing, as the lawsuit filed by Belgian first division club SC Charleroi against the Federation of International Football Association (FIFA) may take a serious turn.

SC Charleroi is a modestly sized Belgian first division club, which last season had the opportunity to qualify for the Champions League.

To protect their star player, Moroccan international Abdelmajid Oulmers, Charleroi withdrew the midfielder from the Morocco squad to face Burkina Faso, but FIFA ruled the 26-year-old had to play.

Oulmers subsequently tore ankle ligaments and was out of action for seven months. Charleroi missed out on qualifying for the lucrative group phase of the Champions League and has since sued world football's ruling body for compensation.

The suit, which is being handed by an industrial court in Charleroi, could have serious consequences for world football and is already being compared with the Bosman case of nearly a decade ago.

Experts believe the case will eventually go to the European Court and, should Charleroi be successful, then FIFA's policy on players being released for international matches would be thrown into disarray.

What's worse is that a decision is expected shortly before the 2006 World Cup finals in Germany.

The court will look at whether clubs have to release their players for international duty without recourse to compensation if they get injured.

For example, Real Madrid lost playmaker Zinedine Zidane after the French international injured himself playing against Ireland in a World Cup qualifier on Sep 7 and have estimated the injury to have cost the club around 70,000 euros a day.

The G14 Group, which is made up of Europe's top clubs, is supporting Charleroi in its battle with FIFA. Involved in the case is lawyer Jean Louis Dupont, who was also involved in the Bosman case, which led to a revolution of the transfer system.

"In our view, FIFA is abusing its dominant market position," said Dupont in an interview with Spain's AS newspaper. "This is in breach of EU competition law."

Dupont also pointed out that the clubs are aware that the 2006 World Cup will bring in 2.5 billion euros of revenue.

"They (FIFA) are getting the most important ingredients - the footballers - for free," he said. "In the case of an injury, they don't even get any compensation."

FIFA has refused to comment on the case, saying it will wait until the legal process is over. However, FIFA has called for the Belgian football federation to haul Charleroi up on disciplinary charges.

Some national federations pay for their players to be released for national duty.

German Bundesliga clubs, for example, receive 6,000 euros per player from the German football federation DFB but poorer federations, such as Cameroon, aren't in such a position.

"We don't want that clubs get money for every game a player is released for," said G14 CEO Thomas Kurth in an interview with Spain's El Pais newspaper.

"We only want a percentage of the income from large competitions. The size of the percentage is still to be discussed."

I first heard about this morning whilst watching Jimmy Hills Sunday Supplement. One of the pundits commentated that if this case is successful it could most definately destroy the game at grass roots level. Seemingly G14 are only looking for a percentage of income as compensation for clubs but the critics feel this will grow into larger amounts.

What this all means if National associations begin compensating clubs it can destroy the game as a whole because the money lets say the fa recieve in England, the majority is invested into the game on all levels, but if a sizable chunk of what people are saying will happen is given as compensation to players clubs it will ruin the infrastructure.

Imho opinion I will agree on one level that clubs should be compensated if a player is injured in a friendly but not whilst playing for the national side at the world cup. This in turn would promote double standards.

Guy:Incognito

I dont see why clubs should be obliged to release players, or that players be forced to play.

At the end of the day though, theres nothing to stop a player retiring/getting injured for a few weeks if they dont want to play.


The colubs definately shouldnt recieve money for letting the players play though.

Chong

Still if thats the case friendlys should be abolished.

Guy:Incognito

WDK wrote:

Still if thats the case friendlys should be abolished.

They dont have to release them for friendlies anyway.

Personally, I think friendlies are a load of crap anyway.

Chong

Oh ya agreed there are a load of tosh, but I most certainly love watching Holland in the world cup.

Lemlin

Friendlies give managers a chance to experiment. Perhaps Irish people haven't seen their worth in a while because of Brian Kerr's tactic of using few substitutues, even in friendlies against teams like Japan.

I saw Jimmy Hill's Sunday supplement too. It certainly looks like Charleroi are being used by G14 to push forward their own agenda. What one of the pundits said was correct though, the World Cup is always going to be the biggest tournament in the World because it catches the imagination of the entire world.

Ireland may not be there next year but we'll still be rooting for Togo and the other underdogs in the competition, not to mention hoping that Brazil's five piece forward line can show us some sublime football.

At the end of the day, it all comes back to passion. Thierry Henry may care for Arsenal: they pay him. But he's going to care even more if France lose to Germany, one of their biggest rivals, and he lets his entire nation down.

I wouldn't agree with what he said about changing the tournament staging to every two years. I feel that would take away some of the uniqueness. And we've got the Euros to tide us over anyway.

evilhomer

I don't agree with the clubs getting a cut of the proceeds from the games.
But I do think that they should be able to say no when a player is called up despite being injured.
Two recent examples are
Emre for Turkey played 45 minutes of a game despite not having played for Newcastle for 5-6 weeks.

Milan Baros for Czech republic, given a cortosone injection on an ankle injury and told to play! again despite not playing for his club for a couple of weeks.

I agree clubs should be compensated if a player is injured i.e pay the players wage/rehabilitation costs until he is fit to line out for his club again.

Guy:Incognito

evilhomer wrote:

I agree clubs should be compensated if a player is injured i.e pay the players wage/rehabilitation costs until he is fit to line out for his club again.

Thats a fairly big ask. Imagine if roy had picked up his cruciat ligament injury playing for Ireland and they had to cover £60,000 a week or whatever he was on at the time.

[Jackass]

I think International football should be imune from such acts...I think there should be some sort of clause in competition contracts...for example if united want to compete in the champions league (should they qualify) they must sign a contract to say that they are willing to release players for competetive international matches without exception and without repercussion.

And national asscociations should have a clause to cover their ass aswell, the same clause in a contract that if you wish to compete in the premier league, championship/1st/2nd division, FA Cup ... you must allow players without exception play in competetive internationals, with no repercussion.

I doubt sir alex would forefit his right to play in PL, CL, FA cup and every other competition to keep his stars in Manchester.

Don't worry...they'll find a way aound this

evilhomer

Stekelly wrote:

Thats a fairly big ask. Imagine if roy had picked up his cruciat ligament injury playing for Ireland and they had to cover £60,000 a week or whatever he was on at the time.

It's a fairly big ask of a club too, especially if they are struggling because they are missing a key player. It's not such a big deal for some of the bigger clubs, but imagine a team like west brom losing a player they are paying 40k a week for an entire season, then they go down at the end of the season, which may not have happened if their most influential player was available.

That would cost the clubs millions in revenue. Hardly fair especially if the player had being carrying a knock and the management didn't want him to go on international duty incase it got worse!

Kingp35

I can understand the fact that clubs would want to be compensated if their player gets injured while on international duty. After all they are the ones that are paying the players wages and they are the ones that will suffer the most should the player be injured.

I dont theink they should be paid just because a player is playing in a mojor tournament for their country. Thats just bordering on ridiculous and its simply the G14 clubs looking for a way to make their large bank accounts even bigger. This court case could have some serious consequences for football.

BKtje

its simply the G14 clubs looking for a way to make their large bank accounts even bigger.

I haven't seen any of the big cl.ubs mentioned in this. Infact its a small club doing the sueing. Now i don't doubt the g14 clubs wanna make their bank accounts bigger, but then who doesnt?

Pigman II

Personally I think in the distant future qualifiers will have to be restructured into 'windows' ie for a certain amount of time per year (eg 5-6 weeks) club football in Europe will just 'shut down' and during this time each countrys players are made available without question. During this long break/meetup each country can get as good preperation done as they would for a world cup finals. They'll play a couple of friendlies at the start and 5-6 qualifiers .... and that'll be their international duty over for the year.

Kingp35

B-K-DzR wrote:

I haven't seen any of the big cl.ubs mentioned in this. Infact its a small club doing the sueing. Now i don't doubt the g14 clubs wanna make their bank accounts bigger, but then who doesnt?

Read he article and you will see the mention of the G14 clubs. They seem to be doing all the talking and all the public backing of Charleroi

stevenmu

I think this is a sad indication of the way football has become more about profits and balance sheets, than passion and glory. Imho clubs need to realise that it's still a sport, and that part of the downside of having great players is that they may be called up for international duty. If they don't like it, they can stick to crap players, or form their own non-FIFA affiliated leagues (not likely I know). I don't like seeing courts being brought in to decide sporting matters, in the Bosmann case it was fair enough, his right to work for a living was being impinged upon, but clubs by entering FIFA affiliated competitions, agree to the rules laid out by FIFA and should stick by them.