Football's new Bosman

IN COMMITTEE rooms across Europe, the battle for control of football is well and truly joined. Early in 2007, decisions will be made which will affect the future of the beautiful game forever.

It is the involvement of 'big business' in football which has caused several ongoing debates in the European Union concerning the sport's true place in society. The key issue is whether sport in general should be allowed almost a separate existence in which clubs and national associations are not subject to the same laws as the rest of commerce, or whether organisations like Uefa should be brought into line with the principles of the Treaty of Rome.

Last week in Brussels, sports ministers from EU countries met to discuss proposals concerning the future of various sectors of sport. The ministers themselves seem ready to back Uefa on such proposals as forcing top clubs to limit their spending - a plan opposed by the English Premiership - but there are some politicians who want to go further and change football utterly.

The biggest threat of all lies in an explosive document prepared for the European parliament by an obscure Dutch MEP, Dr Toine Manders, whose name may yet come to rival that of Jean-Marc Bosman in the history of football.

Manders is an expert on the internal market rules of the European Union, and his report to the parliament, which is expected to be debated in January, contains several devastating assertions and recommendations which could blow the whole European football system into smithereens.

For a start, Manders asserts that football has changed utterly in the last five decades and is now "big business" which he is determined to see brought into line with EU rules. He would like to see football clubs being treated in legal terms like multi-national companies or what is known as SMEs, small-to-medium enterprises. They should get no exemption from the rules, he says.

Effectively he argues that Uefa itself should not be given special status because it is not only a governing body but a huge business. Manders' proposals could eventually mean that clubs - for instance, the G14 - could go off and start up their own leagues separate from Uefa and Fifa, which in turn would be banned from imposing sanctions such as preventing players from such clubs being selected for international sides, as Fifa has threatened in the past.

Manders also directly assaults the pyramid structure of the game, pointing out that fans want to see matches between the best teams. The obvious conclusion from his recommendation is that there would be no relegation or promotion to, for instance, a new franchise-based European super league.

In his report, the Dutch lawyer points out that the Bosman case among others has already shown that individual players are entitled to freedom of economic movement within the EU countries, so why should clubs not get the same rights, just as normal businesses do? That would open the floodgates for clubs to move wherever they liked and yes, Celtic and Rangers could go and play in England or anywhere else within the EU for that matter. Eventually, there would be no 'restraint of trade' in football, meaning clubs, players, and agents could act as they want as long as they conform to EU laws.

Only last week, Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell stuck to his usual mantra that the big clubs should be allowed to do what they want, which in Celtic's case is join a new European league.

Manders' report is the most controversial of five being prepared for the European parliament, which cannot change the law overnight but could instruct the European Commission to find ways of bringing football into line inside say, a season or two.

Uefa are taking the threat of Manders and other political interference so seriously that they have established an office in Brussels to try and influence the outcome of the present debates. Within the European parliament itself, unlikely alliances have been forged by football-minded people who want to preserve the social and community aspects of the game - another possible consequence of Manders' report, if it is accepted, is that football associations would not be allowed to pass on state aid to clubs, which would destroy the SFA's youth action plan, for example.

Uefa would also not be able to help football develop in smaller nations - in some former Soviet countries, for instance, profits from the Champions League are used to fund up to 100% of youth development.

Leading the fight against the 'football common market' within the Strasbourg-based parliament is Christopher Heaton-Harris, a leading English Conservative MEP who represents the East Midlands. He is a qualified referee who has become chairman of the European parliament all-party football group, and as a top politician he says that politics should have little to do with football.

"There has been a big push by politicians to get involved in football," said Heaton-Harris. "They want to be dealing with something which is seen by voters to be more relevant than their usual activities. Unfortunately, this particular report is really, really dangerous. It is calling for political interference by the European Union to be magnified a thousand-fold, and it would give the European Commission the powers to change football utterly.

"We have already seen what happens when European law affects sport - the Bosman ruling, for instance. If this report is accepted, the main fear I have is massive damage to the structure of European football, with the likes of Celtic and Rangers able to walk away from the SPL and join any league they like."

Uefa has seized upon the recent Independent European Sport Review as a major weapon in the fight against Manders and Co. Led by former Portuguese deputy prime minister José Lois Arnaut, the authors of the 178-page review say they are "totally against a blind and insensitive application of EU law to sport".

In response, Manders has said that the football authorities are acting like "ostriches", putting their heads in the sand and failing to see that change is coming.

Uefa Vice-President Per Ravn Ormdal then entered the fray, calling for the protection of sport's "specific nature" and urging cooperation between Uefa and politicians.

"We are entering a crucial phase for European football," said Ormdal. "The political challenges facing UEFA and its national associations have never been so urgent. Never before has our co-operation been so necessary. Football is not above the law, and we must respect European and national rules. But our governments and regulators should recognise sport's specificity. It is unlike any other economic activity, and does not operate according to normal commercial rules."

For too long, football existed in its own wee world and complacent administrators, supine club officials and ignorant pundits thought the game was not subject to European law. Then along came an obscure player called Jean-Marc Bosman and football has not been the same since. Everybody ignored Bosman at the time, but they should not ignore Toine Manders.
IN A NUTSHELL

If Toine Manders' proposals become European law and football is subject to the same laws as other industries, here are some of the likely outcomes:

• End of national based leagues - clubs will be free to organise leagues across national boundaries (eg: British League or European League)

• The transfer window, which is a clear restraint of trade, would be illegal

• Uefa could not stop players being able to play for their country, even if their clubs don't play in Uefa competitions

• End of the pyramid structure, so that there would be no guaranteed promotion and relegation in Europe (as with franchise system in NFL and NBA in USA, or the southern hemisphere rugby's Super 14)

• State aid prohibited, so that national governments wouldn't be able to support youth football via top clubs, as they do now

Taken from the Scotsman