Writer: Mike Field
Date:Friday February 5 2010
FIFA are apparently concerned about the use of 'emergency loans' in the English game when it means a player, like Shorey, turns out for 3 different clubs in one season.
Goal.com are carrying quotes from a 'FIFA Spokesman' who believes that the appropriate regulations are being skewed when it suits.
This appropriate regulation, given this is the first time I've ever paid attention to it seems very much against EU law on restricting the right to work to be honest as by default it could lead a player to rot on the training pitch for a season if a loan move doesn't work out, but nontheless the super Paragraph 3 in Article 5 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (short title - waste of space, typical beaurocracy) states that a player can as a maximum be registered with 3 clubs during 1 season, but can however only physically play for 2 of them.
Shorey has already turned out for Villa, Forest and now Fulham.
'Generally speaking, and with regard to the application of Article 5, Paragraph 3, the regulation should be applied as stated.'
However the FA's outlook on this is that emergency loans don't fall under this Regulation because the player is technically still registered to this 'parent' club.
However it now means the deal between Villa and Fulham is to be potentially investigated which may or may not have a bearing on the future of the player - as afterall, an agreement is in place to make the deal permanent at the end of the season should Fulham wish to.
Surely FIFA have better things to do? If the FA have classed the loan as an appropriate 'emergency deal' then Villa hold the registration and Article 5 is irrelevant.
Moreover, in the grand scheme of all things football, let alone life, what does it really matter if a player turns out for more than 2 clubs in a season.
It's a game...not an exercise in creating red tape to justify the existence of organisations that quite frankly football could do without.
Afterall, if I understood the news correctly earlier all the time FIFA spent on the Chelsea inducement nonsense was a waste of time because the players 'contract' was void anyway - therefore they cannot have breached any FIFA rules and the transfer embargo has been lifted.
Do you think eventually this game will ever be the fans' again?
Date:Friday February 5 2010
Which Villan Would You Most Like To Keep? (Monday September 29 2014)
U21s - Villa 3-0 Bolton (Monday September 29 2014)
Benteke Steps Up His Fitness (Monday September 29 2014)
The Vital Villa Fantasy League Table (Monday September 29 2014)
Lambert Content Following Chelsea Loss (Sunday September 28 2014)
Stats: Chelsea v Aston Villa (Saturday September 27 2014)
Vital Villa Match Day - Villa Away To Chelsea (Saturday September 27 2014)
Something For The Weekend (467) (Friday September 26 2014)
Lambert - We Must Be Pragmatic Against Chelsea (Friday September 26 2014)
Mystic Mug v Lawro .. Villa Away To Chelsea (Friday September 26 2014)
|1.||Pride of Lions||766|
|6.||Villan Of The North||272|
|Aston Villa||2||-||1||Hull City|
|3. Man City||6||3||2||1||5||11|
|6. Aston Villa||6||3||1||2||-3||10|
|7. Man Utd||6||2||2||2||2||8|
|9. Crystal Palace||6||2||2||2||0||8|
|Tests For Coates.
» Sunderland : 30/09/2014 12:12:00
|Humiliating Horror Show at the Hawthorns!
» Burnley : 30/09/2014 12:02:00
|Chelsea and Manchester United chase same target
» Everton : 30/09/2014 10:32:00
|Team News: City v Roma
» Man City : 30/09/2014 08:56:00
|Boss Confirms Maguire Available For Loan
» Hull City : 30/09/2014 08:53:00