The EU is, slowly and among thousands of obstacles, in the process of building the castle of rules and provisions applicable to the most popular of sports, football, an edifice that was brutally demolished by the Bosman ruling and by the rigid and mechanical interpretation of it by most Community legal experts. The step taken by the European Commission this week (see yesterday's bulletin, p.9 and today's) lays down some essential principles.
The specific nature of sport, enshrined in the Treaties, is no longer theoretical, but has become operational. Ms. Reding recognised that certain provisions admitted for the transfer of football players, applicable in the field of sport, would not be so in any other field.
The right to compensation when a young player trained by a club is taken under contract by another club, enters the rule book. This role used to be exercised by "transfer fees", prohibited by the Bosman ruling (as they would be …. incompatible with the free movement of workers). The Court of Justice admitted in theory the possibility of compensation for training, but without authorising the time it would have taken to put it into practice. In the old days, each small club, or nearly, had its school: the larger ones had up to fifty pitches and teams, and as many trainers. They played a social role of incalculable value by pulling young people off the streets, facilitating the integration of immigrants, and inculcating the principles of fair-play, camaraderie and effort. All this was financed by the transfer fees of some of the few young people who had the qualities to pursue a career in football; the others anyway received school and professional training. The sudden and immediate ban on transfer fees destroyed this construction, and it took years to rebuild the system now reflected in the decisions taken this week. Meanwhile, hello devastation! The most powerful clubs and especially unscrupulous, money-grabbing agents creamed young teams, enticing parents with fast bucks and running off with fifteen or sixteen year old kids, transferred to large cities (and quickly abandoned if they did not live up to their promise). Talent left without the club that trained them receiving a penny; for lack of resources, several had to cease their help to the young.
Contract-stability is now protected. Building up a great team demands years of effort, skill, patience, and luck too. In this way clubs sometimes emerge that become myths: Real Madrid, Ajax Amsterdam, Juventus of Turin, Manchester United… Add to the devastation of the Bosman ruling the possibility of breaching a contract with impunity, would have been the final blow to the whole edifice. Fortunately, the Commission has applied the principle of the specific nature of sport and, against the opinion of some of its legal experts, agreed that: a) a contract may not be breached unilaterally for three years for players up to the age of 28, two years thereafter; b) compensation for breach of contract is anyway due, "sporting sanctions" being added in the absence of a "just cause" for the breach. Whatever, a contract may only be breached unilaterally at the end of the season, so as to respect the regularity of competitions and fair-play.
The responsibility for drawing up the norms and details has been left to the sports federations. The officials decided not to stipulate the exact duration of a sporting sanction, calculate the compensation for training, etc., themselves. The Commission has set the principle and will monitor their translation into texts as well as their implementation, without going beyond that. Each to his own.
Another sports element may be added to the four principles now recognised: the Commission did not waiver before the claims of FIFpro, professional football players trade union, which especially gave the impression of defending the interests of agents and others revolving around the world of football (its representative value of players should be clarified). The Commission tried to convince the world of football (FIFA, UEFA, FIFpro) to present a united front; but as the Commission moved forward in understanding the reasons behind sport, FIFpro gradually isolated itself, and the last wranglings took place without it. And against it too, as we note that its lawyer, Mr. Denis, has rejected both the principle of the respect of contracts for three years as well as the sporting sanctions for those wanting to breach contracts freely entered into, and announced the intention of taking the case to court. Good: thus the European Court of Justice will have the possibility of proving that it too has moved on (1) (F.R.)
--------------------
(1) see this section in our bulletin of 19/20 February.