Platini

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
So, Platini's the new UEFA president. What do you think of his proposals?

- Maximum of 3 teams from each country in the Champion's League by 2009.
- Minimum of 5 local players in the starting lineup of each team.
- Increasing the European Championship from 16 to 24 teams.
- Salary cap of 60% of the clubs annual turnover.

They're just the ones I've heard about so far.

On the Champions League, I think it's fine as it is, and there's no need to change it. Anyway, I think this'll see quite a lot of opposition from the G14 clubs, and the big leagues.

On the minimum of 5 local players, I think this is a good idea in principle, and I'd extend it to require a certain number of homegrown players too. But I can also see smaller clubs getting held to ransom over players because they need someone who is English. Not sure how it'll work in practice.

On the European Championship, I definitely agree. Love the competition, so anything to expand it would be good.

And on the salary cap, again I agree in principle. It would make the league more competitive, and would mean that teams would have to build success rather than buy it. But then again, I think the current gross mismatch in income between the top four and everyone else might have the reverse effect. So not sure.

Thoughts?

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think the plans are over-reaching a bit. Platini relied on "smaller" countries votes IIRC and I think he'll find implimenting these plans hard going.

    - 3 teams maximum will only release another 3 places. It's not worth doing really. The Champions League should either be reorganised to allow more teams in without dramatically increasing the number of games or it should be left how it is. If he tinkers too much with it, it could be straw that breaks the camels back with regard some sort of breakaway European Super League.

    - I agree in principle. Should be workable.

    - Unless groups are increased to 6, I don't see how it would work. Anything to reduce the number of qualifying games is welcome though. I don't think many European countries would be able to host a 24-team tournament when they would a 16-team one.

    - Again I agree in principle, but it'll face massive opposition.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Champion's League should be the best teams in the Europe playing eachother, which means having more teams from England, Spain and Italy, at the expense of smaller nations. It will only devalue the competition if it is altered to allow more smaller countries' teams in. People want to see the big European teams play eachother, that's why it's set up as it is. As Allardyce says as well, it's effectively going to kill what little hope teams like Bolton have of breaking into the Champions League, making things more and more uncompetitive.

    The local players rule is good in theory, but it's a non-starter I feel. How do you define local? And surely it means clubs in the huge cities benefit most as they'll have a greater pool of talent to draw from.

    European Championship changes sound good to me. More chance of Northern Ireland getting in!

    Not sure about salary caps. Seems like another one that would be good in theory, but probably wouldn't work out. You'd get alot of corrupt teams finding ways around it, paying dodgy under the table payments to attract players etc.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The extra teams from each country would make it less competative. Barry Town vs Manchester United anyone? Though in a total act of hypocracy i would support 24 teams in the European championships, Wales would have a chance to qualify! (Maybe):thumb:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote: »
    The local players rule is good in theory, but it's a non-starter I feel. How do you define local? And surely it means clubs in the huge cities benefit most as they'll have a greater pool of talent to draw from.
    Same country as the club. The only possible problem I could think of would be players that change nationality like Ben Thatcher or Freddie Kanoute, but that should be easy enough to sort out.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The whole definition of local would worry me, and especially in the UK, nationality wouldn't be the best thing. You'd have the situation where Welsh and Scottish players were "foreign", and that would undoubtedly hold back the development of players from those countries. Also the top clubs bring players through from throughout the world- if the player comes out their academy, would he be local, even if he was Alergian?

    I would agree with the changes to the Champions League, though. The whole format devalues the European Cup- Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal all got to the final without being their domestic champions, and that's ridiculous. Smaller countries should have more chance of getting in, like in the old days, and the bigger countries should have to give up some of their slice of the cake. It wasn't so long ago that only the top two in England went into the European Cup, and that's how it should be, really. Teams like Bolton and Everton have no place qualifying IMHO.

    I'd change it so the FA Cup winner gets a Champions League spot, to let the smaller clubs have a chance. It'd also stop teams like Bolton taking the piss out of the most famous trophy in the world.

    Extending the Euro Championships would simply have the effect of creating more pointless games as shite like Scotland would get there and not achieve anything.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    The whole definition of local would worry me, and especially in the UK, nationality wouldn't be the best thing. You'd have the situation where Welsh and Scottish players were "foreign", and that would undoubtedly hold back the development of players from those countries. Also the top clubs bring players through from throughout the world- if the player comes out their academy, would he be local, even if he was Alergian?

    That would be my concern. Only English players would get developed here unless you included the whole UK as a single country. Also, looking farther afield, South American talent would be left untapped if the Spanish clubs were restricted in how many they can take etc. I think these regulations would almost certainly move football backwards, not forwards.

    Extending the Euro Championships would simply have the effect of creating more pointless games as shite like Scotland would get there and not achieve anything.

    Beats watching overhyped shite like England get a tiny bit further and achieve about the same.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    The whole definition of local would worry me, and especially in the UK, nationality wouldn't be the best thing. You'd have the situation where Welsh and Scottish players were "foreign", and that would undoubtedly hold back the development of players from those countries.

    Precisely what happened in the past. I remember the likes of McClair, Hughes and Giggs being declared as foreign when UEFA has the "no more than 4 foreigners" rule. It's partly why the best United team of a generation really struggled.
    I would agree with the changes to the Champions League, though. The whole format devalues the European Cup

    Totally agree. Either it's for Champions, or it isn't.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote: »
    That would be my concern. Only English players would get developed here unless you included the whole UK as a single country. Also, looking farther afield, South American talent would be left untapped if the Spanish clubs were restricted in how many they can take etc. I think these regulations would almost certainly move football backwards, not forwards.
    Or maybe, just maybe, the clubs in these countries would get to keep a lot of their talent, rather than acting as a production line for European football, and we'd have more prosporous leagues in some of these countries?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Or maybe, just maybe, the clubs in these countries would get to keep a lot of their talent, rather than acting as a production line for European football, and we'd have more prosporous leagues in some of these countries?

    In a footballing utopia perhaps. These things may all seem good in theory but there's big flaws.

    You'd actually be damaging the potential of the smaller countries' players if they aren't able to receive the best youth training at the best clubs. Using Northern Ireland and Manchester United as an example, I know we wouldn't have the quality of Gillespie, Healy and more recently Johnny Evans had they not received such a good apprenticeship at Manchester United. I like the idea of 'homegrown' quotas, just without limiting it to nationality.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Exactly. And United certainly struggled in the 90s by having to choose between people like Giggs and Cantona- people like Gillespie, who would otherwise have been quite good squad players, were forced out of the door by these changes. Forcing the Welsh to play for Total Network Solutions, or forcing the Irish to play for Glentoran, isn't going to do anyone any good.

    South America already has a prosperous league, and the production line keeps clubs like River Plate in business.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would say maximum of 2 teams for the champions league...
    If not, change the name back to European Cup!

    As for the local players, I agree too. Gives more incentive to smaller countries to develop football.

    What is wrong with 24 teams for the European Championship? Nothing!

    Salary cap, as if the underhand things are not going on already, anything to lessen the ridicilous pay is good.

    And bring back the Cup Winners Cup!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote: »
    people like Gillespie, who would otherwise have been quite good squad players, were forced out of the door by these changes.

    The same Gillespie who struggles to get into Sheff Utd's team? :eek:

    Funny how these type of comments were never levelled at Liverpool in the 70s & 80s isn't it (and not this isn't me talking about anti-United sentiments)... there was never a problem with the number of non-english in their team for example.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not too sure I agree with the 3 teams from each country - for a start, (as it has already been emntioned) there are some countries who aren't considered 'footballing nations' or something like that.

    I quite like the idea of wage caps - would stop players getting stupidly high wages.

    Not too sure I agree with having x amount of homgrown players. I think Wenger was moaning about this a while back because Arsenal don't have that many homegrown players.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't think that three Champions League places is the way ahead, even though it'd benefit my club. The group stages are more often than not a bit of a procession as it is. All very well trying to be inclusive, but not to the detriment of quality.

    I agree with bringing back the Cup Winners Cup though, mainly because it stops shite like Gretna who get to the Cup Final without beating an SPL team, yet manage to get a UEFA Cup place over an SPL team who've worked their arses off to get fourth.

    Not got a problem with the Euros being extended to 24 teams either. Smaller nations like Scotland are well capable of giving the supposedly better teams a game (France and Holland beaten, Italy drawn with in the last couple of years), and it's better for the tournament to have teams who play with a bit of pride and fire in their bellies, rather than underachiving botttlers like the English.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote: »
    because Arsenal don't have that many homegrown players.

    Eh? Half their sqaud are homegrown.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The same Gillespie who struggles to get into Sheff Utd's team? :eek:

    Well that's because of his drinking and his fighting really...and that he's old now.
    Funny how these type of comments were never levelled at Liverpool in the 70s & 80s isn't it (and not this isn't me talking about anti-United sentiments)... there was never a problem with the number of non-english in their team for example.

    I'd agree, really. Liverpool had a team full of Scots but nobody cared- not because of an anti-United agenda but because they weren't dirty foreigners who spoke a dirty foreign language.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A load of bollocks, 3 teams from each country in the champions league kind of makes sense but the rest is utterly ridiculous.

    Why on earth do these people think they need to tinker and change things which are already so successful?

    5 local players is so contemptibly stupid it is horrible, what the hell would it achieve? The only people who care about the nationality of their clubs players are xenophobes/racists and people who do not understand football (or anything quite possibly).

    I don't know what he has to do to enact these proposals but I hope he fails miserably and humiliatingly.....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru


    Totally agree. Either it's for Champions, or it isn't.

    Strange from a Man Utd fan, seeing as you wouldn't have been in the Champions league in 1999 if that were the case.

    If any of the cups need changing it is the UEFA cup which is a complete mess as it stands....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote: »
    If any of the cups need changing it is the UEFA cup which is a complete mess as it stands....

    Couldn't agree more.

    I'd also put a stop to this parachuting into the UEFA from the Champions League too.

    It was always better in the old days of the Cup Winners Cup because it's an absolute joke that the losing team in a cup final should take the UEFA Cup spot of somebody who finished high up in the league.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Eh? Half their sqaud are homegrown.

    So why was Wengerm whinging then? And I can only think of 2 English first team players. (Hoyte & Walcott)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Eh? Half their sqaud are homegrown.

    Nah, it actually isn't. They have alot of young players and people seem to believe these are all Arsenal's kids, but they're not. Hardly any of them actually came through the academy and most of them were just snatched from other clubs around Europe, for 'undisclosed fees'. I think Fabregas counts as 'homegrown' because he was signed before he had a professional contract, but obviously Barcelona did all the graft with him, not Arsenal. Under the proposed regulations, Arsenal would be the worst off out of the big clubs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote: »
    Nah, it actually isn't. They have alot of young players and people seem to believe these are all Arsenal's kids, but they're not. Hardly any of them actually came through the academy and most of them were just snatched from other clubs around Europe, for 'undisclosed fees'. I think Fabregas counts as 'homegrown' because he was signed before he had a professional contract, but obviously Barcelona did all the graft with him, not Arsenal. Under the proposed regulations, Arsenal would be the worst off out of the big clubs.

    Does the same go for Hoyte and Aliadiere etc?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Does the same go for Hoyte and Aliadiere etc?

    Hoyte is one of their few homegrowns. Not sure where Aliadiere came from. Players like Senderos, Clichy, Eboue, Diaby and Flamini are the ones people usually confuse as homegrown, when they were all actually bought from other European clubs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Home Grown is an odd one. I mean Micah Richards is a Man City academy product, but technically we bought him from Oldham when he was about 14. So is he homegrown? He signed his first professional contract with us, and a fair bit of his development was at our academy, but then quite a lot was with Oldham as well I imagine. How long does someone need to be at your academy before signing a professional contract, before they're considered home grown?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote: »
    Why on earth do these people think they need to tinker and change things which are already so successful?
    Maybe something to do with the threat of anyone who isn't in the top four of their top national league going down the shitter?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Home Grown is an odd one. I mean Micah Richards is a Man City academy product, but technically we bought him from Oldham when he was about 14. So is he homegrown? He signed his first professional contract with us, and a fair bit of his development was at our academy, but then quite a lot was with Oldham as well I imagine. How long does someone need to be at your academy before signing a professional contract, before they're considered home grown?

    He's Man City homegrown because he hadn't signed a professional contract with Oldham. Had he signed a professional contract with them, which players don't usually do until they're 17/18, and then you signed him, he wouldn't be a Man City homegrown player. That's the way it works I believe. It's confusing though because there's semi-professional contracts as well.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Surely by local he means local in terms of a country of birth, and not the town of birth!!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Which would make things even more confusing.

    A lad born in Rhyl who came through the Liverpool academy wouldn't be "local", but a lad born in Brighton would be. Who's more local?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Maybe something to do with the threat of anyone who isn't in the top four of their top national league going down the shitter?

    Is this likely to happen?

    What with the massive new TV conratc for the premiership that pays huge amounts of money to even the bottom club this seems unlikely......
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,329 The Mix Honorary Guru
    a player is homegrown if he has trained for 2 or more years with that club in that nation before the age of 18.

    i personally believe it should be limited to 2 teams per country, and only then for england, spain and italy, for the "champions" league. only drawback is the competition would be weakened for a few years.

    its a total catch 22 - the teams from smaller nations do not have the budget to hang on to the best players from their nation, so they go to other nations. why don't they have the budget? they're not allowed into the champions league. i mean what if guys like cech, nedved, baros, all played for sparta prague? what if haestad, john arne riiise, john carew all played for brann or rosenberg, forsell and hyypia for finnish teams. then you'd have a competitive competition, strengthen national squads and leagues, AND solve the problem of 'local' players. there'd be enough money for players to stay in their own leagues. its really that simple, but G14 will never never allow it - UEFA don't really have the first say in what goes on in european football, G14 and the other big teams control it totally.

    teams like bolton in the CL is a total and utter joke and it devalues the competition and is a complete insult to teams from other nations who work so hard with limited resources to actually WIN their leagues. whole situation is a travesty.
Sign In or Register to comment.