Player power boosted

News that FIFA and the international players' union, FIFPro have reached agreement on the proposed new transfer system should mean sweeping changes to the relationship between clubs and players here over the coming months.

It should also pave the way for players to have a considerably greater say in the way that their industry is administered, not necessarily something that those currently running the Eircom-sponsored National League will be entirely thrilled about.

FIFA had originally concluded their agreement with the European Union on the new system at the start of the summer but the players' organisation was deeply unhappy with a deal that it felt continued to discriminate against its membership by requiring unacceptably high levels of compensation to be paid to clubs when young footballers moved, thereby undermining the ability of the players to obtain the best possible terms for themselves.

Now it has been agreed that the local associations and players' unions, in Ireland's case the FAI and PFAI, will decide levels of compensation between them. The deal has been ratified by both parties, with parts of it having come into effect last Saturday and the rest scheduled to become binding on January 1st.

All of which means that the FAI and National League will have to move quickly in the weeks following next Monday's first full discussion of the matter between the various clubs.

One of the first issues that will have to be decided upon is the timing of the league's new transfer window for, from the start of the new year, transfers between clubs will be allowed only during two specified periods each year: one of a maximum of six weeks during the close season and a period of four-weeks maximum during the season itself when only moves that can be justified by tactical adjustments or injuries will be allowed.

The league's new commissioner, Roy Dooney, points out that the allocation of these windows will pose slight problems here given the impending change of season.

Nevertheless, the association will have to set a window for the tail end of this season which will have an immediate effect from the start of January on the ability of clubs to bring in new players.

One of the key points in FIFA's original deal with the EU was the proposed payment of compensation to clubs that had helped in the footballing and educational development of a player once that individual signed his first professional contract. Subsequently, there would be further payments on each occasion that the player changed clubs until he turned 23.

Earlier proposals that players would not be able to move between countries before turning 18 were scuppered by EU law, though English clubs will, for instance, have to be provide minimum standards of educational support for players signed from abroad while they are still minors.

The anticipated amounts of compensation involved will almost certainly now be scaled back by the influence of the players' unions but there will still be some funding available to schoolboy or league clubs here who have helped to develop youngsters and in the cases of players moving to larger clubs abroad the amounts involved could still be fairly significant.

Such payments will not, however, have to be made if the young player is out of contract and not offered a new one by the club that he is leaving.

Of potentially more benefit is the "solidarity mechanism" which requires that five per cent of any fee paid for a player during his career is diverted to the clubs that helped in his development until the age of 23.

This would, in effect, mean that if Roy Keane was to change clubs next year for say £10 million, the clubs what helped bring him through, Rockmount and Cobh Ramblers, could seek up to £50,000 for each season that he played with them from the age of 12 upwards. Nottingham Forest would also be able to claim compensation, but in all cases the clubs involved would have to show that they had contributed to the player's development and education rather than simply employing a professional footballer.

Under the new regulations all players will have to have contracts of between one and five years. These can be broken by the player after two or three years, depending on the age of the player in question, provided that adequate notice is given and the move takes+ place during a transfer window.

During the early years of the contract, though, the player can also initiate a move for "sporting reasons", most likely because he is not playing in the first team and wants to leave for a club where he would be.

In cases where a contract is broken without "just" sporting cause then bans of between two and six months will be imposed, although a concession won in the most recent negotiations by FIFPro is that representatives of players will make up half of any committee established to adjudicate in disputes.

The new regulations, which are contained in a lengthy and detailed document, also have some implications for the handling of the availability of players for international duty.

Broadly speaking, the entitlements of national associations with regard to their players for representative games are strengthened. And clubs will continue to be obliged to assume all of the financial burden (insurance, wages, etc) associated with the players during the period they are with their national squads.

There is some benefit to the clubs, however, with the old five-day rule - the period when club games are put on hold before international fixtures - now becoming a four-day one, except in the case of intercontinental matches, while there are provisions for the imposition of severe penalties on associations whose players fail to return quickly to their clubs after international games.

All in all, players should make considerable gains from the new regulations, which are aimed, for the most part, at regularising their employment status.

That has always been something that leading members of the PFAI have favoured, and yesterday FIFPro's general secretary Theo van Segellen described the new regulations as "especially good for countries like Ireland". Why? "Because the players' union has not been so strong there and now it will have a much bigger say."

He might just get himself an argument on that one if he was to pop along to Merrion Square next Monday night.