Transfer transparency

This is a good article, although there are a few points to get my head around, anyway the rest is up to you.




Corruption is rife in football, it’s a sad fact that few can protest and it’s tainted the beautiful game for far too long. The financial documents of each club can no longer be shrouded in mystery; it’s time to untangle this web of lies, deceit and confusion.

FIFA have sought to rectify this growing issue with the introduction of their new transfer matching system. The scheme requires clubs to submit their financial details with FIFA, including individual payments made whenever they complete an international transfer. They hope that this will help eliminate any illegal or questionable payments that are made on behalf of either club during negotiations.

“We know there is extreme behaviour out there,” said Mark Goddard, general manager of the transfer matching system. “There are still limitations with this system, but we are trying to ensure money is being paid between clubs. We are drawing a line in the sand, that nobody can get in between clubs.”

The report, which does not include transfers from within the same country, revealed that a staggering £82m had been splurged on agents in 2011 and the average payment to an agent during an individual deal worked out at just under £154k. It’s clear that player representatives are making a tidy sum during these deals but I’m struggling to understand how their role justifies such an enormous salary. These figures don’t even take into account the money that’s paid to the agent directly from the player.

The phrase ‘undisclosed fee’ is often the bane of every supporter’s life. The rumour mill continues to churn long after the confirmation of the transfer as the press and fans alike try to uncover the actual fee. The decision not to announce an exact figure usually revolves around a risk of embarrassment, either the buying club want to avoid being mocked for paying over the odds (Johan Elmander to Bolton) or the selling club don’t wish fans to know that the player went for less than his ‘supposed’ valuation (Kaboul to Tottenham).

There is also the stark realisation that no transfers are ever really free. Of course in some instances there will not have been a payment between the two clubs themselves but there will always be the cost of signing on fees, additional add-ons and of course aforementioned agent fees.

In a previous article of mine I eluded to a recent interview in which West Ham co-chairman David Sullivan revealed the intricate details of the move that saw Demba Ba join Newcastle.


“As I say, he was on £35 grand a week and I offered him £45 grand a week to stay, but he went to Newcastle. His agent got £2 million to take him to Newcastle.”

Suddenly this free transfer doesn’t look like such a good piece of business for the Magpies especially when Sullivan went on to claim that he’s been told the Senegalese striker has “got a £7 million get-out at Newcastle and he gets half the money over that.”

We could easily take these comments with a pinch of salt, the ramblings of a chairman who feels aggrieved by his own mistakes but the truth is we have no idea of the specific implications in any transfer deal that remain undisclosed. Isn’t it about time clubs were more open with their figures, especially when an increasing number of teams are descending into the murky waters of administration.

As a Palace supporter I can fully relate to the trials and tribulations being endured by Portsmouth fans at the moment but it’s difficult to sympathise with a club that has continued to operate outside their means. Trevor Birch, former chief executive of Chelsea and Leeds, who will front the administration for the firm PKF revealed, “I’m used to dealing with clubs in crisis; 30% of the clubs in the Championship are paying wages in excess of 100% of turnover.” A truly worrying statement that highlights the current status and grim outlook of the Football League.

The unyielding pursuit for success is financially crippling clubs. In this past week alone it has been revealed that the cost of the Glazers’ takeover at Manchester United has exceeded £500m. Elsewhere Aston Villa suffered a loss of nearly £54m (for the year ending 31 May 2011) as they struggled to cope with the turmoil following the departure of Martin O’Neill as manager.

In Scotland I don’t think anyone can fully comprehend just how much money Rangers owe the taxman. Each new day seems to deliver another financial blow to Gers fans, who can only sit and watch as the interest on the debt accumulates. The latest developments see them chasing a missing £9m payment that Craig White failed to supply after his takeover at the club, whilst there is still an uncertainty surrounding the £24m ticket deal with London-based company ‘Ticketus’.

Is it time for the FA to step in and thrust the account books under a microscope? Perhaps teams should accept the risk of ridicule and be more open with their expenses because one point remains abundantly clear, going out of business is no laughing matter.


http://www.footballfancast.com/2012...me-for-transparency-over-these-transfer-deals

 

That was an interesting read Bill..What I would love to see in the Premiership is something on the lines that they have in America (I can't remember if it was American Football or their version of rounders); where each team in the league has an equal and set budget for wages and transfers...That would certainly make things more interesting, although I would imagine that it would increase the scope for corruption which would need to be monitored closely...

 

I'm sorry but this whole thing fell apart the second FIFA was mentioned in the same breath as stopping corruption.

They must be the biggest single corrupt organisation since Al Capone formed a gang in the 1930's. They are led by the filthy dirty pig scumbag Blatter, who has brought nothing but shame and despair to the most beautiful of games.

For this reason alone, I'm out.

 

(this is a generalisation and some of the North american members will tell us better)
I follow NHL hockey in North America and basically they have a team wage cap (an individual wage cap is illegal in the EU) so each team is capped at say 70mill dollars per season that does not stop them from signing super stars but they must say what allocation of the cap each individual represents per season. for example a player signs a 10 year contract worth 100 mill - the club must then tell the league what each year contributes to the overall cap 15 mill in year 1, 20 mill year 2 etc so the club then has to stay within the cap - one advantage that this has is that its not the same clubs at the top all of the time and it makes the sport much more interesting.

 

Gonna google this in the morning, this is something I dont know about, but always ready to learn. nice one.

 

as i say the north american lads will tell us better but there are other complications eg over there the youth players are ranked and so at the end of the season the bottom placed club out of the 30 have first pick of the best "youth player" etc then the trades between clubs come in to it - but in my opinion it levels the playing field and its a lot better than domination by a few clubs