• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Loan System

Fifa agrees to limit loan deals and re-introduce agent regulation

Fifa plans to limit the number of players a club can loan out each season to prevent teams stockpiling talent.

Football's governing body had proposed a maximum of six loans per club.

But it is still has to come to an agreement with the game's other stakeholders - including club, league and player representatives - as to what the limit should be.

The proposed new regulation could affect Chelsea, who have 40 players on loan this season.

Fifa will also re-introduce the regulation of agents by summer 2019.

Fifa said the plans were endorsed by representatives from clubs, the World Leagues Forum, players' union Fifpro and member associations and confederations at a meeting on Monday. The Fifa Council will aim to sign off the proposals next month.

President Gianni Infantino has previously said he was "concerned about the huge amount of money flowing out of the football industry", and hopes the plans will improve the transparency of the transfer system.

Since 2015, anyone can become a football agent, and Premier League clubs have paid them £211m in the past year, an increase of £37m on the previous year.

But Fifa's proposals to cap agents' fees have been dismissed.

Chelsea have previously said they "don't send players out [on loan] because we are trying to recover money, we send them because we want them to play and develop".

But the Fifa Football Stakeholders Committee has agreed the as yet undetermined limit should be introduced for "the purpose of youth development as opposed to commercial exploitation".

It is hoped a figure can be agreed on as part of plans to be phased in over the next two years.

Other regulations include creating a "clearing house" to process transfers with the aim of protecting football's integrity and avoiding fraudulent conduct.

There will be a big increase in solidarity payments to lower-league clubs who have trained players but then lose them to clubs from other countries.

The principles of the reform package will be submitted to the Fifa Council at its next meeting on 26 October.

Infantino said: "We have brought everyone to the table and all key actors of the industry have understood that we need to take action, leading today to this reform proposal.

"This is a significant first step towards achieving greater transparency, the effective enforcement of rules that will deliver millions in solidarity payments to clubs, and developing a consensus on how to tackle the issue of agents, loans and other key aspects of the transfer system."

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/45643965
 
So a shed load of young Chelsea and City players will be available soon. History suggests a fair few of them will come back to bite them in the ass!
 
milo said:
City will probably be able to get around this by transferring players between the various clubs they own for nominal sums.
Click to expand...

you would think chelsea would be able to get around this in just the same way, or via a gentlemans agreement to buy back the player.
 
If buybacks were eliminated - or treated as being, essentially, loans, and therefore counting to the quota - would there be any remaining loopholes?
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
If buybacks were eliminated - or treated as being, essentially, loans, and therefore counting to the quota - would there be any remaining loopholes?
Click to expand...
Owning multiple clubs.

I can’t see how a contracted buy back clause matters if for example Emirates Marketing Project ‘sold’ a player to NYC, then wanted said player back two years later. They are just moving funds and player registrations around their own ‘accounts’ anyway.
 
Jon said:
Owning multiple clubs.

I can’t see how a contracted buy back clause matters if for example Emirates Marketing Project ‘sold’ a player to NYC, then wanted said player back two years later. They are just moving funds and player registrations around their own ‘accounts’ anyway.
Click to expand...

There are pretty good transparency and disclosure rules for related party transactions in GAAP. You could apply those, and then add any instances to the quota.

Of course, all of this needs teeth to be enforced. Which is probably the bigger issue. Nice to see things moving in the right direction though.
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
There are pretty good transparency and disclosure rules for related party transactions in GAAP. You could apply those, and then add any instances to the quota.

Of course, all of this needs teeth to be enforced. Which is probably the bigger issue. Nice to see things moving in the right direction though.
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely. It all helps.

It reminds me of the sponsorship swizzle City pulled though, getting the Shieks brothers company to sponsor them at x10 market rate and circumnavigate FFP.

Cannot believe that was allowed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back