FIFA moves to help cut agents costs and influence at clubs.

[Flex]

FIFA moves to help cut agents costs and influence at clubs.
By Andrew Warshaw, Chief Correspondent

January 9 - FIFA has made further progress in a move to help clubs deal directly with each other during transfers rather than employ agents.

According to football's world governing body, agents took commissions averaging 28% of the 11,555 cross-border deals in 2012 and many clubs have complained about having to pay too much money to intermediaries.

FIFA's proposed Global Player Exchange (GPX) concept was discussed by its Club Football Committee this week and will, it says, "revolutionise" the transfer market by helping clubs sidestep agents.

"These new optional services will have the same core aim of improving transparency," FIFA said in a statement. "Subscribing clubs will be able to access market information and interact with each other."

"Extensive stakeholder consultation has shown that most clubs have limited resources for accessing information on the professional player pool and often have to rely on intermediaries, thus increasing club costs."

Meanwhile, club representatives at Tuesday's meeting were told FIFA will pay $2,850 per day for all players called up for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

The payments come from a $70 million compensation fund following years of often fractious talks with the clubs who claim they should be compensated at major tournaments since they pay players' wages.

The meeting also broached the subject of third-party ownership. The committee was presented with a recent International Centre for Sports Studies (CIES) study, indicating that 15% of licensed agents in England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain - the so-called Big Five - had entered into third party ownership arrangements.

"It was reiterated by the committee that a consistent global solution must be found to ensure the integrity of the game," the statement added.

[Observer]

This is hugh if it become a reality. Far to many agents are in operation and many are not legit and quite frankly underhanded.

[Football supporter]

Meanwhile, club representatives at Tuesday's meeting were told FIFA will pay $2,850 per day for all players called up for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

Imagine if Pro League players were called up in the future - thats more than a months wages PER DAY that the clubs will receive!!

[Observer]

Meanwhile, club representatives at Tuesday's meeting were told FIFA will pay $2,850 per day for all players called up for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

Imagine if Pro League players were called up in the future - thats more than a months wages PER DAY that the clubs will receive!!

Well you would have to make the WC first. I wonder what the players at the 2006 WC were paid a day by FIFA? Or is this new starting at the 2014 WC.

[Football supporter]

Meanwhile, club representatives at Tuesday's meeting were told FIFA will pay $2,850 per day for all players called up for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

Imagine if Pro League players were called up in the future - thats more than a months wages PER DAY that the clubs will receive!!

Well you would have to make the WC first. I wonder what the players at the 2006 WC were paid a day by FIFA? Or is this new starting at the 2014 WC.

I believe its the clubs who receive the money. Players are paid by their Association/Federation. This is compensation for clubs. Kind of wear and tear compensation as players would not have had a decent break between seasons.

In my opinion, clubs shouldn't get this. They will benefit through the players exposure increasing their value. In fact, I would prefer to see less money awarded for qualification and some of the money, and this money for the clubs, awarded to players who played during qualification (pro rata) and the squad that attends the finals. Further bonuses could be agreed by individual associations depending on the prize money won.

[Observer]

But Association already receive 10 mil for qualification and bonus scheme for each round.

[Football supporter]

But Association already receive 10 mil for qualification and bonus scheme for each round.

Yes, but that isn't passed to member clubs necessarily. That should be to cover costs for participation such as practice games etc, hiring of additional staff for the tournament, scouting players and locations and, most importantly, future development and investment back into the sport. Clubs receive nothing unless the association decides to share, which they don't. Much the same as clubs don't share their income from competitions with the association (aside from the F.A. cups/trophys where gate some money goes to the organising associations) 

[Bakes]

In my opinion, clubs shouldn't get this. They will benefit through the players exposure increasing their value. In fact, I would prefer to see less money awarded for qualification and some of the money, and this money for the clubs, awarded to players who played during qualification (pro rata) and the squad that attends the finals. Further bonuses could be agreed by individual associations depending on the prize money won.

Mad talk.  By extension... when players suffer injury while away on international duty for the W.C., it's the clubs who are left in the lurch, and still very much on the hook for the player's salary.

[Football supporter]

In my opinion, clubs shouldn't get this. They will benefit through the players exposure increasing their value. In fact, I would prefer to see less money awarded for qualification and some of the money, and this money for the clubs, awarded to players who played during qualification (pro rata) and the squad that attends the finals. Further bonuses could be agreed by individual associations depending on the prize money won.

Mad talk.  By extension... when players suffer injury while away on international duty for the W.C., it's the clubs who are left in the lurch, and still very much on the hook for the player's salary.

Players are insured by the Associations and compensation packages are paid, as in the case of Michael Owen a few years back.

But there is still the potential of losses to clubs, and I feel that the compensation package could be improved.
The "mad talk" is paying a club $2,850 per day for a player who earns less than $2,850 per month.

[Observer]

In my opinion, clubs shouldn't get this. They will benefit through the players exposure increasing their value. In fact, I would prefer to see less money awarded for qualification and some of the money, and this money for the clubs, awarded to players who played during qualification (pro rata) and the squad that attends the finals. Further bonuses could be agreed by individual associations depending on the prize money won.

Mad talk.  By extension... when players suffer injury while away on international duty for the W.C., it's the clubs who are left in the lurch, and still very much on the hook for the player's salary.

Players are insured by the Associations and compensation packages are paid, as in the case of Michael Owen a few years back.

But there is still the potential of losses to clubs, and I feel that the compensation package could be improved.
The "mad talk" is paying a club $2,850 per day for a player who earns less than $2,850 per month.

You are making a lot of sense  and I for one clearly see your point. However, not all association insure their player for International duty. Remember the rant from ManU when they found out Dwight was not insured by the Association. Along the lines of your discussion, the reality is, that most players at a WC earn more than the stipulated amount. Now if TT, JA etc. makes it and local based are involved, I see your point.

[Football supporter]

In my opinion, clubs shouldn't get this. They will benefit through the players exposure increasing their value. In fact, I would prefer to see less money awarded for qualification and some of the money, and this money for the clubs, awarded to players who played during qualification (pro rata) and the squad that attends the finals. Further bonuses could be agreed by individual associations depending on the prize money won.

Mad talk.  By extension... when players suffer injury while away on international duty for the W.C., it's the clubs who are left in the lurch, and still very much on the hook for the player's salary.

Players are insured by the Associations and compensation packages are paid, as in the case of Michael Owen a few years back.

But there is still the potential of losses to clubs, and I feel that the compensation package could be improved.
The "mad talk" is paying a club $2,850 per day for a player who earns less than $2,850 per month.

You are making a lot of sense  and I for one clearly see your point. However, not all association insure their player for International duty. Remember the rant from ManU when they found out Dwight was not insured by the Association. Along the lines of your discussion, the reality is, that most players at a WC earn more than the stipulated amount. Now if TT, JA etc. makes it and local based are involved, I see your point.

Well, yes, you are correct. I'm assuming FIFA took a mean figure. Certainly, EPL players will earn far in excess. And, again, you are correct that some associations do not insure their players. The shocking thing is that clubs sometimes do not check before releasing their players.

To be fair, all stakeholders will have different concerns. Bearing in mind that Central F.C. could one day benefit from this decision, I still feel that although some compensation would be useful to clubs like ours, we would benefit far more from increased value of the player.

Yes, I'd like the compo, but the players (particularly those who helped the team qualify but lose their spot in the finals squad) deserve a little more.
Clearly, following some high profile disputes, associations aren't always reliable when it comes to rewarding players.

[Sam]

Mike Berry retired in good time then.