davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 The Bosman ruling has had a massive impact on football and the power of players. We've recently seen players muscling their way out of clubs for more lucrative deals even though they've signed long term contracts has power swung too far in favour of players. The transfer window provides an unnatural imposition on movement of players and the ability of clubs to operate in a free market type operation. Last Monday saw many high profile, record breaking last minute transfers in want appeared to be panic buying is this conducive to the need to have clubs run in a professional manner? Have they been good for the well being of football or not what do you think?
Bryn Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 The Bosman ruling is necessary IMO... I'm actually not sure how the system used to work, how it could work in any other way. Once a player has served his contract, he's a free man for me. Transfer windows are shit though, I really can't see whose life they make any easier.
Guest Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 Transfer window - I've gone with no because I think it forces hugely inflated prices within a fairly short period of time, and favours those with ridiculous amounts of money to stockpile the talent. Personally I'd like to see an open transfer window all season, but a cap on how much teams can spend on players per season. I know it's never gonna happen but hey ho.
Simi Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 If we didn't have a window, wouldn't it make teams like Chelsea turn around in March and just buy the league and go and win it?
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 If we didn't have a window, wouldn't it make teams like Chelsea turn around in March and just buy the league and go and win it? No because there used to be a block on transfer towards the end of the season to prevent that but at least you could justify it's existence. Yes, and Yes. Why & Why
lildave3 Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 I don't actually know what happened to a player once his contract ran out before the bosman? Can someone enlighten me? I voted yes and no.
Joe. Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 I voted yes to both. I think the Bosman ruling is fair enough, once a player has served their contract they should be allowed to move on. If this wasn't the case players could be kept at the club against their will. The Bosman ruling also helps clubs who can't always afford to buy players. As for the transfer window, I think that's also fair enough. It means that clubs don't have to be fighting to keep their star players all year round against bigger clubs who could bully them into selling the player. I think loan deals should be allowed outside the window however.
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 I don't actually know what happened to a player once his contract ran out before the bosman? Can someone enlighten me?I voted yes and no. Wikipedia Link The player was still subject to a transfer fee in order to get his registration.
Simi Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 No because there used to be a block on transfer towards the end of the season to prevent that but at least you could justify it's existence. So being pedantic, the window would close at a certain time?
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 So being pedantic, the window would close at a certain time? Being pedantic yes but it was justified.
Asha Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 Why & Why Bosmans because it allows players to move on after seeing out their contract, the club should never 'own' the player, just his contract. And Transfer Windows because, like Ched pointed out, teams would just keep buying their way to the title.
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 Bosmans because it allows players to move on after seeing out their contract, the club should never 'own' the player, just his contract. And Transfer Windows because, like Ched pointed out, teams would just keep buying their way to the title. They still can and do! They're was a block on transfers from March onwards to prevent any blatant attempt to do this. You don't need a virtual season long transfer embargo to stop them.
Asha Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 They still can and do!They're was a block on transfers from March onwards to prevent any blatant attempt to do this. You don't need a virtual season long transfer embargo to stop them. Yeah your right. I just meant that if they were a couple of points behind in the title race, a Chelsea or Man Utd would buy lots of top quality players even in April/May time.
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 Yeah your right.I just meant that if they were a couple of points behind in the title race, a Chelsea or Man Utd would buy lots of top quality players even in April/May time. Maybe but it's mostly just my opinion.
Asha Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 Maybe but it's mostly just my opinion. And when am I ever right?
davieG Posted 4 September 2008 Author Posted 4 September 2008 And when am I ever right? Well it could be now - who knows when it comes to opinion.
eye666 Posted 4 September 2008 Posted 4 September 2008 Think it should go back to the old way of transfer dealings. Open in July, ends in February/March.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.