What new rule would you introduce to protect clubs

[Andy S]

Like Fulham From having to let top talent leave cheaply like Dembele and Sess

[Fulhamerica23]

Something similar to restricted free agency in the NBA which protects teams who draft well and develop their talent. When their contract runs out, they are free to sign a deal with whoever they want for however much they want, the market can decide that. But once that deal is signed, the home club has 72 hours to match the offer. If they match it, he must go back to his home club.

[One Martin Thomas]

We have profited too from this sort of thing.... It's just natural selection.

[toshes mate]

I'd like to see retrospective value added for all players who a club has developed at the beginning of their playing career both as an incentive to develop young talent and an encouragement to release players to better things without feeling sated by the initial transfer fee.  In other words if somewhere down the line a player is transferred for £100m the club who originally handled the player's development would receive a percentage cut of that - say 5% or whatever.  This would repeat every time the player is transferred.

[toshes mate]

We have profited too from this sort of thing.... It's just natural selection.

Capitalism doesn't do natural selection but it does do privilege.

[Andy S]

My personal opinions is clubs should hold a players registration until an age agreed with their parents. At age 18 that registration automatically transfers to the player however if a 5 year agreement was in place at 16 there would be an obligation to pay the player who has to remain with the club until they were 21. A player leaving during that time would be expected to pay the market value of his contract. This would be picked up by the signing club. The value of his contract would be judged by the wages the home club were willing to pay

[Lighthouse]

Not sure if it would work. But if a club buys a player from a lower league. They would have to play him in at least 10 games in a year. Loaning out players would still count so the abuse of the loan system would still be there. But it might stop the top clubs having squads of players, some of whom they have no intention of using.

[epsomraver]

Back to original post, to protect clubs, pay agent 10% of their fee on a club signing the player and then the balance when he completes the contract, failure to see out contract would be reflected in balance percentage paid, stop these agents keep unsettling players so they can line their pockets

[Forever Fulham]

I'm against the notion that contract law should be revised to strip away the voidability of contracts with minors, or that clubs could get around that by contracting through the kid's parents, like he's chattel.  I do like the restricted free agency idea.  So many teams get cannibalised when a few individuals have a good year.  And then the club has to start over again.  No continuity.  Plus, easy transfering has a way of jacking the prices up into the stratosphere, hurting the poorer clubs.   

[cmg]

Some really good ideas here. But I fear that most would fall foul of restraint of trade/free enterprise/ protection of minors regulations.
It would not, however, seem unreasonable to stipulate that a percentage of any future transfer should be received by the developing club in the case of a young player picked up for (next to) nothing.

[toshes mate]

Back to original post, to protect clubs, pay agent 10% of their fee on a club signing the player and then the balance when he completes the contract, failure to see out contract would be reflected in balance percentage paid, stop these agents keep unsettling players so they can line their pockets

+1

[Nero]

Like Fulham From having to let top talent leave cheaply like Dembele and Sess

get promoted to the premiership

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

First of all I'd allow clubs to tie players of any age down to normal, long-term contracts. Do away with the rule they can't sign until they're 17.

To protect the young players I'd have a rule that says they can leave if they're not getting first team appearances between the ages of 16 and 21. For example a club might have to play a 16 y/o 5 times, 17 y/o 15 times, etc, or the player could leave.

If they left in those circumstances (or at the end of the contract) something like the current domestic tribunal system would kick in.

I'd do away with the international system (under which we only got £300k for Dembele) and beef the new system so for both domestic and international moves, clubs potentially get even bigger fees than they do now under the domestic system.

However I'd keep much of it contingent on future events. So for a player like Sessegnon maybe Fulham would still only get £4m up front, but we'd also get 30% of any sell-on fee, £100k for and PL appearances, £500k for any international appearances, etc, up to his 24th birthday

Yes, something like this but rather than a tribunal I would suggest a concrete formula possibly based on the player's wages at their new club. Maybe something as direct as the compensation fee would be exactly the total wages over the length of the player's contract maybe paid in annual instalments.

[toshes mate]

What bothers me most about agents and transfers is FIFA's inability to apply rules effectively as history tells us only too well.  The rules about agents, transfers, clubs, and players look quite comprehensive on paper and so why do they not work so well in practise?

[grandad]

Retrospective analysis of referee performances. Yellow & red cards for failing to make correct decisions, fines & bans where deemed appropriate.
Ability for a club to refuse a referee due to previous performanses.

[YankeeJim]

As in government, removing the effect of money would be a tremendous help. Yea, I know its not going to happen. However, we can mitigate the effect by limiting squad size. That way the 4-5 big clubs could not buy up talent and perhaps more importantly, buy up prospects and put them on a shelf. I'm not sure what would be a  proper squad size.......24-26? Right now Chelsea can field 4-5 better strikers than we have. Injuries or a run of bad form don't effect the money clubs. They simply plug in the next million pound player. 

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

As in government, removing the effect of money would be a tremendous help. Yea, I know its not going to happen. However, we can mitigate the effect by limiting squad size. That way the 4-5 big clubs could not buy up talent and perhaps more importantly, buy up prospects and put them on a shelf. I'm not sure what would be a  proper squad size.......24-26? Right now Chelsea can field 4-5 better strikers than we have. Injuries or a run of bad form don't effect the money clubs. They simply plug in the next million pound player. 

Rather than a strict limit on the size of the squad might I suggest that there is a limit on players brought in from other clubs.

Say, for example, clubs were only allowed to buy 18 players. That covers the 11 players on the pitch plus the 7 substitutes. After that they might be allowed as many home grown players as they like. This would have the benefit of encouraging clubs to develop their own youngsters and, I think, players to be loyal to their first club.

[G_Gribby]

Interesting reading and a important subject for clubs like Fulham as we have still an excellent academy. Some clubs has closed down that activity as there is no ROI. For sure something must be done otherwise the top schools will close down.

:022:

[Forever Fulham]

As in government, removing the effect of money would be a tremendous help. Yea, I know its not going to happen. However, we can mitigate the effect by limiting squad size. That way the 4-5 big clubs could not buy up talent and perhaps more importantly, buy up prospects and put them on a shelf. I'm not sure what would be a  proper squad size.......24-26? Right now Chelsea can field 4-5 better strikers than we have. Injuries or a run of bad form don't effect the money clubs. They simply plug in the next million pound player. 

Part of me likes this suggestion a lot.  The anti-Chelsea rule, if you will.  No hoarding rule.  But if I was an up and coming player, I'd hate it, as it would act to limit my pro prospects.