The Footie Thread

[Deleted member 21784]

It isn't discrimination at all. AFCON choose when they hold the tournament, it's 100% their decision. That decision has consequences, consequences they must be aware of.

If I was a director of football I'd be signing the best players I could but in the back of my mind I'd be aware of tiredness of South American players after qualifiers and absence of African players for AFCON. That's common sense. I'd be buying some, but not an entire team full of either.

How is it not discrimination? If your saying clubs shouldn't sign players or sign less players from Africa because of the tournament and pick say a french player over them, that's flat out discrimination

Then you have players who are one nation for example again french who after a year of signing for you declare for ivory coat (happened with Haller) how do you plan for that?

 

[Captainron]

. respectfully disagree.

Even Ian wright has said coach's have been known to not sign African players because of it. That's wrong. You shouldn't have to avoid a continent of players .. clubs are happy to sign south Americans and them to play the copa America in July. It's classic discrimination

Acon in 2017 was moved to the summer going forward to avoid clashing with normal seasons .. this is the 2023 tournament and was moved due to the weather last year.

Next one is suppose to be the summer but is set to clash with the new extended World Cup

Money talks and I wouldn’t sign an African player without putting something in his contract which protected the club like no pay for the period they are away for AFCON.

 

[DPapas1982]

How is it not discrimination? If your saying clubs shouldn't sign players or sign less players from Africa because of the tournament and pick say a french player over them, that's flat out discrimination

Then you have players who are one nation for example again french who after a year of signing for you declare for ivory coat (happened with Haller) how do you plan for that?

Football is an open market.
Clubs need a percentage of home grown. That's not discrimination either.

The fact previous afcons have moved is pandering to the bigger leagues. Its been run long enough. If you sign players you should use your best judgement, but such it up.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Money talks and I wouldn’t sign an African player without putting something in his contract which protected the club like no pay for the period they are away for AFCON.

Big clubs might work with but west ham? I doubt

I mean take kudus the bloke is bigger than us. Teams like city can be picky and go no African players because they can buy whoever they want. We have to take the talent left over

I've heard a rumour that kudus might be available for Brighton which as much as I hate the Acon at least that would be more sensible solution. 11 days I'd enough rest before the tournament.

 

[Captainron]

Big clubs might work with but west ham? I doubt

I mean take kudus the bloke is bigger than us. Teams like city can be picky and go no African players because they can buy whoever they want. We have to take the talent left over

I've heard a rumour that kudus might be available for Brighton which as much as I hate the Acon at least that would be more sensible solution. 11 days I'd enough rest before the tournament.

He’s not all that though. He’s never bigger than the club. No one is.

 

[IanM]

How is it not discrimination?

Because a club is restricting signing any player who is unavailable during the playing season. (Regardless of where they are from)

Bit like an accountant who goes awol every other March!

Of course a player can sign an availability clause.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

How is it not discrimination? If your saying clubs shouldn't sign players or sign less players from Africa because of the tournament and pick say a french player over them, that's flat out discrimination

Then you have players who are one nation for example again french who after a year of signing for you declare for ivory coat (happened with Haller) how do you plan for that?

I think we have differing definitions of discrimination. It's about maximising player availability, players being available at their peak for the most amount of time.

If one continental association wants to impact that, that's on them. Don't criticise the clubs that take that into account, look to the association.

How many players will you lose out of interest?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Bit like an accountant who goes awol every other March!

I love that analogy

 

[DPapas1982]

I think we have differing definitions of discrimination. It's about maximising player availability, players being available at their peak for the most amount of time.

If one continental association wants to impact that, that's on them. Don't criticise the clubs that take that into account, look to the association.

How many players will you lose out of interest?

First African player in english football 1992, first Afcon. 1957. But let's blame the associations.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

First African player in english football 1992, first Afcon. 1957. But let's blame the associations.

That's a different discussion entirely

Football is now a truly worldwide game, clubs will buy players from any continent.

 

[DPapas1982]

That's a different discussion entirely

Football is now a truly worldwide game, clubs will buy players from any continent.

True, but in no way shape or form should an association change their criteria or comps for leagues outside their control.

 

[Hobbit]

How is it not discrimination? If your saying clubs shouldn't sign players or sign less players from Africa because of the tournament and pick say a french player over them, that's flat out discrimination

Then you have players who are one nation for example again french who after a year of signing for you declare for ivory coat (happened with Haller) how do you plan for that?

It is discrimination. To make a choice based on ethnicity is discrimination, irrespective of the reason. The players are African, and the decision not to sign them based on eligibility to play in AFCON is discrimination.

If a club signs them but then puts restrictions on their availability the club is still guilty of discrimination by restricting their opportunities - think it’s called level of opportunities. Non-African players would not be blocked from playing during international breaks during the season but suggesting African players can’t play in AFCON is discrimination.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

I think we have differing definitions of discrimination. It's about maximising player availability, players being available at their peak for the most amount of time.

If one continental association wants to impact that, that's on them. Don't criticise the clubs that take that into account, look to the association.

How many players will you lose out of interest?

2-4

It's been reported now that cornet won't be called up

However it's not been announced yet if benramha has been called or not

But 2 defo kudus and aguard which if was only 2 wouldn't be terrible

 

[Lord Tyrion]

True, but in no way shape or form should an association change their criteria or comps for leagues outside their control.

I've certainly never suggested they should. AFCON should run its tournament whenever it wants to. It is their right to do so.

 

[IanM]

I'm not employing someone who won't be here for my operating times.

Not discrimination.

I'm not employing any (insert any race, religion etc etc here)

Discrimination.

Proven by employment case law.

Ps. African footy authority can hold their championship whenever they choose.

Clubs in the rest of the world can take it or leave it. If a player is that good, you'll still want them for when they are available.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Because a club is restricting signing any player who is unavailable during the playing season. (Regardless of where they are from)

Bit like an accountant who goes awol every other March!

Of course a player can sign an availability clause.

It’s January we have to be available.
But otherwise a good analogy.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Who cares if you call it discrimination or not?
The clubs have a right to choose who they sign. There’s no rules to say African players, or South Americans etc have to be signed by English teams.
The teams have just chosen to sign them in the past.

Also, it’s not like the normal job application procedure. The clubs choose the players. The players don’t apply and then have their CV reviewed and get asked when they are available.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

A good balanced article about acon

Afcon 2023: Does the club versus country dilemma still exist for players and fans?

As Premier League stars prepare to head to the Africa Cup of Nations, is the club versus country debate still relevant?

www.bbc.co.uk

And the best news now it seems official

David Moyes: West Ham set to open contract talks with manager in new year

West Ham United are set to open contract talks with manager David Moyes in the new year, whose current deal expires in the summer of 2024.

www.bbc.co.uk

Get Tim on his jet asap and sign some players that will work for Moyes

Werner linked. Yes please solves our left wing issue and would fill in up front with Bowen right whilst kudus is away

Just need a CB if kehrer is off

Worral Is frozen out of forest I'd take him

 

[Fade and Die]

First African player in english football 1992, first Afcon. 1957. But let's blame the associations.

Lol someone else who thinks football was invented in 1992!

First African player to play in England was Arthur Wharton in the 19th Century. Since then they have played regularly.

http://www.outofafricacampaign.com/wp-content/themes/child_theme/documents/Phil_Vasali.pdf

 

[Slime]

How is it not discrimination? If your saying clubs shouldn't sign players or sign less players from Africa because of the tournament and pick say a french player over them, that's flat out discrimination

Then you have players who are one nation for example again french who after a year of signing for you declare for ivory coat (happened with Haller) how do you plan for that?

But, if you bought the African player, rather than the French one, couldn't you argue that that was discriminatory also?
You have to pick one over the other, you can't have both!