Clubs call for new treaty clause

Date: 09/11/1995

By Tim Jones

EUROPEAN football clubs have joined the queue of institutions seeking amendments to the European Union's treaties at next year's Intergovernmental Conference (IGC).

The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) was shaken by the opinion delivered by a European Court of Justice advocate-general in September that long-standing practices in the game were in violation of the Union's constitution, and would like to avoid a repetition.

After presenting an open letter from the 49 presidents of Europe's national associations last week, English Football Association Chief-Executive Graham Kelly called for a special clause in the new treaty specifying that sport “is not like any other economic activity”.

His call follows an opinion delivered by German Advocate-General Carl Otto Lenz that both the transfer system and the “three plus two” rule, which allows clubs in European competitions only three foreign and two naturalised players, violated Article 48 of the Treaty of Rome on the free movement of workers. The full Court has yet to decide whether to accept the advocate-general's opinion.

But last week UEFA decided to respond in detail to the opinion delivered in the case of Belgian footballer Jean-Marc Bosman.

Having reached the end of his contract with RFC Liège, Bosman accepted a new position with French club Dunkerque, but was prevented from moving because of difficulties between the two clubs in paying the agreed transfer fee.

Liège offered him a new contract at a quarter of his salary. He took his case to Belgium's national tribunal and insisted on a referral to the Court of Justice.

In the open letter, UEFA's members criticised the “volume of ill-informed comment” following the September ruling and warned that the EU had failed to appreciate fully the impact of the decision, if it is supported by the full Court of Justice.

UEFA said the transfer system worked well and Bosman's problems arose from the fact that RFC Liège had failed to follow the rules.

At the moment, small clubs rely on developing young players and selling them on to big clubs for income. Lenz's suggestion that funds should be redistributed without reward would not work, UEFA warned.

“The concept that a handful of big clubs in each nation should simply give away a large percentage of their income to support the mass of middle and smaller clubs with nothing in return is simply not practicable,” the open letter said.

The court's suggestion that the “three plus two” rule should also end would be to the detriment of the game, the letter continued. It would split the EU football system from that operating in the rest of Europe, ensure that Europe's richest clubs snap up all the best players and undermine the performance of several national teams, argued UEFA.

The letter from the national association presidents concludes with a warning. “European Union law must indeed safeguard the basic principles with which it is imbued. It must also, however, respect the subsidiary autonomous regulations governing various sectors and especially those of a specific national sporting or cultural nature, which represent the unassailable wealth of Europe, and which cannot be absorbed by some simple economic vision,” it states.