The Football Slave Trade

[Anonymous]

For those who don't know, there is a FIFA rule that prohibits under-18s (more or less) from signing professional contracts in countries where they do not have the legal right to live (with some caveats). Some have asked why is this the case, hoping to send their kids to Europe to pursue a career in the sport, and this new video from TIFO Football (a great Yotuube channel) is really quite informative on how this process has abused young players--not just misleading them about football, but stealing all their money and forcing them into the dark underbelly of street life in European cities.

A fascinating story that needs to get more action and attention from the powers that be.

[Anonymous]

Anyone interested in this may want to check out "The Away Game", a book by Sebastian Abbot. Recommended.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there were awful abuses, but the application of the rule in other cases really makes no sense.

A local kid in the US just moved from Alexandria to Portland to pursue his professional dream, but the move that Griesman made when he was a young teenager - from his home in Southern France to just across the border in Northern Spain - would be illegal if it happened today. Iniesta moved 100s of miles away from his parents to a residential academy at age 12/13, and cried himself to sleep every night. That would be OK. Messi moved with his entire family at 13. That would be prohibited.

Families with the means are gaming the system now by moving over and having their kid play at amateur level for a year, so he doesn't have to register with FIFA, then joining an academy in year 2. That way they and the club can claim the move wasn't really motivated for football, the family just relocated for other reasons and, wouldn't you know it, the boy happens to have some talent so I guess he needs a place to play now. It's all BS.

Seems to me they just have to make it a requirement that at least one parent move and reside with the child until he turns 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, there were awful abuses, but the application of the rule in other cases really makes no sense.

A local kid in the US just moved from Alexandria to Portland to pursue his professional dream, but the move that Griesman made when he was a young teenager - from his home in Southern France to just across the border in Northern Spain - would be illegal if it happened today. Iniesta moved 100s of miles away from his parents to a residential academy at age 12/13, and cried himself to sleep every night. That would be OK. Messi moved with his entire family at 13. That would be prohibited.

Families with the means are gaming the system now by moving over and having their kid play at amateur level for a year, so he doesn't have to register with FIFA, then joining an academy in year 2. That way they and the club can claim the move wasn't really motivated for football, the family just relocated for other reasons and, wouldn't you know it, the boy happens to have some talent so I guess he needs a place to play now. It's all BS.

Seems to me they just have to make it a requirement that at least one parent move and reside with the child until he turns 18.

+1. The rule, as currently interpreted, goes well beyond protecting from child exploitation, but rather functions to provide unfair advantage to young players from the UEFA countries. Griesman's move would be OK because he has European passport and there is an exception for EU passport holders, but Messi would have been out of luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, there were awful abuses, but the application of the rule in other cases really makes no sense.

A local kid in the US just moved from Alexandria to Portland to pursue his professional dream, but the move that Griesman made when he was a young teenager - from his home in Southern France to just across the border in Northern Spain - would be illegal if it happened today. Iniesta moved 100s of miles away from his parents to a residential academy at age 12/13, and cried himself to sleep every night. That would be OK. Messi moved with his entire family at 13. That would be prohibited.

Families with the means are gaming the system now by moving over and having their kid play at amateur level for a year, so he doesn't have to register with FIFA, then joining an academy in year 2. That way they and the club can claim the move wasn't really motivated for football, the family just relocated for other reasons and, wouldn't you know it, the boy happens to have some talent so I guess he needs a place to play now. It's all BS.

Seems to me they just have to make it a requirement that at least one parent move and reside with the child until he turns 18.

+1. The rule, as currently interpreted, goes well beyond protecting from child exploitation, but rather functions to provide unfair advantage to young players from the UEFA countries. Griesman's move would be OK because he has European passport and there is an exception for EU passport holders, but Messi would have been out of luck.

I think EU passport holders are allowed to move at 16 (like Pulisic), while everyone else has to wait until 18 (like Sargent).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, there were awful abuses, but the application of the rule in other cases really makes no sense.

A local kid in the US just moved from Alexandria to Portland to pursue his professional dream, but the move that Griesman made when he was a young teenager - from his home in Southern France to just across the border in Northern Spain - would be illegal if it happened today. Iniesta moved 100s of miles away from his parents to a residential academy at age 12/13, and cried himself to sleep every night. That would be OK. Messi moved with his entire family at 13. That would be prohibited.

Families with the means are gaming the system now by moving over and having their kid play at amateur level for a year, so he doesn't have to register with FIFA, then joining an academy in year 2. That way they and the club can claim the move wasn't really motivated for football, the family just relocated for other reasons and, wouldn't you know it, the boy happens to have some talent so I guess he needs a place to play now. It's all BS.

Seems to me they just have to make it a requirement that at least one parent move and reside with the child until he turns 18.

+1. The rule, as currently interpreted, goes well beyond protecting from child exploitation, but rather functions to provide unfair advantage to young players from the UEFA countries. Griesman's move would be OK because he has European passport and there is an exception for EU passport holders, but Messi would have been out of luck.

I think EU passport holders are allowed to move at 16 (like Pulisic), while everyone else has to wait until 18 (like Sargent).

You are right and 16 to 18 is the critical development time so it gives a huge advantage to EU passport holders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, there were awful abuses, but the application of the rule in other cases really makes no sense.

A local kid in the US just moved from Alexandria to Portland to pursue his professional dream, but the move that Griesman made when he was a young teenager - from his home in Southern France to just across the border in Northern Spain - would be illegal if it happened today. Iniesta moved 100s of miles away from his parents to a residential academy at age 12/13, and cried himself to sleep every night. That would be OK. Messi moved with his entire family at 13. That would be prohibited.

Families with the means are gaming the system now by moving over and having their kid play at amateur level for a year, so he doesn't have to register with FIFA, then joining an academy in year 2. That way they and the club can claim the move wasn't really motivated for football, the family just relocated for other reasons and, wouldn't you know it, the boy happens to have some talent so I guess he needs a place to play now. It's all BS.

Seems to me they just have to make it a requirement that at least one parent move and reside with the child until he turns 18.

+1. The rule, as currently interpreted, goes well beyond protecting from child exploitation, but rather functions to provide unfair advantage to young players from the UEFA countries. Griesman's move would be OK because he has European passport and there is an exception for EU passport holders, but Messi would have been out of luck.

+2. I actually thought that was the rule's intent, until I saw the video. I thought it was a way to protect European players from being ousted by outsiders, a former of anti-immigration if you will.

[Anonymous]

What about a player moving from VYS to BRYC!