Parents: Don't believe all you're told by clubs

My role as an agent is there to protect and enhances the interests of my clients, it is also to help clubs source new players and mediate with players currently there to keep them happy and progressing, regardless of age.

Perhaps fitting into the former more than the latter on this particular issue, I have to admit I am seeing more and more clubs, particularly at academy level, create scenarios, laws and regulations that simply do not exist and portray them to unsuspecting parents as the truth.

The new myth of the month being touted by the odd academies across the country, which I believe was first implemented by a club in the south, is this so called 'scholarship extension'. Now, I am not talking about an 18-year old at the end of his 2-year scholarship being offered a 3rd year on 'scholarship terms' either. I am talking about under-16s being told at this particular time by clubs that at the moment they will not be being offered a scholarship. However, the clubs are then going on to say they want to offer them a month's "extension" or a rolling extention - to give the player time to convince them they are worthy of a scholarship.

Now just for clarity for parents and players that don't know - this is not an extension.

Under regulations, the club has until 1 March to offer a scholarship to a player. It also does not have to release the registration of any player before that. In essence, the player is just continuing on a registered basis as he always has - no extension, no additional contract length, no nothing. All I ask is parents do not be fooled by some of the terminology being used, it is not fair ever to use legal and regulatory language to in essence try to motivate players if it is not true. Additionally, it is just confusing. 

This type of talk is also another ploy by clubs. If on 12 January I tell young Johnny he isn't going to be offered a scholarship and he can have the 6 weeks to prove himself or can go on trial elsewhere if would like, there is a financial reason behind this also. If Johnny decides to go on trial and that club would like to sign him before 1 March then the original registered club of Johnny are within their right to ask for full compensation inclusive of the scholarship years (even if he wasn't going to be offered) as they can still imply they intended to offer a scholarship and therefore expect that payment. This can be done and some clubs are sly in wanting this. However, this does present risks to clubs who to try to maximise compensation may end up offering a scholarship with the interested club(s) pulling out and the club still being obliged to fulfill that scholarship offer. Ultimately, offering for Under-16 players to go out on trial or be heavily watched before 1 March is a good idea for clubs if they have players that truly are 50/50 on whether they want to take or not so they can either aim for full compensation or if it comes to the worst he will have a scholarship but only after clubs have shown interest in him anyway.

At least the regulations protect Under-16s to an extent that at least there is sometime for them to find another club if they don't get offered a scholarship before the season ends. Whereas players coming to the end of their scholars can go until May before finding out if they're going to be offered contracts and by then the season can end without them being able to source a new club or having time to trial. That is something that also needs to reviewed - and will probably require another blog post I'm sure at some point!

Law and/or Enforcement

Whilst I studied for my master degree in laws over 4 years ago at Durham, I very much recall being fascinated by a legal theory question that essentially posed the question: What acts as a greater deterrence, law itself or enforcement of the law?

Ultimately, the obvious conclusion is that without enforcement, law itself is rendered redundant. So it begs the question of why many football regulatory bodies set down such extensive regulations yet not prepare itself to be able to enforce the regulations?

At a recent AFA (Association of Football Agents) meeting in London, The FA's key financial regulation department figures themselves admitted they did not have the man power or finances in order to always be able to speedily forward on finances held in their account, let alone to fully enforce all the regulations rigorously.

[For those interested in the AFA please visit here.]

The FA are ready to admit there is a problem with unlicensed agents operating in the business for example or a knowledge that players and agents are signing contracts but not lodging with the FA or know that experienced pro players are trying to sign shorter representation agreements which are not in line with FA regulations - but really do not have the time or resources to investigate. As a result, where these people can get away with sometimes notably honest mistakes or mis-alignment with the regulations and should be due just a quick personal reminder, this never comes and these (sometimes honest) corners can easily open up to something much wider to those who care to exploit it.

An example would be pretty crime. If petty crime was not acted upon and enforced then criminals would move on and on to see how far they can go without repercussion. Likewise this is happening in our industry.

One of the most known reactions recently by FIFA to the fact that many people operate out of alignment with agent regulations they set at the top and through associations country by country is to look to allow agents to operate without a license potentially from the end of this year. They want to do this so their regulations towards agents and anything related will apply to anyone automatically who is involved in this side of the game - regardless of whether they are licensed. Again all this relates to is greater regulations. But the key question should be what is being done to increase enforcement?

I'll make this rather simple. Unless FIFA, the FA and other bodies looking at increasing what can be done to increase enforcement - not just to agents - but to players, clubs and more who wish to deviate from the regulations relating to transactions and more - then why bother to look at what can be done with changing the regulations? Otherwise all your doing is widening the catchment of what the law applies. Is that enough?

The Football Industry Encourages Bad Agents

The industry often advocates bad agents unknowingly by making the environment of doing business tricky. Let's take typical recruitment agency work for example, a fee for helping a company secure a new employee is agreed at the beginning before work commences. That recruitment agent will submit candidates they've sourced for the job, if one of those candidates gets the job (barring any rebates) that recruitment agent is paid - simple.

In football however, despite the fact it shares similar characteristics to that of recruitment apart from it may be more complex at times, it can be a battle even to agree a fee from the start. Some clubs may even try to agree an agents fee once the player's terms are agreed and then play you around on that fee or dispute it all together. Some may even agree to that fee up front, do the deal and then not pay at all. I'm afraid to say this is just a few examples of what is pretty much common practice in the industry.

A significant issue in football as it stands, let's say at least in the UK, is found in how people working in the industry find it hard to distinguish between the emotional elements of football management and the reality that it is a business where agents are in-fact a key element of revenue generation and player sourcing for clubs. As a result, business is happening, sometimes very big business, but it's far from the professionalism you'd find in other industries.

In this industry, the best way to agree a fee or get paid is simply to have a top player. A top player that everyone wants and then the agent would just tell clubs if you don't agree a great fee from the start and pay a significant portion of it up-front as an agents fee when the deal is done then simply that agent will refuse to negotiate and agree player terms with the club.

If you have a less in-demand player then clubs often want you to fight for your fee; thus we often see agents contacting other clubs trying to create a dutch auction for the player until one club agrees to pay a basic fee. Sometimes for an out-of-contract or a youth player who is even less desirable to the eyes of most, some clubs will just try not to pay an agents fee at all, despite the fact you may have helped that club source a player that does increase player asset value at the club or has distinct potential. There are even clubs that will refuse to take a standard % from a players salary to pay the agent as a matter of accountancy on request of a player - because they don't want to pay an agents fee in principal.

So if you revert back to the recruitment agency concept - do you see those agents not agree a fee or not be paid simply because they're bringing in a £12,000 per year low demand employee rather than a £200,000 per year executive? The answer is no. Likewise, the variety of manipulations of players agent' transactions, including the debate of whether the player or club should pay and what that truly means, is murky, not needed and unhealthy as an insider and looks even worse from the outside.

What I am trying to show in the above primarily is how there is a broad sense that there is no standard way of operating as an agent and each deal with each club can be very different. Where this encourages bad agents is the ones who, regardless of the player' level or demand, are prepared to do anything they can to force agreed terms and payment through any means necessary because they feel it may be the only way they get paid for their work. That's where you see agents offering players to as many clubs as possible or touting them in the press or agents who are keen to manipulate players to hide them from all offers and only disclose offers to them if suitable agents fees are agreed or manipulate families or even step into the realm of corruption all in order to secure their living. It's exactly what the industry says it doesn't want but here it is making agents feel they have to fight all the time.

The industry has allowed itself to manifest poor professionalism and low standards in business in various transactions. As a result, good professionals will harbour away from an industry where you don't know if you'll be able to structure a fee as you'd expect or even be paid from one client or club to the next. Then in turn, the ones who will thrive will be those who enjoy the dark arts and are prepared to needlessly fight for deals and as a result tarnish the name of agents, which could be good one in the right circumstances, and ultimately football.

To reduce the role of 'bad agents' that are corrupting the game in more ways than just morally, the FA and other footballing bodies need to take a firmer role first by giving more acceptance and acknowledgement to the role of agency work and begin to define transactions that safeguard agents and I can guarantee you all out there, cynic of agents or not, that you will begin to see those who are good professionals strive and the image of agents improve. Until that point and agents have to remain in a consistent dog fight to agree fees or even get paid once agreed, the bad agents will continue to operate and the industry will continue to unknowingly encourage it.

Sometimes not being allowed to do the right thing

Hi all,

Just a quick update of my musings of the industry at the moment. Rather than discuss the transfer window I'll give you a little insight into an occurrence recently as we tried to sign to represent a young talented international representative player.

As you will know if you follow or are involved with us, Simply Sport has a code of conduct where we try to as much as we can to inform any club before we make an approach for an 18 or under youth player player at their club. As like any industry, some clubs/companies you have closer relationships with than others, even if we have relationships with most.

However, 5 months ago we rang up one particular club to ask if we may approach a player and whilst it rarely is a question that gets Academy Manager's singing and dancing he appreciated our call and affirmed. However, as of late that same Academy Manager has informed the parents that he has never spoken to us on this subject - and this has upset the parents. Is it merely bad memory, specifically chosen memory or politics? You can decide for yourselves.

Ultimately, I am sure with a conversation with the Academy Manager later today, I can try to get this resolved, but this isn't the first time this occurrence has happened and it really concerns the parents rightly of any young player - albeit I must state it is is a very rare occurrence. Obviously if this occurrence happens it is typically with clubs we have a less close relationship than with others, but it goes to show that even if you try to do the right thing by clubs sometimes, they may appreciate it externally but internally it will be dealt with a different manner. It's disappointing but it won't change the way we are trying to operate at Simply Sport but you if you're reading it as an outsider you can understand how so many unscrupulous agents would happily try never to let the club know they are approaching the player until they turn up for professional contract negotiations because their fearful of how academies may deal with that approach internally and perhaps that club may even gear that player and his family towards 'preferred agents' who may only serve the interests of the club.

Simply Sport will continue to do things the right way - even if it hurts sometimes. And it does hurt.

UK Immigration for Talented Footballers

I am not the first and I will not be the last to petition against a change to the FA and UK government's stance that clubs here may only sign a Non-EU passport holder player if he has played over 75% of competitive games for his national team in the past 2 years, if they are in the top 70 countries in the FIFA rankings.

For example, over the past decade I have observed as South American, African and Asian markets have been plundered by countries without such immigration restrictions, such as Germany, France, Spain and Belgium, who pick up players cheaply with good potential, build them into superstars, they then go onto play heavily for their national teams then they are sold at a premium to clubs in the English Premier League. For example, Papiss Cisse and Sergio Aguero.

Then on top of that, UK teams are now, like the rest of Europe, told to fit into the UEFA Fair Play Rules restricting the way finances may be spent.

Well, if this is to occur - has anyone realised that the playing field does not become more fair if the UK still have these restrictions based upon them? In-fact it hits UK clubs hardest.

Quite simply if a UK club has to wait until a Non-EU passport holder has played over 75% of competitive games for his national team - you would expect them to pay the premium as they will be mature, established internationals by that stage. Let's put it this way, for example, the immigration rules here as it stood meant Man City couldn't have competed to sign Sergio Aguero easily when Atletico Madrid moved to sign him in 2006 as he hadn't played the required amount for Argentina's senior team. And then when the time comes when Man City could sign Aguero they're also going to be impeded by paying the best premium to beat any other club because of concerns of fitting within fair play rules. So both hands are tied.

Whilst the FA does make the odd exception for outstanding youth talent, it is often only for players from the top 10 FIFA ranked countries and it then goes to a subjective panel - then who is actually to say if one 17 year old is better than another for example ? Surely it's the further development that's equally as important to the raw talent adjudged on that day for a visa and that development happens after the exception is made not before.

Truly, if we were to be fair and a totally free market, all clubs in Europe should share the same immigration rules in football and same financial regulations. This is fictitious I know but I still believe the UK's approach to player immigration could be more competitive. What do you think?

Another Transfer Window Closes...

So here we again, at the end of another transfer window in the United Kingdom and across many countries.

This doesn't mean that all transfer activity is over however as of course some players that are out of contract may still be signed freely by clubs after the window has closed. Two more higher profile players I will be assisting in that position include former Leicester City left back/winger Jordan Stewart and German central midfielder, Michael Fink but in the greater scheme of things most player movement is now done until January.

Any of you who followed the sports news yesterday will see a host of deals being rushed to completion, forming a sense of the surreal as an industry completes perhaps 20% of all it's business in one day. What other industry does this? It is yet another reason I do not believe in the transfer window and still believe if truly contested would not stand up to the rigour of EU Law as is quite clearly a restraint on trade and possibly even forms a restriction on the free movement of workers. None the less, here we are.

You could also make the point that it is mainly in the UK that leave all their deals to the last day, whilst in comparison in Germany most deals were concluded far earlier in the window. Revealing a compelling and bizarre cultural approach to transfer market business we have here.

For Simply Sport ourselves it has been an interesting 2 months. As a recently formed business our client list whilst of high quality is still fairly small, it also highly geared strategically for the long-term towards youth who will have high future market value but aren't to be moved at this stage and from a transaction stand point that is not always ideal. Such is the case that I'd say 65% of our transfer window meant utilising my relationships with other agencies abroad to present clubs domestically where we have strong relationships with player opportunities. This often presents it's own challenges in various forms, none less so than when the other agent has his own method of negotiating (or agenda) when a deal is presented that does not fit in with our own. You also have less control and influence over the player, we for example could bring an offer to the table from England but without a worldwide mandate, we cannot stop a better offer coming in for the player from abroad scuppering all the hard work we've done here to bring an offer to the table - and so on.

In any case, I am personally glad that the window is over for another summer whilst remaining keen to help some of the out of contract players secure contracts in the next month. I can now return with my colleagues to focus on signing further leading talents that will ensure the long-term future of Simply Sport and move us away from a reliance on other agencies during these transfer windows. I know with the young talent we have already alongside some of our elite professionals playing in the Premier League and La Liga that we have we are well on course to reducing that reliance.

A Game of Opinions

Here's a little insight into my transfer window so far... for the same player; one Manager of a Championship side who finished mid-table last season barked at me for even suggesting he'd be good enough for them. Whilst on a call to another Manager, this time from a Premier League side that finished in the top 10 last season regarding the same player, he talked of his utmost admiration for the player and his achievements.

This is why football shall always remain - a game of opinions.

The best thing about football is that, everyones opinion is valid. It diverts beyond class, creed, religion or any other theoretical segregation of society anyone may throw at us. Football is purely a game of opinions and that is why it makes it such an interesting conversation starter and enthralling for anyone who enjoys the game. However, when it comes to promoting a player's interest in the transfer window there's only so much "debating" you can do with a Manager...

I recall recommending Luke O'Neill, a young defender released from Leicester City a year ago to lower placed clubs in the SPL. This, merely on the basis that I believed in his quality having seen him play in the u18s and after actively asking Jon Rudkin (the Leicester Academy Manager) about him. However, those SPL clubs then were saying he's too young, he's unproven and wouldn't cut it. Luke spent a short time with Mansfield before transferring to Burnley after being pursued by several Championship clubs this summer and is truly kicking on. Had he moved from a lower SPL club to the Championship this could have made a very good profit for that club - and they recognize this now... this among 100 other examples you could discuss per season, shows even from the highest to the lowest levels, football is a game of opinions.

For me, this is a reason why you should never give up on a player and players themselves should never give up either. It's also a reason why I've never understood agents who say they're "waiting for the phone to ring" during the transfer windows. You can only wait for the phone to ring when someone or a lot of people have a favourable 'opinion' of your player. It's great when I get a call about one of my players. But equally I get a buzz when I'm on the phone or at meetings promoting my players who perhaps have less active admirers but could find just the one Manager and team willing to take my lad to the next level - where he deserves to be, because he never gave up.