Complaint to the FA Premier League re the Berbatov saga

My original e-mail to UEFA bounced back to me. Therefore I sent the following modified version to them through the post today:

I would appreciate your views about the failure of the Football Association (FA) to administer the laws of the game in England in a fair and consistent manner in respect of illegal approaches to players.

As you know, the FA is responsible for ensuring that the international Laws of the Game are applied on the field, and that the rules and regulations concerned with running football in England are observed by officials, clubs and players off the pitch as well as on it.

The FA insist that all leagues under its jurisdiction operate a set of rules in line with its regulatory framework. These rules apply equally to all leagues from the Premier League down to grass roots football.

Each relevant league is required to submit its rules to the FA on an annual basis for approval. Once sanctioned, each league is expected to apply these rules to all parties in a fair manner and the FA has the power to step in where they deem it appropriate.

Unlike many other countries the FA insist that all leagues have specific rules in place to combat illegal approaches to players. The Premier League’s rule K3 is supposed to cover the issue of illegal approaches and is mentioned in the following terms:

'Any club which by itself, by any of its Officials, by any of its Players, by its Agent, by any other Person on its behalf or by any other means whatsoever makes an approach directly or indirectly to a Contract Player except as permitted by Rule K1.1.2 or Rule K2 shall be in breach of these Rules and may be dealt with under the provisions of Section R'. Rule R1 gives the Premier League the authority to inquire into any suspected or alleged breach as it sees fit: 'The board shall have power to inquire into any suspected or alleged breach of these Rules and for that purpose may require any Manager, Match Official, official or Player to appear before it and to produce documents'.

However, Cathy Long (the Premier League’s Head of Customer Strategy) has written to me to say ‘the clubs had told the Premier League that in the absence of a complaint rule K3 was not a rule the collective body of Clubs wished to apply’. A copy of the communication can be made available to you if it assists.

Ms Long indicated the Premier League had not told the FA of this working amendment to rule K3 as they were not obliged to discuss every detail of the implementation of each Rule, simply any Rule alterations as and when they were applied – my view that this was an amendment in all but name and should have been submitted to and approved by the FA was rejected by the Premier League.

Having exhausted the Premier League’s complaint process I took the matter to the FA. I set out my complaint and asked they investigate what was, in layman’s terms, a secret rule change in respect of Premier League Rule K3, which placed all clubs who played by the rules at a competitive disadvantage. It also placed the Premier League on a different footing to all other clubs in English leagues. This difference in approach has led to clubs at the most junior level being liable to punishment for making an illegal approach whereas an identical offence committed by Premier League clubs would pass without sanction.

I complained the intent and effect of the rule change was to prevent the Premier League having much by way of effective power in being able to police the system in relation to allegations of illegal approaches, as the secret agreement meant rule K3 as intended had been neutered by the very clubs the rule was aimed at.

I therefore asked the FA to investigate the way Premier League clubs had circumvented rule K3 and how the Premier League itself had not brought what amounted to a rule change to the attention of the FA.

The FA’s response was disappointing in the extreme. It simply failed to address the substantive points raised and refused to enter into any more correspondence on the matter.

I appreciate the English are somewhat out of step with the rest of Europe in having a tapping up rule and that it is unlikely that any pressure will be brought to bear by you to uphold a principle you don't agree with.

But what might seem strange to your organisation is that whilst the FA insist on such a rule for all its leagues it effectively condones the exemption of the Premier League from the rule; with junior leagues under its banner punishing clubs whilst the big boys are allowed to get away with their transgressions. Such inconsistency is hard to defend and there is a powerful argument to be made that if the FA is not prepared to ensure the rule is enforced consistently throughout England then perhaps the rule should be dropped altogether, thus bringing us into line with the rest of Europe.

I would be grateful therefore if you could let me know whether you have any jurisdiction on the matter in question and if so whether you are able to insist on a consistency of approach by the FA? For it cannot be right that one of the most powerful leagues in Europe exempts itself from one of the rules set by its national body and that the said national body refuses to investigate allegations of wrong doing, even when evidence is put before it.

I would suggest that whilst your organisation does not insist that all leagues in England have a rule to cover so-called illegal approaches you do have a duty to ensure all clubs and all leagues under the jurisdiction of the FA are treated equally in the way the rules of the game are administered by the national authorities. Are you therefore able to raise this matter with the FA?
 
What evidence have you provided?

It is like writting to the council to complain someone parked on a yellow line and didn't get fined. You did not see it yourself, but you heard from someone else moaning about it and they must be punnished.
 
Just spoken to a lawyer (son-in-law and a red) and he says that the Premier League chairmen voted for the amendment and only if there is a complaint from one club would the League or FA take action. Levy's 'complaint' appears to have been paid off and the complaint has vanished therefore the League do not have to investigate. I think the matter rests within the rules of the Premier League and I suspect these have been drawn up to favour the usual suspects.
 
Corky said:
What evidence have you provided?

It is like writting to the council to complain someone parked on a yellow line and didn't get fined. You did not see it yourself, but you heard from someone else moaning about it and they must be punnished.

1. The 'evidence' is the admission contained in the e-mail from Cathy Long, that I have offered to supply. As my letter makes clear. Sorry if this was not clear to you.

2. I don't think your analogy quite fits. The complaint to UEFA is not about Berbatov; things moved on a long time ago. I'm sorry if you were confused by the title of the thread, which was overtaken by events some time ago.
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
Just spoken to a lawyer (son-in-law and a red) and he says that the Premier League chairmen voted for the amendment and only if there is a complaint from one club would the League or FA take action. Levy's 'complaint' appears to have been paid off and the complaint has vanished therefore the League do not have to investigate. I think the matter rests within the rules of the Premier League and I suspect these have been drawn up to favour the usual suspects.

I'm afraid that is not the whole story. The EPL's rules have to be authorised by the FA. The EPL put forward rule K3, which the FA accepted. If the EPL chairman voted for an amendment, as would seem likely, the EPL shoud have passed the amendment to the FA for approval - which they did not. The amendment is therefore some kind of side agreement, operated outside of rule K3, without the knowledge of the FA. It is the only league in England, as far as is known, who operate such a side agreement and the EPL is therefore operating a subtly different tapping up rule than the rest of the leagues in England.

If there is to be a rule it needs to be operated in a consistent manner across all leagues, and apply to all leagues. Otherwise scrap the rule.
 
Montgomery Burns said:
Corky said:
What evidence have you provided?

It is like writting to the council to complain someone parked on a yellow line and didn't get fined. You did not see it yourself, but you heard from someone else moaning about it and they must be punnished.

1. The 'evidence' is the admission contained in the e-mail from Cathy Long, that I have offered to supply. As my letter makes clear. Sorry if this was not clear to you.

2. I don't think your analogy quite fits. The complaint to UEFA is not about Berbatov; things moved on a long time ago. I'm sorry if you were confused by the title of the thread, which was overtaken by events some time ago.

What do you want from this then? City could get in trouble.
 
Corky said:
Montgomery Burns said:
1. The 'evidence' is the admission contained in the e-mail from Cathy Long, that I have offered to supply. As my letter makes clear. Sorry if this was not clear to you.

2. I don't think your analogy quite fits. The complaint to UEFA is not about Berbatov; things moved on a long time ago. I'm sorry if you were confused by the title of the thread, which was overtaken by events some time ago.

What do you want from this then? City could get in trouble.

My reply at page 28, 18/12/08 at 19:30 covers this.

The FA/EPL will not ensure rule K3 is implemented in full. Therefore the only logical conclusion is that this rule, eventually, will be scrapped. Which will in fact suit City, with our new found wealth.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.