Is It Time To Close the 'Transfer' Window?

dennis hillyardContributor IJanuary 19, 2009

I have heard several comments from 'experts' that in the event that the Kaka transfer goes through and at the widely estimated fee of £100 million, then this can only be good for the English game.

If someone had said in 2000, that within 10 years there would be players earning in excess of £100,000 a week and that transfer fee's would exceed £20 million, then I am sure that the person would have been carted off to the funny farm.

I firmly believe that the introduction of the Transfer Window has played a major contribution to this tremendous upsurge in both, transfer fee's and salaries.

Clubs, players and agents all recognize that this 'window' is their only opportunity to either acquire additional players or, to make money.

This time factor places tremendous pressures on all parties and for various reasons.   Agents, clubs and players all start to make contact with each other well before the window opens resulting in all manners of unrest by all parties concerned. 

Contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on. The current Bellamy situation is evidence of that where the player refuses to train so as to enable him to 'get out' of his contract with West Ham in order to achieve a move to Manchester City. 

If the Football Association wants to address this matter but in a different way then I would strongly recommend that they seek to improve upon the current contact system whilst at the same time, closing the transfer window once and for all.



I would propose the adoption of the roll over system, something that has been used in certain circumstances in the past. In its simplest form it would be applied as follows:

A club agree to buy a player for the sum of £3 million, but on a three year roll over arrangement that would require them to pay the selling club £1 million pounds, one third of the total of completion of the deal. 

At the end of the first year, in the event that either or both parties agree to a parting of the waves then, any new purchasing club would be required to pay the original selling club, part or all of the remaining two thirds of the roll over contract (£2 million) plus, any additional amount agreed between themselves and the new selling club.

Once completed then a new roll over contract would be established under the same format.

Naturally, where the original buying club and the player are both happy with the arrangement after the first year then the contract is simply 'rolled over' for a further twelve months under the same format.

A further ruling would be that, during each twelve month period of the roll over contract, the club would not be allowed to sell the player, the player would not be allowed to seek a move and no other club or third party could seek to buy the player.

The players salary structure would be finalized at the start of the negotiations and would remain as agreed throughout the duration of the roll over contract whether one, two or three years. Thereafter, the player would be free to negotiate his salary with the new purchasing club.

This in itself would go a long way to assist the clubs to monitor their balance sheets far more efficiently and effectively over the relative long term.

Simple maybe but then, very often it is the simple idea's that are the best.

Of course. I am not naive enough to think that this method would not be without it's problems or that, others far cleverer than I may be able to show how it would not work never the less, surely it is worth examining.

Any input, positive or negative would be greatly appreciated.