Ever since European clubs loosened restrictions on the number of foreign players, the game has become truly global. African players, in particular, have become abundant on the scene, supplementing the usual followers of Brazilians and Argentines.
Arsenal, for instance, has a first eleven that typically does not include a single British player. If you put together all the English players on the roster of the four English clubs which advanced to the final 16 of the UEFA Champions’ League, you would hardly be able to catch a single team.
There is little doubt that foreign players greatly enhance the quality of play in the European club championships. Europe's soccer scene would not be half as exciting without strikers such as Cote d’Ivoire’s Didier Drogba (playing with Chelsea) or Cameroon’s Samuel Eto'o (with Barcelona).
However, many fear that the quality of national teams is affected negatively by the availability of foreign players. Why hunt and invest for local talent if you can simply hire them from abroad?
England once again provides us with a perfect example. Many have blamed the country’s failure to qualify for this summer’s European national championship on the majority of foreign players in English club teams. True, but let's look at one of the more ignored competitions to get an overall snapshot of the situation.
The 2008 Africa Cup of Nations, held in Ghana during January and February, revealed the two-way reliance that the globalization of soccer has created. Many European clubs were left without their star players, as those players were called up to national-team duty.
But the most important lesson revealed by the Africa Cup is that successful nations are those that combine globalization’s opportunities with strong domestic foundations.
For the winner of the cup was not Cameroon or Cote d’Ivoire or any of the other African teams with loads of star players from European leagues, but Egypt, a country where only four players (out of a roster of 23) play in Europe.
By contrast, Cameroon, whom Egypt beat in the final, featured just a single player from a domestic club, and 20 from European clubs. Few of the Egyptian players would have been familiar to Europeans who watched that game, but Egypt played much better and deserved to win.
And it wasn’t a coincidence either: Egypt is the most successful national team in the tournament, and had won the African Cup five times previously.
The real lesson is that if you are going to take full advantage of globalization, you need to develop domestic competence along with international links.
What makes the difference for Egypt is that the country has a strong domestic league, which fosters depth of talent and consistency as a national team.
If English clubs and the national team take this issue into strong consideration and try to limit the amount of foreign players entering the gates of Europe, I can only see more trophies handed out to the English national team in the near future.
Comments (11) Add a comment »
from 3 days ago
Good article - just don't let a Scot, Welshman or Northern Irishman catch you calling it the 'British' national team!
from 3 days ago
Oh damn! lol
Thanks for the catch
from 3 days ago
Yeah to Jonathan...I was right with you till you said that...sorry bud.
from 3 days ago
Nice article. I think the globalization of football in Europe is a great thing. Without it we would not have most of the players over here that we love to watch, players like Messi, Kaka, Adeybayor, Drogba etc.
Watching these guys play with others around the world is so entertaining. I think there are advantages to homegrown players though, like for instance they can be extremely loyal to their team. But this said youth ranks can cause this loyalty also, Messi for instance is very loyal to Barcelona. I don't think that it should make a difference to the national teams. If you are good enough to play for your country you should be good enough to play for your club, otherwise your country will be outclassed anyway by the better footballers from other countries. If these players did not come to Europe to play then the European leagues would not be as popular and more people would start supporting different leagues. It is the diversity that makes football so enjoyable,
from 3 days ago
Thanks for comment. It's just.. it pisses me off how the English national team doesn't really have a solid foundation. The EPL is successful and all, but only on the international level. It's dominated by foreign players. Then Why should it even be called the ENGLISH Premier League? I dont know. They will have to figure out the answer to this by limiting the amount of foreign players entering the Premier league first.
from 3 days ago
Here we go again!! This "blame the foreigner" issue is getting out of hand. Khalid - I agree with your article 100% and I am not trying to belittle it but this argument is tired...
I wish people would get over the fact that England missed out on the Euro2008, which I assume this article is getting at...
from 3 days ago
I really don't know why you get pissed every time you see an article regarding "Foreigners". But I wasn't only focusing on the fact that they missed Euro 2008. I am talking on a general sense. You can go right ahead and refute my arguments with writing an article yourself about the issue. But it's OUT OF HAND when you go around every now and then commenting on how this argument is "getting out of hand". If you can't really see the problem here, then I really think you've never watched the EPL. And one more thing, how can this be out of hand? Can you see 5 articles a day on this topic? Ahh..No!
Thank you!!
from 2 days ago
Im not really pissed Khalid. People might actually get fed up of me saying it but guess what? Wont matter!
I dont think you read my comment properly, I wrote - "Khalid - I agree with your article 100% and I am not trying to belittle it but this argument is tired... "
Anyway, its all good. Its a decent article...
from 3 days ago
I'd say the main problem is the fact there is virtually no market for English players going to other European countries. If English players moved around as much as players from most other leagues this wouldn't be an issue.
Great players from mediocre teams around Europe head for England so why can't Steve Sidwell go to Werder Bremen instead of sitting on his arse at Chelsea for example....
Anybody feeling me?
from 3 days ago
You need to diversify in Europe. In Brazil we play footvolley (Romario,Edmundo)
Futesal (Ronaldo,Pato) Beach soccer (Junior,Rivaldo) and another kind that even I am still trying to understand the rules.....Like hockey...the ball never or almost never goes out ..you can bounce off the walls and even bounce off behind the goal, pass to your self and score etc.
From all these disaplines come all sorts of talented people and an eventual star.
There have been a few stars from football schools......but when its crunch time...real talent comes from playing those skillful variants of the beautiful sport.
Eto`o almost never shoots into the stadium ...or wildly in general. Always a well placed shot.
Eto`o used to play on a field in his hometown where if you shoot the ball past the goal into the bushes you need to go get it........in a forested area with many snakes.
I got that story off a Brazilian chanel covering the Africa`s cup. I presume they did their homework.
from 3 days ago
I got so carried away above that I forgot to mention my point!!
The point is I think England needs more home grown talent...and the things above could help.
Having a star studded foreign league will ultimately do damage in my opinion and the effects will be felt in the future and could take decades to undo.
On the other hand youngsters could start emulating the stars in the star studded league ...but its a tremendous risk to take with the future of English football.
Write a new comment