6+5: Better Alternatives To Sepp Blatter's Plan

Many clubs and fans are opposed to FIFA's proposed 6+5 rule, whereby "a club team must start a match with at least six players that would be eligible for the national team of the country in which the club is domiciled."

However, few have come up with alternatives and there are possibly many.

But before I delve into the alternatives, I would like to raise some objections which have not been pointed out in the other articles:

a) 6+5 is not practical. Six nationals should start the match but how long should they play? Can they be substituted by foreign players? Other writers have already pointed out the fallacies of this rule when it comes to injuries and suspensions.

b) It will rob nations, especially African countries of their players who would choose a European country over their country of birth because of the preferential treatment they would get.

The 6+5 rule is ill-considered and alternatives need to be looked at.

Firstly, we need to consider why foreign players go to England, Spain or Italy. It's because those leagues are at the centre-stage of world football. Playing in those leagues enhances their chances of getting a better salary and being selected for their national teams and personal awards like World Player of the Year.

In short, the world's best players compete in the major European leagues because that is where the money is. "Money makes the ball go round" and if FIFA sees a problem, they should think about money before anything else.

The problem is brought about by money (economics) and not politics, and therefore the solution should be coming from football economists and not football politicians.

The solution is not to de-globalise the European elite leagues and reduce the money in Europe but to promote other leagues and thereby increase the money and prestige in those smaller leagues.

Brazil and Argentina are responsible for a large percentage of foreign players in Europe. Next in line is probably African players. FIFA and UEFA should address the cause and not just treat the symptoms by improving the standard of those leagues.

How about taxing revenue from TV rights and the UEFA Champions League and allocating that money to leagues in Brazil, Argentina and Africa?

Another alternative would be to tax clubs a percentage of their prize money for each foreign player on their books, whether they play or not. That money will go to the top league of the player's country of origin. This will make clubs think twice about signing a foreign player, especially one that is not guaranteed first team football every week.

Alternatively, clubs could be asked to pay a percentage of each foreign player's salary and/or a percentage of any transfer fee involving a foreign player. That money will again end up in the coffers of the the top league of the player's country of origin.

The net effect will be that foreign players would be relatively more expensive to buy and keep while players back in their home country will have better salaries and less motivation to move to Europe.

Secondly, FIFA must consider incentives for players who play in their home league. The revenue generated by their compatriots abroad could be one of those incentives. The Olympic Games Soccer Tournament was at one stage only for amateur players. At the moment it is limited to Under-23 players and three overage players.

How about limiting the games strictly to players under-24 playing in their home leagues? After all, the Olympic Games are all about national pride.

FIFA, the local FA and fans could also establish a trust that will operate a "national club." The national club will operate an Academy dedicated to developing local talent and sign only local players as a club policy and not a regulation to escape the wrath of the EU laws.

Athletic Bilbao have done this for years, signing only Basque players. There are no prizes for guessing where funding for the national club could come from.

Thirdly, Footballers want to compare themselves to the best and to do that they have to play against the best and compete for the top personal awards. What has FIFA done to ensure that a good player at Boca Juniors stands as good a chance of winning the World Player of the Year as a player playing for Real Madrid?

In that respect, FIFA can be accused of hypocritical behaviour. Complicit to the centralisation of Football in Europe but at the same time complaining of an influx of foreigners in European Football.

Will UEFA and FIFA consider merging the Champions League, Copa Libertadores and other continental competitions and forming a season long World Club Champions League? As a compromise, the competition can be based in Europe but it will still allow players to compete for the top personal awards on equal footing and also to rub shoulders with the best without moving to a European club.

If those proposed solutions are implemented together, it would be fantastic. The Brazilian league will be flooded with money every season and the best Brazilian players will have no reason to move to Turkey, Portugal and other countries that are used as a stepping stone to the big leagues of Italy, England and Spain. Young players will not want to move to an average European league when the Olympics are around the corner.

Imagine Diego Buonanotte scoring the winning goal for River Plate against Real Madrid in the final of the World Club Champions League at Old Trafford. Future generations of footballers will not always dream of playing for Real Madrid, they could dream of lifting that trophy for their home team: Necaxa of Mexico, Flamengo of Brazil or Orlando Pirates of South Africa.

FIFA should not close some doors. It should just open more windows.