Why the French Want 6+5

By: Laurie | June 23rd, 2008

FIFA head honcho Sepp Blatter met with several French football figures this week. The topic? Sepp’s controversial 6+5 proposal. The result? Overwhelming French support.

FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter held very productive meetings regarding “6+5″ with French sports minister Bernard Laporte and a delegation representing FIFPro at the Home of FIFA in Zurich this week.

On Tuesday 17 June, the FIFA President welcomed Mr Laporte to a meeting that was also attended by President of the French FA Jean-Pierre Escalettes and President of the French League Frédéric Thiriez. Commenting on this meeting the next day in a programme on French television channel Canal+, the French sports minister said: “I told Mr Blatter that I think the 6+5 proposal is a good idea. I think it is in the interest of all of us, of education and of our young players, and that it applies not only to football, but also to rugby, volleyball and indeed all sports. It is our responsibility to debate this issue and examine it fully.”

You probably recall that 6+5 is FIFA’s proposal that would require all teams to start no fewer that 6 players who would be eligible to play for the national team of their club’s country. When we at The Offside put it to the vote last month, the result was overwhelmingly against it. Yet the FIFA vote was overwhelmingly for it.

This has been presented largely as a race/xenophobia issue. Or, in other words, it’s about the white countries keeping the “others” (i.e. non-whites/non-Western Europeans) out. But the France situation shows that the issue is more complicated.

It would be difficult for anybody to argue that French football is racist. France society may still struggle with integration, but France football has been a model of colorblindness for years. Black, blanc, beur (black, white, Arab) has been the national team’s motto since at least the 1998 World Cup win. Former captain and legend Zinedine Zidane is of Kabyle Algerian descent. Current captain Patrick Vieira was born in Africa (Senegal) and moved to France at a young age. At any given time, as many as eight or nine of the French starters are non-white.

So if this isn’t a race issue, what is behind France’s support of 6+5?

In a nutshell, France is a net exporter of footballing talent. Their youth academies are among the best in the world and create players with very solid technical and tactical skills. Yet when players get anywhere close to the pinnacle of their success, they tend to move elsewhere. Playing an entire career in France’s Ligue 1 is almost a mark of failure. Established talents like Zidane, Vieira, Lilian Thuram, Claude Makelele, Patrice Evra, William Gallas, Nicolas Anelka, Franck Ribery, and even younger talents like Mathieu Flamini, Lassana Diarra, Bakary Sagna and Gael Clichy mark their success by moving to other leagues.

There are many complicated reasons for this. The major one is the financial situation in Ligue 1, where high French tax brackets mean that clubs must pay far more to give a player the same takehome pay that he would get in, say, the English Premier League. And financial rules that require French clubs to operate in the black limit their ability to borrow money to keep good players — something that clubs in the EPL, as one example, don’t experience. This makes it nearly impossible for Ligue 1 teams to offer the salaries that players might receive in other leagues.

Many in the footballing establishment of France and other smaller countries see 6+5 as a fairly easy, painless way to reestablish some sort of balance. They may not be able to change French tax law, but with 6+5 they could change the number of teams in other countries that would be willing or able to provide higher-paying jobs to their players. Fewer higher-paying jobs abroad might mean that more players would stay home. More players at home might mean better international competitiveness in venues like the high-profile, high-profit Champions League. This could eventually lead to more money coming into French football, which could then allow French teams to provide higher salaries. And this might lead to a world where three of the four Champions League semifinalists aren’t EPL teams.

Would it work out this way? Who knows?

But people who present 6+5 as a simple matter of racism and/or xenophobia are oversimplifying a complex issue.

Some Related Stories:

Category: World Football

« Best Complaint Against YouTube Censorship Ever | Home | Pele Robbed at Gunpoint, Still Has All His Goals »

The Offside RSS Feeds

Nick

Great article. Inspired me to research it further:
http://footballssoul.wordpress...
Phil

i dont get it. there's only a maximum of 23 players in every national team, so, take england for example, how could every club in england field 6 players on the english national team? or am i just not reading this right?
Foreverzidane

I admire your passion but please take a deep breath as we're all fans of the same teams. This argument is the same as the one used for the employment of the visible minorities specially women, and those of different backgrounds other than the white anglos here in Canada,
basically as an "EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM".
Though I whole heartedly AGREE with your view points as player selections should be based solely on MERIT, but currently the fans of the EPL understandably are crying for more players from England! How else those same players with less talent could harvest their techniques than being amongst the best, ENVIRONMENT IS KEY!
Are Turkey's larger land section or Israel on any map, part of Europe? Obviously not, but look at how their football has flourished that no one would take these teams lightly! By competing amongst the best you'll develop a superiror form.
I'm no expert commenting on the Grass roots of any country, but a 1st world nation like England has all the
facilities and I'm sure that they also have loads of talent waiting to be discovered.
It is a joke World Cup time with the Mideast and Asian teams as they might have 2 players playing in europe, but those star players have to suffer because of the lack of the caliber of their team mates who never get the chance of playing against the Europeans on a fairly regular basis. So they get blown out by Germany 6-0!
Is that the kind of experience they were looking for, do you think?
So hypothetically players such the Toure brothers are not being discriminated against but players such as Walcot who "should be a starter" are given priority for the improvement of the level of their league and hence the National team! I know the faults of this system, but
no solution is ever the PERFECT one!
The growing infusion of foreign players is doing nothing for English football, and other NATIONAL programs.
I believe that it is a step in the right direction, however idiotic it might seem to you.
set

sandrahn:
Honestly, I'm not really convinced by this rule myself, but qualifying it as "very poorly thought out, utterly superficial, naive and totally blind to consequences" seems oversimplifying to me.
I think it's pretty hard to predict what would happen with precision. Your arguments made sense but, to me, are too extreme.
You extrapolate and show only one side of the story. Like any change of rules, there would be both good and bad impacts. The hard part is seeing them all, and quantifying them.
set

"A player quota will drive prices up for local players in all European leagues to ridiculous levels, as clubs seek to follow this rigid quota. Big clubs will hoard all the better local talent, leaving the dross for smaller clubs to divide among themselves. How does this achieve competitiveness? For a small club to be competitive, they need to be able to buy good affordable players regardless of nationality. Now this new element of nationality will further limit their choices, and their competitiveness."

Wouldn't it just force them to focus on training young players? Like you said, local players prices will increase, so the clubs who manage to produce better talents will develop considerably: they will be able to sell their young players for more money.

"Oh — one final thing, under a 6+5 rule, the game can say goodbye to players like Cristiano Ronaldo, Adebayor, George Weah, Essien, Hleb, Roque Santa Cruz, Eto’o, the Toure brothers and so many others."

I disagree strongly here. Essien is the perfect example that it will always be possible for exceptional foreign players to break through: He came to France in Bastia first. THEN moved to Lyon. Maybe they won't be recruited by Arsenal at 17, but they'll be able to join smaller teams and start from there.
It's 6+5, not 11+0, and it's the same for all 20 teams of each league. That's plenty of room for great players to develop.
sandrahn

That "smilie" icon came up because I type the number 8 for some reason.
sandrahn

And Nolan, do some research before posting stupid and ignorant comments. It is a myth that France "poaches" players from Africa. None of the players of African descent on the French national team ever even played in Africa, they were all born and raised in France, or emigrated to France as toddlers (ages like 2, 4, 8) and raised, educated and trained in France. They're Frenchmen--only ignorant bigots refuse to acknowledge that fact.
sandrahn

Sorry, but the arguments for this rule just don't hold water. They're very poorly thought out, utterly superficial, naive and totally blind to consequences.

Yes, I'm an Arsenal supporter. Regardless of what you may think, my position on this issue would be exactly the same were I a supporter of Everton or Villareal or Marseille. I agree that you don't have to be racist to favor this rule but you are wrong to believe that the only arguments against it are based on the erroneous charge of racism.

The basic problem with this rule is that it assumes that all countries have the same level and quality of player development at the grassroots -- and that all countries have the same financial set-up in terms of player pricing.

Countries like Italy and France can afford to impose a player quota for the simple reason that they have a deep pool of talent to recruit from within their own countries. They have excellent grassroots player development systems. Notice, however, that even they dip into the foreign transfer market more and more.

What about countries that do not have the same grassroots culture that France and Italy have? England, of course, is the obvious example. For England to reach even the halfway point of what France, Italy and Holland have achieved (developing players from young ages in good technical skills that will allow them to compete on the int'l stage), England will need at least 20 years worth of dramatic changes in its very backward youth football culture. And 20 years is optimistic.

England simply does not have the kind of pool of talent that France and Italy have because English kids are not taught good basics of technique, nor are English coaches capable of imparting these skills to them.

It is no accident that the higher up you go in the English league, the fewer English players you see--the fact is that there are very very few English kids with the skills and talent to compete at the very highest levels. Man Utd and Chelsea may have English players but they're all getting older and there aren't any young ones coming thru from their academies. And I don't see either club buying up any in the transfer market.

Furthermore, a player quota will drive up player prices to obscene levels. In England, this will be catastrophic because prices of English players are already outrageously inflated. Foreign clubs don't bid for even the best English players because their prices are ridiculous. If you want to just buy a good English footballer (not great, just decent), you have to pay at least 10 million POUNDS or more.

A player quota will drive prices up for local players in all European leagues to ridiculous levels, as clubs seek to follow this rigid quota. Big clubs will hoard all the better local talent, leaving the dross for smaller clubs to divide among themselves. How does this achieve competitiveness? For a small club to be competitive, they need to be able to buy good affordable players regardless of nationality. Now this new element of nationality will further limit their choices, and their competitiveness.

This thoroughly naive, blinkered idea will also prioritize nationality before merit. Managers will now have to add a new element in their decision-making for tactics, strategy, team selection. Merit and quality won't be enough. Managers will be forced to use players because of their nationality (and maybe risk losing games) rather than the needs of the game. And what about injuries, suspensions? How can a manager balance following such a rigid rule given the vagaries of the game?

I'm sorry but this is a deeply idiotic idea that--like all stupid ideas--tries to fix a problem by attacking the symptom rather than the CAUSE. So go ahead and force managers to choose their players based on nationality and not on merit, while failing to address the dysfunctional problems with the quality of player development at the grassroots.

And watch as the quality of the game declines and the monopoly of the big clubs over the best local players becomes even more of a stanglehold.

Oh -- one final thing, under a 6+5 rule, the game can say goodbye to players like Cristiano Ronaldo, Adebayor, George Weah, Essien, Hleb, Roque Santa Cruz, Eto'o, the Toure brothers and so many others. Why? Because those players will be forced to stay home and never develop their game and break into the highest levels, never fulfill their potential. It would hurt even a player from the Barca academy like Fabregas--at Barca he was ignored and undervalued, stuck in the reserves, not considered to be a future prospect for them.

It is a stupid, stupid idea.
rick

why does everyone think that will improve competitiveness in the EPL? the big 4 will still buy the best players. all this means we get fewer robinhos and messis tainting our football with their 'talent'. much better.
Aditya

What is England's stance on this 6-5? All the foreign players are hindering England's younger players and their national team has become worse and worse as EPL has become better and better.
BMatt

Laurie- this line "But people who present 6+5 as a simple matter of racism and/or xenophobia are oversimplifying a complex issue."

is 100% correct and its sad when people use those arguments against the 6+5
BMatt

Inara: I agree completely, but why add a rule that FORCES players out of places where they want to play?

Jan: great point about a salary cap- but with so many compeating leauges that seems almost as unlikely as FIFA getting away with breaking EU labor laws.
Corey

Well written laurie.
Jan

I don't think that it's just a tax issue that sees Ligue 1 limping behind financially. Matchday revenue, sponsorship money etc. are all quite low as well. The TV contract is quite big, but doesn't compare to the EPL's and Spain's and Italy's big clubs benefit from individual TV rights marketing. Taxes are just one detail in the whole puzzle.

I think a salary cap linked to a club's turnover and a refined UEFA local player rule would be more helpful to ensure more balance among European clubs.
marotta

Im not saying I agree with the rule, but saying its because of racism is seems like a load of shit. I cant think of any teams that field all white teams, I mean come on, there is still 5 open slots for players from foreign countries.
ordeal_rules (JCS)

it should not only be eligible for your the national team but players from the teams youth system BORN in that country so that teams can't steal young players from other clubs at very young ages just so that they can play for the national team
ordeal_rules (JCS)

I am all for the 6+5 rule! but I doubt it will come true as the clubs will say its racist and all that bullshit.
BMatthews

Ligue 1 will never be the EPL or La Liga. The best players in the world WANT to play on the biggest stages, why force them to "stay home".
Not to mention this may hurt the development of American players abroad, with fewer opportunities for them on larger clubs.
BMatthews

@Paddy- I don't think it will necessarily make the games more competitive at all. I think it waters down the talent pools for all leagues. If I could find a decent XI from ANY country that would make Blackburn or RBNY any better, hells yes I would take that side in an instant.
If the French want to keep their young talent find a way to change the tax laws or the league rules, don't make FIFA do their dirty work.
Julien

I think it actually might make Ligue 1 more competitive. Too many talented French players go elsewhere instead of staying in France. Maybe this rule will help the league actually compete with Lyon instead of getting thrashed every season.
Nick

I don't think that this will happen and don't think that it would be beneficial to the league/english football. If the young players are good enough, they will get in. Competition raises the standard and makes it harder, yet the best will make it.
Check out: http://footballssoul.wordpress...
Paddy

I'm in favour of it because it will make club football more competitive. In England, for example, there're only three or four teams with a realistic chance of winning the Premiership, because they buy can afford the best players, wherever they're from. Being forced to include a quota of home grown players will even things up and give other teams a chance.
Aravind

After reading the article, everything is clear to me
:D
joejoejoe

6+5 is not going to happen unless the EU changes it's trade laws as it would be a violation of the provisions related to the free movement of labor within the EU. Since the entire reason for founding the EU was to establish these trade and labor laws I think 6+5 is as likely to happen as Zidane coming out of retirement to sign with Barnsley.
Nolan

It's classic that the biggest supporter of this plan comes from a country that poaches a lot of their talent from their colonies and ex-colonies.