Â鶹Éç

A Lawyer writes

Hello Chris,
Thanks for your interesting and informative blog.

From a Professional perspective, I don't know why Bosman is not being applied in the Junior ranks. The decision was all about removing restrictions on freedom to market your services or skills, and as long as Junior Clubs pay their Players, they are Employees in the same way ass if they work in a Bank or play in the SPL.

I suspect the SJFA have decided to ignore Bosman on the basis that it keeps money circulating through the game - particularly where a SFL Club want to sign a player - and no one has challenged them so far. Not really my field, but Bosman struck at the retention of a player's Registration after his Contract had expired as a restraint of trade, and if the Juniors are doing that, they may be doing so unlawfully.

Might be talking through my wig here, but Ican't see why the fact that every Junior player is part-time would make any difference - a job is a job is a job, even in Fitba.

Good Luck for the new Season

Hi Chris,

Would have to agree with the first poster. I think what the Juniors are doing is either illegal or your information is not totally accurate. If your information is however accurate then the player could go to court.

Football is however something which doesn't fully comply with EU employment laws and I have often thought that another 'Bosman case' is just waiting to happen.

I think the rule is that, if the club has extended a written offer by July 1, they are entitled to compensation; if they fail to tender a written offer, the player can move without compensation.

To answer the question in the title of the blog, Yes.

There are Bosman transfers in junior football. The retention systems is only between junior clubs. If a player was out of contract at Kello and was signed by Annan no compensation would be paid.

As mentioned before a player is retained if he is offered a new contract in writing before a certain date. If he is not offered new terms then he can leave under freedom of contract.

If a player is retained but has refused the terms of the contract then the retention fee is 40x the players weekly wage (with a minimum of £300 and a max of £3,000).

Also, if a player leaves say Kello (but is retained), sign's for Annan and then gets sold to say Pollok then Pollok would have to agree a fee with Annan and also pay the compensation to Kello.

I'm surprised that this rule hasn't been challenged yet.

Thanks for the comments - glad to know I'm not going off my head.

I think the Juniors may have convinced themselves that if a player is offered continuity of employment with a Club, that addresses the point. If so, they are wrong in my view as Bosman is about the Free Movement of Labour.
A Contract only exists where an offer is accepted, and if no agreement is concluded than a Club would be wanting compensation for loss of the services of someone who has no contractual relationship with it.

It was precisely that which happened to Bosma all those years ago, and which was ruled illegal. UEFA do allow exceptions where a player has been brought up through Youth schemes, but that is unlikely to apply to the bulk of players in the Junior ranks.

Would be interested to hear if anyone takes on the SJFA on the matter

Interested in discussion here. As a lawyer with experience in advising players and also experience on 'other side'[ie at boardroom level of a senior club], I always find the different rules and protocols of the various football associations and leagues to be uneccessarily complex and varied. The inconsistency of approach among them creates challenges when a player moves from the jurisdiction of one association or league to another. Clubs and players are increasingly being forced to consult with lawyers as football's self regulation ethos fades. This is now creeping into transfers within the same association or league too.
My view on the compensation issue for intra SJFA transfers is that the current approach [as far as I am aware]is not a full reversion back to pre-Bosman where a club could retain a player's registration and therefore block a player taking up employment with another club. That of course would now be unlawful. My interpretation of the SJFA approach as existing is that when a pro-player's contract expires at a junior club,the 'old' club can [if they follow the admin requirements]retain the right to claim compensation from the'new'club based on an agreed scale. That approach therefore technically does not infringe the players right to offer his services to the new club and therefore respects the players rights as an employee to move 'freely'. Although in practical terms the compensation issue will of course materially affect the players chances of securing employment with a new club, the compensation issue is in fact one between the two clubs who as SJFA members will both apparently support and therefore comply with the existing compensation regime. While the old club can influence the situation via a compensation claim, they cannot, as they previously could, stop the player from joining another club.
I am inclined to suggest to players who intend signing for an SJFA member club that [if they are worried about the compensation issue obstructing a subsequent move when their contract expires]that they explore the possibility of negotiating into their playing contract a clause stipulating that the club will not claim compensation in respect of the player if he moves on after his contract expires. Any attempt [say by SJFA or by informal coalition of junior clubs]to exclude a player's right to enter into a contract on this basis [even by passive resistance if not by regulation] might be when the real legal red cards would emerge.

That is a helpful analysis - I said it was not my field - from someone who seems to know the territory. My only question is this - in the event of a failure to pay the agreed compensation, does any sanction fall on the Club to which the player moved, or on the player himself.

That does seem a pretty fundamental question, because if there is no effective sanction behind the requirement, why would anyone pay compensation except as a matter of goodwill. Defaults on transfer fees/compensation occur regularly in the higher echelons of the Professional game, so it is hard not to envisage a situation where a Club declines to pay compensation on the grounds that it is skint.

That obtains, on any view, in the case of intra SJFA transfers where Bosman would apply. I can't immediately see how a player whose contract has expired with a Junior side could be subject to a Transfer fee if signing for a SFL Club. I am, however, prepared to be corrected once more by those who actually know, and Apologies if my half-informed surmises caused any upset in the Junior ranks

Voidgrab - the obligation to pay compensation is a club to club obligation and is set out in the Constitution & Rules of the SJFA [see REGISTRATION section and 'Expiry of Contract' provisions there - available through SFA website]. Any breach of the rules on paying compensation would be a breach of the rules by a club and not the player. The player would therefore not be the subject of any formal sanction or penalty. A breach by a club would be dealt with by the SJFA -the particular rule empowers the SJFA to impose a remedy via determining the compensation payable if disputed.

There will also be effective sanctions agianst the club for breach available under the general powers of the SJFA, which are pretty broad and discretionary.These would presumably be invoked by the SJFA if the new club refused to pay all or any of the compensation assessed as payable. Options would apparently range from levying a fine on the offending club to cancelling the players registration with the offending club [although I am not aware of the latter having been imposed probably because the 'innocent' player would unduly suffer].You may recall a couple of seasons ago that the SFL suspended Livingston FC's right to register new players as a penalty for a rules breach re a failure to comply with a determination of the SFL Management Cttee on a player dispute about outstanding wages or payments. The sanctions can therefore be pretty brutal.
Any player seeking to avoid compensation being claimed by a club upon expiry of his contract with them should be careful about how that is achieved within the contract wording. It is likely that SJFA member clubs cannot 'contract out' of the SJFA rules. Therefore the way around this would be to incorporate a provision whereby the club undertakes within the contract not to issue an offer of re-enagement to the player upon expiry of the contract [or to take any other steps to secure a right to compensation - as the rules may change during the contract ! ]. This would ensure that the right to claim compensation would not arise. If the club subsequently claims compensation after such a contract expires, that would be a breach of the contract with the resulting dispute between the player and the club first being subject to the prior jurisdiction of the SFA under rule 4.2 of the SFA Registration Procedure Rules. Only once that process has been exhausted would a court action be competent.

On your point about a player moving from an SJFA club to an SFL club,a transfer fee would be payable if the player was under contract to the SJFA club at time of the move. If however the player was unattached [his contract with an SJFA club having expired], compensation would still be payable by the SFL club to the SJFA club if the player was aged under 23 [SFA rules cover this]. The compensation is calculated differently from the intra SJFA formula. If the player was 23 or over, compensation would not be payable as the SJFA rules on compensation [which are not age restricted]affect only player moves among SJFA clubs [SFL clubs are not bound by SJFA rules on this matter]. However, if the player's last SJFA club have followed the procedures necessary to retain the right to compensation for the player and that player later moves from the SFL club back to another SJFA club, that last SJFA club can then claim the compensation from the SJFA club who sign the player [ie the threat of a compensation claim effectively continues to hover over the player while he is playing in the SFL and will crystallise if he rejoins the junior ranks].
Hope that helps clarify for you Voidgrab. Apologies for the length of the reply.

Well, there you have it...

It is a fairly tangled web, but it now makes sense as a matter of contract between the SJFA Clubs...There are a couple of quibbles one could ask about a SJFL - SFL - SJFL transfer, which is probably commom in a player's career, but if the compensation claim is a contractual one, it probably stands up.

I would have disliked putting a spoke in the lifeblood of the Junior Leagues, but thanks for airing it Chris.

hi all ,new to this so bear with me. i am from north wales and have just started an under11 junior football team on anglesey under the AJFL(anglesey junior football league) which is under NWCFA (NORTH WALES COAST FA).my post relates to the above in a way ,all players are non pro or signed in any way by other league clubs.now i have been told i cannot sign a goalkeeper aged 10 who plays in the NWCFA league to play in the AJFL league as he is not from anglesey but he is welsh ,we are under the same WELSH FA and UEFA , the NWCFA &AJFL said he has to stay at his junior club now where he is unhappy and as a keeper not getting regular games , he been training with us since june 15th and his mum said he so much happier going to training etc and if he cannot join us will have no club next season as he wont return .can anyone shed some light on this ,for me its about the kids my son being in the team and the principle that if a 10 year old wants to play 4 miles down the road where his chances are better he and his parents should be allowed . what can i do? on the ajfl www under documents rule16 section k its gives info as to definitions if anyone with legal experience would be kind enough to help us ,thanks.

Hello,
Anything I say is subject to any contribution the rather better - equipped mpm16 may have to say.

My take on this is that the Anglesey situation is a bit different. For better or worse, AYJFL have a policy - see Rule 1 - that their League is for the benefit of Anglesey residents or players on the adjacent part of the mainland where there is no local club. That rider is, I expect, likely to be triggered in a fairly rare instance, and seems hard to argue in this lad's case, since he already belongs to a Club - albeit he is not getting a game.

What our discussion has been about concerns players who are being paid to play - and in the legal sense, providing labour - the game, and the effects of the Bosman case. As I said in an earlier post, the issue about the old Transfer system was that it allowed Clubs to hold a player's Registration, even when his Contact had expired. Apply that to any other walk of life, and the demand for a Transfer Fee to allow a player to move looks a bit odd.

The problem here is that 10 yo Goalies are not playing for money, so the issue of being able to change jobs freely does not arise. On the other hand, this boy is clearly sufficiently mobile to make the trip across the Menai Staits regularly, and seems to be suffering from a decision to draw a line on the map.

I am not sure whether that is illegal necessarily, but I wonder whether taking things up with the NWCFA or FAW might be enough to have the AYJFL reconsider its Rule 1. I did wonder whether the new Equality legislation might help here, but the area operated by the AYJFL does reflect a real geographical boundary, and I am pushed to see where unlawful discrimination would be taking place.

Sorry I am not too optimistic here, but Bosman does not seem to have the same effect in the unpaid ranks as it does in the Professional or Semi-Professional game to my mind. As ever though, I am open to correction..

thanks for your reply , the keeper is not joining us now. however the ajfl have now said 2 players who have played on anglesey for 3 years one of them my son are now not allowed to join the team i have formed that they can play on the island but only at menai bridge! please someone tell me this cant be true all the boys want is to play and we have signed 8 players who didnt have clubs , so we have strived to create opportunities.there has to be a welfare /legal issue here as we were never told 3 years ago when he went to menai b that there was a ruling ,we have sent in regisration forms with address every year, thanks in advance for help.

sorry forgot to state that we live in bangor so how has my son and his team matw been allowed until now , it sounds like double standards to me .

how can i contact mpm16?

All the talk re the contract situation in Junior football is interesting, esp at this of the season.
The main problem seems to be the "less than honest" clubs and the fact that the retention clause means the player is out of contract but still tied to the club. This means no need to pay the player but still hold on to any transfer fee.
If a player has come to the end of his contract the club will not offer to renew but use the retention clause to "hold" the player until pre season. At the pre season stage they have maximum leverage as they can choose to pay what they like (often lower than previous) as it is very late for a player to seek a new club.
This use of the retention must be illegal as it certainly restricts a players ability to seek employment with another club.
There is mention in the other posts of a time period after the contract expiry which the club has to meet - is this the case?
Presumably if not met the player would be completely free of the club and then be in a position to negotiate his future with another club