By Andrew Warshaw in Barcelona
March 4 – European clubs paid agents a staggering $254 million in international transfer fees over the past two years, representing 14.6% of all deals involving contracted players. That was by far the most eye-catching finding of a wide-ranging independent analysis commissioned by the European Club Association and presented at their annual assembly today.
The main point of the detailed study, which covered 2011-13, was to show that the current transfer system, despite mounting criticism by the international players union FIFPro and others, in the main works perfectly well and that, in any case, a vast majority of player deals – 73% in fact – were out-of-contract moves which did not attract a fee.
ECA general secretary Michele Centenaro said the report, which focussed on freedom of movement and redistribution of funds, was a “factual response to often-heard non-objective opinions.”
FIFPro, for instance, has described the transfer system as “illegal” and wants the European Court of Justice to back its case.
But AC Milan’s Umberto Gandini, ECA vice-chairman, hit back hard. “We saw another study a few months ago and felt it was a little imprecise so we decided to explain from inside the industry,” he said. “What we have found out is that the transfer system is working for the purposes it was established regardless of the views of FIFPro.”
“Most of the movements are out of contract which shows the Bosman ruling has been applied and that there is no restriction of movement on players. We don’t see a reason why, with a dialogue in place, FIFPro has to go to court every time there is something they don’t like.”
Yet ECA officials admit the current system is not perfect, notably that agents were earning far too much.
While the figure of 14.6% showed that agents’ commissions needed to be “reviewed urgently”, said the ECA, the real figure is, in all probability, even higher when the amounts paid by players, as distinct from clubs, is taken into account.
Ivan Gazidis, CEO of Arsenal, conceded that clubs bore some responsibility but said the players needed to consider how much they, too, were handing over to agents.
“Clearly there’s a lot of money going to agents in these transactions and we, as clubs, are part of the problem because we are willing to pay,” Gazidis said.
“Most clubs will spend to their limit but …if I were a player or players union, that would be a really substantial concern to me because it would tell me that my clients as a union, and me as a player, are losing money. Players should be making more money and some of the monies going to agents should be going to players.
“More insidious than the amount of the fee, however, is the conflict of interest that often exists in these transactions when it comes to agents. The governance of agents is something clubs and players should be concerned about.”
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1734870213labto1734870213ofdlr1734870213owedi1734870213sni@w1734870213ahsra1734870213w.wer1734870213dna1734870213