Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 8:08:30 GMT
No, that is incorrect. The analysis was done by The Guardian (not the BBC, as I originally thought -but most def. not the work of 'Remain') . Both Remain and Brexit have picked it up and attempted to use it. But it is an independent piece of analysis, not a 'scare story', even if some have chosen to try to twist it to that effect. This is what the current rules, introduced this season, require from non-EU players to qualifty for a work permit: * footballers for national associations ranked between 1 and 10 of the FIFA Aggregated World Rankings to have played at least 30% of competitive international matches (FIFA World Cup finals, FIFA World Cup qualifying groups, FIFA Confederations Cup, and continental cup qualifiers and finals (e.g. UEFA European Championships and qualifiers) in the 24 months (or 12 months for players under 21) before the transfer; * footballers for national associations ranked 11-20 of the FIFA Aggregated World Rankings to have played at least 45% of games; * footballers for ational Associations ranked 21-30 to have played at least 60%; * and footballers for national associations ranked 31-50 to have played at least 75%. Players that meet these criteria are automatically granted a work permit. The Guardian research shows that as of 11/9/15, only 50 out of the 161 European footballers playing in the Premier League met these criteria. So it is not a 'scare' story. If Britain left the EU, 111 of the 161 European footballers in the Prem League would not qualiy for a work permit. Fact, not propaganda. No, this is a quote from Politicshome website 'The pro-EU campaign warns that two-thirds of European footballers playing in England “might be forced to leave” in the case of a Brexit. Baroness Brady, a Conservative peer and member of Britain Stronger in Europe, has written to the chairs of all professional football clubs in England, Scotland and Wales urging them to speak out in favour of EU membership.' She asked them to tweet their fans saying what effect Brexit 'could' have on their team. More scare tactics, and like all the others, roaming phone charges rising, plane fares rising, will be 100% false. ____________________________________________ There's no point in arguing about it, Mrs D. If it's on the politicshome website, I can assure you that they have lifted it from the analysis which the Guardian ran seven months ago! If you don't believe me - and clearly you do not - here is a link to the original Guardian piece. Note the date: IT RAN IN SPETEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE REFERENDUM HAD BEEN CALLED AND BEFORE THE CAMPAIGN TEAMS WERE FORMED. www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/11/brexit-europe-eu-decimate-premier-league-footballers-dataRead what it says: "As of 11 September only 50 out of the 161 European footballers in the Premier League met the criteria" - so 111 European footballers playing in the Premier League would not get a work permit after a Brexit vote because they would not meet the qualification rules which I have listed above and which will apply to European players if Britain is no longer a member of the EU. "More scare tactics, and like all the others... 100% false", you say. Well, you can twist it and deny it all you like. But it's verifiable, factual research and has been known since last September when the Guardian did the independent analysis. Hardly surprising that Baroness Brady has picked up on it and is concerned; she's vice chairman of West Ham United, who will lose several players if there is a Brexit vote!!!
|
|
|
Post by moderator1 on Apr 1, 2016 8:12:50 GMT
Good debate and long may it continue, but as I suspected, it has veered away from cricket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 8:17:50 GMT
Well it impacts on all sports and relates directly to the position of an Irish passport holder and a Portuguese passport holder on the Sussex playing staff so I don't see it is 'off-topic' at all.
It will also end the Kolpak loophole which the ECB has been trying to find a way of evading ever since it was opened up by the European Court of Justice in 2003.
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Apr 1, 2016 9:56:49 GMT
Moderator, only to the point that they are trying to make the EU debate about who can play what sport and where in the UK should we leave.
My point is that it is all a nonsense, as a sovereign nation we get to set the immigration rules and if we want to leave them exactly as they are as relates to sportsmen and women we can, and if as a country we feel it is in our best interact to limit the quantity and quality of those coming here, we can.
|
|
|
Post by deepfineleg on Apr 2, 2016 10:13:47 GMT
'Leave' does include a wide range of possibilities. At one end joining the EEA, like Norway, would not affect free movement of EU citizens. The rules BM quoted would apply if we broke all links with the EU.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2016 14:34:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jun 25, 2016 8:35:29 GMT
Now we can wipe the word Kolpak, and all its baffling meanings and variations, from the face of the planet. We can dictate our own overseas rule without loopholes and made up of truthful facts that have to be adhered to.
My personal preference, two overseas players maximum in all competitions of any experience, age or country. Absolutely no international experience in the last five years, or whatever, necessary.
Simple, clean and true.
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jun 25, 2016 8:38:48 GMT
Now we can wipe the word Kolpak, and all its baffling meanings and variations, from the face of the planet. We can dictate our own overseas rule without loopholes and made up of truthful facts that have to be adhered to. My personal preference, two overseas players maximum in all competitions of any experience, age or country. Absolutely no international experience in the last five years, or whatever, necessary. Simple, clean and true. I suspect the Brexit vote presents us with slightly more important implications than the employment of cricketers!
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jun 25, 2016 9:08:22 GMT
Now we can wipe the word Kolpak, and all its baffling meanings and variations, from the face of the planet. We can dictate our own overseas rule without loopholes and made up of truthful facts that have to be adhered to. My personal preference, two overseas players maximum in all competitions of any experience, age or country. Absolutely no international experience in the last five years, or whatever, necessary. Simple, clean and true. I suspect the Brexit vote presents us with slightly more important implications than the employment of cricketers! Not for the cricket fraternity. Hopefully there will be more than one person leading the changes across all aspects of life.
|
|