MARTIN SAMUEL: Strike a deal with a kid? Don't make me laugh...

14 September 2009 02:05
The contract that binds Jeremy Helan to Rennes was signed at the age of 13. European Union employment law is not my speciality, but 13-year-olds I know. I've got one. He has moments of little adulthood and moments of big childhood. We now take the same size trainers and he reads Catch-22 on holiday, but our guy also got into several heated arguments with his brothers about Pokemon and is paid pocket money. That is life at 13. And this is the age at which football administrators wish to make a player contractually responsible to an employer; the same men who talk glibly of child trafficking and slavery. Jeremy Helan Recurring theme: France's Jeremy Helan is the latest young foreign starlet to come under the FIFA spotlight Rennes believe they have a case against Manchester City for taking Helan and it will hinge on the signature of a 13-year-old, as if there is such a thing. Schoolboys do not have real signatures because they are not usually given binding documents to authorise. Signatures are for people with self-determined career paths. They are called adults. That is why EU law does not recognise any contract of employment signed before the age of 16. The sooner football resolves these complexities with hard and fast legislation the better, for the issue of youth transfers is getting out of hand. Foolish precedents may be set before the dust settles. The news that ASPTT Marseille, who are not even a professional club, will no longer claim against Chelsea over Jeremy Boga, 11, should come as no surprise to readers of this column, but that such a move could even be contemplated shows how ludicrous the debate has become. Clearly there is no benefit in all the best players being centred at a handful of elite clubs, but equally it is hard to support the idea that a substantial commercial enterprise should seek to protect its interests with the financial ownership of a child. In principle, the first contract of any player should be with the professional organisation that has nurtured his talent and, if it is not, there should be a statutory sliding scale of compensation to repay the club for its time and investment. Yet this could be proven simply by registration documents and playing records, not formal contracts. Arsene Wenger, the Arsenal manager, was right. Steering players away from the big clubs by law could instead drive them into the hands of agents and businessmen who will pay parents good money for a cut of any future fee. FIFA rules do not forbid third-party ownership, so there would be nothing to stop a private company moving in and then hawking a player to the highest bidder, as happens in Africa and South America. Wenger drew comparison with the parents of a gifted young musician who will naturally try to place him at the best music school. The difference is music schools have no need to create the competition which is essential for sport. This would not be served if every good young player was enrolled with the same band of rich clubs and is why a formal system of compensation is necessary. Not even Chelsea could afford to spend limitlessly on teenage prodigies, so the cream would rise to the top, but some very good players would be spread throughout the leagues. And nobody would need to put the thumbscrews on a 13-year-old to secure a signature, because that is nearer playground bullying than fair play.

Source: Daily_Mail