Platini threatens Ribéry with Bundesliga ban

I really can't understand what a coach thinks to accomplish by calling up an unwilling player. As he has no contract with the NT, he is not obliged to give 100%, and you can be sure that he wouldn't do it, so you won't really win anything by calling up that player. (In club football it is different as there the player has a contract and gets paid for his service.)

and generally speaking why wouldn't it be within the basic rights of a professional football player to refuse to play for any national team?

Hapless_Hans wrote:and for the last time, why you keep going on about 'contracts'? what contract does Ribery have with the French National Team?

When you accept to come and play for the NT the first time, you agree to the rules of NT.... all of them.  When you play football period, your contract is bound by the rules of your club, your FA, UEFA and FIFA if you're in a European club.

I don't think you understand the legal basis of football.  It's a federal system.  FIFA is the top dog and its rules supersede any other rules.  Next come the regions like CONCACAF, UEFA, etc.  After that it's the FAs and then the clubs.  Every professional contract for a player state that you are subject to all the governing bodies' rules and regulations.

You are always subject to FIFA even if you aren't playing NT.  FIFA states that you MUST accept a NT callup or else you face a 3 game ban from any competition, club or NT.  That's just how it is.

yes but the FIFA statutes don't overrule CAS, or civil or criminal national or international law, or let's say the European court for human rights, lol.
That is, their rules are not actually 'LAWS'.
So I'm not sure YOU understand how a legal system works, because there is more than one legal system.

I guess there are a lot of rules and provisions in FIFA statutes that never have been contested in front of a proper court, because there was no need for it.
In this case, probably noone was ever stupid enough to actually INSIST a player has to play for his national team even though he doesn't want to, these cases were just resolved somehow between the parties.

We can make a bet right now, that whatever happens, Ribery will neither play for the NT again nor will he get banned for that.

I can see Ribéry skulking listlessly over the pitch during training when he is forced to show up with the French NT and that would benefit no one as the coach couldn't risk putting him into his team that way. So that threat by Platini will actually accomplish nothing whatsoever. I think he hasn't understood that Ribéry is an artist and fun player who can't perform if he hasn't fun playing.

eh.. forget the European court of human rights, as Switzerland is indeed not part of its jurisdiction..

CAS is the court of arbitration ffs.  DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS?  They're not a separate governing body.  They just interpret the rules that are applicable to the case they're listening to.  What could Ribery possibly dispute legally here?  The regulation is in black and white. They are bound to act within the rules/laws/regulations in effect... in this case FIFA.  So Ribery would have to prove one or several of the following:
1-  FIFA rule is not applicable to him.  
2-  The punishment is excessive and the law/rules doesn't require such punishment and, thus, it should be lessened for xyz reason.
3-  Another law/rule supersedes FIFA (for example EU regulations) so FIFA is not the top dog.

CAS has no authority to change rules/laws, only interpret them.

Ribery would be put in the stands.... he wouldn't be involved in the group. They'd just force him to come to make an example of him.

Anyhow, according to KHR, Ribery did call Deschamps and it's cleared up now. So it's all moot.

Very, very, very sloppy by Ribery. As usual, his lack of brain cells came back to haunt him.

exactly. You think no the FIFA statutes superseding laws can be found to argue that FIFA should not be able to punish players with a club ban who don't want to play for their NT?

What football statute is going to supersede FIFA ffs... that doesn't exist because they are the superseding governing body.  You can't say that the FIFA rule wasn't a good one in your opinion What could Ribery possibly argue?  You're just grasping at straws here dude.

But again, it's moot according KHR as Ribery called Deschamps finally.  

What a little coward he is btw.  How hard is it to call your NT coach, who went against public opinion to bring you back... and tell him you want to retire.

Why do you think he is a coward? You have no idea when exactly he called them as I would expect no one of these guys to be 100% honest, especially not a politician like Platini.

As for Ribéry - it took Bayern quite a while to understand how to handle Ribéry to get the best performances from him, but obviously the French NT never really cared. That guy simply isn't low maintenance, and if you aren't ready to invest a lot of time and pamper him, you will never have his top performances. He's a primadonna, and if you want him to play well, you have to live with his antics.

Because both Deschamps and LeGraet said they were never called weeks ago and Deschamps again when he announced the list for these friendlies... nothing to do with Platini saying it.  Platini has nothing to do if the FFF take no action (i.e. calling him up).  The sense is that Platini was warning Ribery because he got told by the FFF that they would call him if the process wasn't observed.  Better to warn the guy, have some banter and then move on...  the other method is to wait for FFF to call him up and then actually be forced to suspend Ribery per the rules.  This way is much better.  Gives the player a chance to rectify.

Also, Ribery was never a good enough player in terms of France NT.... he was below Zidane obviously and then Henry...  to get special treatment.  When Henry left, the whole 2010 WC fiasco happened led by Ribery among others.  After that, there was absolutely zero chance he was going to get treated like a star.  None.  He's lucky he got called back to NT after that tbh.  90% of people didn't want him back and probably 50% still don't like him.

That said, he was the key player in the WCQ and most recognize that.  So he was starting to grow on people.  But after this, he lost the goodwill he had built again lol.

http://rmcsport.bfmtv.com/football/luis-attaque-didier-deschamps-en-direct-167.html

Deschamps: "Ribery? I won't waste more time talking about this. I'm not going to respond to what he said. He made a decision. The most important is that he finds form again at Bayern which is not the case right now since he's injured. But Michel Platini is right: Every active player can be called to NT whether he likes it or not."

sportsczy wrote:What football statute is going to supersede FIFA ffs... that doesn't exist because they are the superseding governing body.  You can't say that the FIFA rule wasn't a good one in your opinion  What could Ribery possibly argue?  You're just grasping at straws here dude.

But again, it's moot according KHR as Ribery called Deschamps finally.  

What a little coward he is btw.  How hard is it to call your NT coach, who went against public opinion to bring you back... and tell him you want to retire.

Sports, I wasn't talking about football statutes.
I was talking that it surely can be argued that a FIFA statute that forces a professional football player to play for his NT under the threat of a league ban might probably violate some basic principles of labour LAWS. How can FIFA justify that statute in front of a court? I'm dying to know that.

And no, 'it's justified as a statute as we have decided it's a statute' does NOT suffice if it's challenged
And by that I mean, the statute itself would be challenged, not a decision based on the statute.


As for the coward thing.. you do sound a bit bitter..

I was surprised too that he quits before the Euros in France, but he might have his reasons you know.
His body might be one.

Arbitration courts are there to give an opinion on existing laws/statutes.  They have absolutely no power to change it, comment on its validity or come up with new ones.  Changing laws is not part of the powers of any judicial court.  They can only apply them.

Governing bodies are the only ones that can change laws/statutes.  So as i said, unless the FIFA rule is contrary to a EU or other superseding law, there is nothing Ribery or the CAS can do.

As far as Ribery, i just started being on his side about 2 years ago because i thought he had matured and would act like a proper representative of a NT. But he has proven me wrong again by being such a punk here... Deschamps is just stopping short of calling Ribery a liar. Wtf is wrong with this guy? He will never play for NT again. But knowing Deschamps, i can see him frakking with Ribery by calling him to a squad and then making him sit in the stands. Ribery would need to come too or he would get suspended for 3 official Bayern games.

sportsczy wrote:

Governing bodies are the only ones that can change laws/statutes.  So as i said, unless the FIFA rule is contrary to a EU or other superseding law, there is nothing Ribery or the CAS can do.

don't you think that might well be? Think about it, what grounds is there to consider it obligatory a professional football player MUST play for his NT, whether he wants or not.

These are people with rights, you know

if his NT team coach calls him up he should score a couple own goals.

let's make a hypothetical scenario - let's say the Spanish NT calls up an ardent Basque or Catalan nationalist player who doesn't want to represent Spain - don't you think a statute threatening professional consequences for his club career if he refuses to play national team football might violate fundamental personal freedom rights?

dude...  the law is the law.  If you want to change a law, you need to convince a politician to bring up your cause in the appropriate senate/house/whatever where you are allowed to change or create new legislature.  The courts, whether regular court or arbitration, have absolutely no power to change existing legislature.  They can only make decisions within the framework of the existing legislature.

This isn't that hard to understand.

If Ribery or others feel that this FIFA rule is wrong, they need to get someone at FIFA to take up their cause and try and change it.  Nobody else has the power to make such change since it doesn't run contrary to any superseding legislature.

This is a private entity where the clubs, NTs, players, administrators agree to abide by the rules/regulations of the governing entity(entities) in exchange for the privilege to participate in their competitions.  It's the same with any company out there too.  They can set any rule that they want to, whether you agree with it or not, as long as they're not breaking any superseding law.  When you sign a contract, accept membership, accept employment, etc., you are accepting that you are subject to these rules.  Simple.  No grey area...  it's all black and white here.

I don't think you're reading what I'm saying.

there's no infringement of personal freedoms or rights AT ALL.  He accepted to be subject to the rules and regulations of Bayern/Bundi/UEFA/FIFA by signing a contract and getting paid for his work.  One of the obligations of his employment is to play for NT when called...  it's when a company sends an employee on a task that he doesn't enjoy.  Well tough shat.  It's part of your employment contract.

If you don't like it, you can quit your employment.  Ribery can stop playing for teams that fall under the FIFA umbrella if he wants to.  There are some football associations out there that aren't members of FIFA...  not many though

Yes, but you know that there may be clauses in any contract you sign that may be violating superseding law, as you yourself say.
And then your employer can't just argue "well but you signed the contract, you HAVE to wear a dunce cap every monday at the office"...

So, let's be a bit more precise now.

Here are the relevant passages from the "REGULATIONS on the Status and Transfer of Players"

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/01/95/83/85/regulationsstatusandtransfer_2014_e_neutral.pdf

Annexe 1 \"Release of players to association teams", Article 1, Paragraph 1 wrote:Clubs are obliged to release their registered players to the representative teams of the country for which the player is eligible to play on the basis of his nationality if they are called up by the association concerned. Any agreement between a player and a club to the contrary is prohibited

(p.30)

Annexe 1, Art 3, Paragraph 1 wrote:As a general rule, every player registered with a club is obliged to respond affirmatively when called up by the association he is eligible to represent on the basis of his nationality to play for one of its representative teams.

(p.35)

Annxe 1, Art. 5 wrote: Restrictions on playing
A player who has been called up by his association for one of its representative teams is, unless otherwise agreed by the relevant association, not entitled to play for the club with which he is registered during the period for which he has
been released or should have been released pursuant to the provisions of this annexe. This restriction on playing for the club shall, moreover, be prolonged by five days in the event that the player, for whatsoever reason, did not wish to or
was unable to comply with the call-up

(p.36)

So first of all there's nothing about "3 games" ban, but a ban for the time of the call up plus five days. So what is Platini talking about.

Second, here's an article by a sports lawyer, in German only I'm afraid, arguing that:
http://www.lto.de/recht/hintergruende/h/ribery-platini-franzoesische-nationalmannschaft-sperre/


- Platini has nothing to do with this anyway as an enforcement would be down to FIFA at the request of FFF

- A case like Ribery is new as never before that regulation has been tested/applied to a player that does not WANT to play national team football (anymore).
So while FIFA does not specify exceptions for such cases, the formulation "as a general rule" players have to respond affirmatively suggest there may be exceptions, and it could well be argued a personal wish of a player to retire from the national team might be seen as one.

- third he argues that while the player has only a contract with the club, these contracts include direct or indirect inclusion of being subject to DFB/UEFA/FIFA statutes, as you rightly say. According to this, the release of the player to his national team legally is a "non-commercial hiring-out of employees".
However since a player obviously cannot challenge a single statute or regulation when having to sign the contract, so of course there might be a case when a certain regulation might have to be challenged in a specific cases later, since the argument "he signed it - if he didn't want it he shouldn't have signed it" omits that FIFA etc have effectively monopoly status on how a professional player can practise his profession.

LOL

and now I found the official FIFA 'commentary' to the above cited regulations.
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/51/56/07/transfer_commentary_06_en_1843.pdf

It says:

Annex 1, Art. 3 'Calling up players' wrote: Once a player has been called up to play for his national team, he basically has to comply with this summons. Should he wish not to be called up for a certain match or matches or for a certain period of time, he must inform the association of which he is a national, in writing, of his intention before being called up. Furthermore, only the player himself is entitled to renounce representing his national team.
This declaration shall be submitted by the player to the association concerned in writing

(p. 91)

So it says black and white a player himself can decide to not play for his NT if he wishes so. End of story.

So, let's remember what Platini said regarding this:

"If Deschamps calls him up, then he has to come to the national team,’’ Platini said. “That’s written in the Fifa statutes. If he doesn’t report for duty, then he would be banned for three matches for Bayern Munich.

“It is not the player’s decision whether he represents his country, it’s the decision of the coach. Ribéry cannot simply decide for himself whether he wants to play for France or not.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/sep/11/franck-ribery-france-michel-platini-pressure

What Platini said was factually wrong, completely unfounded, and most of all out of line.
The UEFA boss publicly threatening a player with a ban, in a matter that is none of his business, citing FIFA statutes that do not at all justify or back up his remarks?
I actually think he should apologize, or step down

what's also funny is that the 'sports lawyer' I cited apparently wrote a whole article on the matter for the 'Legal Tribune Online' without bothering to read the official FIFA commentary to the regulations lol.
I had to read the comments below to find it mentioned