Lwould have Koscielny is a fairly dignified footballer, who had been criticized for admitting his suffering to see his teammates of the French team become world champions without him, seriously injured in 2018. A simple admission of humanity, however, of the share of an irreproachable player during Euro 2016, completed on a lost final.
It was again a protest of humanity that he issued saying: "We are not goods! "Lamenting that" hearing about "good value" players being "good business" is unacceptable. " In fact, footballers are human beings. Can they also be goods?
Page Contents
Speculative values
“The players are slaves. " These words caused a scandal in 1963, because there was no question of complaining about footballers. But by pronouncing them, Raymond Kopa had launched the movement towards the establishment of the time contract (1972), ending a status which enslaved them to their employer.
A quarter of a century later, Bosman (1995) freed them a little more, in the name of the free movement of workers in the European Union. However, this conquest would not only transform them into workers – almost – like the others, but also place them on an internationalized market.
The freedom gained was not evenly distributed, it especially benefited the best of them, in terms of mobility and remuneration. Its counterpart was the speculation which they began to be the subject: because, if they are not strictly speaking goods, they became speculative values, "assets" named as such in the accounts of the clubs.
Loaned in number by clubs with a large portfolio of players, currency in certain transfers, sold more and more young, vectors of capital gains for clubs specializing in "player trading", oil from countries trainers like France: these workers are not just labor, they are traded.
General deflation
This trade has even become a significant part of sports information, a spectacle in the spectacle with the topicality of the transfer window – which implies in particular to discuss what "worth" such a player, this value being constantly estimated by specialized organizations.
Sports economists rightly object that these amounts denote the value of the contract and not that of the player, or that the compensation concerns only a minority of transfers. But they are modesty of language if they serve to deny what the liberalized transfer market has made of footballers.
It is certainly derogatory to say that they can be of a " good value for money " and constitute of " good deals ". But if such terms are used, it is precisely because the current crisis is affecting prices. PSG is negotiating downward the release clause (70 million euros) of striker Mauro Icardi with Inter Milan.
"Transfers to 100 million, it's over", proclaimed the Spanish daily Marca, 1er April. This remains to be confirmed, but they are very likely to experience strong deflation. KPMG has already estimated it between 17.7% and 26.5% for ten European leagues. Salaries, the main burden for clubs, are also expected to fall.
Voices in Chapter
This prospect was sometimes greeted by vindictive comments against the overpaid mercenary footballer. It is to wish to punish him – he, one of the few workers who capture most of the wealth he generates – with a system from which he benefits, but does not bear responsibility.
The crisis threatens the balance of an entire economic system largely based on transfers. It should not be overlooked that it will punish the worst-off players, clubs and championships more harshly.
Laurent Koscielny’s remarks are part of an approach by the professional players' union, the UNFP, which regrets their dismissal of discussions on the future of French football. Citing the efforts made on their wages as a token of their awareness of the difficulties, they want to have a say.
Footballers are right to take part in the reflection on "football after", which cannot be satisfied with a rescue plan. But they must be aware that any "revolution" – regulation of transfers, the salary cap ("salary cap"), the nationality quota, for example – will force them to give up certain freedoms.
In short, it is probably up to them, at the cost of a few sacrifices, to prove that they are actors rather than goods.
