Who agrees that english teams should have to contain at least 5 english players?

Question

Why do we allow teams like arsenal to make a mockery of english football by fielding a mixed french/african team with no english players.

Answer 1

well lets look at the evidence:
who won the world cup ?
what league only allows 3 foreigners per team ?
why are England training other internationals to beat them in world football ?
i'm not english but i find that "shot in the foot" is not an unconnected phrase.

ARSEnil would be fcUKed.

Answer 2

I don't think there are any laws to forbid it. It works in cricket where teams can only play two overseas players. Though the scheme doesn't seem to help the quality of the England team in that case.The Bosman thing was all about a player being able to move without a fee at the end of his contract.

One positive would be to give opportunities for the development of English players. Another would be that teams like Man Utd and Chelsea would find it harder to buy success.

A negative would be the quality of the premiership might fall where insufficient quality players who were English could be found.

Answer 3

Not just English teams, it was at one time in the rules layed down by UEFA and I still think it would be benefitial to each team wherever they're from. I think all national teams have suffered in the UK in the past 10 years or so.
Don't give me how wonderful the England team is, I admit it's a great looking squad on paper with strength in depth, but it's full of bigheaded twats that believe the tabliod press that pumps them up to being godlike.
The point I'm making is the british national teams haven't done well in any tournaments IF they actually qualify. I believe that stems from teams buying in foriegn tallent depriving the home grown players from getting first team football.

I agree strongly

Answer 4

Isn't it funny after the week we've just had with Big Brother that racism still exists in football. Not allowing foreign players play in the p'ship is basic discrimination aganst different races pure & simple. If somebody is good enough to play for a team he should play for them, regardless of the country on his passport. It's the same with any job.

Funny also the way Arsenal is considered to make a mockery of English football yet, unlike Chelsea, Man Utd, etc. they are 100% owned & run by an Englisman.

Kick racism out of football I say.

Answer 5

not a bad idea. however look at man utd, top of the league and with ferdinand, neville, scholes, carrick, rooney playing every game. also look at chelsea without john terry and joe cole, they look like a different team. I think most teams/managers would like a team built around english players however because of this english players are very expensive and some teams just can't afford them.

I think a minimum of 2 english players is about right as any more would mean poorer teams having to field lesser (english) players and the premiership would suffer as a result.

Answer 6

I'm stuck in between here. I think Arsenal are right to play the best players instead of passports but I feel as they're based in England they should have at least 5 English players in the team.

Answer 7

Unfortunately football has become a BIG business! People put a lot of £££s in football and they look for heavy returns! they don't care who brings in the quids, black Yellow, red, white etc.
Please consider the problem of money first before the pride and national identity associated with football. Under Normal circumstances all English teams should have exclusively English player BUT MONEY IS SWEETER

Answer 8

Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal
Arsenal 2 -1 Man Utd

who needs English players when we smash you all the time? MUG

Answer 9

No. You should win your place in a team based on your footballing ability, not your nationality. If English players were good enough they'd get in, simple as that.

Answer 10

Justin Hoyt was the first English player to score for Arsenal in a looong time

but i agree