Chelsea and the Loan Market – Is it right for football?

In 2009, UEFA introduced Financial Fair Play (FFP) – rules designed not only to limit the expenditure of football clubs from exercising their financial muscle and gaining an unfair advantage over their less, cash-rich clubs, but also to stop clubs falling into debt that becomes unmanageable and ultimately unsustainable. The perfect case in point is Leeds United, who plummeted from competing in the Champions League to League One in the space of a few seasons. The famous club spent far more than it earned to maximise on their over-achievement, but to devastating consequences. They continue to pay the price till this day.

The intentions of FFP seem fair and justifiable – do not spend more than you earn, otherwise you will be punished. These punishments range from fines, which UEFA has already handed out to Manchester City, to expulsion from UEFA competition.

Mike Jakeman’s detailed article on Chelsea’s use of the loan market details how the West London club have exploited the loan system to recoup huge financial expenditures. Romelu Lukaku and Kevin de Bruyne are two of the most high-profile examples. Both players were bought at a young age, loaned out to get first team football, all the while elevating their transfer values before being sold for a healthy profit. Thibaut Courtois impressed so much so at Athletico Madrid, he bucked the trend and has since displaced veteran Petr Cech in goal.

It must be stated that Chelsea are doing nothing illegal here. They are simply taking advantage of a system that is already in place. But is this right for football? This recent Bleacher Report outlines how Chelsea has a staggering 26 players out on loan. 26 players plying their trade in Europe’s top leagues – all on one club’s books.

Just because something is legal, it doesn’t exactly translate to what is morally right. This is not merely an attempt to attack one individual club, but Chelsea are by far the biggest culprits of this latest trend. Why does one club need an entire separate squad out on loan? This allows them tremendous power and influence over the outcome of other leagues – even their own.

Lets take Lukaku as an example. He was banned from playing against his parent club Chelsea for Everton in the 2013/14 season, as English Premier League rules stipulate a loanee cannot play against his parent club. Everton brought in Lukaku in that season and built their entire attack around him. Removing him from the team sheet twice against Chelsea weakened them, but strengthened the Merseysiders against Chelsea’s rivals. Perhaps Everton have an amount of blame in building their attack around a loanee, but the system clearly manipulates other results in one clubs favour.

It would seem common sense to introduce rules at FIFA level to cap the amount of loanees one club can send out (but don’t hold your breath on that one). No club should be allowed to warehouse footballers to this degree. If a player is deemed not suitable for the first team, then they deserve to be playing at a club that will foster their talent and reap the rewards that come with that – either as a star performer or to be sold for a profit.

There is no denying that in the process of developing younger footballers, a loan spell is a tremendous opportunity to improve their trade. But when seasoned international players such as Fernando Torres, Marko Marin and Victor Moses are continually sent on loan, it exposes a system that rewards only the wealthiest clubs who are able to stock and sell footballers as though they were cattle. It may meet the “Financial” requirement of FFP, but surely it is not fair play.

Google+