The International Scholar

View Original

Analysis | Bend it like Brexit: Football and European Identity

Raj Dhage

Brexit’s disruption of pan-European football will have implications far beyond the pitch.

Moving to the Bernabéu in the summer of 2003, footballer David Beckham made an unprecedented move. After winning six near-consecutive English Premier League title-ships, four Royal Super Cups, three FA Trophies, and the only British based intercontinental treble in European history, Beckham — without a professional agent nor any precedent in the rigorous transfer market — left Manchester United and his eternal fans at Old Trafford for good. As a free agent, Beckham moved from one major club in Europe to another. By the end of his career, Real Madrid’s “Golden Englishman” would go on to play in four EU countries including the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, and France, with multiple caps for Paris Saint Germain and AC Milan.

As a citizen of both the U.K. and the EU, David Beckham’s whirlwind tour of European football was enabled by the EU’s Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which entitled him to free, non-discriminatory movement across Europe. With just a national identity card or passport, Beckham was able to stay in any EU member state for up to three months and was able to secure the right to permanent residence upon employment with Real Madrid C.F.

Under the same legislation, workers in other industries enjoy the exact same rights: An unemployed fisherman in Marseille can join a newly-started fish farm in Riga, a baker in Vienna can open up an Austrian-style bakery in Lisbon, a finance student born and raised in Athens can seek employment at a bank in Frankfurt, and before January 31, 2019, English footballers from Club Brugge could transfer to the likes of Manchester United, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, and many more.

After a massive overtime extension on London’s withdrawal process, the United Kingdom finally blew the whistle on its exit from the European Union on January 31, 2019. Following the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU on February 1, 2020, however, it’s unlikely that Britain will ever come to see another Beckham grace the Bernabéu — or any other European football team — in quite the same way, carrying implications far beyond the stadium.

Walking Off the Field
Despite the ratification of the withdrawal by both Brussels and London, the Brexit process drudges on. After the transition period of the next 11 months, the UK must leave the single market and customs union wholly and start a  new relationship with the EU altogether. For Britain and the connected economies to go unharmed, Downing St. must negotiate a complicated trade deal that obtains as much access as possible for its goods and services in the European Union’s market.

The crux of the problem lies in the fact that Britain and all twenty-seven member states of the EU must come to a consensus and ratify an agreement that covers all aspects of trans-European trade policies and standards. If the UK and the EU cannot come to a full agreement on all areas of policy by January 1, 2021, then the UK will force a no-deal Brexit. As a consequence, the U.K. would have to trade on World Trade Organization (WTO) terms with the EU — which would likely prove detrimental to the British economy and thoroughly harmful for the EU’s. A Brexit with a comprehensive trade agreement between the United Kingdom and the trading bloc, however, would allow for a smoother transition and likely dampen the blow to the British and European economies. The chances of the U.K. reaching such an agreement with the EU by the end of the year, however, are slim. Negotiations are expected to take 12-24 months.

Further narrowing these odds, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he would not sanction an extension even if were necessary, the European Parliament has already ruled out an extension to the transition period in previous legislation, and overturning the clause altogether is unforeseeable. Ideally, the ruling Tories would prefer to secure tariff-free access and a host of exceptions for Britain to form a completely new UK-EU Free Trade Agreement (EFTA) and continue a stable relationship with the common market, despite the hostile rhetoric coming out of London.

Wary that even the appearance of capitulation to the Brexiteers could set a dangerous precedent for other Euroskeptic movements and damage the integrity of the EU, however, the European Commission has been quick to emphasize that Britain is in no position to “cherry-pick” its future relationship — noting that a no-deal Brexit would affect the U.K. far more than the EU. The sum total of the perceived fouls from both sides of the English Channel has severely soured relations between Brussels and London over the last year. Striking the last volleyed attempt at cooperation, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has since disrupted vital policymaking meetings, diverted the attention of politicians and the press from the Brexit process, and further worn away trust between the EU and the British government.

Own Goals and Foul Plays
In the world of European football, Brexit is an own goal. The messiness of the negotiations over trade and future EU-UK political relations will have negative consequences for labor markets — particularly in the U.K. — whether for bankers, bakers, fishermen, or footballers. European footballers from beyond the British Isles will likely have to obtain a work permit to work in the Premier League and British teams will likely have to pay more to acquire footballers from the rest of Europe to cover a slew of new legal fees.

Worst of all, the Bosman ruling may no longer apply to British teams and players. This means that English players in Europe and European players in the UK who, previously, could leave a club on a free transfer after their contract ended (per the European Court of Justice ruling) will now have to pay an astronomical sum to cover the transfer fee, or else be subject to fee negotiations between corporate club boards. In effect, they would lose the autonomy to decide on their transfer futures.

The free transfer capability ruled in the Bosman case of 1995 allowed Manchester United to obtain – with little restriction – the likes of Eric Cantona from a club in France, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer from a club in Norway, and, of course, the one and only David Beckham on loan from a small youth club in the Netherlands.

All across Europe, a nascent collective European identity is forming, drawing together people (particularly younger generations) from a multitude of linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This is particularly significant, not only because racial and ethnic diversity forms the basis of Western democratic values and its consequent global influence, but more-so because diversity is quickly becoming Europe’s essential lifeblood. As native populations continue to decline, increasing societal diversity and welcoming more open immigration policies is the only way European countries can continue to thrive.

With changing demographics and shifting populations, Europe must address, head-on, its perennial challenge — the dichotomy between integration and identity. For both Britain and the rest of Europe, as the U.K.’s relation to and place within Europe are thrown into question, it is crucial to cultivate a greater European community and shared identity in the face of rising challenges from Russia, China, the United States, and other actors.

Lest it be forgetten, the European Union’s member states defined their place in the world today by challenging their own perceptions of identity and by championing joint projects like the European Single Market, the Euro, and the Schengen Area, and by striving to place principles of human rights and democracy at the fore of value-driven policy. At a time when the world is challenged by nationalism, xenophobia, and great power competition, protecting and promoting a shared European identity is a worthy goal unto itself.

A Hamstrung Economy
Yet time has been called on retracting Article 50, and Britain, once a star of the EU's roster, is leaving the team — most likely without a trade agreement.

A no-deal Brexit will probably pull Britain's footballing muscle. Players from EU countries would have to follow the protocol that players from beyond Europe face, applying for a convoluted work permit that “takes into account wages, transfer fee, and recent international appearance.” According to an analytical study by FiveThirtyEight, over half of all Premier League players that have entered the league since 1992 through the EU’s “freedom of movement” standards would not qualify for work permits at the time of their transfers. The lack of policy on independent immigration standards in Britain, combined with the inability of players to obtain work permits in the heat of professional footballing transfer negotiations, will leave both British players and clubs out of the lineup going forward.

Not only will a no-deal Brexit likely injure the U.K.’s football industry, but hamstring its economy. Analysts predict that over the next five years, the pound will devalue heavily after losing the bargaining power and industry access it retained as part of the European Single Market. With constraints on the pound, the purchasing power of clubs across the UK will shrink substantially. Financial experts estimate that the pound could devalue anywhere from 1.3% to 5% in relation to the top ten global currencies over the next month alone, awarding it the appellation of “worst-performing major currency of the day.” Although the economic dropkick might be a drop in the bank for top clubs like Manchester United and Chelsea, clubs on the brink of premiership like Sunderland and Derby County will be playing in countervailing financial winds, having lost the purchasing power they once had.

The most significant casualty of the hard Brexit campaign, however, affects the group that had the least say in the referendum: the youth. One of the Premier League’s major advantages over the past thirty years has been its youth academy and development of minor players into home-grown footballing prodigies. Under the UK's law on domestic footballing, twelve out of twenty-five players on a British club team must be British. Access to the EU market has allowed the Premier League to scout players from a young age across Europe, bring their families with them thanks to the freedom of movement, and enroll them directly into youth football academies, turning them into “homegrown” players.

With this freedom gone, however, clubs will not be able to relocate players and families as easily, forcing British clubs to navigate through national and European policies on minor recruitment and sports and deal directly with legal issues pertaining to children and relocation. Youth programs have allowed Premier League clubs to develop strong players and rosters without having to pay the enormous fees associated with transfers. The drought that UK-based youth programs will face now that Britain is leaving the Schengen Area will have enormous financial repercussions for Premier League teams and, sadly, will force EU-based youth players to look elsewhere for scouting and employment where constraints are fewer.

A Long Shot from Midfield
In 2001, Beckham scored on a free-kick 40 yards out from the goal at the bare end of injury time, saving England from disqualification from the World Cup and instantly making him a household name throughout Britain. To save British football, an equally herculean feat is required of London now.

London, like the English squad in 2001, has spent its overtime. There are a precious few seconds left in injury time — a fitting name, as the U.K. reels from economic shocks from Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic. Now is the time for heroes of the policymaking pitch to wrestle up a miracle play to save British football, and in so doing, salvage a piece of Britain's prestige and European identity.

This miracle play is a long shot, third option, which would allow professional footballers and clubs to operate under a ‘business as usual’ framework — independent of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Through a special exemption, European football would face no hurdles going forward, operating wholly under UEFA laws, already cover the game’s most important rules and regulations, outlining standards for everything from general governance, to workers’ rights, to revenues and the payment of levies. As a pre-existing administrative body, UEFA already covers the same things that EU and UK regulations for professional football do, and at present, serves merely as overlap.

This play, for which the Premier League and Europe’s top five leagues strongly advocate, would be an enormous “win-win” for both the UK and the rest of Europe. In essence, remaining within the UEFA framework would preserve the football industry's freedom of movement, legal and labor regulations, and financial system — only changing who serves as the oversight body. Teams would be able to leverage the infrastructure they already have in place to thrive in a competitive marketplace.

What’s more, an increasingly popular trend in football — loaning — would also be legally secure under a UEFA third option. When a club has a strong full squad and bench, it often sends several of its extra high-demand players to compete on other teams and leagues for a couple of seasons, earning revenue for the club back home and accolades for the receiving team without risking their official transfer. Players like Phillipe Coutinho, for example, who is under contract for FC Barcelona in Spain, is playing for Bayern München in Germany for the next few seasons. With a UEFA third option heading into next year, British clubs could freely send out contracted players to wealthy clubs across Europe without having to face goods and services tariffs, legality issues over residency, or immigration applications and setbacks.

Consequently, it is in the best interest of clubs, players, leagues, agents, and the footballing world alike across Europe and the UK to create a common and secure policy for keeping football regulations out of the realm of Brexit. But more importantly, a UEFA deal would also help to keep the blanket over the incredibly valuable development of collective European unity and common identity, which has developed over the better part of 70 years, prevented the continent from reliving historical conflicts, and served to give Europe common purpose. A goal so paramount, it lies at the core of the EU’s founding principles. More than bringing the football lobby and national governments together in agreement, it is of the utmost importance to preserve one of Europe's most celebrated pastimes. What is more in keeping with the purpose of European unity than citizens continent-wide competing in peace and in celebration of the beautiful game?

Setting Up the Play
For football across Europe to be secure under UEFA’s jurisdiction, however, a vast array of policy decisions and intricate details need to be agreed upon by the U.K.’s and the EU's 27 member state governments.

Firstly, all governments involved would have to come to a consensus and vote in favor of legislation allowing professional footballers who play at the European level to be granted special UEFA-approved work permits, which would allow them to work freely across Europe and the U.K. as they have over the past decade. As UEFA-certified European football employees, players would then be able to move freely under article 45 of the TFEU from teams in the U.K. to those in Europe and vice-versa, under special professional footballing provisions.

At the macro level, European football clubs that buy players from across Europe and play in regional and Europe-wide tournaments would also have to be granted special UEFA licenses to operate outside of the Brexit process, at least temporarily, while the details are agreed upon and sent to national governments for ratification. A policy where the UEFA body is allowed to handle more bureaucratic needs on transfers and labor issues would allow the football industry bridging the mainland and the British Isles to remain in-tact, without the threat of club devaluation or restricting players’ career options. It also ensures that footballers and clubs in the EU and the U.K. do not face unnecessary legal penalties.

Despite the obvious benefits to both the EU and British economies, this “special exemption” is still a long shot. The EU and the UK cannot simply give football special market access and separate laws without other European industries lobbying for the same latitude. Despite the possibility of achieving pan-European football continuity after Brexit, marking exemptions outside of the EU and U.K.’s normal scope of labor, legal, and financial operations may simply be too big a swing to ask for. Nevertheless, without it, Britain will lose yet another piece of its European identity, and the invaluable people-to-people ties built across the English Channel will fade a little further.

Raj Dhage

Staff Contributor

LinkedIn

Edited by: Cameron Vaské, Liam Kraft

All views expressed in this article are solely those of the author, and do not represent the views of The International Scholar or any other organization.

Photo Credits (photos reused and modified):