Thursday, 7 November 2019

The Tap Room - Foreign Players In The TPL: 2014

The Tap Room was a popular feature on my old website. Each week, I would invite five fans to share their views on a topic that was dominating the news. Here is our discussion on foreign player quotas, from July, 2014:

What do you think the rules should be regarding foreign players in the TPL?


Reply #1: Monday
Name: Tommie Duncan
Team supported: Singhtarua
Twitter: @TJRDBKK

When I first started supporting Port in the ’11 season the quota was 5 foreigners per side. Now we are 3 + 1 and it looks like we might be headed for yet another change that will reduce the quota even more.

The excuse given for decreasing the number of foreign players is that they take away opportunities for and hinder the development of Thai players. I disagree with this stance. In fact I will go as far as saying it is “bassackwards.”

No one ever gets better competing against others of their own or lesser ability. Having to compete with better players forces local players to raise their game; that is if they want playing time. It is also an opportunity to learn from more experienced players who have trained in different systems and played in different leagues.

As far as development is concerned instead of restricting the number of foreigners even more, wouldn’t it be better to require teams to carry and play a certain number of Thai U19s, U22s, etc? This quota could be increased for the 1st Div and Regional Leagues. Combine this with a return to a foreign quota of 5 a side and I think you would see better play and better development of local players.

Interestingly enough as the foreign quota has decreased the play of the national team has worsened as has TPL team’s performance in the Asian Champion’s League.

From a fan’s standpoint I thought the quality of play was a better when 5 a side were allowed. Each year subsequent has seen an overall drop in quality. Mind you, I did not say quality of competition, rather quality of play.

The 5 foreigner rule was also a bit of an equalizer as the top Thai players want to play for certain teams and the lower echelon teams are left struggling.

Sadly I think the jury is no longer out and we will see fewer foreign players and in turn see slower development of Thai players and a very slow increase in quality of play if any at all.



Reply #2: Tuesday
Name: Vinnie
Team supported: Nakhon Ratchasima FC
Twitter: @swatcat_fc
Website: www.clubwebsite.co.uk/koratfc

I was already quite familiar with Tommie's views on the foreign player quota, and I can't deny he makes some valid points, but I'm still not entirely won over. I think the assertion that the national team may have gone backwards because we now have, in most cases, four foreigners in a team instead of five is purely speculative. It's also worth pointing out that in England there is near unanimous agreement that an excess of foreign players has had a deleterious effect on the home grown product and the fortunes of the National Team. However, I would have no great opposition to returning to five foreigners per side, or at least 4+1.

There are some situations whereby foreign players keep certain Thai players sitting on the sidelines – particularly in the attacking department where almost every team goes for a foreign forward line these days. And I can give a specific example in the case of our own Prompong Kransumrong: a striker whom I know to be good enough for League 1 and who has proven he is good enough for League 1 in the past two seasons, and yet now finds himself at least third in the pecking order behind recently acquired foreign strikers Ivan Boskovic and Lee Tuck.

That said, I have always had the feeling that there's a touch of 'blame the foreigner' when the TPL starts considering a reduction in numbers. It's lazy, simple reasoning when trying to explain away the paucity of Thai talent when there are surely far more significant reasons. The complete lack of a proper youth system at the overwhelming majority of clubs is a pretty big elephant in the room to begin with (and by 'proper youth system' I don't mean a shiny 'academy' with a few age group teams; I mean a full set of age group teams, both sexes, age 7-18, and a province-wide community coaching scheme that can tease out any talented kid, rich or poor, that happens to live in the province of any given club). And, to steal a theory from @wellywolf, the number of foreign players playing in Thailand isn't necessarily a problem, but the lack of Thais playing abroad – compared with the numbers who did so in the past – could be harmful to the development of Thai players and by extension the performance of the National Team.

But I realise I'm slightly drifting off topic here. Basically, I don't think it will make any significant difference to the ability and prospects of Thai players if we have 7,6,5,4 or 3 foreigners. I would suggest that 4 or 5 is about right, but that there are far greater reasons as to why Thai players aren't developing into the players they could be.


 Reply #3: Wednesday
Name: Matt
Team supported: disillusioned former Muang Thong Utd fan, now a floating voter
Twitter: @fcsuphanburi
Facebook: Suphanburi FC English

The reduction of foreign players to help the development of local talent makes sense but, like Thai football's move from AFC competition to the Champions League, it is a process started too early in their development and moved along too quickly.

The quality of foreign players has increased greatly over recent seasons, but the ineptitude of the FAT has meant that the nose-diving national team would have happened whichever way they jumped in relation to foreign players.

It is very difficult to suppress a chuckle when the increasing restriction of foreign players in Thai football (that continues next season) is justified as a way to be the same as the J and K Leagues. The similarities between those two and the TPL ends with the shape of the ball.  The development of Thai football is five years away (at least) from denying a talented foreigner entry due to a highly talented local. Until Thai football takes a long hard look in the mirror and admits its imperfections, the delusion of progress by increasingly strict foreign quotas will make an enemy of the future.



Reply #4: Thursday
Name: Kevin
Team supported: Singh Tarua
Twitter: @wellywolf
Website: www.thaileaguefootball.com

I agree that the foreign quota is coming down for the wrong reasons. As Matt points out, following the AFC rules simply to mimic the J-League & K-League is ridiculous. They aren't where they are now because of their import quotas, but because of long-term planning and youth development. A reduction of the quota will come with maturity, and steady production of local talent. Secondly, while Thai teams in AFC club competitions have to comply with the 3+1 rule, leaving out foreigners due to quota restrictions is nothing new to clubs like Buriram, Muang Thong & Bangkok Glass, who've regularly had more than the 7 or 5 foreigners allowed under TPL rules on their books in the last few seasons. These bigger, richer clubs also seem to stockpile enough big-name Thai talent to cover any gaps that need plugging in the ACL.

I also agree that the number of foreigners in the league is not the reason the national team has performed poorly in recent years. The TPL boom has seen players paid large salaries at their clubs, leading perhaps to less importance attached to playing for their country, than in the past - a problem not unique to Thailand.

Additionally, I'd use that word again - planning - as part of the problem. The constant changing of coaches, as well as the back-stabbing & politicking that's gone on when a foreign coach hasn't meekly accepted his role as window-dressing, has had an impact (and also applies to some clubs). Winfried Schaefer proposed a decade-long plan to develop Thai football, but only lasted a couple of years. FAT President candidate Pinit Ngampring also proposed a long-term development plan. Both plans have disappeared, as their proponents fell by the wayside. In contrast, no long-term plan has been announced by Worawi Makudi, despite multiple terms in the driving seat of the national game.

But back to the main issue - I think a maximum of 5 foreigners on the pitch at one time is acceptable; as the league matures, reductions could follow. I applaud the AFC's desire to enourage Asian clubs to look locally for talent (with the +1 rule), instead of spending exorbitant amounts on waning European or South American superstars, and am comfortable with the TPL following this. The proposed ASEAN spot in TPL rosters is also a good move, as long as some Thai players take the chance to move outside their comfort zones and play elsewhere in (Southeast) Asia. If it's all one-way traffic into Thai leagues, then from a Thai perspective, it's pointless.

However, outside of the professional leagues (TPL & League 1), I'd like to see either a ban on foreign players, or a much smaller quota (1 or 2 players per squad) applied at in the Regional Leagues and lower. Many of these clubs struggle financially, and don't the need higher wage bill that foreign players usually bring. I've argued before that if a foreign player is only good enough to play in Thailand's 3rd tier, then his wages would be better spent on a young Thai prospect. Hopefully, this would free up funds for youth programmes & leagues, particularly in the provinces.

Another thing that could be considered is position and or age restrictions. The K-League doesn't allow foreign goalkeepers, for example. Of course, outfield positions would be harder to police than goalies. One can imagine clubs claiming they'd picked a Thai striker, and it was just coincidence that their foreign midfielder kept winding up on the end of crosses. Tommie's suggestion that squads include age-group players is a good one, and is one used in Australia, where 3 of a club's 23-man squad must be under 20 years old. Some of those players may not get game-time in the A-League, but at least there's a reserve/youth team league running concurrently -  something else Thailand needs to address.

I'm not sure I completely agree with Tommie's stance that more foreigners raises the standard of the league. In some cases, this certainly is true - local players can learn by observing a model professional's behaviour/and play, especially the number of local role-models like Terdsak Chaiman declining. However, signing players (both foreign & local) can be a bit of a gamble, and this isn't always the case. Raising or lowering the import quota won't change this, although you could argue more restrictions will force clubs to be more cautious in their signings.

In conclusion, I feel the foreign quota isn't a major issue, as long as it's not interfering with the development of local talent. Personally, I believe the FAT are a bigger hindrance in this area.


 Reply #5: Friday
Name: John Lees
Team supported: Chonburi FC
Website: www.clubwebsite.co.uk/chonburifc

I’d like the foreign quota per squad to be reduced from seven to five. However, the 3+1 rule should be scrapped and the five non-Thai players should be able to play at any given time. The maximum of five in the team ensures that the majority of players on the pitch will remain home grown while from my own entertainment standpoint, there are still enough foreigners on the field to keep it interesting. 

With the rule changes mentioned above it would stop this potty situation of having two foreign players, who are fit and ready to play, from sitting in the stand fiddling with their smart phones for 90 minutes. On the other hand, I was quite pleased when the hapless Jaime Braganca was viewing the match from a high vantage point rather than having him on the pitch trying out flicks and tricks to be included on his YouTube channel.
Similar to Tommie, it’s generally the foreign players that stand out for me. I’ve watched league sides that have fielded all Thai players and to me they are rather bland to watch.

The statistics in the top two divisions show that the leading goal scorers are coming from foreign shores. Only two of the top 19 in the TPL are Thai, with one of them recently departed for Spain while the other is currently injured. If I were to pick my all-star TPL XI, there wouldn’t be many Thais in it. By Hobson’s choice the keeper would have to be Thai. Theeratorn would certainly be my left back, but apart from him, who else? You could argue cases for Datsakorn or Jakkaphan (Buriram) and for sentimental reasons I’d be tempted to include our beloved Therdsak. But that’s about it though!!

One thing I have noticed since the cut back of 5 to the 3+1 is that less African players are featuring in the TPL. The majority of them seem to be plying their trade in the lower leagues while the top flight is bursting with Japanese, Koreans and Brazilians. I’m not saying one is better than the other. It’s just something I’ve noticed.

I do feel a bit selfish and guilty for my preference of foreign players but at the same time I’d like to see the Thai national side do well. The World Cup just gone showed how distinctly average the Japanese and Korean sides were compared to the big hitters. It’s a bit worrying that the current Thai national squad is miles behind either of this pair on or off the park. Nowadays the idea is to get the ball forward as quickly as possible using pacy counter attacks. The Asians sides are still predominately passing the ball sideways. There is a mountain to climb and Thailand are still stuck at the sea level base camp!!

As others have mentioned, the reasons for Thai football going backwards lies at the top of the pile rather than the grass roots. There is plenty of youthful talent here but it isn’t getting the chance to develop properly. As Vinnie mentioned ‘shiny academies’ are useless unless they have some proper structure while Kevin identified that there is plenty of scope for developing younger pros in the regional leagues. Unfortunately the self-absorbed ‘pu yais’ running the show are more concerned about enhancing their reputations and allegedly lining their pockets with a few extra dollars. I better stop there as this a debate for another topic.

Going back to the original point, I can accept and understand the 3+1 rule but I’m definitely in the ‘no’ camp when the calls are for reducing this number. Once the quality of the home talent improves, then a reduction in foreigners would be justified.


Reply: The Final Word: Saturday
Name: Tommie Duncan
Team supported: Singhtarua
Twitter: @TJRDBKK

First of all a big shout out to Dale for doing this. You are appreciated for all the time you put into the website. Keep it up. And thanks for the opportunity to post.

A lot of great responses this week. Can't say that I disagree with much that has been written.

Seems there are really two issues here, one being the development of local talent and the other being the quality of play.

It is interesting to me that most of the comments revolved around developing local talent as opposed to quality of play. The consensus seems to be that the foreign quota has little to do with that, rather FAT is to blame for the failure of the system or lack thereof. 

So that brings us to quality of play issue and I must say i like Kevin's idea of 5 a side and let them all play whenever. I agree, it is really silly to have highly paid players in the stands. And lowering the quota in the Regional league seems like a pretty solid idea.

I think we all want to see entertaining football that gets better as the years progress.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years as far as both are concerned. Given the track record of FAT during my time as a fan, it is hard to be optimistic.


No comments:

Post a Comment