Forget right or wrong - Will foreign quotas happen?

'But it is against the law', they say. European legislation has long been the trump card to the perennial debate over limiting foreign players. A Fifa congress will convene later this week to discuss quotas as Sepp Blatter, like a desperate exiting premier, attempts to secure his legacy. Forget right or wrong - could it actually happen?

Consensus states that the law is clear cut and impermeable. But it is anything but introvertable, and there could their be leaks in the legislative wall. There are concessions already. Football as with most sports is based on an alien concept to the rest of the working world - the transfer system. Players are bought and sold on the market as commodities rather than employees, and only at the end of a contract or in its final few years can a 'move' be guaranteed. This is an exception to the laws on freedom of movement guaranteed under the Maastricht Treaty.

The transfer window, which states that players can only move between clubs at a certain stage of the season, further exaggerates these discrepancies between European ideals and football's reality. In Scotland teams are required to have a designated number of young Scottish players in their match day squads - so that would be a quota system then (deciding who should be employed based on nationality rather than ability).

Whatsmore these exceptions are recognised in law. The latest EU constitution - the treaty of Belgium signed in December - guarantees for the first time the unique nature of sport, the 'specificity of sport', allowing exceptions in certain circumstances. But it is a map rather than a trodden path. These exceptions exist because they have no objectors, they are tolerated and yet to be thrown to the court house wolves.

But quotas in the domestic leagues is another matter. This time the Premier league, the clubs and the owners will stamp their feet and hire the most obscene lawyers to ensure their pursuit of global domination is not compromised by second rate nationals imposed upon them. This issue is no skirmish, it is the war they will not lose.

But as a Fifa official has suggested, along with compromising there are other avenues to be explored. They could also contest the bureaucrats of Brussels over European competition laws and create alliances with sports like basketball (who also rebel).

But as ever the fate of things lies delicately in the hands of the lawyers.

England in Europe - best and worst

"It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.”

England are the best in Europe. England are the worst in Europe. The pantheon of club competition, the European Cup, will soon be in the English hands (whether they are Ferdinand’s or Terry’s) and yet in a couple of months when Europe’s finest gather European Championships both will be barred. How can such a dichotomy exist? How can they

The truth of course is both representations are inaccurate, and should be treated as impostors. But how representative are the highest echelons – the filthy rich four – of the quality of the league in entirety?

Three out of four champions league semi finalists cannot be baulked at, but is the English premier league really the world’s premier league. The cooing of pundits and promotion of clubs searching for a billionaire to fall for would suggest so, and the scandal induced demise of the Italian league and struggles of Spain’s top clubs offers substance to the assertion. But the monopolising of the Champions League is not an expression of the omnipotence of the English clubs.

While the champion’s league confidently says yes, the UEFA cup screams no! The middle tier English clubs have been shown up by their continental counterparts. This season has brought new meaning to the anonymity of mid-table mediocrity - West
Ham have coasted to a top ten finish, a glitteringly average Newcastle side have won seven in a row and Bolton Wanderers have avoided relegation! Derby, Sunderland, Reading, Birmingham, Bolton, Fulham and so on - so many candidates only three vacancies. Has the relegation reaper ever had such choice?

Beyond the top four, beyond the mega bucks, beyond the foreign influence, the Premier league is no that premier. And when it comes to the top four how English are they anymore? Like any cheeseburger flogging multinational, the roots of their identity are increasingly submerged by their reliance on foreign investment, importation of skills and dedication to overseas markets. Admittedly a solid core of English internationals and faithful British fans give them a home-grown facade, where would Chelsea be if were not for Abramovich. Certainly not in the Champions League final. Had the band of billionaires chosen the economically less attractive Spanish and Italian leagues over England, would the monopolising top four be as domineering? No. Although Arsenal with Wenger and United with Ferguson would have had a chance. English European success is built on foreign cash, and so if it is English success, it is substantially diluted.

And so the national team is not the best in Europe, but nor is it the worst. Despite the furore about their doomed Euro 2008 campaign in terms of calibre of player available the 1990s were darker days. You only have to look at, yes, the Champions League. Scholes, Ferdinand, Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney etc - they have been among the main protagonists. Sure we could do with more top quality, a Ronaldo here, a Messi there, but England are not poor. But they have underachieved in the international arena. There will be no three lions renditions this summer, but in terms of player quality there have been darker – may be that is the real angst. There is talent, no matter how tarnished, and under Capello they should qualify for the World Cup and what happens then who knows.

But it is not a time for true despair – that should kept in reserve – nor is it the time for Premier League elation. The two impostors must be treated the same.