Football » English » Suggestions/Improvements

Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By shadowx - 15-04-2024 23:04

[FVMZ]

As I understand it, work permits for teams are defined by a regional system determined by the level of community activity in each country. This was established about a decade ago and even then it didn't make much sense and right now it makes even less sense. As a refresher, here are the three regions. I've bolded countries that in my opinion belong one region above (e.g. China definitely belongs in Region A): Region A: "These countries usually have a strong and active internal transfer market." Argentina, Brazil, Poland, Sweden, and Turkey. Region B: "These countries generally have an active internal transfer market, but there are times when the market is slow or limited." Austria, Belgium, Chile, [b]China[/b], Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, England, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, [b]Romania[/b], Russia, Spain, Switzerland, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela. Region C: "These countries generally have an inactive or very limited local transfer market, with occasional bursts of transfer activity." Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, [b]Australia[/b], Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, [b]Bosnia and Herzegovina[/b], [b]Bulgaria[/b], [b]Canada[/b], [b]Colombia[/b], [b]Costa Rica[/b], [b]Croatia[/b], Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Faroe Islands, Finland, [b]France[/b], Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, India, [b]Indonesia[/b], Iran, Ireland, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, MZ Country, Nigeria, Northern Ireland, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Wales. The whole point of the regional system is to make sure that a well-run club from a less active country can still compete against an equally well-run club from a more active country. With that in mind, it's wildly unfair that countries with communities large enough to have their own Division Cups (China, Romania) and therefore have access to a massive pool of domestic players have the same number of foreign slots as smaller countries like Venezuela, a country with a community so small that it doesn't have enough players to fill a single page of the transfer market. I'm no data scientist, I'm just a graphic designer but even I can tell that a country like China or Romania does not belong with Venezuela in Region B, much like France and Colombia, to name a couple, do not belong along the likes of Andorra in Region C (I highlighted a few more in that list). Maybe we should have four regions instead of three, distributed as such: Region A (current Region A, plus China and Romania) / 3 foreign slots, 2 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits Region B (the stronger three quarters of current Region B) / 3 foreign slots, 4 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits Region C (the weakest quarter of current Region B, plus the stronger quarter of current Region C) / 3 foreign slots, 6 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits Region D (the rest of current Region C) / 3 foreign slots, 7 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits Maybe we should just keep the same number of regions but shift countries around. I don't know what a fair system looks like. But I do know what an unfair system looks like and that's the one we're currently using. Whatever math was used to determine these regions is not accurate anymore (if it ever was) and we're long overdue for an update. Thank you if you've made it this far.As I understand it, work permits for teams are defined by a regional system determined by the level of community activity in each country. This was established about a decade ago and even then it didn't make much sense and right now it makes even less sense. As a refresher, here are the three regions. I've bolded countries that in my opinion belong one region above (e.g. China definitely belongs in Region A):

Region A: "These countries usually have a strong and active internal transfer market."
Argentina, Brazil, Poland, Sweden, and Turkey.

Region B: "These countries generally have an active internal transfer market, but there are times when the market is slow or limited."
Austria, Belgium, Chile, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, England, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela.

Region C: "These countries generally have an inactive or very limited local transfer market, with occasional bursts of transfer activity."
Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, MZ Country, Nigeria, Northern Ireland, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Wales.

The whole point of the regional system is to make sure that a well-run club from a less active country can still compete against an equally well-run club from a more active country. With that in mind, it's wildly unfair that countries with communities large enough to have their own Division Cups (China, Romania) and therefore have access to a massive pool of domestic players have the same number of foreign slots as smaller countries like Venezuela, a country with a community so small that it doesn't have enough players to fill a single page of the transfer market.

I'm no data scientist, I'm just a graphic designer but even I can tell that a country like China or Romania does not belong with Venezuela in Region B, much like France and Colombia, to name a couple, do not belong along the likes of Andorra in Region C (I highlighted a few more in that list).

Maybe we should have four regions instead of three, distributed as such:
Region A (current Region A, plus China and Romania) / 3 foreign slots, 2 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits
Region B (the stronger three quarters of current Region B) / 3 foreign slots, 4 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits
Region C (the weakest quarter of current Region B, plus the stronger quarter of current Region C) / 3 foreign slots, 6 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits
Region D (the rest of current Region C) / 3 foreign slots, 7 work permits, 2 World Tour work permits

Maybe we should just keep the same number of regions but shift countries around.

I don't know what a fair system looks like. But I do know what an unfair system looks like and that's the one we're currently using. Whatever math was used to determine these regions is not accurate anymore (if it ever was) and we're long overdue for an update.

Thank you if you've made it this far.

 

Page 1

 

Reply

Last Message

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By shadowx - 15-04-2024 23:04

[FVMZ]

For further reference to illustrate how ridiculous some of these allocations are, user douglaskampl from Brazil compiled this list a couple days ago in a different post and as of April 12, 1 AM UTC, this was the transfer market situation: Top 5 countries with most transfer market players: Argentina (A): 933 Brazil(A): 566 Poland(A): 398 [b]China(B): 339[/b] Turkey(A): 334 Countries with 100-300 players: Sweden(A): 320 [b]Romania (B): 195[/b] Italy (B): 129 Spain (B): 101 Mid-range contributors (50-99 Players): Belgium(B): 84 Portugal(B): 64 Chile(B): 52 Smaller contributions (30-49 players): Mexico(B): 49 Peru(B): 43 Ecuador(B): 42 Germany(B): 39 Uruguay(B): 38 United States(B): 36 [b]Bulgaria (C)[/b], Netherlands(B): 34 each Estonia(B): 33 Contributions around 20-29 Players: Greece(B): 30 Hungary(B): 27 [b]France (C)[/b]: 25 England (B): 23 [b]Indonesia (C)[/b], [b]Lithuania (C)[/b]: 20 each [b]Australia (C)[/b]: 19 Canada (C), Paraguay (C), Switzerland(B): 17 each Countries with 10-15 players: Colombia (C): 15 Russia (B): 13 Denmark (B): 12 MZ Country (C): 11 Cyprus (C), Finland (C): 10 each Countries with 5-9 players: Norway (B), Scotland (C): 8 each Bosnia and Herzegovina (C), Costa Rica (C), Dominican Republic (C), South Korea (C): 7 each Austria (B), Croatia (C), Czech Republic (B), Singapore (C), Slovakia (C): 6 each 2-4 players: Albania (C), Panama (C): 4 each Andorra (C), Angola (C), Azerbaijan (C), Belarus (C), Iceland (C), Malta (C), Serbia (C), Venezuela (B): 3 each Bolivia (C), Guatemala (C), India (C), Ireland (C), Latvia (C), Malaysia (C), Thailand (C): 2 each Only 1 player: Algeria (C), El Salvador (C), Georgia (C), Honduras (C), Iran (C), Israel (C), Kenya (C), Lebanon (C), Liechtenstein (C), Moldova (C), Morocco (C), Northern Ireland (C), Ukraine (C), Vietnam (C) Countries with no players in transfer market (all of them rightfully belong to Region C): Bangladesh, Egypt, Faroe Islands, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Montenegro, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovenia, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, WalesFor further reference to illustrate how ridiculous some of these allocations are, user douglaskampl from Brazil compiled this list a couple days ago in a different post and as of April 12, 1 AM UTC, this was the transfer market situation:

Top 5 countries with most transfer market players:
Argentina (A): 933
Brazil(A): 566
Poland(A): 398
China(B): 339
Turkey(A): 334

Countries with 100-300 players:
Sweden(A): 320
Romania (B): 195
Italy (B): 129
Spain (B): 101

Mid-range contributors (50-99 Players):
Belgium(B): 84
Portugal(B): 64
Chile(B): 52

Smaller contributions (30-49 players):
Mexico(B): 49
Peru(B): 43
Ecuador(B): 42
Germany(B): 39
Uruguay(B): 38
United States(B): 36
Bulgaria (C), Netherlands(B): 34 each
Estonia(B): 33

Contributions around 20-29 Players:
Greece(B): 30
Hungary(B): 27
France (C): 25
England (B): 23
Indonesia (C), Lithuania (C): 20 each
Australia (C): 19
Canada (C), Paraguay (C), Switzerland(B): 17 each

Countries with 10-15 players:
Colombia (C): 15
Russia (B): 13
Denmark (B): 12
MZ Country (C): 11
Cyprus (C), Finland (C): 10 each

Countries with 5-9 players:
Norway (B), Scotland (C): 8 each
Bosnia and Herzegovina (C), Costa Rica (C), Dominican Republic (C), South Korea (C): 7 each
Austria (B), Croatia (C), Czech Republic (B), Singapore (C), Slovakia (C): 6 each

2-4 players:
Albania (C), Panama (C): 4 each
Andorra (C), Angola (C), Azerbaijan (C), Belarus (C), Iceland (C), Malta (C), Serbia (C), Venezuela (B): 3 each
Bolivia (C), Guatemala (C), India (C), Ireland (C), Latvia (C), Malaysia (C), Thailand (C): 2 each

Only 1 player:
Algeria (C), El Salvador (C), Georgia (C), Honduras (C), Iran (C), Israel (C), Kenya (C), Lebanon (C), Liechtenstein (C), Moldova (C), Morocco (C), Northern Ireland (C), Ukraine (C), Vietnam (C)

Countries with no players in transfer market (all of them rightfully belong to Region C):
Bangladesh, Egypt, Faroe Islands, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Montenegro, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovenia, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Wales

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By dodonpa (RA) (NC) - 19-04-2024 01:46

[FVMZ]

Totally agree, i hope the crew can review thisTotally agree, i hope the crew can review this

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By christopherriverol (NCA) - 19-04-2024 12:39

[FVMZ]

#Justicia#Justicia

Ce: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By ginilaloshi - 20-04-2024 22:13

[ALBA]

Albania🖐Albania🖐

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By charef (FA) (NC) - 21-04-2024 00:00

[PV]

+1+1

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By christopherriverol (NCA) - 21-04-2024 09:51

[FVMZ]

Gracias por sus comentariosGracias por sus comentarios

Re: Update the allocation of foreign player slots

By pibasog - Tuesday 07:50

[CaB]
President

i think every 2 seasons, they have to Update this slotsi think every 2 seasons, they have to Update this slots

 

Page 1