Probably an infringement on human rights. But football is a game turned into a business or plaything. I preferred it when players from other countries were limited. To stop the likes of City, Newcastle etc buying up all the cream of the crop. I believe when Liverpool won the European cup once. Not one foreign player. (Unless you deem Ireland as foreign.) The rule was in place then had to be abandoned because of work permits which were introduced into football.
The only sustainable - and fairest option - is to give each club the same budget out of the television money. It doesn't matter if that is £10m per season, or £100m, provided that all have the same fixed budget. No club can go bust because they can only spend the money the FA give them on players or coaches. Any other income can be invested to improve the fan experience or invest in youth players or helicopters for the CEO. The playing field would be level, every club would have to spend wisely on players and coaches. If they blow 90% on the star striker, they've got to cut the costs elsewhere. Football was a lot more fun in the 70s and 80s when any one of 10 teams could win the league or the cups...
Almost every company that has employees has pay structures, company I work for has 3 grades with a min and max in each band, this isn't an infringement on human rights. It's down to the governing bodies to grow a pair
Glad to see they learned from their past when companies didn't get paid....To think people were happy when they won the PL despite not paying the likes of emergency services what they owed. Now they are at it again.
The limit to foreign players was abolished as it was a restriction of trade, which is illegal as part of the agreement to working rights in the EU.
See they are trying to suggest significant costs were getting rid of Rodger’s and his coaching team as if that is a justifiable reason.