Birmingham and Sunderland's Financial Problems

And the weekly "Secret Footballer" in The Guardian

The Secret Footballer/The Guardian:

Why we owe a debt to Bosman but not a livingHis landmark ruling helped pave the way for the wages today's footballers enjoy but should we help him out now he's skint?

Much has been made of Jean-Marc Bosman's plight since his career came to an end. The man who fought, successfully, to overturn an illogical and unjust contract situation, is battling alcoholism and depression, something he talked about as recently as this week.

Bosman is arguing that after what he did for football, someone should do something for him. I'm sure a few chairmen could think of more than one way of thanking him, but the financial handout Bosman has in mind probably wouldn't be in their thoughts.

His situation has moved some to suggest there should be a fundraising match to generate a payday for a man who finds himself on benefits in his native Belgium. I would argue that an enormous cheque for a man who is a recovering alcoholic living on antidepressants might not be the best idea. Besides, if it's charity we're supporting, wouldn't it be a far better use of everybody's time to play a match to aid the many victims of recent flood and earthquake disasters?

Football, it should be noted, has the ability to help people like Bosman. There are many schemes devoted to getting ex-players and coaches, down on their luck, back on their feet and in to work. Most, if not all, do it without signing off cheques for hundred of thousands of pounds.

Bosman, through his own courage and determination, has had his hands on some of those zeros in the past. His settlement in 1995 landed him £720,000. More than a decade later he had two houses, rented one out and lived in the other, which enjoyed an outdoor swimming pool. The cherry on his Belgium bun was the gleaming BMW in the drive. Fifpro, the international players' union, also made a payment to Bosman. Yet he has since been back at Fifpro asking for more, prompting the union to publicly declare, as delicately as it can, that perhaps, from now on, the only person that can help Bosman is Bosman himself.

If you think I sound like someone who doesn't appreciate the significance of Bosman's legal action, you couldn't be more wrong. For all the players that have benefited from moving on "a Bosman", or at least held it up as an empty threat in negotiations, there is something to be grateful for. Personally, I am thankful a situation exists where, financially, I am far better off than I would have been without it. I am also aware there were far better players than me that finished with only newspaper cuttings for comfort. Many of them remain my heroes.

When I hang up my boots, I will have opportunity to move on to things I have always wanted to do before I undergo the hip and knee replacements my doctor promised a few years ago. Bosman, possibly, found himself in the same position, albeit a little bruised and battered after the rigours of a lengthy legal battle, but, financially at least, fairly secure. I have no idea what has gone wrong in the interim but, in football, we are very aware of Bosman and not just because his actions allowed the rest of us to profit.

I have been in contract negotiations where the Bosman ruling hung over proceedings, and as long as I knew that the club I was dealing with were desperate to keep me then it didn't matter what argument the club put forward when trying to drive down my wages. If they didn't pay up, I would eventually be on a free transfer and no transfer fee meant higher wages for me elsewhere. There are abuses of the system, with some players only opting to move when they are out of contract in order to maximise signing-on fees and wage demands, but many players simply use the Bosman ruling as a "reminder" to their employers.

But let me share a few of my other thoughts on Bosman the person. So far as looking after No1 is concerned, I don't believe his mindset was any different to that of today's Premier League players when he set out on the road to justice. It is too simplistic to hold him up as some kind of martyr for the game of football. Bosman's crusade was born out of what he stood to gain financially, which was three times more in wages than the contract he was earning at RFC Liège.

Bosman wanted to move clubs for more money, which he wanted so desperately that he took his case to the European Court of Justice, and won. The consequence of that landmark ruling to the modern player should be of no concern to Bosman, just as the thousands of modern-day icons that have made a name for themselves in all manner of noble pursuits make no financial commitment to those that have gone before upon whose shoulders they now stand.

I have much admiration for what Bosman did – I admire anyone who fights injustice and wins – but I will not endorse a man that uses a selfish motive to prick the ears of those not involved in the game while simultaneously ostracising the same players he wants to play a benefit match for him by banging on about their outrageous wages.

When it comes to money, in fairness to Bosman, football is not a selfless game, and you would have had to go an awful long way to find any player willing to take on the battle he did purely on behalf of others. Only he knows whether he truly had anyone else's interests at heart. Could he have foreseen the riches the world's top football clubs would bestow upon their players less than a decade later? If most players had to guess, they would probably say: "No." But then we're just as selfish as he is.

Follow the Secret Footballer on Twitter @tsfguardian

www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/mar/05/bosman-ruling