Some football pundits may remember the exploits of the infamous Belgian player Jean-Marc Bosman. The former Standard Liège midfielder was a reasonable footballer, having played for his country at youth level and amassing almost one-hundred appearances with one of Belgium’s foremost clubs.
But what Bosman is most remembered for is the European Court of Justice ruling in 1995, which ultimately allowed for the free movement of uncontracted players between football clubs in Europe.
Not to be outdone by their European contemporaries, Football Federation Australia have handed down a landmark ruling of their own in early August, allowing for the unprecedented scenario of a player being able to register and play for two clubs – at the same time.
In years to come, this may well be coined the Zois ruling – and could change the very nature of how footballers are contracted to clubs in this country.
Earlier this year, Peter Zois signed a one-year contract with South Melbourne and has played in every official match but one, including the club’s historic first match in the Singapore Cup.
The day before the A-League season kicked off, Zois signed a one-year deal for new A-League franchise Melbourne Heart where he has been employed as Goalkeeper Coach.
The question regarding his current contractual status is a baffling one, perfectly illustrated when you examine his playing record for the month of August thus far:
August 1: Played for South Melbourne v Richmond
August 5: On the bench for Melbourne Heart v Central Coast Mariners
August 6: Played for South Melbourne v Oakleigh Cannons
August 13: On the bench for Melbourne Heart v Newcastle Jets
August 15: Played for South Melbourne v Sunshine George Cross
An Intriguing scenario to say the least, and South Melbourne’s upcoming Premier League finals campaign could result in an even bigger twist to this tale.
There a number of questions that arise which pose some food for thought:
Does Zois still play for South Melbourne in the VPL finals?
What if there is a clash of fixtures between Melbourne Heart and South Melbourne? Which club does he play for?
What if he receives a red card for either club? Where is his penalty served?
What of South Melbourne’s pending Singapore Cup clash on October 5?
What if a club tables an offer too-good-to-refuse to purchase Zois? Which club gets the transfer fee?
The ultimate question that surrounds this contractual dilemma is simple: Who owns Peter Zois’ contract – Melbourne Heart or South Melbourne? Judging by the evidence tabled above, it appears that both clubs do.
This is not entirely unprecedented in the world of football. In Italy and some South American countries for instance, the concept of co-ownership is a practice that is widely implemented. The most common example cited in recent times was that of Brazil’s Adriano, who was co-owned by both Inter Milan and Parma. Inter essentially sold half of its share of Adriano to Parma, who were able to play the player in return for covering his wages.
This is the major point of difference: Despite being owned by two clubs, Adriano could only ever play for one club under the terms of this arrangement.
The topic of disciplinary suspension is one that is more complex. In Europe for instance, suspension in domestic leagues does not carry through to UEFA competition. Wayne Rooney may receive a red card for Manchester United in the English Premier League, but his suspension does not apply to the European Champions League.
Thus, if Peter Zois were red carded for South Melbourne in the VPL, his eligibility in the Singapore Cup in October would be unaffected, as his penalty would only be served domestically.
However, using the example above, if Wayne Rooney were to receive a lengthy suspension, he would be ineligible for any domestic cup competitions which fall under the English FA’s jurisdiction.
This mirrors the scenario of the A-League and VPL, and if Zois were to receive a red card playing for either Melbourne Heart or South Melbourne, his suspension would almost definitely be served across both competitions. Or would it?
The contracting of Zois raises question marks over the transfer of other state league players across Australia.
Sebastian Mattei (Melbourne Knights), Nicholas Kalmar (Oakleigh Cannons) and Brad McDonald (Brisbane Strikers) have all left their state league clubs to sign contracts in the A-League. Why have these clubs not been afforded the same luxury as South Melbourne, and been able to retain the services of key players as their domestic seasons draw to a close?
Melbourne Heart is in an obvious bind.
Without a National Youth League team to underpin its senior squad, the club has barely had enough time to find a suitable young goalkeeper to complete its roster.
However, this hardly constitutes an exceptional circumstance which would allow a rule to be circumvented for the benefit of the A-League.
No one can begrudge Peter Zois’ desire to play in Australia’s top flight competition, but allowing any player to compete in two domestic leagues at the same time with two different clubs, is either a cunning manipulation of the rules, or a case of complete ignorance.
Are you the ultimate team manager? Pick your own superstar team and go head to head with other football fans for glory and cash prizes on Draftstars. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.
There were many disgusted by the overall spectacle at AAMI Park on Sunday afternoon when the Phoenix and Victory played out a cagey 0-0…
Leandro Trossard scored the only goal after 20 minutes, to keep the pressure on Manchester City.
It's going down to the wire. Arsenal have earned a critical 1-0 win at Manchester United, a victory that ensures the Premier League title…
Two more wins. That's all that separates Manchester City from becoming English champions for an unprecedented fourth straight year. The game is up, though,…
The Sky Blues took the lead at home but couldn't hold on as the Mariners came back to claim a 2-1 win in the first leg of the semifinal.
A fresh punishment was imposed after the club failed to comply with profitability and sustainability rules during the three-year cycle to 2022-23.
