The Case Against Third Party Ownership


When Radamel Falcao finally decided to leave Atletico Madrid,everyone expected him to be destined for greatness. After all he had been in the final Ballon D’Or shortlist that year. So when he ended up in the newly promoted Monaco in the French top flight, more than a few eyebrows were raised. He performed decently at the Principality club but just as he was about to cut loose, his knee was seriously injured in a cup match. The injury caused him to not only miss the rest of the season but also the World Cup. This season he has wound up at Manchester United on a season long loan but lacklustre performances for the Red Devils makes it seem unlikely that the Colombian’s move will be made permanent.

However,what many people have failed to realise is the fact that Falcao hasn’t had that much of a say in his transfers. Instead, his move from Porto to the Rojiblancos and later to Monaco was decided by third party owners(TPO) simply based on which transfer would make them maximum profit.

This policy of maximum financial gain for the TPO’s however has had a dire effect on the careers of players currently under its shackles.

While a vast no. of players,mostly South American, are still under TPO in Serie A and Liga Portugesa, the banning of such ownership in the other major leagues of Europe has led to comparatively better quality of player’s careers in these countries.

This certainly promotes the steps taken by the UEFA and Platini to ban TPO across Europe and make player’s careers throughout Europe more secure,both financially and professionally.


4 thoughts on “The Case Against Third Party Ownership

Comments are closed.