The proposal has been mooted keeping in mind the best interest of the national team, the All India Football Federation (AIFF) has said. At an executive committee meeting where Indian football’s worst-kept secret was finally out and among a raft of proposals, some of them good, came this: reducing the number of foreigners in the Indian Super League (ISL) and I-League playing 11s to give Indian strikers more game time.
This proposal comes one week after South Korea lifted a 27-year ban on foreign goalkeepers in the K-League. South Korea said it had to do this because barring imports had led to a huge inflation in salaries of Korean goalies.
How will this happen?
That Indian strikers are played out of position in ISL is well known but exactly how does AIFF propose to ensure more playing time for Indian attackers by reducing the number of foreign players in the top two tiers by one? Can it prevent a club from listing a striker as a midfielder on the team sheet? Or, in this day and age of fluid playing positions, as a defender?
Igor Stimac had mooted this in 2023 but his idea of barring foreign strikers and attacking midfielders was not followed up and we do not know why. What has changed between then and now for this proposal beyond it being suggested by AIFF president Kalyan Chaubey at his press conference last month?
Time was when AIFF, in its bid to give juniors exposure, had made a “development” player mandatory in the starting 11 in the I-League. All it led to were teams replacing teenagers with older players soon after kick-off.
There is also the matter of clubs agreeing to this at a time when Asian Football Confederation (AFC) has walked in the opposite direction. Indian clubs compete for spots in Asian tournaments where there are no restrictions on the number of foreigners. How will they deal with this? Also, will reducing the number of foreign players not cut into the quality of ISL and I-League at a time when domestic football could do with a bigger audience?
Where is the data?
Till I hear how Mohun Bagan Super Giant will be encouraged to use Manvir Singh as No. 9, or Mumbai City FC Lallianzuala Chhangte, I choose to reserve judgment on this proposal. Just as I would on national team director Subrata Paul’s comment about India lacking desire against Bangladesh.
There is a lot to like about Paul. He revived a career that could have ended with the unfortunate death of Cristiano Junior, his courage and bravery making Bob Houghton a fan. And he says it like he sees it..
But shouldn’t he elaborate why he thought players did not give of their best in Shillong? Did they cover less ground than players of an earlier generation? Were they less fit, or made fewer sprints? Did they go into fewer tackles? Was it all the players or some of them? How many of them were then left out of India’s next two matches?
India played poorly against Bangladesh, Manolo Marquez and Lalengmawia Ralte said as much but to conclude that it stemmed from a lack of desire feels like an off-the-cuff comment. Especially if it not backed by data. Check reactions here and here.
Good ideas
Back to the proposals. The idea of suggesting I-League players return to Santosh Trophy and participate in the National Games gives those competitions a boost and the footballers game time they so desperately need. In 2013, AIFF had barred I-League players from the Santosh Trophy but given that most do not even play 35 matches a year the rule needed revisiting.
Taking players from the SAFF region out of the foreigners’ list too is a proposal worthy of consideration. It could make it easier for Indians to hop across to friendly neighbourhood countries on short or long-term deals. As is the suggestion that the next men’s national team head coach should hold only one job, a point earlier made with some conviction by Bhaichung Bhutia. Exploring the possibility of India U23 playing in I-League is also a good thought but again, AIFF needs to explain how it will make the players, many of whom are on long-term contracts at clubs, available.
