Nobody Likes Me, Everybody Hates Me...

Fifa’s Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, Article 17, paragraph 4, states: “It shall be presumed, unless established to the contrary, that any club signing a professional who has terminated his contract without just cause has induced that professional to commit a breach. The club shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two registration periods.”

In 2005 Roma were banned from the transfer market for two windows over their signing of Philippe Mexès from Auxerre. The club appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which ordered that Roma should be banned only from the January 2006 window.

Sion, of Switzerland, received a similar Fifa ban in April for two transfer windows after enticing Essam El Hadary from Al Ahly. Sion appealed to CAS, which has frozen the sanction while it deliberates. A verdict is likely this year.

But the English don't care that Chelsea has been treated the same as everyone else. In their self-proclaimed position as the best domestic competition in the world, English clubs have grown exceedingly paranoid, to the point that any action that doesn't go their way is perceived as a slight.

"Chelsea will argue that the punishment is disproportionate to the relatively modest fine imposed and the nature of the offence, while senior figures at the club — who have maintained their innocence — believe that they are victims of an anti-English conspiracy at the heart of Fifa and Uefa.

Yesterday’s punishments came two days after Eduardo da Silva, the Arsenal striker, was given a two-match ban for diving by Uefa, leading Arsène Wenger, the manager, to voice similar concerns about Barclays Premier League clubs being victimised.

“Chelsea will mount the strongest appeal possible following the decision of Fifa’s Dispute Resolution Chamber over Gaël Kakuta,” a club statement read.

“The sanctions are without precedent to this level and totally disproportionate to the alleged offence and the financial penalty imposed. We cannot comment further until we receive the full written rationale for this extraordinarily arbitrary decision.”

It's a similar line to the one Chelsea were pushing after their exit from the Champions League last season. I don't see how Chelsea can claim the punishment is extreme or without precedent given the Roma and Sion cases, then again, I am assuming that English clubs keep up with what happens outside of their own little world.

I hope the ban remains and, if it is reduced, Chelsea should at least be banned for one transfer window. I also think that this type of ban should be used as punishment for other infringements for two reasons.

1) It would be a major deterrent and a real punishment. Do clubs, especially big clubs, care about the minuscule fines they are often handed out? I doubt it. Stadium bans are a good visual way of punishing clubs, like making them sit in the corner with a 'dunce' hat on, but transfer bans are what would really hurt clubs and make them think twice about trying to play fast and loose with the games regulations.

2) Transfer bans would also help to slow the massive inflation in transfer fees and player wages at the moment. Say Chelsea's ban is up held and Manchester United get a similar ban for their alleged breach, that's potentially upwards of 100 million pound taken out of the transfer market for the next 18 months. Also, if transfer bans were regularly meted out to those who committed serious infringements, it might force clubs to invest in their youth academies to ensure they can continue to bring new talent into the first team during such bans.

This is one FIFA crusade I'm willing to sign on for.