Club or country?

Fifa has advised Australia and France to select only one player per club for their forthcoming friendly.

Should players put their countries first? Or do the clubs that pay their wages deserve their say?

Faced with losing up to four players for the friendly fixture, Arsenal led a petition against a match they dubbed 'meaningless'.

Chelsea, Fulham, Leeds and Manchester United signed up in support, as did other major European clubs, including Real Madrid, Juventus and Bayern Munich.

In response Fifa now "strongly recommends" France and Australia choose only one player from each club.

But the proposal has been met with oppositon by Soccer Australia's chairman Ian Knop who argues: "Playing for your country is the most honourable thing any player can do."

Should France and Australia bow to Fifa's wishes? Or should the clubs back off and stop interfering?

---

FIFA need to sort out the international calender - it's as simple as that! It's a complete joke and just asking for trouble when different regions have different international weekends so that non-EU players have to miss club games to play for their countries. As a Leeds fan I agree with David O'Leary - we've known about this for ages and we have to accept it.
Steve, UK

If French clubs tried to influence the selection of an England team we would, rightly, be livid. You know the risk you are taking when you sign these players. The arrogance of these clubs has been a major embarrassment. Be grateful that you have such wonderful players and don't be so churlish and greedy.
Chris McDermott, England

It is ludicrous to say that a friendly against good opposition does not mean anything. How are you to prepare a team if they never get a chance to play together?
Peter Leeson, Australia

When club management are calculating how much they should pay for a quality international, surely they take into account the fact they will not be available at certain times due to national duty. If not, they are surely guilty of corporate mismanagement. The fact that the French players will not even miss a club match makes this stance equally heinous.
Jonathan Barlow, Australia

Thierry Henry, Robert Pires, Marcel Desailly and Patrick Vieira have featured heavily in the advertising campaign for this game

John Tingey, Australia

Let's not beat about the bush - if this game was REALLY a warm up for a World Cup play-off against the fifth placed South American team, Australia would be playing a South American nation in order to get a feel for the conditions, style of play, etc. that they were likely to encounter.

In reality, it's just a set-piece money-spinner for the Australian FA, and isn't going to do much for either team's preparations for a tournament that's months away. Clubs should only have to release players for qualification and finals of officially sanctioned tournaments, NOT such meaningless games.
Mark, UK

The game between Australia and France was arranged months ago. At the time no-one heard any complaints about it. Now, only a few weeks until the fixture, the clubs want to call it off.

This is why it should not be called off: 1. 50,000+ tickets have already been sold. 2. Australia has not fielded a full strength team for ages, because they almost always lose out to the clubs. 3. Thierry Henry, Robert Pires, Marcel Desailly and Patrick Vieira have featured heavily in the advertising campaign for this game. If they do not show up, they will make liars of themselves.
John Tingey, Australia

Fifa and the European clubs have got to be joking. This Australian side has never had an opportunity to play together, ever. This is their one chance for a warm up match before a World Cup qualifier against a South American team, probably Uruguay.
Scott Matheson, Australia

I can't help but feel the Gunners have not helped themselves by having so many internationals from one country in their squad. Whenever the French play, our squad is wiped out. However, Arsenal pay their wages and surely it's not unreasonable to expect them to play for their club in preference to their country when the international fixture is only a friendly.
Bill, UK

This game does mean something - it is very important for Australians

JC, Australia

The game against France is very important for Australia, not just the football team, but the whole country. It is a great step for the Australian team to prepare for the World Cup qualifier a week after. Players need to get together and prepare. This happens once every 4 four years and UK teams should respect that.
Jose, Australia

The answer is simple. Australian fans haven't seen a full Australian team play at home in three years. Need there be any other reason? Fans must always come first. Who cares about the importance of practice and all the other reasons that go with it?
Debasish Datta, Calgary, Canada

The match in Australia has two main purposes: to prepare the Australia team for the South American match and raise the profile of the game with the Australian public. These reasons obviously mean nothing to Fifa. The Australian public gets very few opportunities to see high quality soccer live. If soccer is to develop then smaller nations must be given the opportunity to watch quality games at home. This game does mean something - it is very important for Australians. So what if people have to travel, Australians always do.
JC, Australia

National federations have invested huge sums of money on talent identification and development programs, and are entitled to some return by having that talent play for their national team. The mouse that is Australia has decided to roar, and should continue to do so.
Graham Yallop, Australia (ex-UK)

Arsenal and other English clubs are paying these playes wages, and very good wages they are too. And don't forget how English clubs are giving Australian players the chance to play at the highest club level, something they will never get if they were to stay at home, domestic Australian football(i refuse to call it soccer)being what it is.
kc, uk

People who are shouting for country over club are missing the point. This is a friendly international that doesn't mean anything

Tim, England

Every time an English team gets beaten, you guys wonder 'why?' and 'how?'. Take for example the English rugby side that toured New Zealand and Australia a few years ago. Clive Woodward toured with a shameful bunch of second rate players because his squad had been decimated by withdrawals because of club pressure.

The results? A thorough thrashing, loss of reputation and a chance wasted. We laugh from afar at how you guys muck things up for yourselves - but when you do it to our guys, it becomes serious.
Max, Australia

People who are shouting for country over club are missing the point. This is a friendly international that doesn't mean anything. It is a 46 hour round trip for players who are already playing twice a week - is that really wise?
Tim, England

Look at the euphoria surruonding England's qualifaction. I guarantee that to be ten fold if we qualify. I think the clubs should stop being so selfish, and let the dreams and aspirations come true for the little guys.
Hrishi Badethalav, Australia

What has always been needed are common breaks in leagues worldwide that would allow all players to play for their countries without big clubs holding smaller footballing countries to ransom. Come on. Football is big enough for all relevant authorities worldwide to get together and sort these situations out and stop making "lesser" footballing nations suffer.
Wayne Lee-Sing, Trinidad

Maybe the clubs should use the opportunity to give their homegrown talent a chance for a change

Steven, Edinburgh, Scotland

Of course Australia need a good game before their play-off against the fifth South American team. But almost all the players involved, including the Aussies, play in Europe. The disruption of travelling so far is a great penalty on teams involved in intense club competition - ask Bobby Robson about Solano's trips to South America. I think that the game should be played in Europe.
Faustino, Australia (ex-pat Geordie)

It strikes me as naive when clubs sign internationals then complain when they're called up for internationals. Maybe they should use the opportunity to give their homegrown talent a chance for a change.
Steven, Edinburgh, Scotland

The major European clubs should be ashamed of their attitude towards this game. For starters the game is being played on 11th November at 11 o'clock - a hugely significant date in that it commemorates Armistice day. Australia need all their best players to be available for a make or break game that will determine their World Cup dreams. The sheer arrogance of teams like Arsenal and Leeds bellyaching about the fact that they will lose players for a couple of extra days beggars belief.
Paul Stoddart, UK

As an Arsenal fan, I'm outraged that we have to send our most influential players over and have them exhausted for the more important Tottenham match

Will, Hong Kong

Soccer Australia's comments are right, playing for your country is the greatest honour any sportsperson could have. However, friendlies are nothing more than competitive training games. Playing for your club is a player's bread and butter, and the amount of money invested in the top players in the game is so much that clubs shouldn't be impeded at a crucial time of the year.

Most top clubs want their players to play international football as it improves them, but when it's a pointless friendly the other side of the world at a critical point of the season then they're not going to agree to it. And quite rightly so.
Kevin Bray, UK

Being an Arsenal fan, I'm outraged that we have to send our most influential players over and have them jetlagged and exhausted for the more important match against Tottenham. The Australian and French FA should learn and respect these club outcries and accept Fifa's proposal to select only one player per club for it is the only way to achieve a fair solution for both club and country.
Will, Hong Kong

Why not just play the game in France?

Jonathan, England

Australia has always been unfairly treated by FIFA, always trying to stop it from qualifying for the World Cup. Even though it has won the group for Oceania, it still does not qualify. Every time it has to play teams from some far-flung place to qualify, looking back through the Football history, Australia has had to play countries like North Korea, Argentina, Iran in Tehrain etc.

I just think the clubs should just back down and let Australia play a good French side, a team they beat in the Confederations Cup in Japan and Korea earlier this year.
Cheung Ko-Kwok, Hong Kong

Both the French and Australian FA are being a little unreasonable over this matter, expecting players to travel for two days to play for football for ninety minutes. Why not just play the game in France?
Jonathan, England

Playing for your country should be the greatest honour that can be bestowed upon any player of any nationality. Clubs should stop interfering. Having said that, there should be slots for international fixtures and these should be adhered to.
Matt W, UK

The game is vital preparation for Australia as they rarely get chances to play qualtiy international opposition

Ashley Ralston, UK

This game is a World Cup warm up game for Australia. The same applies to France who do not have qualifying games to get them ready for the Cup. Therefore the game is not meaningless. Did not England play a full team against Holland before the German match?
Paul Carr, UK

Paul Carr: England played approximately two full teams against Holland, neither of which particularly resembled the team that beat Germany - not a great argument to use...
Michael Parker, UK

The visit by the French team is vital preparation for Australia as they rarely get chances to play qualtiy international opposition and will be facing a South American team in its deciding qualifiers which is used to the most difficult opposition.

I have actually not read any opposition to the tour from the players themselves, so to me the key question is this - How did David Dein et al convince the world governing body to advise against its own laws and integral aims (of spreading the world game) for the sole benefit of rich clubs such as his own?
Ashley Ralston, UK