[Football] Wage Capping

[Kinky Gerbil]

It would still get overturned - restraint of trade, probably.

Unlikely as they could still sign for a overseas/PL/Champ side if they wish.

We already have a sort of wage cap in those leagues.

I’d also sort out the youth set ups.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

As [MENTION=13947]happypig[/MENTION] has said, some kind of fund to be used in extreme circumstances. Could be a 1% levy on all Prem team wage bills, could pay for a business management team to be put into place when clubs are about to be declared bankrupt/insolvent, with owners signing up to this as part of league membership rules? The club then kept running until new owners/a new business plan can be found. It would obviously have implications that would entail players agreeing to a ‘minimum wage’ until issues are solved or they get a transfer. Just a thought......

The only problem is whilst as fans we look at this as a sport and with passion each football club is a business with shareholders, Articles and a P & L and why should other businesses, that are competing with them, shell out when they spent more on players wages etc?

It'd be like asking Tesco's, Sainsbury's et al to do the same just because Aldi slashed prices and gave away gimmicks to get more customers etc?

 

[GT49er]

Unlikely as they could still sign for a overseas/PL/Champ side if they wish.

We already have a sort of wage cap in those leagues.

I’d also sort out the youth set ups.

No, you're mixing up a club offering a contract and refusing to offer more ("Right Pogba, your contract is coming to an end in June (whatever year); here's your new contract, £50K a week, take it or leave it", in which case he could go elsewhere to get more if it was on offer. No legal issue - contract offered, offer refused, end of. On the other hand, if United say 'sorry Paul, we'd like to pay you a million quid a week, but the league/FA/FIFA have imposed a wage cap so we can't' - straight off to court!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

No, you're mixing up a club offering a contract and refusing to offer more ("Right Pogba, your contract is coming to an end in June (whatever year); here's your new contract, £50K a week, take it or leave it", in which case he could go elsewhere to get more if it was on offer. No legal issue - contract offered, offer refused, end of. On the other hand, if United say 'sorry Paul, we'd like to pay you a million quid a week, but the league/FA/FIFA have imposed a wage cap so we can't' - straight off to court!

League 1 and 2 are only meant to spend 60% and 55% of turn over on wages

 

[BadFish]

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to save Bury and Bolton?

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to ensure all clubs can operate effectively?

The Premier League right royally ****ed the finances of English football, maybe it/they should consider giving a little of their untold riches back to the game that supports them?

As far as i am concerned the mercenary players and clubs that are sucking up money and causing smaller clubs to gamble with their own existence can **** right off. Holding the game to ransom with the threat of a break away european super league should elicit a two word response "see ya".

 

[GT49er]

League 1 and 2 are only meant to spend 60% and 55% of turn over on wages

Yes, but that restriction doesn't apply to any one player. The club can choose how much of their budget to offer to any individual player - they can pay one player half of it if they want to. No restraint of trade. Nothing for the courts to get involved in.

 

[studio150]

The real answer is for the EFL to be far stricter on their fir and proper person test.

Very sad for Bury. but if you have a chairman effectively paying Championship wages in League 2 all based on a very restricted income it is only bound to end one way.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Yes, but that restriction doesn't apply to any one player. The club can choose how much of their budget to offer to any individual player - they can pay one player half of it if they want to. No restraint of trade. Nothing for the courts to get involved in.

But technically their is a restraint even on that one player, 60% of the clubs turnover. And this indirectly impacts all other players. Besides, plenty of sectors already have standard rates of pay.

You’re not making any sense.

 

[amexer]

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to save Bury and Bolton?

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to ensure all clubs can operate effectively?

The Premier League right royally ****ed the finances of English football, maybe it/they should consider giving a little of their untold riches back to the game that supports them?

As far as i am concerned the mercenary players and clubs that are sucking up money and causing smaller clubs to gamble with their own existence can **** right off. Holding the game to ransom with the threat of a break away european super league should elicit a two word response "see ya".

All very well but Premier has a product that has worldwide interest. Apart from in some cases a very small radius no interest in lower league football. Several years ago a relative who supports a Div 1 club said they struggle because there top earners get max £2500 a week.so assume lots of clubs were paying way above this. Madness. £200/300k to play lower league football. Assume if players went part time wage bill will halve and this is what so many should do especially those with small gates

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The bottom line is if the EFL, and the government will be needed, want to do something to prevent this happening again they can. There’s plenty of tools at their disposal. But neither really seem willing , or able.

 

[blue-shifted]

Surely all the clubs as employers could get together and agree a salary cap. The player would have no more right to appeal this legally than I have to take my employer to court as I want a pay rise.

The clubs could be incentivised (the EFL) to sign up to this system, by being included in a club insurance emergency fund (0.5% of all transfer fees would soon build up a decent insurance fund) and by increases or decreases to their annual payment for league finishes.

There would also have to be large increases in financial transparency to prevent the wage cap system from being abused

A wage cap would be an excellent thing to have, but is untenable, unfortunately. A player would do a 'Bosman' and take their case to the European Court of Human Rights or wherever and get it overturned as 'unfair'.

 

[blue-shifted]

Look at the legal difficulties there are in enforcing Financial Fair Play, including the number of loop holes used and expensive court cases. When you look at it superficially, this is easy to resolve. Not so easy in practice though.

The bottom line is if the EFL, and the government will be needed, want to do something to prevent this happening again they can. There’s plenty of tools at their disposal. But neither really seem willing , or able.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Look at the legal difficulties there are in enforcing Financial Fair Play, including the number of loop holes used and expensive court cases. When you look at it superficially, this is easy to resolve. Not so easy in practice though.

True. But this was a I’ll-advised approach from the EFL within the framework of current law. This is why I deliberately mentioned including the parliament. Between them they can sort something and update/introduce legislation accordingly .

 

[blue-shifted]

But the same problems exist. The Premier League will just flat out say no, There will still be a whole load of ways clubs can circumvent the rules and a lot of clubs who won't want, and can't be forced to be involved as they see this as an opportunity to climb. I don't see what the government can do. We are talking about the spending of private companies.

True. But this was a I’ll-advised approach from the EFL only, this is why I deliberately mentioned including the government.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

But the same problems exist. The Premier League will just flat out say no, There will still be a whole load of ways clubs can circumvent the rules and a lot of clubs who won't want, and can't be forced to be involved as they see this as an opportunity to climb. I don't see what the government can do. We are talking about the spending of private companies.

There is plenty parliament/government can do if there’s a will. Governments can renationalise industries if they want. My suggestion is possibly extreme, but it’s certainly well within the realms of reality. It shouldn’t be too difficult for the government and the EFL to bring in rules and laws to better protect clubs.....if they wanted to.

 

[GT49er]

Surely all the clubs as employers could get together and agree a salary cap.

Look at the legal difficulties there are in enforcing Financial Fair Play, including the number of loop holes used and expensive court cases. When you look at it superficially, this is easy to resolve. Not so easy in practice though.

But the same problems exist The Premier League will just flat out say no. There will still be a whole load of ways clubs can circumvent the rules and a lot of clubs who won't want, and can't be forced to be involved as they see this as an opportunity to climb.

So, is that 'yes they can' or 'no they can't' then?

 

[beorhthelm]

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to save Bury and Bolton?

What % of the last Premier League TV deal would it have taken to ensure all clubs can operate effectively?

the problem with this approach is that the money would be spent, the clubs would overspend and we'd be exactly where we are.

 

[BadFish]

the problem with this approach is that the money would be spent, the clubs would overspend and we'd be exactly where we are.

It is the starting point of a solution IMHO.

A more equitable distribution of money throughout football.

 

[HitchinSeagull]

I fear that any attempt to help clubs in trouble will further incentivise unscrupulous owners to abuse the system. The starting point is finding a governing body which more actively seeks to prevent unscrupulous owners and prevents owners leveraging clubs. If we van trust the owners we can trust emergency funds will be exactly that. The EFL and FA should be ashamed and maybe should be replaced.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Yes, but that restriction doesn't apply to any one player. The club can choose how much of their budget to offer to any individual player - they can pay one player half of it if they want to. No restraint of trade. Nothing for the courts to get involved in.

It’s not much of a difference to bring it on players.

No one is stopping them from working - rises can be done with inflation.