Minimum wage introduced

[pineapple stu]

Interesting one from Dan McDonnell today (https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/minimum-wage-of-430-per-week-to-be-introduced-in-league-of-ireland-42125616.html?fbclid=IwAR1CCF0V7tyF-WHfoUwiGHc1rkwLn_CCNXcL_oQhfRWZmIN03q8RDnyUXIg) - full-time pros are entitled now to at least €430/week, and part-time players must get at least €130/week from the beginning of pre-season.

Amateur players then are expenses only (though not sure what expenses would count?)

All sounds great and all, but as Dan then says -


That would more than double the pay for some lower paid squad members at certain clubs.

[T]here are concerns further down the food chain about whether this change represents too much too soon and may lead to clubs running smaller squads to keep costs down, thus meaning there are fewer contracts to go around.

So - what sort of impact is this going to have on clubs? In the end of the day, clubs can't magic money up. And what constitutes full-time and part-time anyway?

[joey B]

Definitely puts the squeeze on the middle class of clubs,the big clubs are already paying most of their players that anyway I’d say and the lower first division sides are basically amateur,as said above clubs can’t magic money out of nowhere from one season to the next but players deserve a fair wage aswell,in theory and on paper it is right and proper but I’m sure there are some club accountants with a headache this evening….

[culloty82]

In terms of amateur clubs, I presume it'd follow the GAA model where any travel expenses are reimbursed, along with meal vouchers, so that would cover Treaty and other lower First Division teams. Certainly seems as though this will have most impact in the Premier, with smaller clubs becoming increasingly reliant on youth players.

[pineapple stu]

Meal vouchers? But the team meals pre- and post-match are presumably covered anyway?

Travel - but what travel? To/from training would be a stretch surely? The team bus will cover most away games.

[timothydec77]

This isn't like an employee working for some multi national company.

This will come from the pockets of owners, sponsors and customers. None of whom earn a profit.

[Jd2793]

how will this effect ucd? did someone say on here before that the newer signings such as lonergan werent going to college there like players were under previous managers?

[A N Mouse]

Are there other changes coming?

This would seem to tie into quite a lot of other things.

Like the salary cap. To have a squad of 20 full time pros, there now a minimum turnover of around 800K

[pineapple stu]

how will this effect ucd? did someone say on here before that the newer signings such as lonergan werent going to college there like players were under previous managers?
Possibly less than other clubs as we're not trying to be full-time, so would have the €130/week cap for anyone being paid.

But in the end of the day there's only so much money to go around, so if we can't afford €130/week for a player, I presume we'll just have to sign an amateur instead. Same as other teams.

But it does mean that a squad player on, say, €250/week can't train on full-time terms and that's going to impact the middle Premier teams most I'd have thought. If you now can only afford 10 full-time players, you can't really organise full-time training I'd have thought. That'd probably benefit clubs like UCD to be honest.

[sidewayspasser]

Some clubs will probably already look into a way around it. What exactly constitutes full time training? Morning sessions? The amount of sessions? Maybe this becomes an exercise on how you can have your players on part time contracts and be as close to full time as possible while staying below the magic limit, whatever that is.

[joey B]

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/if-clubs-cant-be-full-time-next-year-because-the-minimum-wage-cant-be-paid-they-can-go-part-time-pfais-stephen-mcguinness-42129609.html

Pretty strong stuff from Stephen McGuinness here......

[SeanDrog]

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/league-of-ireland/if-clubs-cant-be-full-time-next-year-because-the-minimum-wage-cant-be-paid-they-can-go-part-time-pfais-stephen-mcguinness-42129609.html

Pretty strong stuff from Stephen McGuinness here......


Thx for sharing the article - interesting read and the unions end game (min number of pros per club and no amateur teams etc) may result in a stronger league but I would suspect many teams will leave the league during the transition.

Given the mood music coming out of Drogs at the moment I would not be surprised if we are one of the first to the door. At this stage there is no way we could have min 14 pro players. I’m sure paying from
Preseason (which I do understand the reason) will be a significant cost to clubs given no gate income in the period.

Maybe it will end with a stronger one division with the current pro sides added with Galway Cork and Waterford. I can’t see most of the rest being able to fund the proposed set up (rest of first div UCD and Drogs).

Interesting times ahead.

[pineapple stu]

I don't think having to go semi-pro will be the end of Drogheda surely?

It may mean a weaker league because teams will be training less and some players may go LSL rather than be amateur in LoI, but that's far from a case where clubs will fold.

[SeanDrog]

I don't think having to go semi-pro will be the end of Drogheda surely?

It may mean a weaker league because teams will be training less and some players may go LSL rather than be amateur in LoI, but that's far from a case where clubs will fold.

Just going off this bit “ He wants each Premier Division club to have a minimum of 16 full-time professionals on their books as a condition of entry and similar rules to apply for part-time professionals in the First Division, where he is opposed to the concept of amateur teams competing.”

On the above we would be a first div team unless something drastic changes in our circumstances arise and what club would be satisfied being a perm member of the 1st division. - there also could be no relegation at times as teams can’t afford to come up despite winning promotion.

A long way to go on this but to be fair to the union, they have clearly set out their stall.

[pineapple stu]

Ah, ok. That's just ******.

Whatever about arguing that players shouldn't be offered €200/week and be expected to train 15 hours a week plus travel to a match, a union leader can't expect to just magic up more full-time positions. The market does that.

[osarusan]

He wants each Premier Division club to have a minimum of 16 full-time professionals on their books as a condition of entry and similar rules to apply for part-time professionals in the First Division, where he is opposed to the concept of amateur teams competing.

This may be a nice idea, but if the money isn't there, it's just aspirational. In the same way, it would be silly to make it a condition of entry to the Premier Division that every team had to have, say, a ground with at least 5000 covered seats. The money just isn't there to make it happen.

It's not like there are millionaire owners exploiting players at every club. In most cases the clubs just don't have the money. If they had the money, they'd already be paying it in wages.

McGuinness knows this as well as anybody.

[culloty82]

Just going off this bit “ He wants each Premier Division club to have a minimum of 16 full-time professionals on their books as a condition of entry and similar rules to apply for part-time professionals in the First Division, where he is opposed to the concept of amateur teams competing.”

On the above we would be a first div team unless something drastic changes in our circumstances arise and what club would be satisfied being a perm member of the 1st division. - there also could be no relegation at times as teams can’t afford to come up despite winning promotion.

A long way to go on this but to be fair to the union, they have clearly set out their stall.

He may be right in the general philosophy, in terms of player welfare, but in practice it's hard to see how any potential new clubs could begin life as part-time outfits - yes, outlining how they would work towards that goal should be a licensing condition, but even then it would take 2-3 years to be achieved.

[CorribsideSteve]

This isn't a runner in the medium to long term without SOME kind of at least medium investment in the League through a TV deal. Even Lithuania have one. Airtricity put a few hundred grand in as sponsorship but it feel like a bare minimum, tokenistic amount of money. The money from transfer fees is still very low as a source of income into the League as a whole also. An external ringfenced pool of money needs to exist so that clubs don't fold trying to aspire to the prospective plan.

[El-Pietro]

Some really basic maths to understand what this might mean.

If a team was to pay 16 players minimum wage of 430 per week, for 42 weeks that would come to 288,960 a year before any additional pay related costs (employee PRSI etc). A part time team paying 16 players 130 per week for 42 weeks comes to 104,832 per year.
I can't find the exact rules for the Salary Cost Protocol, but I think its 60% of turnover right?

That means a professional team must have minimum turnover of €481,600 per year and a part time team €145,600. Assuming a 36 game season in both divisions with 18 home games that means professional teams need to make €26,756 per game and part time teams need to make €8,089 per game. At an average of €10 per ticket that comes to an average attendance of 2,676 in the Premier, or 809 in the first. Obviously sponsors, merchandise etc will offset this, but this is all assuming the minimum wage for every player in a team.

I agree that this is generally a good thing, and if teams can't get this kind of support then they probably shouldn't be pro, or even part time, but before these sort of changes are made we should understand what the effects will be and whether that is something we want.

I don't know what the turnover is like across the league, but I would assume Shamrock Rovers, Derry City, Dundalk, St. Patricks Athletic, Sligo Rovers, Bohemian FC, Shelbourne, Cork City, Galway United and Waterford can probably make this work at a mostly professional level, though several of those teams would be asking their owners, sponsors and fans to dig deep to keep the show on the road.

Drogheda United, UCD, Finn Harps, Longford Town, and maybe Treaty United could find a way to meet the amateur requirements, though if promotion to the Premier Division is cut off to them that probably has a detrimental effect on attendances that mean it may not be possible.

You would basically be saying Athlone, Cobh, Bray and Wexford are either entirely amateur or out of the league. Maybe they should already be, and maybe Bray could get up into the Amateur group if this year was a one off.

This probably ends up being a negative for players. More players get up to that 130/430 per week level, but some teams won't be able to pay anything above that to more than a couple of players. Any marginal players end up out of the league at 20 because teams cant afford to wait for their development.

Probably more talent is accumulated at the top of the table with the European teams, who can afford to have larger squads, leading to a larger gap year over year.

[nigel-harps1954]

Some really basic maths to understand what this might mean.

If a team was to pay 16 players minimum wage of 430 per week, for 42 weeks that would come to 288,960 a year before any additional pay related costs (employee PRSI etc). A part time team paying 16 players 130 per week for 42 weeks comes to 104,832 per year.
I can't find the exact rules for the Salary Cost Protocol, but I think its 60% of turnover right?

That means a professional team must have minimum turnover of €481,600 per year and a part time team €145,600. Assuming a 36 game season in both divisions with 18 home games that means professional teams need to make €26,756 per game and part time teams need to make €8,089 per game. At an average of €10 per ticket that comes to an average attendance of 2,676 in the Premier, or 809 in the first. Obviously sponsors, merchandise etc will offset this, but this is all assuming the minimum wage for every player in a team.

I agree that this is generally a good thing, and if teams can't get this kind of support then they probably shouldn't be pro, or even part time, but before these sort of changes are made we should understand what the effects will be and whether that is something we want.

I don't know what the turnover is like across the league, but I would assume Shamrock Rovers, Derry City, Dundalk, St. Patricks Athletic, Sligo Rovers, Bohemian FC, Shelbourne, Cork City, Galway United and Waterford can probably make this work at a mostly professional level, though several of those teams would be asking their owners, sponsors and fans to dig deep to keep the show on the road.

Drogheda United, UCD, Finn Harps, Longford Town, and maybe Treaty United could find a way to meet the amateur requirements, though if promotion to the Premier Division is cut off to them that probably has a detrimental effect on attendances that mean it may not be possible.

You would basically be saying Athlone, Cobh, Bray and Wexford are either entirely amateur or out of the league. Maybe they should already be, and maybe Bray could get up into the Amateur group if this year was a one off.

This probably ends up being a negative for players. More players get up to that 130/430 per week level, but some teams won't be able to pay anything above that to more than a couple of players. Any marginal players end up out of the league at 20 because teams cant afford to wait for their development.

Probably more talent is accumulated at the top of the table with the European teams, who can afford to have larger squads, leading to a larger gap year over year.

Maths is good and all, but the new wage rules also sees players paid until the end of November, and from the first week of pre-season, so you're probably looking at closer to a 46 or 48 week wage bill.

A lot of what the PFAI have come out with is right and proper, from a players perspective, but as said above, until there's more money pumped into the league, I don't see how this is going to end in anything but tears for several clubs.

You'd have to say that prize money needs close to doubled, and a proper TV deal sought out, as well a ringfenced goverment money to be directed towards the league each season for this to stand any sort of a chance of working.

[sbgawa]

I think for the likes of Bohs and Shels this will be a problem as they have been low paying clubs who have a lot of players who sign for them as they have no other viable better paying options.
Shels are open about paying part time wages for a full time training envioronment.
If Shels want to continue full time next season they will have to pay full time wages, ditto Bohs are moving to full time apparnatly and wont be able to take the Shels 2022 approach now.
Bohs have the cash and Shels look like they are getting some new investment so they will be able to deal with the situation.

[WeAreRovers]

MW is a good idea no doubt but as pointed out needs to be part of an overall strategic pitch to government along with academy funding etc. As a solo run by the PFAI it will only get the backs up of hard pressed clubs.

[joey B]

https://twitter.com/offtheball/status/1590800209994457107

Stephen McGuinness saying here "there’s a cohort of clubs in the first division who want the league to go backwards" ,that's pretty confrontational from PFAI on the issue's at hand......

[Longfordian]

The PFAI want the best deals for their players. Though he never speaks much about where the extra money will actually come from.

[ger121]

https://twitter.com/offtheball/status/1590800209994457107

Stephen McGuinness saying here "there’s a cohort of clubs in the first division who want the league to go backwards" ,that's pretty confrontational from PFAI on the issue's at hand......

I guess he says it like he sees it. He’s always been very blunt and direct with his opinions.

[A N Mouse]

https://twitter.com/offtheball/status/1590800209994457107

Stephen McGuinness saying here "there’s a cohort of clubs in the first division who want the league to go backwards" ,that's pretty confrontational from PFAI on the issue's at hand......

It all a bit bite off your nose to spite your face.

The ideas for where he wants to go are good. But the proposals should be aspirational, and brought in over a period of time, even this minimum wage being introduced overnight seems problematic. There needs to be a roadmap for how to get there, and part of that is a huge increase in sponsorship/prizemoney.


Let ignore outside income and look at these wage proposals purely in terms of gates.

To run a squad of 16 part-timers on minimum wage, over 48 weeks will cost 100K.

16 home matches at €15 a head would need to average more than 400 in attendance, to equal that.

Bring in the spending cap (160K), and you need to be averaging 700 over those 16 games.

You're going to want more than 16 players. (more than 20 too but let's go with that)

20 part-timers on minimum wage will be 125K, that needs average above 500 to equal. Or above 800 with spending cap (200K).

16 full-timers on minimum wage, over 48 weeks will cost 330K.

That's about 1500 attendance over 16 games. Or getting on for 2500 with cap (550K).


Now also bear in mind the minimum no of full-timers proposal. Would effectively see that 550K become a minimum for entry to premier division.

[pineapple stu]

I'd say average ticket price is closer to €8 once you take in concessions, freebies, season ticket discounts, etc

He comes across like a lad demanding a ten grand increase for all the guys on the floor. It's lovely in theory, but in reality the market says ye're not worth that.

[John83]

All of the calculations above seem to ignore all non-salary expenditures at LoI clubs, and even all salary costs not associated with players. I'd guess you can double most of the budgets above, meaning you're demanding an average crowd of 1500 from the team bottom of the first division. This is pie-in-the-sky bull**** and will end badly.

[A N Mouse]

I mean I was being generous giving a first division fixture list and premier division prices. But yeah the disparity is bigger.

I was going for paying a minimum number of players the minimum wage, but even at that there'd be tax and other stuff to add on top of the basic pay. And yeah, bigger squads, other playing and non-playing contracts, admin and other expenses I couldn't even guess.

Some of the 40% factored in with cap would go toward no playing side of things, but you're still looking down the back of the sofa

Has anyone the text of the paywalled article in indo about impact?

[joey B]

Article here:

The unexpected Brexit twist preventing Irish footballers from moving to the UK before their 18th birthday is the most significant thing to happen to the senior club game on these shores in a generation. But the introduction of a minimum wage isn’t far behind.

Our story yesterday confirming the new terms and conditions for players in this country has generated a considerable amount of feedback and debate. There’s a Brexit parallel, too, in the sense that the natural response is to wonder if this will really happen or if ways will be found to get around it. This is why 2023 promises to be a very interesting year for the FAI hierarchy.

The players' union, PFA Ireland, and their members are very happy with negotiations that guarantee senior full-time professionals aged 20 and over a minimum of €430 per week from the start of 2023. Jonas Baer-Hoffmann, the general secretary of global players union FIFPRO, was amongst those to herald the news on social media channels, describing it as a ‘big win’ for their Irish wing.

He added that he’s sure they will be pushing for more, which may be a reference to union dissatisfaction with the minimum wage for part-time players which is set at €130 per week. It’s understood that the hope was that €190 would be the amount, but influential First Division clubs successfully pushed back against that.

Another factor here may also be the likelihood of the Women’s National League transitioning from amateur status to a paid model, with part-time the most likely starting point. Given attendances in that sphere are nowhere near the levels of the men’s game, lower cost bases would be preferable.

But there’s a road to travel before that happens, whereas the new contract conditions for players in the men’s game are now operational, with more than one Premier Division club already offering €430 per week deals to prospective recruits aged 20 or over that might previously have anticipated a smaller offer.

It’s fair to say the response amongst clubs has been lukewarm. Informally reaching out to a variety of officials to ascertain the mood on the ground brings back a consistent reply – that the idea may be good in theory but difficult to operate in practice. And there’s also a degree of resentment around the timeframe, in the sense that it’s coming into place now while clubs feel in a degree of limbo around the FAI’s future funding plans for the league.

Clubs have been hearing encouraging messages from the top about the likelihood of Government support, largely built around investment in academies arising from the aforementioned Brexit game-changer, but impatience is starting to kick in. They feel extra costs are being landed on them before they are ready. “Another run before you can walk thing,” as one source put it.

What are the pitfalls here? There are a few elements to it.

It’s true that at the top end of the league, there are clubs where pretty much every senior player would be earning more than €430 per week.


There are tiers to the system, which means the minimum wage for teenagers is lower – rising year on year from 17 to 19 – and this is the area where a lot of the momentum for this change came from.

Anecdotal evidence exists of youngsters signing ‘professional’ contracts on minuscule amounts and league rules allowed clubs to retain them on that wage.

Yes, if a player emerged as an outstanding talent, their pay would increase, but squads were padded out with individuals on a pittance sharing a dressing room with first-teamers earning proper salaries, albeit in a volatile market. Now there is a baseline that should offer protection to lower-profile aspiring pros.

Read More

Minimum wage of €430 per week to be introduced in League of Ireland
But here’s where the cynicism/pragmatism kicks in. Critics of this move are warning that clubs will now simply run smaller squads and sign fewer professionals.

Young players can still be signed as amateurs and paid travel expenses and if they’ve nowhere else to turn, that’s the gamble they may take. Given that officials at one middle-ranking outfit were arguing at a particular point that a player’s working time was only the period spent on the pitch rather than travelling, this is all about cost-cutting.

And that’s nothing new in a league where cash is tight. Opportunism is required to make ends meet and this is why clubs without significant backing will be exploring ways to ease the budget pressure this change will create for them. Another administrator predicted that clubs that have been described as full-time may now explore hybrid models.

A box on the player’s contract is ticked to denote if they are part-time or full-time. The part-time figure was thrashed out on the basis that these individuals have other sources of income outside of football. Will clubs look for players without another wage to define themselves as part-time to avoid the €430 ceiling? There’s a 'watch this space' element here.

Another gain from the player's perspective is that all players must be paid from the start of pre-season. At First Division level, it remains common for wage payments to only kick in when the competitive season starts and money comes through the gate.

There’s better protection on paper now and also guaranteed wages until November 30, regardless of how early a team’s season ends. This is a contentious one. Experienced heads expect clubs minding their pennies will delay signing players until closer to the start of the new season. Understandable, you could say, but it hardly benefits their chances of competing with fully prepared rivals.

It all comes back to the different philosophies that exist between the haves and the have-nots, a gulf that looks set to widen as the likelihood of a full-time professional top-flight sails into view, even with some prospective participants watching it unfold from their lifeboat. Introducing a minimum wage to a league where members are conditioned to exist off the bare minimum is never going to be easy. From this point, however, there can be no turning back.

[El-Pietro]

If the minimum wage, even part time, applies to womens teams as well, I'd imagine that would lead to a lot of womens teams folding. I don't see how clubs can be expected to financially support a professional and an amateur team on these terms, or two amateur teams, as well as Mens U19, U17, U15 and U14 teams and Womens U19 and U17 teams.
My previous post assumed in the region of 289k for 16 minimum wage professionals and 146k for 16 minimum wage amateurs, over 42 weeks which was pointed out to be underselling it as it would be for 46 weeks. So a team with a Professional Mens team and an Amateur Womens team would have a combined wage bill of €476k if they just had the bare minimum of 16 amateurs and 16 pros.

With the salary cost protocol at 60% this means they need a minimum turnover of €793k. This would require average attendance of 4,958 at an average of €10 a ticket, or 3,305 at an average of €15 a ticket. Again, these gates could be reduced using additional income such as sponsorship, prize money or non existent tv rights, but there are other costs such as pay related PRSI, food, accommodation, travel, running underage teams, stadium maintenance or rent, insurance etc. I'm assuming virtually no income from womens games. Maybe thats unfair.

Realistically only the European teams , or those with significant outside income would have any chance of maintaining two teams.
You would be saying goodbye to the Womens teams from Athlone Town, Cork City, Galway United, Treaty, Shelbourne, Bohemian FC, Sligo Rovers and Wexford most likely. I have no idea if the likes of Peamount and DLR could fund this sort of model.
Would the womens league consist of Derry and Rovers playing each other 30 times a year? Derry don't even have a team in the WNL but given their finances they could support one if they wanted to. Even if some of those teams try to keep a womens team going, imagine a team relying on European income missing out on qualification and having to make a tough decision about their womens team at short notice.

I have no issue with the principle of a minimum wage, and I think our players are dramatically underpaid, but its not because we have wealthy owners screwing over the players and keeping money in their pockets. The majority of our clubs are largely struggling to keep the show on the road and are probably overinvested in their first teams. Cork City had several seasons of turnover close to 2 million, but a couple of bad seasons and missing out on European qualification sent us to the brink. This is a common story in the league.

These changes are going to have a significant impact on the league with several teams having to consider whether they need to go amateur, or drop out entirely (whether that be the mens or womens league or both), which would be totally fine if we were in a position where we had plenty of teams waiting for their opportunity to replace them, but we know thats not the case. We had a 9 team first division this year. We might be looking back in a few years at the glory days of the 9 team first division.

[pineapple stu]

I think our players are dramatically underpaid [...] The majority of our clubs are largely struggling to keep the show on the road and are probably overinvested in their first teams.
I don't think both of these can be true at the same time to be honest. If clubs are struggling to keep the show on the road, then arguably the players are overpaid.

If what you do only gets, let's say, 500 people to pay €10 once a fortnight, 20 times over a year, then your salary is going to have to reflect that. Football differs with other jobs of course in that for many it's a hobby, and there's a gradient between those who are, say, paying €200/year in subs to play park football, who are exempted from club fees by being on a first team (I presume), who get €50 a week and are quite pleased that they're actually getting paid to play football, who are on €200 a week and are getting through college on that, who are on €400 a week and are expected to make that a full-time career, and who are earning a grand a week plus Euro bonuses

I'd be interested to hear how much McGuinness and the PFAI have lobbied the FAI for increased prize money for the league down the years, with the FAI's revenues increasing five-fold or so since the turn of the century. Very little, I'd imagine. Wouldn't want to risk getting turfed out of their offices.

[El-Pietro]

I don't think both of these can be true at the same time to be honest. If clubs are struggling to keep the show on the road, then arguably the players are overpaid.

If what you do only gets, let's say, 500 people to pay €10 once a fortnight, 20 times over a year, then your salary is going to have to reflect that. Football differs with other jobs of course in that for many it's a hobby, and there's a gradient between those who are, say, paying €200/year in subs to play park football, who are exempted from club fees by being on a first team (I presume), who get €50 a week and are quite pleased that they're actually getting paid to play football, who are on €200 a week and are getting through college on that, who are on €400 a week and are expected to make that a full-time career, and who are earning a grand a week plus Euro bonuses

I'd be interested to hear how much McGuinness and the PFAI have lobbied the FAI for increased prize money for the league down the years, with the FAI's revenues increasing five-fold or so since the turn of the century. Very little, I'd imagine. Wouldn't want to risk getting turfed out of their offices.
I get your point and don't disagree with it, but I think for the work/effort they put in they deserve to be compensated more. But football salaries don't exactly correlate with effort/work in the way other jobs do.

[pineapple stu]

Why do they deserve more though? It'd be nice for sure, and I get there's hours put in and they're also expected to look after themselves and stay out of pubs and chippers and so on. But "deserve" is a strong word.

Is it because it's a sport? I play chess in the top division in Ireland, and I've played in the Champions League alongside some of the top players in the world (including guys making millions), where most teams had sponsors and backers of some sort. It takes work/effort to get to that level, but I had to pay my way.

Do I deserve to be compensated more?

If you're not generating money, I don't see why you deserve to get paid more. College American footballers deserve to get paid more because there's guys making millions off them and they get nothing. But I don't think LoI footballers deserve more at the current time. And nor do I, much and all as I'd like it

[nigel-harps1954]

One thing worth noting.

We've talked about the effects of Brexit, keeping young players in Ireland, and getting proper transfer fees for them.

I would argue that this could have a negative impact on young players moving forward, as they'll remain on amateur contracts longer, in turn hurting clubs financially if they move on. There'll be a reluctance from clubs to give young lads on the fringes of a squad the minimum €130 a week on a part time contract.

[pineapple stu]

Probably fairly minimal transfer fees for a guy on a ton a week?

But I guess every bit counts really.

[nigel-harps1954]

Probably fairly minimal transfer fees for a guy on a ton a week?

But I guess every bit counts really.

More than one would get for an amateur player though. Absolutely every bit counts in this league.

[Kiki Balboa]

Seen the interview with Stephen McGuiness on 'off the ball'.


It kind of left a bad taste in my mouth about it all, to be honest. It really comes across as if he stands against the league and its clubs.


There is a common interest for everyone, the clubs, players, fans, and the FAI, that league develops sustainably. To be honest, I am not sure about the economics of the league to have an opinion on the minimum wage. I feel like it's a good thing, but I do not know the reality on the ground.


But what I do know is Nobody is getting rich in this league or hoarding money away from players. In fact, when most teams financially struggle it's because they spend too high on wages.


I get the league is tough on players and there is little money in it, but
McGuiness going on national media and speaking so negatively about the league does nobody any use. Creating a boogeyman out of presumable clubs like Longford or Athlone is not helping anyone. The league has greatly improved for players too with clubs far more stable than 10 years ago. I genuinely do not understand it as surely this too hurts the PFAI players by being so against the work of the league.

[sbgawa]

Mcguiness loves himself, he is a poor representative for the players

[Martinho II]

Mcguiness loves himself, he is a poor representative for the players

McG strikes me as more of a union head than an ex loi player bit like Fran Gavin in the past!

[EalingGreen]

Would the womens league consist of Derry and Rovers playing each other 30 times a year? Derry don't even have a team in the WNL but given their finances they could support one if they wanted to.

Point of information: Derry City Women play in the Northern Ireland Womens Premiership, whose (summer) season has just ended.

The NIWP, an amateur* league which is run by the NI Football League (i.e. alongside the Mens' top 3 divisions), consists of 8 teams**, but DC Women have just endured a terrible season, winless, shipping loads of goals and finishing bottom:
https://www.nifootballleague.com/womens-premiership/2022/standings/

Have to say I know nothing about their set-up, but I can't imagine DCFCs benefactor is putting much (any?) money into them. Indeed they may be in the NI set-up because travel costs are lower than if playing in ROI (guessing).

Otherwise, an interesting discussion, which may have tangential consequences for the IL, seeing as it has several Southern-based players playing in it.


* - There is talk of Glentoran, who have their own benefactor, providing some sort of payment scheme for at least some of their players.

** - For the season just passed, the NIWL was expanded to 8 teams, with the elevation from the Championship of Lisburn Ladies (did ok) and Mid Ulster Ladies (struggled). It is planned that it will be expanded further to 10 teams (not sure when).

[NeverFeltBetter]

WNL getting similar rules: https://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2022/1130/1339200-professional-deals-and-minimum-wage-introduced-to-wnl/

[sbgawa]

WNL getting similar rules: https://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2022/1130/1339200-professional-deals-and-minimum-wage-introduced-to-wnl/

How can you justify same wages for the woman when the crowds and sponsorships are so much less.
If anything this could prevent womans teams giving out contracts i would have thought...

[pineapple stu]

I think it's more that if they're going to be full-time, then they should get the same basic level of pay.

That doesn't mean they'll get the same pay as the vast majority won't be full-time, and those that are will likely be on the bare minimum, which won't be the case with Rovers, etc

But yeah, anyone picking up €100/week for a hobby is going to get stung

[WeAreRovers]

Big win for Rovers and Women's football in Ireland. Other clubs were dead set against Rovers WNL side being semi-pro next season but unlike the Rovers II debacle the FAI/League have refused to bow down to clubs standing in the way of progress.