Scrap 65% Wage Cap?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03/07/2008, 10:30 PM
A face

Scrap 65% Wage Cap?

Is it time to scrap the 65% wage cap? I mean there is no way its being enforced now. The accounts were meant to be review every month in so far as i understood it anyway.

What the point in having it if its not going to be policed, its only got club tittering on the edge of it or tip toeing around it and losing out as a result or the other extreme where clubs are blatantly ignoring the rule as if it doesn't exist.

Or was the rule just something so the powers that be could be seen to be doing something for the league?
03/07/2008, 10:36 PM
Sam_Heggy

There is 2 clubs currently in the Premier division that can not sign players as a result of the wage cap.
03/07/2008, 10:39 PM
TheBoss

I think a rule like that should be implemented to teams that are struggling financially, cause top level teams can cover some of the debt quite easily.
03/07/2008, 10:43 PM
gufct

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBoss

I think a rule like that should be implemented to teams that are struggling financially, cause top level teams can cover some of the debt quite easily.

?????????????????????
03/07/2008, 10:46 PM
A face

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBoss

I think a rule like that should be implemented to teams that are struggling financially, cause top level teams can cover some of the debt quite easily.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gufct

?????????????????????

??????? = Shelbourne

€100,000 debt = struggling financially

€1,000,000,000,000 debt = struggling financially (but considerably more of a headache and far more damaging for the league)
03/07/2008, 10:49 PM
The Rebel Ram

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBoss

I think a rule like that should be implemented to teams that are struggling financially, cause top level teams can cover some of the debt quite easily.

If a club is in debt it is in debt it doesn't matter if you are 'Top Level' or not. One rule should apply
I don't think it should be scraped but I do think it should be enforced. A random testing of two clubs per month or something like that would proably be the best way of enforcing it. I believe there are clubs falsifing accounts to support players wages.
03/07/2008, 10:51 PM
TheBoss

My mind sometimes wanders :D
03/07/2008, 10:55 PM
A face

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBoss

My mind sometimes wanders :D

Its alright fella, you're not on your own. The FAI's collective mind is wandering too. I just wish it would wander past their 'brand spanking new rule' sometime soon.

Who'll be talking to Miriam O'Callaghan for the next Prime Time show that focuses on an eL catastrophe?
03/07/2008, 11:06 PM
DmanDmythDledge

I would imgine Galway are one of the clubs over the limit as number of players leaving and nobody coming in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBoss

I think a rule like that should be implemented to teams that are struggling financially, cause top level teams can cover some of the debt quite easily.

Debt wasn't the only reason the cap was implemented, hopefully clubs will spend some of the 35% remaining on youth development, facilities and marketing/promotion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rebel Ram

A random testing of two clubs per month or something like that would proably be the best way of enforcing it. I believe there are clubs falsifing accounts to support players wages.

All clubs are checked every month. No need for random testing- they all it's coming.

No clubs would have false accounts as they would be checked by an independent auditor. You would be hard pressed to find an auditor that would sign false accounts.
03/07/2008, 11:23 PM
Ceirtlis

Its a very good rule in my opinion and well worth sticking with. Ever since full-time football came into the league it has been a case of the top teams spending money, winning the league, finding they have gone in to deep and cutting spending allowing another team that is spending too much money to win the league. The only problem is that budgets can go up in smoke if the team is not doing well on the pitch and wage cuts and fire sales are needed to get back into line, see Galway United.
03/07/2008, 11:55 PM
CharlesThompson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceirtlis

Its a very good rule in my opinion and well worth sticking with. Ever since full-time football came into the league it has been a case of the top teams spending money, winning the league, finding they have gone in to deep and cutting spending allowing another team that is spending too much money to win the league. The only problem is that budgets can go up in smoke if the team is not doing well on the pitch and wage cuts and fire sales are needed to get back into line, see Galway United.

Nail on the head. Take a bow Ceirtlis!
04/07/2008, 12:48 AM
MariborKev

Quote:

Originally Posted by DmanDmythDledge

No clubs would have false accounts as they would be checked by an independent auditor. You would be hard pressed to find an auditor that would sign false accounts.

I think you'd find plenty who sign them off "with qualifications" which is when you know there could be a problem.
04/07/2008, 12:57 AM
stann

Quote:

Originally Posted by A face

Is it time to scrap the 65% wage cap? I mean there is no way its being enforced now. The accounts were meant to be review every month in so far as i understood it anyway.

What the point in having it if its not going to be policed, its only got club tittering on the edge of it or tip toeing around it and losing out as a result or the other extreme where clubs are blatantly ignoring the rule as if it doesn't exist.

Or was the rule just something so the powers that be could be seen to be doing something for the league?

I don't think that's fair, I think it is being enforced on the whole, Galway for one being the proof of that. I think there were always going to be clubs struggling with it in the first year as it required a new way of thinking, and maybe a club or two has been given a bit of month-to-month leeway, particularly in months where they've had lower numbers of home games as happens regularly in the first, at least, but as it goes on clubs will be more aware of having to budget through the season for it.
I know that in our own case it has been a struggle to match the percentage, due to poor attendances rather than a high budget, but through controlled injection of the fundraising cash they've managed to stay compliant, thus far at least. I don't know if it's happened with us but if a club has one home game in one given month and goes over the 65% cap, so long as they are under by a similar amount the next month when they have three home games then I don't see that as a problem.
04/07/2008, 1:25 AM
dcfcsteve

Quote:

Originally Posted by A face

Is it time to scrap the 65% wage cap? I mean there is no way its being enforced now. The accounts were meant to be review every month in so far as i understood it anyway.

What the point in having it if its not going to be policed, its only got club tittering on the edge of it or tip toeing around it and losing out as a result or the other extreme where clubs are blatantly ignoring the rule as if it doesn't exist.

Or was the rule just something so the powers that be could be seen to be doing something for the league?

Is the FAI no longer policing the accounts ?

Are there multiple clubs clearly in breach of it ?
04/07/2008, 8:05 AM
Macy

Something that was designed to mean sustainable development of the league has been rendered worthless by all the get out's regarding "donations". It's not that it's not being enforced, it's that the rule is pointless with the loopholes they allowed.
04/07/2008, 8:22 AM
forza rovers

were not getting any players in because of the wage cap
04/07/2008, 8:37 AM
WoodquayBoy

I think what is happening with/at my club shows the wage cap IS working. Letting clubs spend money they don't have does the league no favours. I don't agree with the begrudgery I have heard from some people (not necessarily on this forum) saying it is okay for the likes of Patds and Drogs, they have big backers so the rule effectively does not apply to them.
Well tough tittie, good luck to them, I would love to have someone with a scatter of money pumping euros into United, but just because we don't is no reason to give off about clubs that have.
So no, for me, they shouldn't scrap the wage cap
04/07/2008, 8:42 AM
dublinred

Quote:

Originally Posted by forza rovers

were not getting any players in because of the wage cap

I heard we got a tip off that a club may appeal relegation on the grounds that they had to enforce the wage cap and were hence unable to buy players to stay up so a lot of clubs are doing a bit of housekeeping now. It would be a good rule if it applied to operational income but it is abused by donations and money from ground sales.
04/07/2008, 8:55 AM
Paraic

Quote:

Originally Posted by A face

Who'll be talking to Miriam O'Callaghan for the next Prime Time show that focuses on an eL catastrophe?

My vote would go to Tom, sligobrewer and dcfcsteve..

And back on topic, AFAIK, the accounts are reviewed monthly and there's clear evidence of that in terms of the way the clubs mentioned already have reacted. It's forcing clubs to really take stock of the reality of overspending.

There doesnt seem to be the major scramble for players during this transfer window, (but perhaps it's early days yet) and that would suggest that it's impacting all clubs to an extent. If you look at it, take a club with �40k weekly wage bill, assuming a full year gives you approximately �2m. [Now it's probably lower in the off season cos bonuses aren't paid etc] But these clubs still have to raise/receive about �1m extra to make the 65% rule.

Bloody mad money, don't know how it's sustainable, but I've no doubt that the cap is working at focussing minds if nothing else.
04/07/2008, 10:19 AM
John83

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceirtlis

Its a very good rule in my opinion and well worth sticking with. Ever since full-time football came into the league it has been a case of the top teams spending money, winning the league, finding they have gone in to deep and cutting spending allowing another team that is spending too much money to win the league. The only problem is that budgets can go up in smoke if the team is not doing well on the pitch and wage cuts and fire sales are needed to get back into line, see Galway United.

Well said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodquayBoy

I think what is happening with/at my club shows the wage cap IS working. Letting clubs spend money they don't have does the league no favours.

Exactly. It clearly is working to some extent. Maybe it's not perfect, maybe there are clubs trying to bend it, but ultimately it's beating financial sense into a load of clubs who would otherwise happily rack up a quarter of a million or more debt in a season just to tread water. There's always a lot of talk about "sustainability" of the league - well, this is it. No more Shels, no more Dublin Cities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paraic

And back on topic, AFAIK, the accounts are reviewed monthly and there's clear evidence of that in terms of the way the clubs mentioned already have reacted. It's forcing clubs to really take stock of the reality of overspending.

That's what they said at the FAI fans forum at the start of the season. They had a guy there whose only job is to check those monthly accounts. I've also heard from a Bray official that they have to submit those accounts - so they are being checked.

The wage cap is a good idea. If there are loopholes which allow a club go into debt paying wages, then close them. Either way, keep the rule.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page