Printable View
I would think its illegal to say that players cannot earn more than X amount. Easier to introduce rule that says clubs cannot spend more than X on total wage bill.
€950k for Aussie players wage bill is very low at i think for maybe 18 or so 1st team squad players.
I don't think bringing hasbeens like Yorke would do anything for the eL.
No - but it would mean a bonanza for adult shops. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
It'd be wrong to make a straight comparison anyway, cost of living far lower than here. A women who worked here recently emigrated and reckoned 2:1 when taking exchange rate and cost of living into account, but I'm sure there's people here that have done the oz thing....Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
the only proper way forward for the league is serious investment in coaching for young players&attacking the bar stooler mentality so ppl might give the league a chance. but i do think it'd be good for the league if somehow a cupla dublin clubs merged. for a city of a million+ people&shels, who have to be regarded as the best club at the moment, can only get 800-900 for a game whereas ourselves get 1600 in the graveyard division
If my club was to fold so that a new franchise could be formed then I wouldn't follow it, and I am sure most people would feel the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red4Eva
You can't just force an artificial affinity to a club, it has to be developped.
What you are suggesting is that the clubs that we have all followed for years should be destroyed so that we can try and attract some people to games with no interest in Irish football?
direct those comments to rocky seery and his chf cheerleaders!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatGuy
i totally agree that's why i said somehowQuote:
Originally Posted by ThatGuy
Jesus, this is the worst idea yet. The possibly workable point from that article is a salary cap. I think English rugby league operates a cap of some percentage of turnover. I'm open to correction on that but if true, it must be legal in the EU and would be a good way to go IMO. The rest of the stuff in the article are so stupid as to not require comment.
The CIA World Factbook credits Australia with a population of 20million +. Are we to understand that attendances of 11,000 in an eight-club league with this population base, in a sports-crazed culture, is being held up as an astonishingly successful turnaround? Socceroos or suckers?
I hope any consultants who do the sums on this have a better grasp of arithmetic as it relates to a population of around one fifth of Oz's. They can do the sums -- it's what they're paid for -- but that is either on a par or actually worse than EL's proportionate position.
As it is, if true, 6% growth year on year is a respectable performance. Better to build on a solid if modest model, and for once provide it some decent funding that reflects the strength of participation in the game, than to pull down the whole thing in search of some spectacular revival.
Especially if this madcap scheme includes a group hug with Shels, and Bohs supporters having to learn that puerile injun chant!
From the BBC Sport websiteQuote:
Originally Posted by Schumi
Quote:
Rugby League
First introduced a decade ago, clubs were limited to £1.7m on players' salaries in 2005
Rugby union
Premiership clubs operate under a maximum annual wage bill of £2m
American football
No team in the NFL can spend more than £47m ($85m) on wages in 2005. If they do financial penalties are shared between other teams
Basketball
NBA franchises are limited to £25.5m ($46m) but rules are bent for long-serving players
Baseball
Teams with a high wage bill pay a "luxury tax" which is shared among the other teams
Ice Hockey
The 2004/5 season was called off due to disagreements over a cap but an agreement has now been reached
Australian Rules
Has been in place since the 1980s but is different for each team based on geography and the cost of living
Thanks, didn't know that rugby union had one in England too.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmac
6% growth in the EL? Where's that figure from?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
as far as i know the NY Yankee's (baseball) break their wage cap by loads every year because they can easily afford to pay the fines.
Second last par of the Indo piece. Don't know where it's sourced though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schumi
Sumed up perfectly....Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatGuy
that's true, the "luxury tax" is sufficient to deter most teams though. Even the reigning champions (RedSox) are regularly considering trading one of their best players (Manny Ramirez) because of the huge money he's on. Spreading the tax amongst other clubs acts as an extra deterrant though, can't see many clubs in Ireland willing to give money to their rivals just to have the privilege of paying more wages.Quote:
Originally Posted by blutil
Oh yeah, see that now. Misread it as being Australia's increase for some reason. Wonder is it just guesswork (seems unlikely given the specific figure) or from the official figures given to the FAI.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
Then how come Cork City get bigger crowds than the Dub teams?Quote:
Originally Posted by thejollyrodger
How do you explain the existence of Harps, Sligo, Cobh, etc.
To merely dismiss the interest in soccer that exists outside the pale is a foolish way to look at things. Granted, there isn't enough of a population to support a major football team in most rural areas, but that doesn't mean that there is no interest there.
Soccer was always far and away the most popular sport where I grew up (middle of nowhere, turn left). Much of the crowd that Cork City draws comes from towns and villages outside the city.
At the end of the day, it's the most popular sport all over the island and needs to develop across all areas and sectors in order for this league to thrive. Merely looking at attendances in Jackeen-land won't ever help the league to grow to it's full potential.
I think that Cork people buy into the whole "People's Republic" stuff, and closely identify themselves with their county, which isn't really the same in Dublin. Cork City seem to effectively be county reprsentatives it seems too. And of course they are doing well at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by liamon
Because it's a merger.Quote:
Originally Posted by liamon
We Dubs might envy CC attendances, but not so much that we all want to follow one team, or fewer teams (apart from dropping CHF and UCD).
No Sirreee! :D
Hits the nail on the head for me. Non-Dublin clubs have several advantages. Most of them are named after and wholly represent an entire town or county. Particularly with Cork when this is combined with minor centre/perhiphery resentment and being the club with the largest single city to themselves it helps. Someone pointed out that UCD's crowd at the League Cup final was half the last two finals. However when a Dublin club reaches a final it does not have the same effect in mobilising the town/county pride into a big day out wherever the game may be, particularly the capital.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatGuy