Salary caps

[BetterRedthanBlue]

I note that is says "Their statement added: "Any contract entered into on or prior to the vote will be capped at an agreed divisional average until that contract expires.""

I guess this means as rovers have done their shopping early say they pay a player £3k a week (highly unlikely but this is a hypothetical situation) and the agreed rate is £1k they would still be in budget which feels wrong. 

[WolfOfWestStreet]

27 minutes ago, BetterRedthenBlue said:

I note that is says "Their statement added: "Any contract entered into on or prior to the vote will be capped at an agreed divisional average until that contract expires.""

I guess this means as rovers have done their shopping early say they pay a player £3k a week (highly unlikely but this is a hypothetical situation) and the agreed rate is £1k they would still be in budget which feels wrong. 

You have to start somewhere to be fair and this seems like a solid compromise. We really need this to future proof our leagues and stop this pay to win mentality. 

[BetterRedthanBlue]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12044582/pfa-salary-cap-for-league-one-and-league-two-clubs-unlawful-and-unenforceable

Well that took long. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Hmm says nothing about under 21s in that article.

Agree with the idea but it always amuses me that a club punishment for overspending is a fine.  

That said the fine would be automatic and separate to the Disciplinary Commission. The basic tariffs tbh. 

PFA have been whinging right through this Pandemic tbh. No revenue, no salary if they prefer?

[Mr Popodopolous]

This is drastic but if the PFA don't wind their neck in how about an owners strike.

All for one and one for all. Owners subsidise these losses at quite a few clubs, unity of purpose.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This is drastic but if the PFA don't wind their neck in how about an owners strike.

All for one and one for all. Owners subsidise these losses at quite a few clubs, unity of purpose.

It is true that owners subsidise losses but, pandemic aside, they are also responsible for the financial mess clubs find themselves in. If they refused to pay silly money on wages and transfers alike their clubs would be in a more stable financial situation. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

It is true that owners subsidise losses but, pandemic aside, they are also responsible for the financial mess clubs find themselves in. If they refused to pay silly money on wages and transfers alike their clubs would be in a more stable financial situation. 

I don't disagree with that. I guess I'm just finding the actions of, statements by the PFA in these times to be increasingly irksome.

[ExiledAjax]

22 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Hmm says nothing about under 21st in that article.

Agree with the idea but it always amuses me that a club punishment for overspending is a fine.  

That said the fine would be automatic and separate to the Disciplinary Commission. The basic tariffs tbh. 

PFA have been whinging right through this Pandemic tbh. No revenue, no salary if they prefer?

Makes more sense to me to look to the Saracens rugby case as a precedent. Without going through the whole case they were handed a 35 point deduction (equivalent to anything between 21 and 45 point deduction in the EFL*) plus a fine of over £5m or about 70% of the relevant cap of £7m (plus 2 marquee players). Now they broke the rules in 3 consecutive seasons so it was a very serious breach. Perhaps in the EFL for a "standard" breach you'd be looking at a 15 point deduction, to be applied in the season in which the judgment was handed down, plus perhaps instead of a fine you have £X deducted from your future salary cap for Y years - and you then taper back to the full Cap limit?

*Based on the fact that 35 points is equivalent to 7 Rugby bonus point wins of 4+1 points, but 7 games is 1/3 of a Rugby season - which would be 15 games for us. So either 7*3 = 21 or 15*3 = 45. If the idea of the punishment was to all but guarantee relegation then you'd lean towards the higher limit of that tariff.

[bristolcitysweden]

There need be support from the state for L2 to go ahead.  My prediction is that there will be no L2 2020/21 season. Who is going to pay?? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Makes more sense to me to look to the Saracens rugby case as a precedent. Without going through the whole case they were handed a 35 point deduction (equivalent to anything between 21 and 45 point deduction in the EFL*) plus a fine of over £5m or about 70% of the relevant cap of £7m (plus 2 marquee players). Now they broke the rules in 3 consecutive seasons so it was a very serious breach. Perhaps in the EFL for a "standard" breach you'd be looking at a 15 point deduction, to be applied in the season in which the judgment was handed down, plus perhaps instead of a fine you have £X deducted from your future salary cap for Y years - and you then taper back to the full Cap limit?

*Based on the fact that 35 points is equivalent to 7 Rugby bonus point wins of 4+1 points, but 7 games is 1/3 of a Rugby season - which would be 15 games for us. So either 7*3 = 21 or 15*3 = 45. If the idea of the punishment was to all but guarantee relegation then you'd lean towards the higher limit of that tariff.

I think one of the planned ideas at our level was beyond certain ranges, 5% overspend initially allowed and then beyond that some other tariffs and then beyond that, the big one.

£3 fine per £1 of overspend. This would be an automatic penalty. 

Additionally, you would be referred to a Disciplinary Commission, with the usual range of sanctions.

Further, providing deliberately misleading info, this would be an offence in of itself. This in addition to the above would be a punishment, automatic points deduction.

Saracens seems a fair starting point IMO.

With respect to the fines, the plan I believe is to split them between compliant clubs.

[Robin101]

Whilst this is seemingly unfair on Sunderland, you have to remember that they are a massive club for League One. They’re very much the anomaly, and it’s very much their fault they’re down there. 

You’d still think that their facilities etc would make them far more attractive than their rivals. In fact, if this encourages clubs to sell themselves as good for development, improve their facilities etc. in order to attract players then surely that’s good. 

[havanatopia]

I would have thought a salary cap should have started at the top and worked down. As it stands the Championship could fail to agree and the gap between level 2 and 3 will only widen further. 

In principle its a good idea but in reality I give it a less than 50% chance we will not be back here in a year's time re hashing it.

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, TomF said:

£5-10m at a guess

£18m has been suggested which magically works out at 25 players at the league average salary of £720k per annum.

3 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Well a 25 man squad on 2000 a week each would be over the 2.5 limit.

Of course that's on average. First team would be on more than most reserves. But that does seem a bit low I think.

Talk of 22 man squads at Lg1/2, no idea if that is the case.

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

£18m to then be reduced to £2.5m upon relegation. Brutally out of sync - for clubs being promoted L1 > Champ and those relegated the other way. 

In which case start writing contracts with relegation reduction clauses!!!

3 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Ta. Isn't there something different for under 21s when it comes to being registered?

Yes, I read that u21 wages will be deducted, as will any monies received from outbound loans.

I think we will start to see clubs going with younger players.

[ExiledAjax]

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

In which case start writing contracts with relegation reduction clauses!!!

It actually makes it way easier to do this as well. Stops much of the potential negotiation around it. Just refer to the Salary Cap regulations and state that your hands are tied. I guess this is one of the aims of the legislation.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

It actually makes it way easier to do this as well. Stops much of the potential negotiation around it. Just refer to the Salary Cap regulations and state that your hands are tied. I guess this is one of the aims of the legislation.

There already are but not to the levels required. Certainly between PL and Championship most often, and on occasion between Championship and League One.

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

There already are but not to the levels required. Certainly between PL and Championship most often, and on occasion between Championship and League One.

Yeh I know. My point is that the cap would allow you to standardise it across a squad. Would stop a big player coming in and negotiating less of a reduction.

Thinking about it I guess you might saw more automatic release clauses. Prevents the Sunderland/Rodwell type situation cropping up again.

[Davefevs]

17 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

It actually makes it way easier to do this as well. Stops much of the potential negotiation around it. Just refer to the Salary Cap regulations and state that your hands are tied. I guess this is one of the aims of the legislation.

You can still pay players what you like....just you’ll be financially penalised for it

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 08/08/2020 at 11:51, Davefevs said:

You can still pay players what you like....just you’ll be financially penalised for it

That's an intended automatic penalty, plus the Independent Disciplinary Commission- unsure which scenario would see that aspect kick in. Perhaps a referral for anyone over limits is in addition to the fine?

Further talk though seems to have been little in this thusfar, of automatic points penalties for misleading/incorrect/downright false disclosure. This was in addition to the fine and Independent Disciplinary Commission.

Ah yeah, the fines- my post below links the article  but the planned sanctions/fines/punishments albeit at League One.

Quote

HOW WILL CLUB SPENDING BE MONITORED?

The EFL have pledged to monitor the cap in a ‘real-time basis’ to prevent clubs from signing players that would see them breach the restrictions.

HOW WILL CLUBS BE PUNISHED FOR BREACHING THE CAPS?

 

 

Fines for breaching the squad cap by up to five per cent have been set by the EFL.

In League One, clubs face a set fine for overrunning their wage bill by up to £125,000.

The fines are set as follows

- Between zero and two per cent overspend - 50p for every £1 over spent.

 

 

Example: A club breaches the League One cap by £25,000. They will be fined £12,500.

- Between two and four per cent overspend - £1 for every £1 over spent.

Example: A club breaches the League One cap by £75,000. They will be fined £75,000.

- Between four and five per cent overspend - £3 for every £1 over spent.

 

 

Example: A club breaches the League One cap by £125,000. They will be fined £375,000.

Any club overspending by more than five per cent will be immediately referred to an independent disciplinary commission, who will determine the punishment.

The EFL have warned of ‘serious consequences for intentional misconduct.’

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE FINES?

 

 

The EFL have termed the fines as a ‘luxury tax.’ The total amount of the fine will be redistributed to clubs who comply with the restrictions.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Nice little article on it too, saw it linked via Blades Analytic the other day.

https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/explained-how-new-squad-salary-caps-league-one-will-affect-clubs-including-doncaster-rovers-2936369

I can either see it running really quite smoothly or being a complete fiasco- see the QPR 2014 'Fair Play Tax' debacle! That system was not dissimilar...? Odd how History if not repeats but rhymes.

Wonder if in 5-10 years we will see owners once again fed up- a new set of owners that is- that they cannot spread the risk and bring in a system not identical to but quite like our current FFP! 

When it was planned at our level, under the old (simple) FFP, the 'luxury tax' idea did not find favour with the PL- Shaun Harvey said in 2014- under the one year system that had similarities to this, and yet now they are bringing it back albeit in a new system!!

Round and round we go...?

[bcfc01]

On 08/08/2020 at 11:51, Davefevs said:

You can still pay players what you like....just you’ll be financially penalised for it

I think there will be all sorts of payments outside of salaries to make a club an attractive proposition.

It is alleged that some Rugby professionals have benefits such as housing payments, car provision (his and hers), subsistence allowances, etc etc. It happens in regular companies who are hamstrung with salary scales so I don't see why it won't happen in the EFL (if it doesn't already on a small scale).

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

I think there will be all sorts of payments outside of salaries to make a club an attractive proposition.

It is alleged that some Rugby professionals have benefits such as housing payments, car provision (his and hers), subsistence allowances, etc etc. It happens in regular companies who are hamstrung with salary scales so I don't see why it won't happen in the EFL (if it doesn't already on a small scale).

Benefits in kind may well be included with respect to salary caps. They already are with respect to EFL regulations- Andy Holt the excellent owner of Accrington got pulled up by the EFL- and this is laughable tbh- for buying Accrington a McDonalds post game. Nothing came of it.

The point is they are monitoring these things rigorously- and intentionally misleading the EFL can/would lead to serious consequences (Of course if the club is in the PL then it's like the old system whereby if you cheated during the season and went up the EFL had to wait for the club to return).

Now it doesn't specifically and explicitly state "Benefits in kind"- but it's a pretty broad brush so good chance it includes them- "Other fees and expenses paid directly or indirectly to players"- this feels relatively pertinent in this context.

Quote

WHAT DOES THE WAGE CAP COVER?

The cap does not stop at basic wages, in a bid to prevent clubs circumnavigating restrictions by offering bonuses and incentives.

The cap includes

 

 

- basic wages

- taxes

- bonuses

- image rights

 

 

- agents’ fees

- other fees and expenses paid directly or indirectly to players.

 

[bcfc01]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Benefits in kind may well be included with respect to salary caps. They already are with respect to EFL regulations- Andy Holt the excellent owner of Accrington got pulled up by the EFL- and this is laughable tbh- for buying Accrington a McDonalds post game. Nothing came of it.

The point is they are monitoring these things rigorously- and intentionally misleading the EFL can/would lead to serious consequences (Of course if the club is in the PL then it's like the old system whereby if you cheated during the seaosn and went up the EFL had to wait for the club to return).

Really ?

I find it hard to believe they would do anything rigorously tbh.

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Really ?

I find it hard to believe they would do anything rigorously tbh.

 

 

Might be different with Parry to Harvey- it's supposed to be in-season monitoring- but I think it'll either be very smooth or complete fiasco. 

Won't be any middle ground though I'm sure. 

[Davefevs]

55 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's an intended automatic penalty, plus the Independent Disciplinary Commission- unsure which scenario would see that aspect kick in. Perhaps a referral for anyone over limits is in addition to the fine?

Further talk though seems to have been little in this thusfar, of automatic points penalties for misleading/incorrect/downright false disclosure. This was in addition to the fine and Independent Disciplinary Commission.

Ah yeah, the fines- my post below links the article  but the planned sanctions/fines/punishments albeit at League One.

 

Sorry, what I was trying to say was that you could pay one player £18m and the rest of your squad play for free.  But if you then decide to pay that player £25m, you’re gonna get a fine.

19 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Really ?

I find it hard to believe they would do anything rigorously tbh.

 

 

I’ve read some stuff that says it will all be reportable via company HR data, so I fully expect P11D / Benefits stuff to come into it.

Id rather the Champ wait a year, find all the loopholes and then implement it.  All owners buy into that process, and if they think they’ve found a novel way of paying an employee that didn’t come up in the year of consultation, then they must seek agreement before they start using that method.

to use an example.

Club start paying the players Agent instead of the player paying it, reducing player salary as a result.  Nobody had thought of that idea during the consultation period.  Club should’ve sought approval before using that method.  When the EFL find out, they punish them for not following the process and if the committee agree it’s invalid they punish them again.

[Mr Popodopolous]

59 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Sorry, what I was trying to say was that you could pay one player £18m and the rest of your squad play for free.  But if you then decide to pay that player £25m, you’re gonna get a fine.

I’ve read some stuff that says it will all be reportable via company HR data, so I fully expect P11D / Benefits stuff to come into it.

Id rather the Champ wait a year, find all the loopholes and then implement it.  All owners buy into that process, and if they think they’ve found a novel way of paying an employee that didn’t come up in the year of consultation, then they must seek agreement before they start using that method.

to use an example.

Club start paying the players Agent instead of the player paying it, reducing player salary as a result.  Nobody had thought of that idea during the consultation period.  Club should’ve sought approval before using that method.  When the EFL find out, they punish them for not following the process and if the committee agree it’s invalid they punish them again.

Yeah, with you now. Makes sense, no individual cap but more to one player, the less to the rest.

Agreed. A year will be sensible, use that to iron out any flaws. It's a bit more pressing at the lower levels IMO. 

Seems a sensible policy. It covers a lot that one for bottom two divisions...I assume wheezes like paying the WAG of the player an inordinately high amount as a Secretary or admin/waitress staff would all be picked up on.

Thinking notably in the bottom 2 divisions where salary caps are £2.5m and £1.5m respectively (I believe). This level, the idea of having to seek approval- I'd say at EFL meetings so that the idea is either open to everyone or closed off and clear.

[Davefevs]

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Yeah, with you now. Makes sense, no individual cap but more to one player, the less to the rest.

Agreed. A year will be sensible, use that to iron out any flaws. It's a bit more pressing at the lower levels IMO. 

Seems a sensible policy. It covers a lot that one for bottom two divisions...I assume wheezes like paying the WAG of the player an inordinately high amount as a Secretary or admin/waitress staff would all be picked up on.

Thinking notably in the bottom 2 divisions where salary caps are £2.5m and £1.5m respectively (I believe). This level, the idea of having to seek approval- I'd say at EFL meetings so that the idea is either open to everyone or closed off and clear.

I think they will have to disclose HR Payroll records.

[The Bard]

100% certain to be a completely ineffective system.

 

If Premiership rugby can't get it right with only 12 clubs and British ownership then the EFL has sod all hope given the kind of ownership in football. Accountants field day

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

100% certain to be a completely ineffective system.

 

If Premiership rugby can't get it right with only 12 clubs and British ownership then the EFL has sod all hope given the kind of ownership in football. Accountants field day

How did Premiership Rugby not get it right out of interest?

Rick Parry as a vastly experienced football administrator, with roles at the PL, UEFA, Liverpool and maybe more and from an accounting background, he should head it up himself personally.

[Mr Popodopolous]

That moron Gordon Taylor needs to get back in his box.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8609679/PFA-threatened-injunction-prevent-salary-cap-voted-League-One-Two-clubs.html

I suppose he is doing what unions need to do but does he not get it- there might not be a League One and League Two or a severely decimated one in a few years without drastic action- are the players at this level not aware of the dire straits caused by Covid at many of the clubs??

Strange how many of the Leaders of football are or have been basically inadequate.

I'm fairly convinced though, that under relatively pragmatic and fresh blood this stupid posturing by PFA leadership wouldn't be happening.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Well said Simon Jordan- well said!

I think the PFA certainly have a role to play, but not that idiot who heads them up.