Is the Bundesliga a model for the A-League?
Roar Guru By Jesse Fink, 24 Jul 2009 Jesse Fink is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- A-League, Bundesliga, football, World Football
Stuttgart's Serdar Tasci, left, and Berlin player Andrey Voronin, right, challenge for the ball during the German first soccer Bundesliga match between VfB Stuttgart and Hertha BSC Berlin in the stadium in Stuttgart, Germany, on Saturday, March 21, 2009. AP Photo/Christof Stache
Brendon Santalab pissing off to China is hardly going to sink the SS A-League but you really have to wonder about what having a contract actually means in this day and age.
Santalab signed for two years with the North Queensland Fury and didn’t even play one regular-season match before being pilfered this week by the Chengdu Blades, a Chinese Super League club. Almost half a dozen Aussies now get around in the Chinese comp and more will follow.
Is our own national comp really so weak that we can’t hold on to a player who a couple of seasons ago was getting around in the NSW Premier League?
Clearly, the answer is yes.
Football Federation Australia has to take some of the heat. They’ve been tardy in countering the new Asian Football Confederation dispensation that allows Asian club to acquire an “Asian berth” player (one from the AFC zone) and so bypass normal visa restrictions and continue to moan about the lack of money in the comp.
But there is money in the league.
Look at Melbourne Victory – they are the biggest club in the A-League but can’t spend above and beyond the salary cap. So they’re aggressively pushing into basketball and rugby union and hoping to turn Victory into a southern-hemisphere version of Barcelona, an SC as opposed to an FC.
By rights, Melbourne should be allowed to spend their money as they see fit. They’ve been a standout performer among a clutch clubs that haven’t been able to keep themselves above water without the FFA’s beneficence.
So why can’t the A-League replicate a competition model like the one in Germany that allows clubs to spend money on player salaries as a proportion of their turnover while being forbidden to go into debt?
Yes, it might nudge Melbourne to even greater dominance of the league but who’s to say they don’t deserve it? Would the administrators of the EPL do the same to Manchester United? La Liga to Barcelona or Réal Madrid? Serie A to AC Milan or Juventus?
It’s part of the reason why the Bundesliga, while not the most successful in European competition, is one of the most profitable if not the most.
And it would go some way in servicing the great and enduring problem of player retention in the A-League.
Yes, the Fury is a different kettle of fish to Victory and is only just finding its way as a football club and a commercial entity, but the basic concept is sound.
The more revenue any A-League club can turn over through the turnstiles or off the park in commercial deals, the more they can spend on players and on thwarting the predations of cashed-up Asian clubs.
And so the revolving door of players to Asia can at least be partly jammed and we don’t lose average players such as Santalab the moment some obscure Chinese club knocks on the door.
The salary cap was well intentioned but it’s out of kilter with what’s required to survive and prosper as a national competition in a confederation filled with predatory rivals.
It’s time for a serious rethink.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- A-League, Bundesliga, football, World Football
July 24th 2009 @ 9:46am
Pippinu said | July 24th 2009 @ 9:46am | Report comment
The Bundesliga model is worth a serious think.
By the way – who says the GCU would have unlimited funds to spend on players under the Bundeliga model?
Don’t forget – it’s about percentage of turnover from football operations- not capital funding from oil magnates.
For all we know – the GCU could be in the bottom tier in terms of turnover!!
July 24th 2009 @ 9:54am
Kazama said | July 24th 2009 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Understood Pip, but would the FFA really risk pissing off Clive by telling him your mob could spend whatever they want while he had to hold back? I’m sure he’d find a way around it – either that or he’d buy Melbourne.
Until we see how GCU perform on and off the field it is premature to say what tier they’ll be in in terms of turnover, but point taken.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:17am
AndyRoo said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Turnover includes sponsership, so it’s pretty easy to get arround. Clives coal mining company sponsers GCU for X amount of dollars and there is the turnover.
July 24th 2009 @ 9:51am
whiskeymac said | July 24th 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
as an aside Kazama and General, apologies if i am one who says that Reds are in financial trouble – i for one like the reds and was more than impressed with their ACL efforts – but it’s whats reported or implied at best (for example in this story there was the damning line that “The cash-strapped Reds can’t afford a marquee reinforcement…” http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25823147-5000940,00.html). Not being from Adelaide my views are ashamedly influenced by such media reports.
the HAL and game generaly would be a lot poorerfor the loss of the Reds. I cld understand MV fans wanting to beat the reds – now they cldnt do that if they werent there…
July 24th 2009 @ 10:01am
Kazama said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:01am | Report comment
No worries whiskeymac – it’s not that we are in major strife, but if we want to be able to spend on marquee signings etc we really do need a proper owner rather than the FFA running us.
So Roman, mate, if you are reading this, perhaps it’s time to invest in a new feeder club for your Chelsea empire. How about you, Sir Richard? No aspiring Bond villain’s portfolio is complete without a football club.
July 24th 2009 @ 9:54am
Pippinu said | July 24th 2009 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Either way, there is a strong case for a bit of tweaking (even if we keep the salary cap system), in particular, via additional categories, similar to the additional category we created for junior marquees.
For instance, a category for an AFC marquee could exist, as well as a Socceroo or ex-Socceroo marquee (i.e. I’m thinking of additional categories that are either out of the salary cap, or at least allow for additional spending).
This allows the ability to do a bit more in terms of recruitment and competing with Asian clubs, while retaining the financial discipline that goes with a salary cap.
We’re now about to start our 5th season – four new teams in the next two seasons – TV rights are up soon after that – it’s time to at least tweak the salary cap system.
Also, please refer to a recent blog I put up where I suggested that we retain a cap for overseas signings only, and make it open slather on Australian players, with the regulation that only a certain number (say 10 to 12) be over the age of 21.
Why?
The vast bulk of Australian players are getting paid their market value, cap or no cap.
I like the idea of putting the focus on youth (which would be completely unlimited in this proposal), and taking it away from salaries.
Basically, in a match day squad of 15, you only need a few injuries to start filling it with U21 players – so it would certainly sharpen a club’s focus on their youth.
July 24th 2009 @ 9:56am
Pippinu said | July 24th 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
….and youth is cheap – thus you meet your objective of financial discipline.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:08am
DogsOfWar said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:08am | Report comment
I think they need to look to the USA for ideas.
Luxury taxes may be a better model, where if you go over the cap, then you have to pay an amount equivalent ot the amount you went over the cap to the league, which is then divided up amongst the teams less well off.
I could see many of the bigger teams spending over the cap, and thus keeping the Nth Qld, Newcastle and CC boys afloat.
Though you also need to have a trigger that allows the salary cap to go up as well, a percentage of total revenue could be the key to this.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:24am
AndyRoo said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:24am | Report comment
Hmmm that is a pretty solid Idea, the luxury tax idea has a lot of merit.
Would make for great chants. Sydney FC buy a huge flop (Billy Alnogoals) as there marquee and he is greeted by mariners fans with “thanks for the 100 grand Billy”
July 24th 2009 @ 10:15am
AndyRoo said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Just further to how at this stage of the comp (5 years in) I would rather the clubs be spending on improving operations and develpment rather than pouring massive amounts on mediocre players.
By doing so and having the money to go on scouting missions and such you no longer have to sign players off DVD. And surely in the case of Santalab that is what has happened here.
Mediocre player getting big money, but he has some great U tube clips due to his spectacular long range shots. Fury who aren’t expected to make the finals (with a top 6 that is saying something) have admitted he wasn’t even assured a first team place.
Maybe in 3 months time we will see a host of Chinese football writers talking about the need for a salary cap so that there clubs can afford to invest in infrustructure and not waste so much yuan on mediocre Australians
July 24th 2009 @ 10:17am
Gaz said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:17am | Report comment
Mention of the Global Financial Crisis is timely. I wouldn’t expect FFA to tweak the salary cap too much until the global economy looks better.
It’s also worth considering some cautionary tales from UK clubs, where big investors have blown wads of money on a team, failed to find success, and then disappeared into oblivion. Over there, such clubs can sink back down to Div Three and still bounce back. Over here we still have no such mechanism, so it’s up to the FFA to ride to the rescue.
In a healthier financial climate, I am sure more guys like Clive Palmer would be stepping in to “rescue” clubs like Brisbane and Adelaide. When and if that happens, the club owners will surely be putting pressure on the FFA to raise or abolish the salary cap. But the question of what happens when an A-League club (or its owner) crashes would still need to be addressed. Again, the Bendesliga might be a better model than the EPL here.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:20am
Art Sapphire said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:20am | Report comment
On these virtual pages at the Roar I have long advocated the introduction of a turnover based salary structure for the A-League ala the Bundesliga. Well done Jesse, for a well argued piece.
Also, Pip makes a good point re: GCU.
Kazama – MVFC supporters don’t want Adelaide to fold. They only want them to crumple in a heap every time we play them.
Seriously, if the FFA plays it right, the new TV rights deal will see and injection of much-needed funds to the A-League clubs. Hopefully, with a much more secure financial situation, the FFA, should then think about introduction of a turnover based system.
If we want better quality, bigger crowds, higher ratings, bigger tv and sponsorship deals the FFA have to take this appoach.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:20am
jimbo said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:20am | Report comment
Adelaide actually made a profit last year.
Nick Bianco had to sell his stake in AU to get his construction and import/export businesses out of trouble.
The FFA once owned MV and PG don’t forget and they made a healthy profit when they sold their shares. MV now is a profitable business.
But the next 2 years are going to be the toughest financially for the A-League.
The cheap and plentiful youth players will be part of the rescue package and the majority of them don’t fail to entertain the crowds.
Then the clubs make a good profit on them when and if they sell them.
July 24th 2009 @ 10:27am
jimbo said | July 24th 2009 @ 10:27am | Report comment
If you introduced the Bundesliga rule that you can spend up on players as long as you don’t go into debt there would only be 3 teams in this year’s A-league – MV, CCM and AU. The others would have to field their youth teams.