The AFL says players have rejected a $1.1 billion pay deal over the next five years, holding out for more under a fixed percentage agreement.
AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou revealed the amount had been offered to the players to either take as salary up front or as part-wage, part-retirement plan.
But instead the players remain steadfast in their demand for a percentage of between 25 and 27 per cent of total AFL revenue.
While those cash demands in the short-term are not significantly higher than what the AFL is offering, the players also want a three-year deal rather than a five-year agreement.
And the fixed percentage deal would allow their coffers to swell with any increase in total AFL revenue in future years.
The $1.1 billion on the table is effectively the entire cash component of the league’s recent broadcast rights deal.
Demetriou said he would be happy to address players directly on the issue, and on the AFL’s opposition to a percentage-based pay deal.
“The more we can inform them the better,” Demetriou said.
“The package we’ve offered is around the $1.1 billion (mark) and that really equates to what the broadcast rights cash component is.”
The $1.1 billion is around $300 million more than players receive under the current five-year collective bargaining agreement.
But that bigger pie must cater for an extra 80 to 90 players with the addition of expansion clubs Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney.
Players all but ruled out strike action at a meeting in Melbourne on Wednesday night, although they remain united in their demands for a percentage-based cut of cash.
Demetriou said he believed agreement would eventually be reached between the league and players’ union.
But he said while players would and should get more money, the needs of clubs, those at the grassroots level and supporters needed to be balanced against that.
“I’m philosophically opposed to percentages. I’ve always been a believer in making sure the players get treated fairly,” said Demetriou, a former head of the players’ union.
“They get the largest share of our stakeholders, and the largest share of any upside that we’ve received.
“They are our principles. You hope that’s a fair outcome.
“The game should afford the players what the game can afford.”
GrantS
Guest
I agree Redb but this can always be turned around into "work to rule". As you are probably aware every single employer in the land is breaking their contracts with their employees in some way.(It is literally impossible not to.) In most cases it is in a way that is so inconsequential that no one bothers to do anything about it but if the need arose something could legally be done. I am sure that in the players' contracts there must be means where they are (legally) not required to play or turn up to certain media events.
The_Wookie
Roar Guru
across the league annually its about 750 million apparently. More with the new deal. The problem the AFL has is that it not only funds the AFL, it funds all the development, stadium upgrades and a whole host of other things. The problem the players have is that the AFL is counting the GWS and Gold Coast player wages in the overall bill, relating it to the current wage deal, and forgetting that this adds 100 million to the wage bill over 5 years. Id expect another 50million or so to be added and then things will be happy.
Redb
Roar Guru
The don't call it the gownlow for no reason. :) i'm not sure it was a smart move by the players to take strike action of the table so early in the negotiations. I thinks it's an unwanted action by all parties but why not leave it there as the ultimate threat. I think AD might be rubbing his hands a little here. I suspect the players rightfully know any threat of strike action will not win them any favours with fans so they have removed it from the equation, but did they need to so early?
Matt F
Guest
Can you imagine a player being stupid enough to boycott the brownlow? He'd be sleeping on the couch until the next one!
Redb
Roar Guru
Good test for AD. I sense he is getting near the end of his time. One of the things the players can do is hide the AFL logo on their jumper, not attend events and boycott the Brownlow - as long as the WAGs turn up who cares. :)
Redb
Roar Guru
Already ruled it out. I guess you dont read much.
Midfielder
Guest
Shall be worth watching.... the NFL in the states pays I think about 53% so 27% is a good deal ... No idea how it will go .... but the players can still play but strike on off field stuff .... sponsor days, interviews etc... AD over to you
Cman
Roar Rookie
“Strike! Strike! Strike!”
Mark
Guest
The players should accept this figure, it's pretty much most of the new TV deal. Anymore than this is greed. Does anyone know how much money the entire AFL earns? 300 million dollar increase and there not happy? Clearly there is a lot I don't understand here! -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.