Heading into the upcoming A-League season, the salary cap for all clubs is fully guaranteed for all clubs by the FFA courtesy of the much higher broadcast revenue elicited from the new four-year $160 million television broadcast rights deal.
This is a good development, as it helps to underpin the viability of clubs and should ensure the issue of payments of players wages that plagued Central Coast Mariners last season will be a thing of the past.
Generally speaking, there is no debate the general presence of the salary cap is of crucial importance to the A-League.
It ensures viability in a country with a relatively small population and crowded sports market does not see player wages become inflated in an effort to compete with clubs from richer Asian countries.
This means that while there is a player retention issue, there is the added challenge of clubs having to develop an organisational culture where the skills to effectively develop youngsters or scout otherwise unknown foreign imports.
There is also the added challenge for coaches to get their strategies and tactics right, because given most clubs are by and large playing with squads of the same financial value.
The existence of the salary cap, along with a sensible Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Professional Players Association, prevents problems of player wage inflation occurring each time there is a new and higher broadcast revenue deal.
As is the case with the English Premier League in particular.
This in turn means there are surplus funds within the football economy to spend on other areas such as fleshing out the clubs administrative infrastructure or – perhaps more vitally in the long term – being able to buy and develop physical infrastructure assets (such as academies and training facilities).
But there is something of a fine balancing act that needs to be achieved.
There is no dispute that it is to the league’s benefit and certainly exciting that a fixed salary cap set at a uniform amount (currently $2.5 million) which keeps all A-League clubs generally on an even par (even if they are not always even off it in terms of attendance or sponsorship revenue), this system has side effects.
There is a question as to whether it would be to the league’s benefit to modify the structure from being set at a uniform amount regardless of club size, to a structure inspired more by the new UEFA Financial Fair Play rules where the allowable expenditure (or in our case allowable salary cap) for each club is set at a ratio of their income or revenue.
A combination of the two systems might be more preferable as there is still a sensible constraint on the range of expenditure, for example have a fixed $1.5 million base for each and allow the remaining allowance to be determined by club revenue.
For example a smaller A-League club could end up having an allowance of $2.5 million perfectly covered by the TV deal.
A bigger club could end up with an allowance of $3 million or even $3.5 million, which does not end up being a financial issue because the higher revenue generated by a much higher membership base or corporate sponsorship is more than capable of covering the difference.
While care would need to be taken to ensure this does not lead to higher wages spread over the same talent pool.
As a whole with no discernible benefit (wage inflation), the bigger A-League clubs would be able to spend more money on either developing bigger squads or an overall stronger football department.
This would allow them to better cover for player losses that occur during FIFA international breaks, for example.
This would also allow for squad rotation when competing concurrently in the A-League and AFC Champions League at the same time so teams don’t fall away from the Premiership title race, or are even more hard-pressed to qualify out of the ACL group stages.
Alternatively the extra cap space allowed could be used upgrade the contracts of non-marquee players who have had good seasons and assist in preventing these players from being poached by clubs in other leagues such as the US, East Asia or the Middle East.
There is an issue that the current structure works to prevent big clubs from developing something of a winning culture in terms of trophies.
In international terms the brand of a league is often mingled with readily identifiable large and successful clubs from those leagues who feature regularly in intra-continental competitions.
Examples include Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal from England, PSV Eindhoven and Ajax from Holland, Real Madrid and Barcelona from Spain, Bayern Munich from Germany etc.
A European-style scenario whereby given the financial and competitive gulf between the top clubs and ‘the rest’ in a given league makes for an often predictable and boring title race needs to be avoided at all costs.
Especially as there is no relegation battle to act as a counter-balance.
There is nevertheless something of a greater need to structure the A-League cap to enable the bigger A-League clubs to translate their off-field strength into on-field strength
After all, it is just as much in the A-League’s interest to be able to have some A-League clubs and coaches to be able to adapt and develop a good ‘continental style’ culture and be competitive in Asia.
As we can see with English teams in the UEFA Champions League, the process often takes years of consistent qualification to the competition before they start becoming genuinely competitive.
A modified salary cap structure would assist A-League clubs to have the ability to go far in AFC competitions on a semi-consistent basis despite the awkward playing conditions and financial gulf that exists in comparison to other participant clubs.
A good example to look at for inspiration is the aforementioned PSV Eindhoven and Ajax of Holland who are highly respected clubs given their competitiveness in UEFA competitions.
In turn, it ensures there is a slightly higher respectability for the Eredevise throughout Europe despite still being in essence feeder clubs in feeder leagues.
A reasonable balance for the A-League would be where there can be a reasonable expectation that a bigger club would finish towards the top and qualify for the ACL.
But there should also be an opportunity for an innovative, well drilled and well organised smaller club to have a realistic chance of winning trophies as Central Coast Mariners have been able to do so admirably.
Johan
Guest
It is quite clear that the a league players are grossly overpaid. They are paid much more than MLS players. This cannot be justified as their skill levels are significantly worse. I suspect last season's crowd increases in the a league were in part due to a lack of competition from other sports played at that time of year. This year the Ashes is on in Australia and I would imagine that this will significantly efffect crowd numbers for the a league with them reducing to their previous levels.
Ballymore
Guest
Nine (9) foreigners in a team doesn't faze me, as a Roar fan, I care about the club, not the nationality of players/employees. Brisbane or Belgrade, all the same to me. I just want the best possible players wearing the orange kit. In terms of development: i) The players who would pushed out would be those at the bottom of the talent-spectrum anyway. If deregulation saw the likes of M Jurman or M Foschini not needed in the HAL, who really cares? They're not anywhere near the NT anyway. ii) Playing with and against higher quality players is good for the development of Aussie players. iii) My proposals reward clubs for development by placing players they develop outside the cap, so there is extra motivation to develop Australian players. iv) No player should be "looked after" based on their nationality, I'd suggest if players can only get a gig at HAL level based on protectionism, we wouldn't want them near the NT anyway. Being forced to fight for a 1st XI spot is the norm overseas, I feel young Australian players would benefit from similar levels of competition.
Mike
Roar Guru
I'm all for an increase to the salary cap, but only if it is relative to the funds being pumped into the League. I agree with everyone else here - the more the League grows, and the bigger the TV deal, the higher the cap will inevitably become. But it would be far too risky to allow bigger clubs to have a higher cap. Yes, they might have more facilities and the bigger fan base, but it would then become the first stage of the Big 4 domination of the EPL. I'd rather see all of the A-League teams have a shot at the title then watch a competition that will be a 3-way or 4-way race every season.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
@Ballymore So, with your first 2 amendments would allow A-League clubs to have up to 9 non-Aussie players out of a squad of 20-26? I think that would be absolutely terrible for the long-term development of Aussie players. In fact, taking it to the extreme all 9 Australian A-League clubs could have the whole squad without a single Aussie player! Some of the other amendments are reasonable, but I want the foreign intake reduced - maybe 4 foreign players PLUS 1 player from an AFC nation (OFC for Nix).
Kane Cassidy
Roar Guru
Most of those are spot on. Especially 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, and 13. Those rules show an emphasis on rewarding teams that develop players and scout for hidden gems in Oceania, not just youth players too, if clubs are rewarded for training Socceroos they'll have that little bit more incentive to get the best out of their players.
Ballymore
Guest
My Humble Plan for HAL Deregulation 1) Allow an Asian Marquee 2) Allow 3 extra Asian players on top of the foreign quota 3) New Zealanders & Australians are 'locals' even if playing for a club in the other country. (For Smeltz would not use a foriegn spot for PG) 4) Oceania players are considered locals 5) 3 extra players for ACL participants 6) Players who graduated from the youth team are outside the cap 7) Players from State Leagues / APL are outside the cap. 8) Players who sign their 1st pro with a club contract are outside the cap 9) The 4th yr onwards a player spends at the same club is outside the cap 10) Released/paid out players are outside the cap 11) Each yr the Champion and Premiers can select 3 players who will be paid outside the cap moving forward. 12) Have an extra marquee position for players of absolute top quality. For example, if Drogba, Lampard were attained this offseason. This is on top of existing marquee provisions. Subject to FFA approval. 13) Scrap the Australian Marquee and put all Socceroos outside the cap.
Tmills
Guest
Having a competitive a-league with steady growth across the league and respect within the country is far more important than progressing deep into the acl. If respect for the a-league brand in other countries comes at the cost of having an elite section of clubs and the rest suffering then I don't want the respect. IMO extra money from ffa revenue should be spent on solidifying the position of the game in Australia on things like making participation at grass roots level cheaper and of higher quality and helping a-league clubs invest in assets such as stadiums training facilities and academies. First time poster long time reader.
yewonk
Guest
how many full season tickets, not trying to burst your bubble just wondering how many took up the six game offer
gumpy
Guest
I don't think too many Oz football fans object to the A-League's salary cap per se, but more likely the fact it isn't as high as it could be. If the cap were raised by $1m each year(quite feasible IMO) you could well see the league's standard increase even further in 5 years than if it had remained at X amount in that time. Just my 2c
Midfielder
Guest
Off topic ... The Mariners have just broken their membership goal ... 5, 018 sold the goal was 5, 000 ... Over 80 K already sold across the A-League MV over 19.5 ...
NUFCMVFC
Roar Guru
Thank you The point of the article was to raise points for discussion which is why the topic is posed as a question, the against arguments are just as strong and valid and the pro arguments. It's a matter of the football fraternity defining what the priorities are It relates to a very old tension within football where there is a need to balance the greater good against the bigger clubs wishes to be able to spend more money Before the EPL it was perhaps skewed too far in one direction. Today it is perhaps too far. As far as other leagues go, some have pointed out the system where TV rights are negotiated for the league as a whole which benefits all teams versus the system where TV rights are negotiated with the clubs which inevitably gives a massive advantage to the clubs For my part I would never agree to do away with the salary cap, and never want a European style situation which is what some people are saying though I explicitly say that must be avoided in the article. But everytime we end up with teams challenging for the Premiership or in the finals falling away or severely disadvantaged because they are playing concurrently in the ACL is going to lead to complaints One day if the ACL is actually worth a bit of money and carries prestige, someone is going to put a reserve side out for an A League finals game (especially if they have won the Premiiership). How would that look then?
fatboi
Roar Rookie
great news for the WSW
NUFCMVFC
Roar Guru
I'm putting forward the idea that they are allowed to spend a bit more, not get around the salary cap Ultimately it's a question of defining what we want, a competitive A League which will mean being competitive in the ACL would always be something of a struggle, or a slightly less competitive A League but having teams able to compete in Asia It's a bit similar to the idea of an A2 league, is it worth sacrificing a balanced geographic spread and guaranteed representation for all population centres at A League level in order to tick a few more AFC spots and perhaps get ane xtra ACL spot (or two). In that case clearly not IMO
NUFCMVFC
Roar Guru
Did you read this part "A European-style scenario whereby given the financial and competitive gulf between the top clubs and ‘the rest’ in a given league makes for an often predictable and boring title race needs to be avoided at all costs."
Kane Cassidy
Roar Guru
I think the cap should be raised when all 10 clubs can meet certain financial criteria. Number of memberships. A healthy profit being turned over by the owners primary business. Adequate media exposure. Constant community exposure. And as Fuss hinted at I think clubs can demand terms from the FFA as well, TV rights being the biggest task.
Midfielder
Guest
Looking forward HHHHHMMMMmmmmm .... I read the other day clubs need an average attendance of 13K to break even ... I think that was pre this deal and assumed no marques ... The single biggest issue is to ensure all the existing clubs can continue and my understanding only MV make a profit ... We are a development league in a very competitive sporting market where we play second fiddle to the NRL & AFL pertaining to media, and revenue... Changes are for the future ... not for today... but the changes mentioned in this article make sense ... however I don't think we are ready for it ...
Aljay
Guest
Agree. Let's not throw away the competition that we have wishing for success in a poorly run, possibly rigged asian competition. Focus on competition the fans care about, which is the domestic league.
mahonjt
Guest
Terrific article. As a Melbourne fan I would say that wouldn’t I? But here is the rub - I disagree. However, my opinion aside, NUFCMVFC raises some legitimate reasons for why some additional flexibility should be considered. One or two of these I hadn’t considered before. I think the ‘Cap/2 Marquee’ framework should persist because I want any excess revenue diverted into football capital (hello ‘Matthew Effect’). I want to see A-League clubs building infrastructure. I want to see A-League clubs building football departments. I am also confident (selfishly) that Melbourne has a comparative advantage anyway as a result of its location, history, culture and stability. Let’s get on building the football. By all means we need to keep an eye on maintaining and building playing standards and the impact of wages on this, but for now let’s get to a stage where there are 14 teams nationwide fighting to win, or fighting to avoid a post season tie against the NPL champions for promotion/relegation. This may be 20 years away, but in the interim we have a lot of building to do and any excess revenue would be well directed to doing this. Terrific article. Many thanks.
SVB
Guest
I agree that could happen as our left side has always been a little weak and suspect. Topor is an excellent defender, but he lacks a little finesse on the ball. Also gives us depth and options in defence now.
Franko
Guest
Topor-Stanley to left back?