A-League's Roar players set to be paid

Spot on Waz. The buck stops with Fong, Dobson & Co. No excuses.

@Waz You are correct. There is what is known as a salary floor ie The minimum amount that every A-league club needs to spend. Seeing as their isn't much of the salary cap clubs tend to spend all of it, which I am in totally disagreement with. This offers clubs no flexibility in terms of how they wish to spend this money. In fact I would allow clubs to spend the grant any way they wish if you really wanted to push the issue. That is because I believe it should be up to each individual club to determine for themselves how much of the grant they want to spend. If they want to spend that whole amount on youth players then I would let them, but, you might not have a very successful season in doing so. On the other hand though you might unearth some young talent which would hold the clubs in good stead going forward. My point is right now clubs are governed by how much they are allowed to spend and how much they are forced to spend. As far as I am concerned this is non-negotiable. The salary cap is used to pay wages for the club, if there is anything left, sure, go and spend it in other others. If I had my way I would just make sure that there is a minimum salary for youth players and senior players and if clubs want to go that path they should be allowed. All that is needed is for responsible owners to manage our game so that first and foremost players are paid. If clubs cant afford certain players, then don't sign them or put clauses in place to protect yourself from unforeseen events.

Brucie, I'm really upset, clearly you either don't like me or you don't like what I post; which is it? I'm a Queenslander and naturally paranoid and I'd just like to know which one it is! sniff ...? Some time ago you stated that MLS players get paid less than their A League equivalents which is simply not true and every report/analysis proves it's the opposite. Average salaries in the MLS are about $280k while in the HAL they are about $130k. Here's another link to go with the last one I sent you the last time: http://screamer.deadspin.com/chart-the-average-player-salaries-in-soccer-leagues-ar-1658856283 Please read this one otherwise I'll have to assume you just might be a troll of sorts. Yours faithfully, Paranoid in Brisbane

I believe that is incorrect RBBA. My understanding is the same as fussy, that each club gets a grant from the ffa for the tv rights and that this is currently roughly equivalent to the cost of the salary cap. Under previous television rights deals this wasn't the case and the salary cap was higher than the ffa grant. If wages go up then they will once again not be the same as each other. I'm not entirely certain on that but pretty confident that is correct.

LB - the same could apply to any of the sporting codes, this from the press last week: “The established (AFL) clubs are convinced that the push of second teams into Queensland and NSW is starting to strain the commission’s finances. In a series of exclusive reports over the past two weeks, The Australian has exposed a brittle financial structure underpinning the league. Thirteen clubs — the Suns and the Giants not included because they are being funded by the AFL — are carrying a combined debt of $91m. Last year eight clubs finished in the red. This season’s results will be no better. Up to eight clubs are forecasting losses again. The Saints and Carlton have budgeted for $2.2m losses. Carlton’s result, in particular, has blown out but they had a poor start to the season and had to remove coach Mick Malthouse. The Western Bulldogs and ­Adelaide forecast losses close to $1m each. Geelong are expecting a negative result anywhere between $250,000 and $500,000, while North Melbourne could lose $60,000. Fremantle and Brisbane might break even.” The AFL have worked hard on their marketing and deserve their mega TV deals, and that gives them margin for error which the FFA simply does not have!

Lots of detailed analysis of this situation has gone on but the simple answer is this is incompetent management by the owners and Director (Chris Fong) and by the CEO (Dobson) who he entrusted to run the company aka Brisbane Roar. Only one of them needed to do the right thing and this situation would have been headed off months ago, but neither did. So analyse away but the FFA have to wrestle with fact some of our clubs are being led by second rate CEOs because the clubs can't afford to pay top dollar to get better CEOs so if the owners get distracted, which the $8billion debt the Bakries has seems to have done, then clubs are at risk - surely there is a better governance model that can be put in place?

RBB, support the principle but it doesn't quite make sense, if a club spends 95% of the FFA Grant on players wages it's left with about $127k which it should be free to spend anyway it likes - coaches, marketing, expenses etc. the FFA set a minimum salary spend and that should be enough.

I've posted the stats before that show MLS players get paid twice the rate of HAL players so c'mon, pick up your game .... your posts are getting tired and repetative, a bit like the Suns only without all the drugs to add drama!!!

Moderated. Stupid, inflammatory comment

"The Grant just forms part of consolidated revenue & can be used to pay any club expenses." My understanding was that it was to be soley used for spending on wages. It shouldn't be used to pay any other expense. If that's the case the PFA should lock that in stone.

"The Grant just forms part of consolidated revenue & can be used to pay any club expenses." - if true, that is ridiculous. Looks like the FFA have a first and foremost priority - attach some specific conditions and requirements for the grant, including trust accounts.

Agree. An utter disgrace.

If there is no clause attached to the Grant that says - in effect - this money must only be used to pay Salary Capped players I can't see any grounds for misappropriation. The Grant just forms part of consolidated revenue & can be used to pay any club expenses. But, morally it becomes an issue for me if the players are not being paid on time after the Grant has been received.

I'm staggered that doesn't already happen to be honest...that is, that monies go from FFA directed into a trust account which is used to pay the players wages each month. On the face of it, it seems the billionaire Bakries have misappropriated these monies, and are still yet to pay the Roar staff from the club's own finances.

From what I've read: 1. the FFA gives each club a Grant (don't know if it's montlhy, or annual) 2. The annual amount of this grant is equivalent to the annual ALeague Salary Cap. 3. The Salary Cap does not cover marquee players' wages - international and Aussie. If I were CEO of the PFA I would insist that every club open a separate bank account & have the FFA deposit the grant money into that account & the clubs can only use this account to pay players' wages. That way the players (under the Salary Cap) are guaranteed they will always be paid.

Correct me if I'm wrong here...but aren't all player wages (with the exception of int'l marquees) covered by the salary cap allowance, which is 100% covered by the FFA? In other words, this is not merely a matter of Brisbane not having the money to pay its players...it's actually a case of Brisbane stealing money from its players...money that is provided by the FFA?

We should never have to see headlines like that in Australia.