bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
MTFCMusings wrote:bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
Completely agree, used exactly the same phrase earlier. It cannot be right.
NorthLondonStag wrote:There will be a few unintended consequences. A championship club dropping down will have a big advantage as they will be able to keep paying championship wages because of the relegation exemption.
Teams that have signed players before today or have existing good players on amounts over the cap will have done well.
Big wage earners with time unexpired on their contract will be harder to move as the new club won’t want to take them on if their wage is too high but the transferring player won’t want to take a wage cut. You could end up with ‘high’ earners stuck at clubs they don’t want to play for but they can’t get a transfer because of the cap.
oldweststander wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
Completely agree, used exactly the same phrase earlier. It cannot be right.
Would you still be saying that if we were Macclesfield?
I doubt it.
bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
oldweststander wrote:MTFCMusings wrote:bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
Completely agree, used exactly the same phrase earlier. It cannot be right.
Would you still be saying that if we were Macclesfield?
I doubt it.
kevin kents tasce wrote:bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
Don't be a snowflake. "Football Communism" what a load of rubbish.
Tippy Tappy Football wrote:The rules do not seem to deal with the problem of a League 1 or 2 club striking a deal with a Premier League or Championship club to pick up loan players on the cheap.
Salford City could stick to the salary cap of £1.5 million (unlikely!) but then use their contacts at Man Utd to sign up their young players on loan and pay a very small part of their wages. They could even receive the players for free as long as they play them. There is a danger of lower league clubs just becoming feeder clubs because they need cheap players to comply with the salary cap although this could happen now.
The EFL would need to have a rule that if you sign a player on loan then you are deemed for the purposes of the salary cap to be paying a certain percentage of that player's wages (10-25%) even if the club concerned is paying a lower amount.
Clubs with a higher income/turnover e.g. Sunderland, Portsmouth, Ipswich Town etc would start complaining if they were prevented from signing players due to the salary cap but clubs with a lower income/turnover such as Accrington and Rochdale were picking up quality loan players on the cheap or even for free.
kevin kents tasce wrote:bellwhiff wrote:This is footballing communism. It is inherently anti competitive.
Don't be a snowflake. "Football Communism" what a load of rubbish.
Sedgwick wrote:Every football club should have a chance of success and it shouldn't take a wealthy owner to come along to make that happen so a level playing field will be good to see for once.
But I think a lot of this just screws clubs over, the gaps between leagues will get bigger.
Question, is this just for one season?
BH_Stag wrote:
There we go, sign our high earners up for Retford and get them on loan to us for the season
Parkinsons Perm wrote:BH_Stag wrote:
There we go, sign our high earners up for Retford and get them on loan to us for the season
Sandy Pate Best Stag wrote:Parkinsons Perm wrote:BH_Stag wrote:
There we go, sign our high earners up for Retford and get them on loan to us for the season
What a fab idea, let's hope JR's read it or already thought of it
Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum
Users browsing this forum: Martin Shaw, Nutty Stag, RabMood, richardstag, Tidy and 330 guests