First Casualty

First Casualty

Post by WiganRLf » Tue, 16 Sep 1997 04:00:00


John Shuster (spellings?) has been effectively cut bay Halifax Blue Sox due to
the salary cap.

Will anyone take him?

Who is next?

IMO this leaves Halifax worse off in terms of the team but obviously better off
financially.

However I can't see many players who are cut finding new homes  easily as most
teams IMO, will be cutting rather than picking up discarded talent from other
clubs as they too will be restricted by their cap limit.

Net result will be, IMO, lower standards of play, decent players careers over
early the players union getting mighty upset.

Dave
--
Wigan RLFC - Simply the best -
but trying hard to become the worst :-(

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by John Drak » Tue, 16 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
> John Shuster (spellings?) has been effectively cut bay Halifax Blue Sox
due to
> the salary cap.

> Will anyone take him?

> Who is next?

> IMO this leaves Halifax worse off in terms of the team but obviously
better off
> financially.

> However I can't see many players who are cut finding new homes  easily as
most
> teams IMO, will be cutting rather than picking up discarded talent from
other
> clubs as they too will be restricted by their cap limit.

> Net result will be, IMO, lower standards of play, decent players careers
over
> early the players union getting mighty upset.

But fewer bankrupt clubs?

John

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by WiganRLf » Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:00:00


Quote:
>But fewer bankrupt clubs?

It does not follow that a salary cap will prevent bankruptcies.

I am sure they can contrive to loose money in all manner of ways (like building
a new stand on ***foundations as Wigan did).

If clubs are badly run they will fail, cap or no cap.  

There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep him
without breaking the bank.

IMO the salary cap is the wrong mechanism to tackle a serious problem.

The real solution is well run clubs.

The salary cap  solution has consequences for the game that, IMO, the powers
that be have not thought through, some of which I mentioned in my original
post..

Dave
--
Wigan RLFC - Simply the best -
but trying hard to become the worst :-(

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by John Drak » Wed, 17 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

> >But fewer bankrupt clubs?

> It does not follow that a salary cap will prevent bankruptcies.

> I am sure they can contrive to loose money in all manner of ways (like
building
> a new stand on ***foundations as Wigan did).

> If clubs are badly run they will fail, cap or no cap.  

I take your point - this was the argument Chris Caisley used when voting
against the proposal at the RL Council. BUT, how many well run clubs does
RL have? How can badly run clubs be turned into well run clubs? The salary
cap IS a blunt instrument, I don't dispute that, but unless some action is
taken, somewhere, by somebody, the well run clubs (all two or three of
them) will have no one else to play.

Quote:

> There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
> Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep
him
> without breaking the bank.

On their gates? Where would the money come from? I would hazard a guess
that Halifax broke the bank a long, long time ago.

Quote:

> IMO the salary cap is the wrong mechanism to tackle a serious problem.

> The real solution is well run clubs.

I agree, but as I said above, we don't have enough of them. What else can
be done, in the circumstances, to rein in those clubs who spend money they
haven't got? The problem is still there, and still needs solving, with or
without a salary cap.

Quote:

> The salary cap  solution has consequences for the game that, IMO, the
powers
> that be have not thought through, some of which I mentioned in my
original
> post..

But what else should they be doing....?

John

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Steve Morri » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>>But fewer bankrupt clubs?

>It does not follow that a salary cap will prevent bankruptcies.

Agreed, what a salary cap is in essence is a very crude regulatory
mechanism, its designed primarily to control the market of players. I
don't know about any new rules concerning transfer fees but regulating
players wages will stabilize the market. The limiting of a squad size is
key in underwriting this process.

Given that the number of SL players will reduce there will be a surplus
in the market and this too will help keep wages and contracts down.

Although a team with a significantly higher income like Bradford will be
able to pay higher wages than most other SL clubs under the new
structure, there will still be a degree of parity between most SL clubs.

What I would like to know is what is going to happen to those players on
high wages already, several of Wigan's stars are already amongst the
best paid in SL and what with Denis Betts's wages on top I can see them
really struggle to keep player wages within the cap. I can't honestly
see that regular first team players will say "yeah Dennis can earn 100k
(or whatever he will be earning) but I will play for 40k"

Part of the restlessness at London is down to wages, agents have
interested players by saying I can get you more money elsewhere so
players think about going or use it as a lever to get a better deal from
the club.

Quote:
>I am sure they can contrive to loose money in all manner of ways (like building
>a new stand on ***foundations as Wigan did).

>If clubs are badly run they will fail, cap or no cap.  

>There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
>Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep him
>without breaking the bank.

Surely they could keep Schuster under the salary cap, under the cap he
no longer represents good value, if he was kicking goals with the
accuracy of 1996 I'm sure Halifax would think long and hard about
keeping him.

Quote:
>IMO the salary cap is the wrong mechanism to tackle a serious problem.

The salary cap is a measure to regulate one part of RL administration.
If the extra resource that this measure creates helps to improve
grounds, reduce overdrafts and develop other resources I'm all for it,
if club directors just put the excess in their pockets it will be worse
than before.

Quote:
>The real solution is well run clubs.

Yes

Quote:
>The salary cap  solution has consequences for the game that, IMO, the powers
>that be have not thought through, some of which I mentioned in my original
>post..

>Dave

Steve Talcum                                    "If its worth saying don't waste
                                                 your breath on Usenet"  
 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by WiganRLf » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
>Given that the number of SL players will reduce there will be a surplus
>in the market and this too will help keep wages and contracts down.

But the problem is down to what level?  If it gets too low (which I think it
will) I don't reckon players are going to stick around and play what is the
most demanding team game going when they can go elsewhere, or even get a
*proper* job that pays more.

We the fans, want to beat the Aussies.  You can't expect to do that when the
rewards for playing the game here are going to be so much less than there.

The problem is not players wages, but badly run clubs.  The RL have latched
onto the cap as a saviour in what I consider to be a typical manner, i.e. they
think this will solve all the problems and have not considered the
ramifications.

The point you make about applying a limit to squad size good one, but IMO this
just brings up another problem with the system, that of player development.

What is the point of developing players for other clubs which is the situation
the likes of Wigan would find themselves in?

This argument was put forward against the cap down under by the Brisbane and
Canberra clubs when (pre SL) a move was made to reduce the salary cap level in
Australia.  IMO, the same problem applies here.

What you could do is encourage clubs to develop their own players by some from
of exemption from either the cap or squad size limits but to my knowledge this
is not on the cards.

The RL have brought in a cap to solve a problem and it is, IMO, the wrong
solution.

Dave
--
Wigan RLFC - Simply the best -
but trying hard to become the worst :-(

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by WiganRLf » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00


Quote:
>> The salary cap  solution has consequences for the game that, IMO, the
>powers
>> that be have not thought through, some of which I mentioned in my
>original
>> post..

>But what else should they be doing....?

Something different :-).

Which is IMO, assuming we accept our clubs are badly run (oh gawd) , a
combination of rules rather than just a salary cap.

The basic rule would be you can't  overspend.  What that means I have not
thought through yet but basically it would leave the club free to decide how to
spend its income and any other monies they could lay their hands on.

If they chose to spend it all on players, fair enough.  OK they then would not
be spending it on other worthy causes such as ground improvements or youth
development etc.

That's when things like framing the future ought to kick in whereby clubs are
obliged to reach certain standards in other areas (i.e. spend some of there
income on things other than players).

Now if you did that I don't know how much that would leave for players compared
to 50% of income, but I bet it would in a lot of cases be *more* than 50% of
income.

If this were so leaving more for players, it would IMO help avoid the serious
situations I see arising from the 50% cap which are, a player drain and player
redundancies with a resulting lowering of standards.

So there you have it, no salary cap and clubs not going bust.  I want ML's job!

Dave

--
Wigan RLFC - Simply the best -
but trying hard to become the worst :-(

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Antonioni P » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00

Are there any accountants on the ng? Do you know of any schemes for
boosting the reportable income from a club without affecting other
variables? There's a medium sized Sl club in a cheesemaking county and
another that was almost called Bombers that might be interested,,,,,,,,

P.J.

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Lloyd J. Barkha » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
>Are there any accountants on the ng? Do you know of any schemes for
>boosting the reportable income from a club without affecting other
>variables? There's a medium sized Sl club in a cheesemaking county and
>another that was almost called Bombers that might be interested,,,,,,,,

Now here's a novel way of boosting reportable income. Wait for it!! It
goes completely against the grain for most RL clubs!!

INFLATE THE CROWD FIGURES :-D

--
Lloyd


 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Paul McNal » Thu, 18 Sep 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

>There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
>Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep him
>without breaking the bank.

There's also the possibility they wanted to cut him regardless of
pay....

Paul

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by WiganRLf » Fri, 19 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:
>>There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
>>Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep him
>>without breaking the bank.

>There's also the possibility they wanted to cut him regardless of
>pay....

I think you maybe right.  He is 33 and approaching the end of his career but he
is fairly typical of the type of player cut in Australia when they had a cap.

I still think my original point is valid in that players (maybe or maybe not
Schuster) will be forced out by the rule rather than by genuine financial
constraint.

Dave

--
Wigan RLFC - Simply the best -
but trying hard to become the worst :-(

(remove the letter t from clarat if replying via email)

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Antonioni P » Fri, 19 Sep 1997 04:00:00

Quote:

> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 21:40:02 GMT

> Newsgroups: rec.sport.rugby.league
> Subject: Re: First Casualty



> >There is also the possibility that while Haifiax may have to part with
> >Schuster, they could, if it were not for the cap, actually afford to keep him
> >without breaking the bank.

> There's also the possibility they wanted to cut him regardless of
> pay....

> Paul

Too true. I wasn't too impressed, this season.

P.J.

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Steve Morri » Fri, 19 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:


>>Given that the number of SL players will reduce there will be a surplus
>>in the market and this too will help keep wages and contracts down.

>But the problem is down to what level?  If it gets too low (which I think it
>will) I don't reckon players are going to stick around and play what is the
>most demanding team game going when they can go elsewhere, or even get a
>*proper* job that pays more.

This is an issue but there has to be a balance between the total income
of a club and RL as a sport and players wages. If the top RU clubs have
budgets two or three times greater than RL clubs the answer isn't to up
the wages to compete, its to find ways to up the income. A salary cap
may help to encourage clubs to raise more money.

Quote:

>We the fans, want to beat the Aussies.  You can't expect to do that when the
>rewards for playing the game here are going to be so much less than there.

I can't imagine more than a handful of our current SL UK stars being
wanted in Oz.

Quote:
>The problem is not players wages, but badly run clubs.  The RL have latched
>onto the cap as a saviour in what I consider to be a typical manner, i.e. they
>think this will solve all the problems and have not considered the
>ramifications.

Look we agree completely with this, in the absence of good housekeeping
by SL clubs a wage cap is one small measure than in part could help the
game reach a more stable financial footing.  

Quote:
>The point you make about applying a limit to squad size good one, but IMO this
>just brings up another problem with the system, that of player development.

>What is the point of developing players for other clubs which is the situation
>the likes of Wigan would find themselves in?

I guess that transfers could play an appropriate part in this system, If
Wigan (or any other club) can build a production line of quality players
and sells one every couple of years for 200k it may work well in Wigan's
favour.  

Quote:
>This argument was put forward against the cap down under by the Brisbane and
>Canberra clubs when (pre SL) a move was made to reduce the salary cap level in
>Australia.  IMO, the same problem applies here.

As there are so many Aussies here rather than vice-versa its still
academic.

Quote:

>What you could do is encourage clubs to develop their own players by some from
>of exemption from either the cap or squad size limits but to my knowledge this
>is not on the cards.

A good idea, if ESL club wages are relatively low they may be forced to
develop young talent!!!  

Quote:

>The RL have brought in a cap to solve a problem and it is, IMO, the wrong
>solution.

I see it better than keeping things the same.

Quote:
>Dave

Steve Talcum                                    "If its worth saying don't waste
                                                 your breath on Usenet"  
 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Piema » Fri, 19 Sep 1997 04:00:00



Quote:


> >Are there any accountants on the ng? Do you know of any schemes for
> >boosting the reportable income from a club without affecting other
> >variables? There's a medium sized Sl club in a cheesemaking county and
> >another that was almost called Bombers that might be interested,,,,,,,,

> Now here's a novel way of boosting reportable income. Wait for it!! It
> goes completely against the grain for most RL clubs!!

> INFLATE THE CROWD FIGURES :-D

Lloyd, lloyd Lloyd, how could you: 1. Even think about such a under hand
thing 2) Expect our honest boards to even think about adjusting crowd
figures for anything other than personal gain. tut tut tut.
Oooooppppss i've got ny tongue stuck in my cheek again

--
PIEMAN
http://www.warriors.ndirect.co.uk
http://www.warriors.ndirect.co.uk/theboro

"Its not the winning, its the taking apart"

 
 
 

First Casualty

Post by Antonioni P » Sat, 20 Sep 1997 04:00:00

As you've probably noticed, I have major problems with the operation of
the cap. The first issue is about its purpose. If the purpose is to stop
clubs from going bust by spending on players wages, it can lock them into
a cycle of underperformance: A poor season results in lower income
resulting in less spending on salaries resulting in a poor season etc.
That is a significant risk. If the purpose is to equalise the competition,
then as proposed it's not going to work. it will just lock in
underperformance again. The second issue is the risk to non wage
investments: you have still 50% of your income to risk on all sort of
hare brained schemes.

I feel that although both aims are worthy, a slary cap as envisaged by ESL
will help achieve neither.