stealthbomber wrote:We all acknowledge that no system for salary cap is perfect - and yes some clubs may look to push the boundaries ....or worse actually break the rules...and that is why the penalties are intended to be so severe that they are a deterent.
Is it perfect - No - will it ever be - No. But without it the league would be lawless and clubs may live beyond their means and ultimately collapse. Most clubs respect they system and those that don't will eventually be exposed or found out.
We all survived before the salary crap.....those who didn't wasn't because of player payments.....no need for big brother looking over us Clubs fell over before.....clubs will fall over into the future.....not because of the salary crap
Get rid of it.......no need for big brother to tell clubs how to spend our money.....none of there business
The Bedge wrote:Don't argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Being called an idiot don't bother me......but you'd be one of the few ......who agrees with the salary crap Don't know an administrators at the clubs think its good.....its idiotic.....so you'd be in the minority and deemed an (idiot yourself)..... by almost all club administrators around the state......not one country club administrator that I know thinks its a good idea
so those in glass houses......shouldn't throw stones
the only club administrators who think its good......don't have any money at there club......or they play in really low standard comps
The script is like RM is using artificial intelligence to post his stuff. And if it’s who we think it is then artificial or no intelligence is around the mark.
The salary cap in leagues such as the South Australian Amateur Football League has both supporters and detractors. Criticism often centers around the following points: 1. Enforcement Challenges
Under-the-Table Payments: Critics argue that enforcing the salary cap is difficult, as clubs may attempt to pay players outside the official channels, such as cash payments or non-monetary benefits like housing or employment. Transparency Issues: Ensuring that all payments are disclosed and fall within the cap requires extensive oversight, which can be resource-intensive.
2. Impact on Player Retention
Discouraging Elite Players: A capped salary might make it difficult for clubs to attract or retain top-tier players, particularly those who could earn more in leagues without such restrictions. Inequality Across Clubs: Wealthier clubs may still find ways to attract talent by offering better facilities or perks, creating an uneven playing field despite the cap.
3. Competitive Balance Concerns
While the salary cap aims to promote fairness, critics argue that it doesn't always address deeper inequalities, such as disparities in sponsorship, volunteer support, and junior development pathways. Clubs in more affluent areas may still dominate due to access to better resources outside of direct player payments.
4. Restricting Player Earnings
Critics highlight that the cap limits the earning potential of players, especially those who rely on football as a supplementary income. It may reduce incentives for players to remain in the league or develop their skills.
5. Administrative Burden
Managing and reporting compliance with the cap can place a heavy burden on clubs, particularly smaller ones with limited administrative support.
6. Potential for Overregulation
Some argue that the cap imposes unnecessary constraints on clubs and limits their ability to operate in a free-market system where they can spend as they see fit.
Despite these criticisms, proponents maintain that salary caps are essential for ensuring financial sustainability and maintaining competitive balance across the league. The effectiveness of such measures largely depends on the robustness of enforcement mechanisms and the willingness of all stakeholders to adhere to the rules.
Down the Hill wrote:The script is like RM is using artificial intelligence to post his stuff. And if it’s who we think it is then artificial or no intelligence is around the mark.
I reckon even AI would draw the line at the... excessive... use...of...full... stops...
Salary Cap is about SANFL not losing players to local footy.
All that is needed is the player points, if clubs want to spend dollars so be it, they will either succeed or they won't and will suffer the consequences. Player points was designed to even the competitions, it should also stop clubs loading up with players and force development.
The only unfair aspect of the points system is the old scholars having the advantage because some kid went to the college, which totally ignores that in the formative years community clubs developed them.
vics01 wrote:Salary Cap is about SANFL not losing players to local footy.
All that is needed is the player points, if clubs want to spend dollars so be it, they will either succeed or they won't and will suffer the consequences. Player points was designed to even the competitions, it should also stop clubs loading up with players and force development.
The only unfair aspect of the points system is the old scholars having the advantage because some kid went to the college, which totally ignores that in the formative years community clubs developed them.
I'm not sure that player points is all that's needed. Glenelg have been very bloody successful lately due to their list structure, a lot of guys in their mid to late twenties. Remove amateur salary caps and all of a sudden these guys go to the country.
Totally agree with your old scholars point, though.
vics01 wrote:Salary Cap is about SANFL not losing players to local footy.
All that is needed is the player points, if clubs want to spend dollars so be it, they will either succeed or they won't and will suffer the consequences. Player points was designed to even the competitions, it should also stop clubs loading up with players and force development.
The only unfair aspect of the points system is the old scholars having the advantage because some kid went to the college, which totally ignores that in the formative years community clubs developed them.
See I have an underlying suspicion that i'm not sure anyone has ever tested is that on a macro level the salary cap has caused a global increase in player payments. This was certainly the case when I was on the Committee of a club when it was brought in.
Paying players used to be extremely subjective, whereas putting a cap on the amount spent on the team and an individual player caused an objective view as to what someone was worth and entitled to. If you were otherwise paying less than the cap this caused an inflationary effect.
I also tend to think puting an objective rather than subjective value on players has caused a corrosive effect on the nature of community football and has commoditised something that is undesirable to be so.
I also share concerns about burdens of additional regulation/paperwork.
I would be very interested in stats in respect of clubs that fell over the decade before the salary cap and since such as to whether that it's saving clubs from themselves bears out.
Further, such that it works out as an equailisation manner in the AdFL i tend to think promotion/relegation does that anyway, and in the Country Comps I suspect APPS causes a greater equalisation problem in that it inevitably favours the bigger centres/towns.
I'd be concerned if we got to a shibboleth that immediately accepted it as a good thing worth preserving. I tend to think that after it's been in place for a decade (which is presumably coming up soon) Community Football undertaking a review of all of it would be good as to its merits and whether it should be persisted with, maintained or amended.
jo172 wrote:See I have an underlying suspicion that i'm not sure anyone has ever tested is that on a macro level the salary cap has caused a global increase in player payments. This was certainly the case when I was on the Committee of a club when it was brought in.
Paying players used to be extremely subjective, whereas putting a cap on the amount spent on the team and an individual player caused an objective view as to what someone was worth and entitled to. If you were otherwise paying less than the cap this caused an inflationary effect.
I also tend to think puting an objective rather than subjective value on players has caused a corrosive effect on the nature of community football and has commoditised something that is undesirable to be so.
I also share concerns about burdens of additional regulation/paperwork.
I would be very interested in stats in respect of clubs that fell over the decade before the salary cap and since such as to whether that it's saving clubs from themselves bears out.
Further, such that it works out as an equailisation manner in the AdFL i tend to think promotion/relegation does that anyway, and in the Country Comps I suspect APPS causes a greater equalisation problem in that it inevitably favours the bigger centres/towns.
I'd be concerned if we got to a shibboleth that immediately accepted it as a good thing worth preserving. I tend to think that after it's been in place for a decade (which is presumably coming up soon) Community Football undertaking a review of all of it would be good as to its merits and whether it should be persisted with, maintained or amended.
So in english......do you agree with the salary cap?
jo172 wrote:See I have an underlying suspicion that i'm not sure anyone has ever tested is that on a macro level the salary cap has caused a global increase in player payments. This was certainly the case when I was on the Committee of a club when it was brought in.
Paying players used to be extremely subjective, whereas putting a cap on the amount spent on the team and an individual player caused an objective view as to what someone was worth and entitled to. If you were otherwise paying less than the cap this caused an inflationary effect.
I feel there is merit in this.. but now that the cap has been in place for a while, and players have become increasingly aware / confident in judging their "worth", if the cap was removed, I can't see it going backwards, but instead potentially significantly increasing what a club spends?
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
jo172 wrote:See I have an underlying suspicion that i'm not sure anyone has ever tested is that on a macro level the salary cap has caused a global increase in player payments. This was certainly the case when I was on the Committee of a club when it was brought in.
Paying players used to be extremely subjective, whereas putting a cap on the amount spent on the team and an individual player caused an objective view as to what someone was worth and entitled to. If you were otherwise paying less than the cap this caused an inflationary effect.
I feel there is merit in this.. but now that the cap has been in place for a while, and players have become increasingly aware / confident in judging their "worth", if the cap was removed, I can't see it going backwards, but instead potentially significantly increasing what a club spends?
A good point, it would seem reasonably likely that you can't unscramble the omlette from here.
jo172 wrote:See I have an underlying suspicion that i'm not sure anyone has ever tested is that on a macro level the salary cap has caused a global increase in player payments. This was certainly the case when I was on the Committee of a club when it was brought in.
Paying players used to be extremely subjective, whereas putting a cap on the amount spent on the team and an individual player caused an objective view as to what someone was worth and entitled to. If you were otherwise paying less than the cap this caused an inflationary effect.
I also tend to think puting an objective rather than subjective value on players has caused a corrosive effect on the nature of community football and has commoditised something that is undesirable to be so.
I also share concerns about burdens of additional regulation/paperwork.
I would be very interested in stats in respect of clubs that fell over the decade before the salary cap and since such as to whether that it's saving clubs from themselves bears out.
Further, such that it works out as an equailisation manner in the AdFL i tend to think promotion/relegation does that anyway, and in the Country Comps I suspect APPS causes a greater equalisation problem in that it inevitably favours the bigger centres/towns.
I'd be concerned if we got to a shibboleth that immediately accepted it as a good thing worth preserving. I tend to think that after it's been in place for a decade (which is presumably coming up soon) Community Football undertaking a review of all of it would be good as to its merits and whether it should be persisted with, maintained or amended.
So in english......do you agree with the salary cap?
It's complicated and there should be a serious and open minded review with all options on the table (dumping it, keeping it, changing it).
My gut feel is that it's a net bad thing, but I think that someone needs to do the job properly to obtain and analyse the data to see whether it's achieving its purpose, and if it is achieving its purpose, whether improvements can be made, and if it's not achieving its purpose, do we get rid of it completely.
