My fellow Gooners, before writing this piece, I want to say I now expect us to win the Prem!
My relief at seeing the Prem clubs have voted solidly to begin the long process towards enabling an effective salary cap is WONDERFUL NEWS and gladdens the heart of this old fan, who has been regularly calling for it for decades, rather than years already.
Only City, United and Villa voted against, with Chelsea abstaining.
Those who oppose it are entirely predictable and few can be surprised at those rapacious old and predictable names.
Much as we all want to beat City to win the title, for the future health and welfare of our precious game, it is actually MORE important that we beat them and their co-conspirators in turning back the tide of huge player wages that is steadily, unless we change tack, going to kill the game we older ones have loved and cherished for many decades.
To my mind friends, it has been obvious for a very long time that the way we are going, with ever increasing ridiculous wage contracts, while screwing every penny from ordinary hard pressed fans, will only lead to a huge financial crash and such a shock to the game that the Premier league may not survive as a great league, at all.
Fan groups throughout the Prem are more and more actively and vocally demanding reduced prices, or at very least objecting to proposed increases for attending games and a sea change in fans attitudes against being constantly fleeced for more, esp for season tickets and entry money, is happening all around us.
Fans have reached a level of refusal to keep being pushed into paying more and more money, simply to FURTHER enrich already multi-millionaire players and their parasite agents and it has reached a turning point, IMO.
Long after it ought to have done too!
My fellow Gooners, this may seem at first glance a small and, by itself, not special step.
But it is at least the first step that is always the hardest to take and once having been taken, further steps in the direction of enforcing reductions in salaries and entrance money rises are BOUND TO FOLLOW.
The vote, where 16 clubs including Arsenal, voted for the proposal, means it will now proceed to a proper confirming vote, apparently in June, in which more and crucial details of exactly HOW the proposed changes towards endorsing a combined salary and wages spent cap (including agents fees too) will be finalised.
The proposal is that all clubs be limited in spending, for wages, transfer fees and interest payments, including agents’ fees, to a multiple yet to be decided of POSSIBLY four and a half, five or even six times the total TV income of the bottom Prem club from the previous year.
That would mean that Southampton, last season’s bottom Prem club who received £103 million in TV money and all other clubs in the Prem would be limited to a total spend, of a yet to be finalised multiple of £103million.
The main aim, and effect would be to limit such as City and United, from throwing endless money at their clubs and distorting the chances of ever having an equal field.
This is of course, although a major principal change, only a first faltering step on the long and necessary road to a sensible salary cap for ALL Prem players. A great deal of detail is still to be discussed and “horse traded” and ultimately finalised before a final vote can ever be taken.
But taken as a whole, this development is at long last a general mass Prem clubs’ realisation that things cannot and must not continue as they are.
I do not see this, by itself, much reducing most existing salaries, though it will in all likelihood prevent further ridiculous way above inflation wage rises. And for that, as faltering a start as it undoubtedly is, we ought ALL to be extremely grateful.
THAT ALL IMPORTANT FIRST STEP IS ABOUT TO BE TAKEN AND I SAY HALLELUJAH FOR THAT!
I do not expect all to agree with me and many will say, albeit in blinkered fashion, “well of course more and more tourists will take up the season tickets, if real fans give them up in frustration at being fleeced”.
Yes, in great cities like London that will and does already happen.
BUT IF WE GO ANY FURTHER DOWN THAT DISASTROUS ROAD, then real fans will be practically extinct from grounds at some future date.
Forced out by simple greed!!
And that, my thinking fellow Gooners, is the day football as we know and love it, DIES from lack of REAL FANS IN STADIUMS.
I will fight tooth and nail to prevent that ever happening and I plead with all true fans to do exactly the same.
Please help save our beloved sport from the obscenity of greed that is strangling it to death!
COYG
Jon Fox
WHAT DO WE THINK OF TOTTENHAM! Watch the latest video from our friends at DublinArsenal
CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS! Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, please contact us through this link…
Hopefully the fans are the beneficiaries of this proposal, otherwise we could see the club owners pocketing fat income. On the other side football is such a short career, players will want to make sure they’re well remunerated so they are taken care of in the future. Also it would help if other leagues follow the suit, so that the EPL doesn’t lose its best talent to high paying leagues.
I believe the PL clubs have finally decided on 5 times the generated income of the lowest club, but I’m sure that they’ll find a way to manipulate the changes to benefit themselves.
I’m incorrect, the multiple has not yet been decided.
For Jon
I hope your Ist line of the article is right. City I hope drop points either at Fulham or Spurs away (as I cannot see them dropping any in their home games) and we have to win all 3 games with Man Utd away being the most difficult.
As for the rest of the article I endorse it completely as a Ist step.
The bottom teams get so much just from TV money that this won’t affect spending too much, and FFP rules still apply anyways. My understanding is that this is mainly being done to avoid EPL being forced to implement an independent regulator.
RSH, your lastline would have been right, were it not now toolate and a government appointed regulator seems to be already lined up to oversee Prem gross greed and to make football fairer for ordinary folk.
This new idea , as I made clear, is only a faltering, though important first step, on the long road to regaining fairness andturning back galloping greed.
I agree wholeheartedly with your sincere concerns Jon and unless something is done to regulate spiralling expenditure including the obscene salaries of certain players ,the community spirit generated by loyal fans will be lost as they continue to be faced with increased ticket prices which they simply cannot afford.There is also of course a section of fans who seem oblivious to the dangers of paying over the odds, in terms transfer fees and wages as for them winning is all important irrespective of the serious financial damage this may cause to their beloved Club.Look what is happening to Everton and Notts Forest , Clubs with great tradition who have been badly run and managed and have suffered the consequences.In a different way the same applies to Man Utd who have recruited badly and have failed to recognise the importance of investing in their stadium.How on earth they could vote against a salary cap surprised me as Ratcliffe is on record with his intention to cut costs across the Club.As for City,eventually justice will be done despite their army of highly paid defence lawyers .
Grandad
I thought that Ratcliffe was touting for government funds to rebuild old Trafford as the northern equivalent to Wembley. But if a cheek really
Indeed he did try Sue.
But rightly, he was told where to go!
Well said GRANDAD . I too am an optimist for the long term, though I despair constantly at the blinkered and non seeing fans you refer to.
Unfortunately, no one needs speical intelligence in order to love and follow football.
I sometimes wish that all fans had to have a proven degree of intellect before being allowed to become football fans.
I say this only HALF tongue in cheek too.
Can only hope it happens, but I won’t cheer just yet.
Up to now, I’d only seen one other piece on this which said that the clubs only agreed to flesh out what a salary cap would look like – not to implement it.
That seemed only a few days ago, so I’m not sure if it’s moved on from there but searching around, there seems to be a few subtle varieties of the story all within the last few days so it’s hard to tell.
One key factor I did come across was a direct quote from a PFA official who said they were against anything that would place a “hard” cap on players’ wages. In other words, the players union wants to keep their wages sky-high. grrr
And the big money clubs are against it, so there will be a lot of political skulduggery going on behind the scenes to make sure this is stillborn.
Chicken counting at this stage – not wise. But reason for optimism, it’s sorely needed.
BTW I hope people realise that a salary cap tends to mean lots of different clubs winning things over time.
Looking at US “football” (lol) they have their clubs (franchises) go from hero to zero and back again over time.
That seems a good thing to me, but Arsenal fans need to be prepared to have lean years as well as good years. In a salary cap world, no club is a “big club”, not for long anyway.
The owners in the premier league largely come from abroad. With the sport now such a global success, then it is hardly surprising that these owners are desperate to develop this interest by showing selected games in their nations.
I understand it, but can’t condone it. I have never understood how the US public tolerate American football coming over to England. Growing the sport, it is referred to.
I have sympathy for PL supporters globally, but not enough to want to see games played abroad so that the owners can either line their pockets or then pay the players even more money, which defeats the object of trying to aim for a wage cap. So as much as I would love to see a wage cap introduced, and as compelling as the argument is for it to happen, I think that money rules.
Yes Sue, money does rule, but IF we continue down this foolish road we havebeen going, and going downit quicker andmore relentlessly each ,thenwe are in deep trouble.
MONEY will reach a stage where ordinary fans, en masse too,wont have the money needed to watch our clubs.
And then what will happen, do you think?! A rhetorical question of course, as once ordinary fans are virtually all priced out of attending matches, only super rich people will be ableto attend.
The vitally precious “fans to club bond” will be broken, not all at once, but stil broken down, albeit in increasing stages.
And THEN we reach tipping point. Just as shopowners who sell merchandise are afraid that if they put uptheir prices TOO much,many will fail,and customers will be unable to afford their goods!!THEY KNOW that is inevitable. But ,arrogant, grossly greedy football,continues to fool itself it is free from the same threat. PLAINLY , IT IS NOT.
It can NOT buck this inevitable trend! It cannot and wont!
ANDTHEN WITH TIPPING POINT HAVING BEEN BREACHED,the game will slowly whither and then dies.
I havebeen warning anyone who cares to think as deeply as we all ought to, and have doing that well before JA even started.
Its PLAIN AND OBVIOUS TO THOSE WHO CAN OBSERVE THE INEVITABLE TREND OF LIVING BEYOND WHAT YOUR CUSTOMERS CAN AFFORD.
IT MEANS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS.
For decades past, football has fooled itself that it can evade and escape the fundamental law ot pricing customers out of being able to afford to watch games.
Unless having money means we ALL have enough to follow and attend foobal, what chance does anyone think the game has of ever surviving? Rhetorical again, as IT MEANS NO CHANCE AT ALL!!
At some stage REALLY SOON Sue, football either gets real, OR IT FACES AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT FOR ITS VERY LIFE
Lastly Sue, social media is full of blinkered, head in the sand FOOLS, WITHOUT ANY TRUE VISION AT ALL!
I can’t disagree with your sentiments Jon but if the world can’t see that we have a major issue with global warming and act urgently to do something about it then rather than still engage in self interest, then the blinkers may be on the PL owners who may not care what happens years ahead
SADLY AND PROFOUNDLY TRUE, SUE!
At risk of nitpicking, a big prob in modern life is companies charging what they think their customers can afford instead of what their product or service is actually worth.
Serving up football is like that. It’s not really “worth” that in the scheme of things, but they sell it at a price they think they can get away with (the maximum the fans can afford).
Things didnt used to be that way. I wish I could reverse it now which is one reason why I vote with my wallet.
Neutral Yes, you are accurately summing upthe gist of my whole article The fact that you have stopped going, as also have counless others, for cost reasons, REINFORCES the truth of my post.
I was referring to this
“Its PLAIN AND OBVIOUS TO THOSE WHO CAN OBSERVE THE INEVITABLE TREND OF LIVING BEYOND WHAT YOUR CUSTOMERS CAN AFFORD.”
Copy/pasted – the capitals are yours not mine.
It’s not right to say that “good” businesses charge customers what they think the customer can afford – that’s what “bad” businesses do.
I think you meant that businesses should charge a sensible price based on the value of the goods/services rather than “get whatever they can afford”.
I see TV football as the latter category – they hiked the price to a stupid level because they think a large segment of society will pay it because they can afford it. But imho its price is grossly inflated in terms of its value.
You can say that there is a subjective element to that and of course that would be true, which is why I describe it as my opinion, not as a fact.
Neutral I am afraid to say I dont understand whatever point it is you are trying to make.
Nowhere did I write – as you wrongly say I did -“good businesses charge customers….. what bad business do.” Plainly you have misunderstood something , though exactly what,I HAVE NO IDEA.
I agree with your objection to that, BUT I did NOT write that at all. As you must surely realise??
While I have always agreed with you on this Jon and its surprising how isn’t it a common knowledge (evidenced by fans cheering outrageous transfer fees, salaries and overall clubs spending) I do not agree that football will go out of business. Adjustments will be made according to the limit of how far fans can be milked their hard-earned cash.
The big problem has always been the billionaire investors. One club affording to pay a player nearly a million per week is the death of passion and soul of the game.
While I started following football in the late 90s, all I have seen is the quality dwindling year after year with footballers treating it more of a job than a sport.
I will not be surprised if young players dream to make it big is not for honors and passion of the game as it was before, but for how much they will make.
HH I THINK YOU HAVE MISINTERPETED MY CONCLUSION .
I did say that we have reached a turningpoint and that, therefore, the necessary changes WILL be enacted in time to save our game from killing itself from greed.
So I AM optimistic in the longer term, but it is still in peril until football and those running it GET REAL.
Actually global warming is a scam, but that’s another discussion.
That was a reply to SueP post above.
Let’s not get into it neutral as you are then in danger of being a conspiracy theorist.
Well, one of us would be in danger of being something like that but… to be a conspiracy theory, there would have to be more than one actor and they would need to be conspiring…
But, last time I checked, there’s only one of me.
Not gonna wave scientific credentials around, as you say, let’s not discuss that in a football forum. I won’t even say “You started it!”.
Oh ok, I just did 🤣
Tip of the day: always keep an open mind.
I only came here as one of many sites to discuss the problems in the game (or sport in general) – the author here highlighted one of them: money. Too much of it in the game. It’s a major issue, let’s focus on that. 👍
Thanks for your advice neutral but I already do have an open mind. Kind of you to show concern though
That wasn’t meant to be insulting to you personally SueP. It was referring to the many “eco zealots” for whom climate change is more of a religion than science.
I know that a lot of science which challenges (or often debunks) climate change – based on observations, not computer models with rubbish assumptions – does not see the light of day for various nefarious reasons.
I look at a parallel with the “climate emergency” of last century when scientists were concerned about oxygen levels could reduce due to logging operations felling trees in the Amazonian forests.
There was no religious fervour then, so science was allowed to do its thing. Knowledge advanced and it was discovered that 80-90% of the world’s oxygen is generated by phytoplankton in the ocean which maintain oxygen at 19% of the atmosphere.
They are under threat btw (pollution, plastics in the sea etc) so if there is a climate emergency, that wd be it.
No offence intended to you personally SueP. It’s the lack of open mindedness of many “believers” that was in my thoughts.
Neutral
Over the years there have been a small number of conspiracy theorists who posted
I don’t know where you hail from, but in the UK the weather has been disastrous for months. A year or so back, we had temperatures higher than ever before. Coral reefs are being bleached by the negative effects of humans. I have read that over history weather has varied dramatically (eg the ice age) but what I’ve also read is that the rate at which the temperature is rising has never happened so quickly as it is nowadays. You mentioned plastics- I just think it’s time for the members of the world to think about the future- not just the here and now
A triumph of typically sensible female diplomacy over a conspiracy damaged male Sue.
Just wanted you to know that!
Weather is not climate. Even if it lasts for months.
“Higher than ever before” means since records began – which is not very long ago in climate terms.
Many ppl confuse these things, it makes it difficult to have a sensible discussion.
I did say that the temperature is rising far, far quicker in a short time scale. That should be cause for concern.
For most people, that in itself is a reason for the world to consider how we take care of what we have.
I have though, decided not to respond further as although I can hold a sensible discussion, you seem to have missed some of my salient points. Cheers
I am all for fairness but am unconvinced about a wage cap being the answer. I look towards the U.S. as an example where all teams are are allowed their day in the sun because once a team becomes successful it’s star player’s will demand a higher salary and then move on to a higher bidder. Thus there is little continuity or reward for a club which has developed good scouting systems and has to watch it’s best talent leave once these young players have become successful. There is nothing wrong in establishing a dynasty if it has been created with intelligence and foresight. Also there is a lot of ambiguity as clubs engage in creative accounting in order to demonstrate that they are remaining under the salary cap. The Cities of this world will be able to maintain that that super star players are remaining there with reduced salaries out of “love” for the club. This is happening in Australian sport where an elite group of clubs with high profile wealthy patrons are able to keep their star players and still recruit more talent while their account books show that everything is in order.
Well said Joe. Very well said regarding the scouting system which is a long and hard work.
And your point on establishing a dynasty is spot on. It’s now impossible for small a club with excellent scouting system to establish their dynasty however small it is when we have Wolves (big clubs) waiting to take away all the best players.
Don’t get it HH. Take Arsenal. Three or four very good players developed through the youth system. A couple of bargains scouted early such as Martinelli and Saliba. Top it up with Rice and Odegaard and perhaps another quality buy in the summer. This being a relatively young team, why shouldn’t the club be entitled to four or five successful seasons,? Under a salary cap players such as Saka, Saliba, Odegaard be could be tempted to other clubs where they could get better financial rewards because their creative accountants have been able to make certain adjustments to get around the cap. This happens all the time in Australia and I’m certain the U.S.
PS, H.H, back in the days when players could earn no more than 20 pounds a week,Wolves could retain their builders and were also able to retain a small dynasty with players such as Wright, Mullen and co. Mind you some people backed then would also have argued that 29 pounds was way too much to be paid for kicking a ball around and if footballers had any comply about bey ripped off by tight fisted directors they should look for a real job.
Typo, that should be players and not builders.
I have several problems with this:
– On principle, I don’t see why anyone’s wages should be capped – it might be unsightly to us, but they can justify these high wages because their “product” is in such high demand.
– there’s enormous amounts of money in football, so capping the wages of players would surely mean there’s a lot of money that just goes to shareholders and owners; it’s got to go somewhere, and why is that any better?
– I don’t see how this improves things for the average fan. Ticket prices are going to be determined largely by supply and demand. There’s a very limited supply and very high demand, so prices are high. Capping player salaries only changes that if it reduces demand, which might happen but for reasons related to quality and competition.
What I expect to see in the longer term is that more and more players will be enticed to leagues without salary caps, and the quality of league football will drop in this country and in Europe, where I understand they are also planning to cap salaries. When that happens, demand will fall and ticket prices will fall – so it will be a more affordable but inferior product. To be honest, I have nothing against that outcome, but many others will. The magnitude of these changes will be determined by whatever the effective salary cap is – if it’s quite a high number (I can’t yet tell from the details provided in the article), the changes will be minimal, I suppose.
Wrt ticket prices, surely a more effective approach would be to cap the prices teams can charge – of course clubs wouldn’t vote for that (because they don’t want to reduce their prices), and I’m not sure what the effects of that would be in the longer term.
Note also that if the quality of the football drops in this country, the money clubs will receive from television will likely also fall, so it could lead to a downward spiral. I suspect these changes would be reversed if that started to happen, though.
Do clubs really afford to pay such salaries without cash injection from outside sources? Look which clubs are paying these kind of salaries and look who is their owners.
If high salaries are the result of high demand, Crystal Palace would have been able to compete with Man city on that regard. After all not so long ago Man city were fellow relegation contenders then how come now City can afford a Haaland while Crystal Palace cannot?
Aren’t they all part of the product in high demand?
Great comment HH – you are right that there has been more of these cash injections/investments that helped certain clubs to pay high salaries without being able to make it back. I don’t know exactly, but I imagine you could say that of Blackburn when they won the title, but it’s been more prevalent since abramovich.
At the end of the day, I don’t think many of them would be willing to continuously sink more and more money without seeing anything coming back – it’s possible if they have enough money or have other lucrative businesses, but generally they build the infrastructures within the clubs to make them more efficient and then start to bring more money back in as they become successful, else they sink? Once the quality of their product improves, then you can say the salaries start to match up better with demand?
I don’t want to appear to claim I’m an expert on this stuff, I’m just not comfortable with imposing caps and rules on luxuries like football matches. I think the motives of the clubs who voted for this are very different from the desires of fans.
👏👏👏👏👏
Superb logical contribution to the debate.
You provide no reason that makes any sense as to WHY standards should drop.
I say they wil not. If and when ticket prices become more sensible and less grossly greedy, the new football regulator, which will very soon be under a Labour government, will IMO ensure that all it means is that fans pay less for tickets.
So grounds will still befull, with demand high. The only and KEY change is that fans will not be fleeece so constantly, as now happens. So that is where the savings will go; back into fans pockets, where they belong. Its simple fairness.
We still will have academies where young players come through, and the best, the SAKA’s and FODENs will always rise to the top.
I cannot seriously believe there will be a mass exodus from our PREM, to such as Saudi Arabia or China. That is just not going to happen. Players will still be highly paid; no sensible fan seriously thinks they are going to suddenly up and leave our PREM and that is plain silly actually. The new fairer PREM WILL ATTRACT NEW FANS, TV FANS TOO, brought in by the new and fairer prices.
A fairer minded game wher fans are also winners and do not routinely get fleeced wil attract many new age type fans who want to be involved with something more wholesome, more fair to all. I reject your post as scaremongering and say , that with a new fairness, wilL come a new enhanced and even more popular still product, ie top level football, for ALL fans across the globe to enjoy.
So I REJECT YOUR ARGUMENT AS A FALLACIOUS ONE. Provided that is , we DO make the very necessary changes.
Well, it’s not just about the players we produce in our academies, it’s also about the players we attract from overseas, which has a lot to do with the wages we pay. Being less attractive to those players will obviously lead to a drop in overall standards which will lead to reductions in money available through TV and sponsorship, which over time will affect the quality of our academies and training.
It won’t be instantaneous, but it’s an inevitability – it might, though, make things more evenly distributed across Europe (which I’d be happy to see), but it will certainly help grow the leagues that don’t cap salaries.
I’m not even saying I completely dislike the outcomes I’m predicting here – not for the English and European leagues at least – but I don’t think it will grow the fan bases in England at all in the longer term, quite the opposite actually. Most fans globally follow the best players, and many of them will be enticed elsewhere.
“If and when ticket prices become more sensible and less grossly greedy, the new football regulator, which will very soon be under a Labour government, will IMO ensure that all it means is that fans pay less for tickets.”
We’ll see – they *might* fix ticket prices (though I haven’t heard anything about that?), which *would* be nice for the average fans, but again, that means clubs make less money, which makes the league less attractive etc etc, which inevitably leads to a decline in standards. And again, I don’t say that’s a bad thing necessarily because money and best in class football are not the most important things to me, but others will disagree.
Keir starmer is a season ticket Gooner by the way
What does that mean?
You wrote: “which will very soon be under a Labour government”
It means that the Prime Minister of England (in waiting) is a lifelong Arsenal fan and has a season ticket…
I quoted Jon saying that, but I don’t see the relevance – not trying to be mean, I’m genuinely trying to understand what I’m missing
It was just a statement of fact. It’s really not that important to generate a discussion. I’ll do an article about the person you mentioned, but know nothing about, soon okay
👍
DAVI, though never a Labour voter, nor remotely right wing – as I am liberal to my core- the reason I mentioned LABOUR was in connection with the soon to be known regulator in football and the likelihood that under Labour- whose ideals, though NOT methods, I like – is that LABOUR IS MORE LIKELY THAN ARE TORIES TO PUT FANS NEEDS FIRST.
AND WILL NOT KOW TOW TO SUPER RICH FOOTBALL AUTHORITIES AND OWNERS.
THAT IS MY OPINION ONLY, and I do not claim it as fact!
Yes, understood. You might be right, but I’m not sure. I think this labour is quite blairite, with begrudging woke elements – we’ll see, I have no idea what they’ll be like when in power, but agree the chances of them putting fans first in this regard are higher (though I personally don’t think politicians should have much involvement in professional sports, but that’s another matter)
Davi And IF football had any intention of ever trying to stop its own galloping greed- which it does not have any intention of doing- than a regulator would not be needed.
But football is incapable of self regulating, so we have, rightly, a regulator.
Maybe the best piece I read from jon, the premier league football needs a salary cap and I will tell you why.
The premier league will do a lot better in terms of competition if a salary cap is placed on clubs.
Surely not only will it make the league more competitive, but pulls fans to other clubs as a lot of players have marketable presence beyond their current football clubs.
A salary cap will effectively stop the premier league from slowly becoming a one league club like PSG in France.
There’s no chance of that. This current City dominance is just a cycle. It also demonstrates that deep down you don’t have much confidence regarding our chances, and that’s ok. Within a season or to, it will be United or Chelsea, or Newcastle or even us. The Premier League is the best attended in Europe whilst I once read that the English Championship is Europe’s fourth best attended league.