Can we get this guy on loan?
Basically a necessity though I donât know how loans work with the cap if heâs on much bigger wages.
Whilst I think Alex Grant would be an adequate enough signing for our backline, Kirk van Houten has some other ideasâŠ
6 Likes
Iâm assuming if Klimala has indeed passed his medical (and/or trial) then the club announcement is imminent (i.e sometime today).
Clearly Alex would have to change his name. Suggest Alex McAlexFace.
2 Likes
Last I heard, the full salary being paid by the parent club counts towards the cap, although now that theyâre reviewing the rules it may be different. This issue is always going to be teams like Melbourne City getting a player to sign with Man City and then getting loaned to them for minimum wage. They definitely canât have that loophole in there.
It would REALLY be nice if the A-League actually published the way in which the salary cap is calculated. There was some earlier suggestions that player signing bonuses count towards the cap, with housing etc as well. But thereâs just WAY too much unknowns to properly know. Itâs weird that they donât considering itâs not like it would necessarily harm the league for the public to know the details.
1 Like
Apparently thatâs not the case anymore.
That doesnât give too much info though. All that tells me, is that theyâre going to allow Man City to purchase Redmayne and then loan him out to Melbourne City. It doesnât cover how that would impact the salary cap. The Caceres Clause bans it completely, with the main reason being there was no allowance for A-League clubs to purchase players in between clubs. That just closed the loophole of having an intermediary do a transfer for them.
The way that it gets applied to the salary cap is very different. I canât see the A-League allowing Man City to purchase Costa (for instance) and then loan him to Melbourne City on minimum wage. If he was designated, or on fill dollars under the cap, different situation, but I canât see any owner (apart from City) being happy with that sort of a situation.
Salary cap treatment
For a player returning to the A-Leagues from an overseas parent club, the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) will have the final say on what salary will be applied within their new clubâs salary cap.
The APL will consider applying the higher of either:
a) The playerâs salary at their former A-Leagues at the time of the transfer, or;
b) The playerâs salary at the purchasing/parent club at the time of the loan back to the A-Leagues
So they have the right to apply the higher of the two amounts.
Will they? I reckon, no. Alex Paulsens wage would blow the cap out of the water. - even just factoring the exchange rate. Theyâll grant exemptions this season in lieu of holistic review next season.
Then, next season they are committed to exploring the benefits salaries being paid by second/third parties and how the clubs can cut costs and find new exciting ways to diminish the integrity of the comp.
Those rules relate to the CĂĄceres Clause, and governs loans between clubs with common ownership. That wouldnât apply to us in this case.
As far as general loan rules go, I think theyâre still dictated by the RogiÄ Rule introduced after Melbourne took the piss and loaned both RogiÄ and Troisi and had them for minimum wage:
The amount included in the salary cap would be the higher of:
a) the actual amount paid by the Club in relation to that Player (including amounts paid to the parent club and amounts paid directly to that Player); and
b) 50% of that Playerâs Salary with the parent club.
3 Likes
Oh thatâs good intel
I missed an opportunity to call them the Alex Amendment to the CĂĄceres Clause.
ahh didnât realise that was the rule. Still very much potential to taking the piss though.
1 Like
Correct. He has already signed the contract. I bet on a club announcement today or tomorrow.
Not doubting you but how do you know?
Iâm not sure itâs terribly exploitable.
Loan moves for experienced players generally mean that the player has not worked out as hoped. The club willingly covering much/most of the salary of the loan deal generally suggests that the player is somewhat overpaid - otherwise the club wouldâve been able to find an agreeable transfer, or the two parties wouldâve negotiated an early release - and the loan is seen as a way of clawing back something out of the sunk cost.
Loan players are the Entertainment Book of the transfer market. On paper youâre paying 30/40/50% less, but generally the bigger the discount on paper is the less value-for-money that the âfull priceâ of the restaurant [player] is. Sure, sometimes you might strike gold because the quality of the resetaurant [player] just hasnât been discovered by enough customers [clubs] yet, but for the most part thereâs a reason why theyâre offering discounts in Entertainment Book [available for loan] in the first place.
Posted by Nicholas Lennon. Has been doing a superb job reporting signings and speculation in this transfer window.
1 Like
You are 100% correct, except for the case in which multiple clubs are owned by a single entity, in which case, they will rarely care where the money is coming from, and simply want to win trophies, however they do it, taking into account theyâll play creative accounting to ensure theyâre not paying a huge tax bill at the end of the day. I mean worst case scenario, Man City could, very much in theory, afford to spend double the cap, purely by âpurchasingâ the entire Melbourne City squad and loaning them back, ensuring 50% of their wages are covered by them.
Thatâs why there are different rules which govern moves between clubs with shared ownership, as @shabby shared earlier:
So have we signed thus cunt or not?
3 Likes