Jump to content
Melbourne Football
jw1739

Transfer Talk, Rumours and Speculation

Recommended Posts

agoalie    300

Saba amongst a host of names gone from Wanderers.

thats confirmed?

dw just saw it on 442

Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mus-28    2,293

Mullen is a good squad player can play RB and CB, but probably isn't good enough to start in the centre at most teams. Would give us more depth, but thats about it. Would rather Chapman & Kisnorbo at CB and he offers much the same as Hoffman, would rather Germano as our option as a full back. If we release Wielaert he'd be a handy pick up as a 3rd CB and option on the bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Murfy1    3,170

It's shaping up to be a pretty interesting January transfer window.

 

 

 

So what left backs from other aleague clubs that we can realistically target?

Reece Caira

Josh Brindell-South

Cassio

Shane Stefanutto

Riley Woodcock

 

 

Might need to look abroad if we want quality

 

 

Jack Clisby is another A-League left-back. It has been reported today that he could get a release in January (http://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/brisbane-roar-and-sydney-fc-battling-for-luke-deveres-signature-20141228-12eow8.html), and given that it was rumoured at the start of this season that Melbourne City were interested in signing Clisby, I'd call him a realistic option. I haven't seen much of Clisby to be honest, so I don't know whether that would be a good signing or not.

 

 

Agree though that Melbourne City almost certainly have to look overseas to get a quality left-back.

 

Some conceivable LB possibilities for the future (not just January) are:

 

Jason Davidson. Is on the fringes of West Brom's squad after signing for the club this season, and there has already been media speculation that Davidson could be cut loose in January, despite him being contracted for next season. I understand that there's speculation in the British media press that West Brom's coach Alan Irvine could be sacked if West Brom suffer a loss (and esp. a bad loss) to Stoke overnight, so given that Irvine signed Davidson, if Irvine goes then Davidson's future at West Brom could really be up in the air come January.

 

Michael Zullo. Out of contract at the end of the season. Tragically for him he suffered an ACL injury around the start of this season, and only looks set to be fit again most likely in March, or February at the very earliest. Zullo is 26, has 10 Socceroos caps and has a respectable amount of European football experience. I think he'd be a good signing, but more a signing for next season and beyond rather than this season.

 

Joshua Rose. An interesting A-League player out of contract at the end of the season. He's 33, but he's played every game in the A-League for the past 4 seasons, and has an excellent fitness record, so I'd say Rose still has at least 2 very good seasons left in him. Not a player that would be a truly long term solution like Davidson or Zullo though, and probably next to no likelihood that Rose will leave Central Coast before the end of the season. 

 

And then there's non-Australian LBs. The options increase exponentially if the club is prepared to use a Visa spot on a LB, and the possibilities are too much to be listed. 

 

 

Hard to say what would be the best signing for LB. It would probably be Davidson, although I'd say a lot of circumstances would have to unfold in Melbourne City's favour for that signing to actually have a chance occurring (such as Irvine being sacked). I'd be pretty pleased if we signed Zullo, although we'd likely have to make do with Garuccio or Germano at LB for the remainder of the season. After those 2, the club unearthing a good Visa LB would be another pretty good possibility.

 

 

Anyone rate Daniel Mullen from WSW?

The Jets’ interest in Mullen follows enquiries from Melbourne City, and it’s expected he will be allowed to depart despite a key role in the ACL campaign.

http://m.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/jets-firming-as-likely-destination-for-wanderers-fullback-daniel-mullen/story-fnf85wvq-1227166627973?from=public_rss

 

Not a player I've seen much from. He seems to be more properly a CB than a fullback, and Mullen doesn't seem that good a CB or a prospect as Chapman, for example. So I also think he'd only be good for depth, and with Wielaert and Kisnorbo not getting any younger I'd like to see the club bring in a CB that could be a good starter. Brendan Hamill is out of contract at the end of the season, so if the club is going to sign a young-ish CB then I'd rather the club went with Hamill.

 

 

JVS has suggested that the club has been working to make things happen in January. And with the release of Kalmar, the club should be able to make at least 1 signing to fill up that recently vacated squad spot. It'll be interesting to see what Melbourne City can come up with.

Edited by Murfy1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Murfy1    3,170

Josh Kennedy will be available from January 1 yeah ?

 

Kennedy is training with the team now. I recall hearing that he'll only be allowed to play for City as of January the 5th, which is why Kennedy and JVS have said in the media that the plan is for Kennedy to debut on February 1st against Western Sydney at AAMI, after hopefully having a good 'mini-pre-season' with the team in January, allowing for him to hit the ground running in that Feb 1st match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
silva10    818

Greg Leigh is a left back currently on loan at Crewe where he seems to be impressing.

 

He is 20 years old and I think the loan spell ends in January.

 

I would like to see him play in Melbourne if he would be willing to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,100

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Yes, yes...except for that small matter of the salary cap. Any and all wages etc. paid to the loaned player would have to be paid by Melbourne City for the period he was with us. And by all accounts we just don't have the room under the cap to allow that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

 

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Yes, yes...except for that small matter of the salary cap. Any and all wages etc. paid to the loaned player would have to be paid by Melbourne City for the period he was with us. And by all accounts we just don't have the room under the cap to allow that.

 

 

There are ways around this.  The player is not loaned to us but cleared to us and paid by us under the salary cap. An agreement is put in place between Manchester City and the player's Manager that after a specific period of time Manchester City will sign the player who will then be compensated for lost salary in the new contract with Manchester City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,100

 

 

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Yes, yes...except for that small matter of the salary cap. Any and all wages etc. paid to the loaned player would have to be paid by Melbourne City for the period he was with us. And by all accounts we just don't have the room under the cap to allow that.

 

 

There are ways around this.  The player is not loaned to us but cleared to us and paid by us under the salary cap. An agreement is put in place between Manchester City and the player's Manager that after a specific period of time Manchester City will sign the player who will then be compensated for lost salary in the new contract with Manchester City.

 

I think FFA would jump on this. Those arrangements may well apply in cases involving lower-league clubs in Europe, but they would be a clear rort of the salary cap principles for the A-League.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
n i k o    4,925

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Yes, yes...except for that small matter of the salary cap. Any and all wages etc. paid to the loaned player would have to be paid by Melbourne City for the period he was with us. And by all accounts we just don't have the room under the cap to allow that.

 

There are ways around this.  The player is not loaned to us but cleared to us and paid by us under the salary cap. An agreement is put in place between Manchester City and the player's Manager that after a specific period of time Manchester City will sign the player who will then be compensated for lost salary in the new contract with Manchester City.

Put yourself in that position, would you as a quality player that is loaned to a championship side with aspirations to play for Man City want to play there or here?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

 

 

 

Manchester City is overloaded with talent.

Surely we could get a quality Manchester City player instead of Manchester City loaning that player to say a Championship side to get regular game time?

Yes, yes...except for that small matter of the salary cap. Any and all wages etc. paid to the loaned player would have to be paid by Melbourne City for the period he was with us. And by all accounts we just don't have the room under the cap to allow that.

 

 

There are ways around this.  The player is not loaned to us but cleared to us and paid by us under the salary cap. An agreement is put in place between Manchester City and the player's Manager that after a specific period of time Manchester City will sign the player who will then be compensated for lost salary in the new contract with Manchester City.

 

I think FFA would jump on this. Those arrangements may well apply in cases involving lower-league clubs in Europe, but they would be a clear rort of the salary cap principles for the A-League.

 

 

FFA need never find out. Plus nothing is illegal.

 

There's no rule in place that insists that a player from overseas cleared to an A League side must earn as much pay as was paid by the overseas club.

 

Anyway, it's about time FFA stopped stuffing up the quality in the A League by failing to allow clubs to provide a decent football career with proper remuneration for Australian players who remain in Australia and making it difficult for clubs to obtain quality players from overseas.

 

When the A League started FFA said the salary cap was not about equalisation. Based on what FFA is now doing, preventing clubs owned by billionaires from recruiting quality and keeping quality - I say bullshit. 

Why should all the wealthy clubs in the A League be held back because of the minnows. Let's have some true battles between rich and poor clubs, just like we have in most football leagues in the World.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

"Put yourself in that position, would you as a quality player that is loaned to a championship side with aspirations to play for Man City want to play there or here?"

 

Some players might look forward to experiencing life "Down Under" for a few years.
           

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,100

Parrot, FFA would find out. Remember that these "clubs" are not "clubs" in their own right and they do not exist outside of FFA. They are franchises. All Manchester City own is 75% of the licence to operate the franchise. FFA can demand anything it wants from its franchises.

 

Quite apart from that, eventually the rort will be exposed by someone "inside" the game who carries a grudge.

 

I'm not defending the salary cap at all, but the effort should go into changing the rules, not into trying to find a way around them. Like you I believe that the cap is inhibiting the game in Australia - certainly at its present level.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
n i k o    4,925

Yes if they're players like Duff who have had a career at the top I could see that, but not so much if they're younger, talented and trying to make that break into the top league. For the player your talking about they must be on the cusp of getting into the Premier League but need game time in the Championship. I know if I was that player I'd be looking at the best route to getting into the Premier League and Championship has the possibility of promotion and being in the same country makes it easier to get a position in a team as opposed to be on the other side of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SF33    615

Parrot, FFA would find out. Remember that these "clubs" are not "clubs" in their own right and they do not exist outside of FFA. They are franchises. All Manchester City own is 75% of the licence to operate the franchise. FFA can demand anything it wants from its franchises.

 

Quite apart from that, eventually the rort will be exposed by someone "inside" the game who carries a grudge.

 

I'm not defending the salary cap at all, but the effort should go into changing the rules, not into trying to find a way around them. Like you I believe that the cap is inhibiting the game in Australia - certainly at its present level.

 

No doubt at all. The FFA would go over any transfer between Melbourne and anothe CFG team with a magnifying glass to quadruple-check that no salary cap breaches are occurring. And it's fair enough for them to do so, too.

Edited by SF33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mus-28    2,293

Saba is the last player we need. We're probably the most well off for guys who can play #10 in the entire league. Wouldn't hurt to look at a few of Auckland City's players after their performance at the Club World Cup, given they're part timers they wouldn't require huge wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saba is the last player we need. We're probably the most well off for guys who can play #10 in the entire league. Wouldn't hurt to look at a few of Auckland City's players after their performance at the Club World Cup, given they're part timers they wouldn't require huge wages.

That Berlanga looked good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imperial Pints    398

Hoffman posted a photo with Bastian Schweinsteiger on Instagram. Bastian is in Melbourne. Surely a multi year deal to Melbourne city is on the cards for Schweinsteiger.

http://instagram.com/p/xKgGcNCSS2/?modal=true

Schweini probably thinking "why the fuck does this so-called professional footballer not own a decent shirt?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

The rules are quite clear.

They allow Manchester City, and for that matter any other club to clear a player to an A League club and for the A League club to pay that player under the salary cap.
 

What happens to the player's salary if later cleared by the A League club to another A League club or to overseas is completely irrelevant.  :)  


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SF33    615

The rules are quite clear.

They allow Manchester City, and for that matter any other club to clear a player to an A League club and for the A League club to pay that player under the salary cap.

 

What happens to the player's salary if later cleared by the A League club to another A League club or to overseas is completely irrelevant.  :)  

 

 

Would I be correct in assuming that there's a '...subject to FFA approval...' safety net in there somewhere for the league, with regards to any proposed player transfer?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
johnno cpfc    650

 

The rules are quite clear.

They allow Manchester City, and for that matter any other club to clear a player to an A League club and for the A League club to pay that player under the salary cap.

 

What happens to the player's salary if later cleared by the A League club to another A League club or to overseas is completely irrelevant.  :)  

 

 

Would I be correct in assuming that there's a '...subject to FFA approval...' safety net in there somewhere for the league, with regards to any proposed player transfer?

 

You could just about garuarantee that is so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nate    2,572

The rules are quite clear.

They allow Manchester City, and for that matter any other club to clear a player to an A League club and for the A League club to pay that player under the salary cap.

 

What happens to the player's salary if later cleared by the A League club to another A League club or to overseas is completely irrelevant.  :)  

If these sorts of deals were actually feasible, we'd have Frank Lampard playing for us. 

 

The FFA has the power and authority to amend rules regarding the salary cap as they see fit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SF33    615

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.

 

 

And the solution is? Remove all restrictions, now that our club has the richest owners? And if so, would you have said the same when Heart was selling its most promising young players simply in order to break even most years?

 

The majority of A-League clubs are operating at a loss and removing the salary cap would bury them. Not much good winning the title in a league of only four teams, I'm afraid. We all want this club to be successful, but to be successful by bringing in players that no other club could dream of getting via pretty blatant circumventing of the salary cap? I'll pass, thanks. City now has more than enough competitive advantages as it is and there is really no excuse for the club to not become very successful very soon.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parrot    145

 

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.

 

 

And the solution is? Remove all restrictions, now that our club has the richest owners? And if so, would you have said the same when Heart was selling its most promising young players simply in order to break even most years?

 

The majority of A-League clubs are operating at a loss and removing the salary cap would bury them. Not much good winning the title in a league of only four teams, I'm afraid. We all want this club to be successful, but to be successful by bringing in players that no other club could dream of getting via pretty blatant circumventing of the salary cap? I'll pass, thanks. City now has more than enough competitive advantages as it is and there is really no excuse for the club to not become very successful very soon.

 

 

I would introduce the following immediately for next season:

1. Increase the salary cap to $3.5 million, but clubs are not forced to pay it.

 

2. Allow clubs to increase senior squad sizes to a number of their own choice, with the minimum to remain the same as at present.

 

3. Increase the number of permitted visa players for each club to 6.

 

4. Allow transfer fees between A League clubs. This will encourage youth development plus provide additional income for the less financial clubs instead of them losing players to more financial A League clubs for nothing.

5. Allow clubs for next season to employ 3 players outside the salary cap, with no nationality restrictions. The following season this is increased to 4, the season after 5, and the following season 6. 

 

We will immediately have a better quality A League.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    720

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.

 

The old NSL was not salary capped and lasted 27 seasons. Clubs came and went. the A-League format has proved more successful (bigger membership base, attendances and broadcast audiences) and yet the clubs are still not breaking even. I can't see how a return to the NSL format can improve the standard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,624

Like SF says, we need a salary cap just to keep the A League alive.

What does concern me is the new position on loan players. I can understand the FFA thinking that CFG were having a laugh wanting to bring in Lampard under the cap, but I don't think their new rule that almost equates to a ban on loan players is a good thing.

Clubs all over the world use loans as a way of strengthening without busting the bank balance and often lower division clubs will bring in young players from a higher division who are looking for game time. In some cases those players salaries may be topped up by the parent club, making the deal affordable. So this is a legitimate method of strengthening both individual teams and the league on a budget and it is detrimental to the league (and to Aussies based overseas looking for game time) to ban it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nate    2,572

 

 

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.

 

 

And the solution is? Remove all restrictions, now that our club has the richest owners? And if so, would you have said the same when Heart was selling its most promising young players simply in order to break even most years?

 

The majority of A-League clubs are operating at a loss and removing the salary cap would bury them. Not much good winning the title in a league of only four teams, I'm afraid. We all want this club to be successful, but to be successful by bringing in players that no other club could dream of getting via pretty blatant circumventing of the salary cap? I'll pass, thanks. City now has more than enough competitive advantages as it is and there is really no excuse for the club to not become very successful very soon.

 

 

I would introduce the following immediately for next season:

1. Increase the salary cap to $3.5 million, but clubs are not forced to pay it.

 

2. Allow clubs to increase senior squad sizes to a number of their own choice, with the minimum to remain the same as at present.

 

3. Increase the number of permitted visa players for each club to 6.

 

4. Allow transfer fees between A League clubs. This will encourage youth development plus provide additional income for the less financial clubs instead of them losing players to more financial A League clubs for nothing.

5. Allow clubs for next season to employ 3 players outside the salary cap, with no nationality restrictions. The following season this is increased to 4, the season after 5, and the following season 6. 

 

We will immediately have a better quality A League.

 

Let's just say, I'm glad you aren't in charge at the FFA.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    720

 

 

Many A League clubs have clearly outgrown FFA's nannying restrictions.

 

It's time FFA stopped trying to run the A League as if it was Aussie Rules - where salary cap restrictions and other forms of nannying work and don't lower the quality of the competition

because Aussie Rules is a game played professionally in one country and one country only.

 

 

And the solution is? Remove all restrictions, now that our club has the richest owners? And if so, would you have said the same when Heart was selling its most promising young players simply in order to break even most years?

 

The majority of A-League clubs are operating at a loss and removing the salary cap would bury them. Not much good winning the title in a league of only four teams, I'm afraid. We all want this club to be successful, but to be successful by bringing in players that no other club could dream of getting via pretty blatant circumventing of the salary cap? I'll pass, thanks. City now has more than enough competitive advantages as it is and there is really no excuse for the club to not become very successful very soon.

 

 

I would introduce the following immediately for next season:

1. Increase the salary cap to $3.5 million, but clubs are not forced to pay it.

I don't think that clubs have to pay the salary cap now. All this will do is allow the richer clubs to poach the better players from other A-League clubs or bring in better O/S players.

 

2. Allow clubs to increase senior squad sizes to a number of their own choice, with the minimum to remain the same as at present.

This could either thin the quality of the playing list (hell it is difficult enough to find decent LBs for 10 clubs let alone to increase the roster) OR the richer clubs will bring more O/S players to the detriment of local development.

 

3. Increase the number of permitted visa players for each club to 6.

This will retard the development of local players. Plus scouting is expensive and haphazard. Not sure what this could achieve.

 

4. Allow transfer fees between A League clubs. This will encourage youth development plus provide additional income for the less financial clubs instead of them losing players to more financial A League clubs for nothing.

This could work.

5. Allow clubs for next season to employ 3 players outside the salary cap, with no nationality restrictions. The following season this is increased to 4, the season after 5, and the following season 6. 

I don't mind the idea of having three players outside the salary cap.  But I still oppose the 6 visa players.

 

We will immediately have a better quality A League.

 

 

Not convinced.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,100

Gents, can we move this discussion to the "Australian Football" forum please?

 

Possibly under the "expansion" thread (because adjusting the rules will definitely affect possible expansion) or start a new "Salary Cap Discussion" thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×