Jump to content
Melbourne Football
strider

Anthony Caceres

Recommended Posts

Deviant    1,491
1 minute ago, Heart of Melbourne said:

Tony Pignata having a sook on Twitter. Flog

Needs to be smacked about with a stick.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JC22    263
5 minutes ago, Torn Asunder said:

CFG's purchase has enabled the CCM to sign Garcia 

Exactly - they would be rapt that they got some decent compensation for a player that was disillusioned with them.

I personally think they should allow transfers between A-League clubs. Would provide another source of income for some of the poorer teams, and the salary cap would still ensure the rich clubs can't exploit it too much.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,112
1 minute ago, n i k o said:

What is unfair is FFA rules and regulations. We're simply working within them, or around them to be more accurate. 

This transfer highlights exactly why transfer fees need to be allowed between A-League clubs. Not only because now we can skirt the rules (though I'm sure the FFA dont mind the $$$ coming into a cash strapped club), but because the obvious benefits are clear. Transfer fees are honestly a large part of why soccer is the #1 sport in the world. It's a great equalisation system that makes teams which otherwise wouldn't be viable able to compete at a much higher level. Most of the clubs in Europe basically exist off of transfer fees.

At the end of the day, good players will find their way to top teams regardless, like with Caceras, he would have just left for free. But like this CCM can get some money in, and with that money they signed a marquee. Great result for everyone.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deviant    1,491
Just now, JC22 said:

Exactly - they would be rapt that they got some decent compensation for a player that was disillusioned with them.

I personally think they should allow transfers between A-League clubs. Would provide another source of income for some of the poorer teams, and the salary cap would still ensure the rich clubs can't exploit it too much.

I hope this opens doors for a better transfer system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,112
7 minutes ago, JC22 said:

Exactly - they would be rapt that they got some decent compensation for a player that was disillusioned with them.

I personally think they should allow transfers between A-League clubs. Would provide another source of income for some of the poorer teams, and the salary cap would still ensure the rich clubs can't exploit it too much.

How can rich clubs "exploit it too much"?

By making the poorer clubs financially viable and more competitive?

TBH you can probably get rid of the salary cap once you allow transfer fees. Sydney, Visitors, and us will keep the rest of the clubs going, just like in pretty much every other league in the world were the top few clubs basically pay to keep the rest financially viable and competitive.

Fact is, it's clear clubs like CCM and Newcastle can't exist without transfer fees in place, allowing them to develop players and make $$$. Exactly how  90% of the clubs in Belgium, Switzerland, Netherlands, etc exist.

It also helps the national team as teams have greater incentive to develop players.

Edited by Tesla
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JC22    263
5 minutes ago, Tesla said:

How can rich clubs "exploit it too much"?

By making the poorer clubs financially viable and more competitive?

TBH you can probably get rid of the salary cap once you allow transfer fees. Sydney, Visitors, and us will keep the rest of the clubs going, just like in pretty much every other league in the world were the top few clubs basically pay to keep the rest financially viable and competitive.

Fact is, it's clear clubs like CCM and Newcastle can't exist without transfer fees in place, allowing them to develop players and make $$$. Exactly how  80% of the clubs in Belgium, Switzerland, etc exist.

It also helps the national team as teams have greater incentive to develop players.

I guess 'exploit' isn't really the right word. But in this era I think the A-League still needs a salary cap so that CCM, Newcastle etc still have a chance at success.

What I meant by that though is that if there was no salary cap, then the rich clubs could effectively just buy all the good players from the league, leaving the poorer clubs confined to the bottom of the table every year.

Whilst you're right in that those teams would greatly benefit financially from this - odds are they're going to be playing in front of 100 people every week once people stop attending to watch them get smashed again. They would be better off financially but worse off in terms of support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,095
15 minutes ago, Tesla said:

How can rich clubs "exploit it too much"?

By making the poorer clubs financially viable and more competitive?

TBH you can probably get rid of the salary cap once you allow transfer fees. Sydney, Visitors, and us will keep the rest of the clubs going, just like in pretty much every other league in the world were the top few clubs basically pay to keep the rest financially viable and competitive.

Fact is, it's clear clubs like CCM and Newcastle can't exist without transfer fees in place, allowing them to develop players and make $$$. Exactly how  90% of the clubs in Belgium, Switzerland, Netherlands, etc exist.

It also helps the national team as teams have greater incentive to develop players.

This.

The League has been splitting into those who "Have" and those who "Have Not" situation for a few years now even with the current Equalisation Rules and Salary Cap with the obvious example being the two Northern Coastal Clubs in NSW.

Newcastle have been seen as last resort club for players since Tinkler and Arnold's coaching really was covering over the cracks at CCM which of course have become obvious for everyone to see when he himself moved on to Bling FC.

Since the introduction of WSW a divide has become clearer and clearer, then even more distinct when both Sydney and Melbourne got club's with proper pulling power. In fact I find it very hard to see certain clubs ever being able to win a championship and if it had continued to exist MHFC would have probably been one of these clubs.

Edited by cadete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,112
22 minutes ago, JC22 said:

I guess 'exploit' isn't really the right word. But in this era I think the A-League still needs a salary cap so that CCM, Newcastle etc still have a chance at success.

What I meant by that though is that if there was no salary cap, then the rich clubs could effectively just buy all the good players from the league, leaving the poorer clubs confined to the bottom of the table every year.

Whilst you're right in that those teams would greatly benefit financially from this - odds are they're going to be playing in front of 100 people every week once people stop attending to watch them get smashed again. They would be better off financially but worse off in terms of support.

I know they have both had past success, but neither CCM or Newcastle will go close to winning anything even under the current rules. The league has moved past the early days where even without money you could have success, the standard was so low back then it really didn't take much. They are dragging down the rest of the league for no reason.

Also I think people don't realise how bad a position CCM are in, they've sold so many players, including the two products of the A-League who are playing at the highest level now, and are still struggling. The fact they are going to collect like $10m sell on fee when Matt Ryan is sold to Real Madrid or Barcelona is probably the only reason the owners haven't bailed. They're already a club existing off selling players, but there are only so many players you can sell to Europe/Asia, however they do develop plenty of players who bigger A-league clubs would happily buy if they could.

Edited by Tesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M13    197

CFG flexing some muscle..and people don´t like it.
Well, as someone said on Twitter "We are the Kylo Ren of the Aleague apparently :D"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,192

There are Financial Fair Play rules in the EPL aren't there? These are designed to keep football sustainable. it is perfectly possible to have sensible rules here in Australia to ensure that the league continues to be viable and an interesting competition and is not just the plaything of a handful of clubs. Montpellier's title in France, and Leicester City in the EPL are examples of what can still happen even with the money sloshing around the European game.

The Caceres move simply highlights the stupidity of the current prohibition on transfer fees between A-League clubs. Players have always been able to move from club to club, simply by obtaining a release from one and then joining another. All that's happened in the Caceres case is that he's moved now rather than at the end of the season. I can understand that certain other clubs are uncomfortable with that has transpired, but the answer is to remove the prohibition on transfer fees, not to stifle further investment in the local game from overseas interests. No other A-League rules need to change for the moment, although this might be an opportune time for a thorough review. Makes the "20-year whole-of-football" review look even more inadequate, doesn't it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,095
22 minutes ago, Tesla said:

I know they have both had past success, but neither CCM or Newcastle will go close to winning anything even under the current rules. The league has moved past the early days where even without money you could have success, the standard was so low back then it really didn't take much. They are dragging down the rest of the league for no reason.

Also I think people don't realise how bad a position CCM are in, they've sold so many players, including the two products of the A-League who are playing at the highest level now, and are still struggling. The fact they are going to collect like $10m sell on fee when Matt Ryan is sold to Real Madrid or Barcelona is probably the only reason the owners haven't bailed. They're already a club existing off selling players, but there are only so many players you can sell to Europe/Asia, however they do develop plenty of players who bigger A-league clubs would happily buy if they could.

I always kind of consider CCM as the Disgruntled Goat of the A-League Family, 

Lowry and Co knew they wanted only one Generic Club in each of the five major Capital Cities because of the thought at the time (Correct or Incorrect) that Ethnic Divides was stopping the growth of the game in Australia.

However then like in "Itchy & Scratchy & Friends" they needed to find some extra friends before they could have league/show... and so they picked CCM as the last friend because they had a new empty stadium and where near Newcastle who was the logical second pick for a club in NSW due to the City's historical links to the game.

In hindsight there really should have been forward planning involved with this decision as when Melb and Syd received second clubs these two clubs were never going to be able to be as good at drawing players.

Edited by cadete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JC22    263
Just now, rayv36 said:

Davutovic on SEN saying the FFA might consider bringing in regulations to stop this from happening again

That would piss me off.

Just make transfer fees between A-League clubs legal and keep the cap as is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dylan    4,187

If they are going to stop it might as well get other players we need like Malik as well before they stop it

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deviant    1,491

I can't believe that this is overshadowing possibly one of the greatest marquee signings of the A-League. 

All because we paid them!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,192
2 minutes ago, rayv36 said:

Davutovic on SEN saying the FFA might consider bringing in regulations to stop this from happening again

A regulation to stop CCM receiving a transfer fee they wouldn't otherwise get? And then FFA ask City again to spend some money bringing a guest player to liven up the league for them? Sounds about right.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
strider    2,424

Green line pls

This forum needs democracy not mod overlords (im lookin at u JW)

Shut my thread down and face my silent wrath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MHFC-FAN    210
26 minutes ago, rayv36 said:

Davutovic on SEN saying the FFA might consider bringing in regulations to stop this from happening again

Sydney fc will be exempt from this rule no doubt...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,192
3 minutes ago, strider said:

Green line pls

This forum needs democracy not mod overlords (im lookin at u JW)

Shut my thread down and face my silent wrath

I feel the pins being stuck into the plasticine doll.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    727

So If I understand this correctly:

The FFA prevents clubs from buying/selling players to each other. They can exchange players or come to a mutual termination agreement but that is it.

The reasons are to stop the richer clubs from poaching the best talent from the poorer clubs leaving the competition perennially with the same winning teams. Having the same teams be on top annually makes the competition dull and lopsided.

The case against this line of thinking is that the clubs are prevented from growing and stops the players from further development.

The case for transfer fees is that the poorer clubs get a fresh injection of cash and are able to develop players.

So my questions would be:

1. what was the experience of the NSL? Were transfer fees part of the deal in the old NSL? If so what was the result?

2. What is the experience of overseas competitions? Are they all lopsided? I note that some people are saying that currently in the EPL, Leicester and Arsenal are doing very well compared to Chelsea/Man U. But AFAIK this is the first season that this has happened in a long time so a sample of one is not enough.

3. Is there a possibility of a half way solution. One where there can be transfer fees but some clubs may need to exercise self constraint. So for example Melb City buys Caceres for $300k but next season its squad may be reduced by one player or its salary cap is constrained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JC22    263
4 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

So If I understand this correctly:

The FFA prevents clubs from buying/selling players to each other. They can exchange players or come to a mutual termination agreement but that is it.

The reasons are to stop the richer clubs from poaching the best talent from the poorer clubs leaving the competition perennially with the same winning teams. Having the same teams be on top annually makes the competition dull and lopsided.

The case against this line of thinking is that the clubs are prevented from growing and stops the players from further development.

The case for transfer fees is that the poorer clubs get a fresh injection of cash and are able to develop players.

So my questions would be:

1. what was the experience of the NSL? Were transfer fees part of the deal in the old NSL? If so what was the result?

2. What is the experience of overseas competitions? Are they all lopsided? I note that some people are saying that currently in the EPL, Leicester and Arsenal are doing very well compared to Chelsea/Man U. But AFAIK this is the first season that this has happened in a long time so a sample of one is not enough.

3. Is there a possibility of a half way solution. One where there can be transfer fees but some clubs may need to exercise self constraint. So for example Melb City buys Caceres for $300k but next season its squad may be reduced by one player or its salary cap is constrained.

The best half way solution would be to just allow transfer fees but keep the cap as is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nate    2,573

rapt to pick up this guy, extra midfield depth is always welcome and he really looks like a player for the future providing our overlords don't have other grander plans for him.

also, transfer fees between A-League clubs are long overdue anyway so hopefully this provokes some FFA action

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bt50    3,467
31 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

So If I understand this correctly:

The FFA prevents clubs from buying/selling players to each other. They can exchange players or come to a mutual termination agreement but that is it.

The reasons are to stop the richer clubs from poaching the best talent from the poorer clubs leaving the competition perennially with the same winning teams. Having the same teams be on top annually makes the competition dull and lopsided.

The case against this line of thinking is that the clubs are prevented from growing and stops the players from further development.

The case for transfer fees is that the poorer clubs get a fresh injection of cash and are able to develop players.

So my questions would be:

1. what was the experience of the NSL? Were transfer fees part of the deal in the old NSL? If so what was the result?

2. What is the experience of overseas competitions? Are they all lopsided? I note that some people are saying that currently in the EPL, Leicester and Arsenal are doing very well compared to Chelsea/Man U. But AFAIK this is the first season that this has happened in a long time so a sample of one is not enough.

3. Is there a possibility of a half way solution. One where there can be transfer fees but some clubs may need to exercise self constraint. So for example Melb City buys Caceres for $300k but next season its squad may be reduced by one player or its salary cap is constrained.

I would suggest the reasoning of the rule in the first place was to stop clubs getting into bidding wars with each other.

Some of the poorer financed clubs and poorly ran clubs would be enticed into paying more than they could afford, thus going under eventually. Tbh I think the A League clubs are past that now and it would actually benefit the poorer clubs especially, particularly when it comes to having the finance for better marquee players.

Salary Cap is a completely different debate altogether although its probably important to note that with the salary cap in place its more likely the talented kids could be more likely to receive more money by staying at the 'poorer club' and as such would be unlikely to move up the wage ladder by transferring to a big club. The transfer fee would only benefit the seller.

Edited by bt50
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kinnibari    422
3 hours ago, Tesla said:

How can rich clubs "exploit it too much"?

If you have the finances, you'd always be able to pay a transfer fee/offer the biggest transfer fee, and therefore be more likely to sign a player, even if the wages we paid were the same or similar because of the salary cap. Because transfer fees are independent of the cap. (Unless there's a separate cap on transfer fees but that seems unlikely.)

3 hours ago, M13 said:

CFG flexing some muscle..and people don´t like it.
Well, as someone said on Twitter "We are the Kylo Ren of the Aleague apparently :D"

I couldn't take Kylo Ren seriously after I saw his face.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,672

Caceres should give us some badly needed punch off the bench, so he's a good pick up.

As to how it was done, well "not quite cricket" but reminds me of CCM signing a marquee (J Aloisi) as an injury replacement, because it was within the rules at the time. All's fair, love and war.

As to the transfer ban, it's just silly. It's discouraging clubs from developing young players (not all kids can get foreign visas for foreign transfers). It's the same as when Australia had "an iron ore shortage" so exports were banned. Australia had an iron ore shortage BECAUSE exports were banned! There was heaps of iron ore but it wasn't worth looking for because you couldn't sell it. Once they got rid of that rule, Australia had the most iron ore in the world 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,192
4 hours ago, bt50 said:

I would suggest the reasoning of the rule in the first place was to stop clubs getting into bidding wars with each other.

Some of the poorer financed clubs and poorly ran clubs would be enticed into paying more than they could afford, thus going under eventually. Tbh I think the A League clubs are past that now and it would actually benefit the poorer clubs especially, particularly when it comes to having the finance for better marquee players.

Salary Cap is a completely different debate altogether although its probably important to note that with the salary cap in place its more likely the talented kids could be more likely to receive more money by staying at the 'poorer club' and as such would be unlikely to move up the wage ladder by transferring to a big club. The transfer fee would only benefit the seller.

This could be fixed. One way, not necessarily perfect, would be by applying a formula for the transfer fee, and making it equal to the balance of the wages due on the player's current contract, and not allow the transfer otherwise. Such a rule prevents bidding. If there were two or more clubs wishing to get the player, he gets to choose which he wants to go to. Or he chooses to stay where he is and the transfer does not take place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mus-28    2,306
8 hours ago, Heart of Melbourne said:

Tony Pignata having a sook on Twitter. Flog

Meanwhile Sydney trying to unsettle Carney so he requests a mutual termination so they can sign him. Shit cunts are shit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jw1739    7,192
5 hours ago, NewConvert said:

2. What is the experience of overseas competitions? Are they all lopsided? I note that some people are saying that currently in the EPL, Leicester and Arsenal are doing very well compared to Chelsea/Man U. But AFAIK this is the first season that this has happened in a long time so a sample of one is not enough.

You'd have to look at the Wikipedia entry for the various leagues. But, for example, the FA Premier League was formed in 1992-93. The winners have been:
Manchester United 13 times;
Chelsea 4;
Arsenal 3;
Manchester City 2;
Blackburn Rovers 1.

If you go to France over the same period:
Marseille 1 (+1 stripped from the club and not re-awarded)
Nantes 2
Monaco 2
Lyon 7
Bordeaux 2
PSG 4
Lille, Lens, Auxerre, Montpellier 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
malloy    3,213
23 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

This could be fixed. One way, not necessarily perfect, would be by applying a formula for the transfer fee, and making it equal to the balance of the wages due on the player's current contract, and not allow the transfer otherwise. Such a rule prevents bidding. If there were two or more clubs wishing to get the player, he gets to choose which he wants to go to. Or he chooses to stay where he is and the transfer does not take place.

I could see the selling club getting fucked over by this. Say an emerging young talent on lower wages who has shown great potential will go for way too cheap. 

 

Imo the ffa need to introduce transfer fees with a cap on the maximum fee.  This cap along with the salary cap (but not the minimum) will be incrementally increased each year  with both caps being abolished within 10 years. Both caps would have their increases published in advance to give clubs full transperancy and the ability to plan for the future.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,112

Honestly the only restrictions I am in favour of is teams having to submit their books to FFA (as they already have to), and basically their debt must be within a certain limit of revenue or assets or both, and secondly their expenses must also be limited to a certain percentage over revenue, eg 200%.

The only problem I see with this, is that most A-League clubs aren't financially viable already so they wouldn't pass any half decent test like this.

So instead we will maintain BS restrictions that only hurt the financial viability of clubs (by not letting them make money from transfer fees, and forcing them to pay a minimum level of salary [2m+] under the salary cap rules)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shahanga    3,672
7 hours ago, malloy said:

I could see the selling club getting fucked over by this. Say an emerging young talent on lower wages who has shown great potential will go for way too cheap. 

 

Imo the ffa need to introduce transfer fees with a cap on the maximum fee.  This cap along with the salary cap (but not the minimum) will be incrementally increased each year  with both caps being abolished within 10 years. Both caps would have their increases published in advance to give clubs full transperancy and the ability to plan for the future.

I don't see the point to any restrictions on transfer fees. Whilst many people seem to have concerns about a club drawing in all the talent by paying higher transfer fees, that overlooks that the talent will need to be under a salary cap. To bring in a lot of talent you will have to pay them less than they can get elsewhere. 

So players will just reject the transfer if they don't like the deal & clubs will be forced to either let players walk at contracts end or take the lower fee.

The salary cap is the only restriction you need.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jovan    3,117

Questions.

Is this kid any good? 

We've recently brought in others with supposedly huge potential but have really struggled . Brown Kuzi come to mind.

Is he a starting 11 player? 

And finally is he better than Mauk, Retre or Melling?

 

Edited by Jovan

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

×