Chelsea's £50m deal for Fernando Torres worries Uefa

And0TheGr8 wrote:well then the 2-4 horse races will continue to happen and you have nothing to complain about in regards to teams spending money

I dont complain. I like the league the way it is and like teams spending big. Its what makes the game exciting and placing caps in the game will take that away

i dont mind it not having it either for footy, but i would like the NFL to keep it

And0TheGr8 wrote:i dont mind it not having it either for footy, but i would like the NFL to keep it

Yeah thats why I like NFL because its so close but I dont think it would work in football so wouldnt want it introduced

And0TheGr8 wrote:i dont mind it not having it either for footy, but i would like the NFL to keep it

No one's debating for it to be taken away, are they?

mauro wrote:surey carrol transfer must be worse

torres is world cup, euro winner that is famous all over the world

carroll is just a 'english clogger' and is worth 10million more then rooney 7 years ago. is a crazy

Mauro

the salary cap is just gonna make the rich richer & the poor poorer - it not gonna work - there are too many fine details involved

flat salary cap will not working in european football culture

North_Sea_Tiger wrote:I dont want any spending/salary caps like American sports. The American sports are so stupid. If you win 60% of your games then you win your league/division. Its really stupid and I really wouldnt want football to be like that

so you would rather clubs carry on buying league titles?......... oh sorry, of course you do you're a rangers fan! you love how 2 teams dominate a league because of how unevenly the riches are distributed. the fans of 40 other clubs in Scotland would like to see the playing field levelled just as the vast majority of fans in England would!

As it stands, i will definitely NEVER see my team get near the top of the league! with a salary cap and the introduction of the fair play rules, it means that i MIGHT!

The way in which US sports operate is excellent, we don't have the same breeding ground for our sportsmen (college sports), so we could never have a draft. but the worst teams have the first option on the best up and coming players and the salary cap means that as a great player you can play for a shit team earning mega bucks or you can take a pay cut to play on a better team and have a chance of winning something!

Just because Chelsea, United and City could no longer blow every other team out of the water with regards to wages doesn't mean the better players won't wanna play for them! it just means that if they wanna win silverware they will have to take a paycut or earn their money elsewhere. the same goes for players in Scotland! playing for an Old Firm team will still be something to aspire to even if it's not as lucrative!

I would support a UEFA wide salary cap on a sliding scale of higher wages, the higher the division you play in. Serie A, La Liga, Ligue 1 & the PL would have the same cap, while Serie B, Segunda, Ligue 2 & the Champ. would share the same cap.

The danger with this is a league whether in Europe or further afield will break away to create a haven for the Worlds greedier players. Colombia done it in the late 1940's, they were paying more than five times the maximum wage in England! it would perhaps leave the door open for the MLS to do the same. when the "Dimayor" league in Colombia did it, they severed all ties to FIFA so had no transfer fee's to pay! some of the Worlds greatest players just walked out on their contracts!

No, salary caps are wrong. You don't see them anywhere else except in sport. The government don't say. Right, all business can only spend a certain amount on wages. They let them get on with it, if they spend too much it's their fault.

Should be like that with football. The biggest spenders don't always dominate. Look at Chelsea, Real Madrid, Man City even. All that money and hardly anything in return in recent years.

Dan wrote:No, salary caps are wrong. You don't see them anywhere else except in sport. The government don't say. Right, all business can only spend a certain amount on wages. They let them get on with it, if they spend too much it's their fault.

Should be like that with football. The biggest spenders don't always dominate. Look at Chelsea, Real Madrid, Man City even. All that money and hardly anything in return in recent years.

the definition of sport;

An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.

A salary cap would serve to make the game more competitive!

It's easy to disregard such measures when your club has just spent All it's TV revenue for the year on 2 players! it would be better for the game if Wolves, Blackpool & Arsenal could all afford Andy Carroll but he chose to join Liverpool because..........they're Liverpool!

Dan wrote:No, salary caps are wrong. You don't see them anywhere else except in sport. The government don't say. Right, all business can only spend a certain amount on wages. They let them get on with it, if they spend too much it's their fault.

Should be like that with football. The biggest spenders don't always dominate. Look at Chelsea, Real Madrid, Man City even. All that money and hardly anything in return in recent years.

Man City used the power of money to become one of the EPL powerhouses. They'll proably win the league in acouple of years at this rate.

I'd like to see salary caps, but as Mauro said, a flat salary cap will simply not work. If someone finds an effective way of implementing it, which doesn't make the rich richer and poor poorer (another fair argument), or another way altogether to limit the Chelseas and Man Cities, then I am up for it.

JMB_94 wrote:

Dan wrote:No, salary caps are wrong. You don't see them anywhere else except in sport. The government don't say. Right, all business can only spend a certain amount on wages. They let them get on with it, if they spend too much it's their fault.

Should be like that with football. The biggest spenders don't always dominate. Look at Chelsea, Real Madrid, Man City even. All that money and hardly anything in return in recent years.

Man City used the power of money to become one of the EPL powerhouses. They'll proably win the league in acouple of years at this rate.

How much money have they spent so far? How much have they got in return?


Also, 'orrible bastard, don't you think he joined us because of who we are, rather than the fact we managed to get £50m?



Anyway, there will soon be a limit on spending anyway. A club will only be able to spend 70% of it's revenue on wages. That's good enough for me. There will be no rich owners ala Chelsea and Man City. All money spent by clubs must be earned by them.

Salarly cap = no.

Dan wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Dan wrote:No, salary caps are wrong. You don't see them anywhere else except in sport. The government don't say. Right, all business can only spend a certain amount on wages. They let them get on with it, if they spend too much it's their fault.

Should be like that with football. The biggest spenders don't always dominate. Look at Chelsea, Real Madrid, Man City even. All that money and hardly anything in return in recent years.

Man City used the power of money to become one of the EPL powerhouses. They'll proably win the league in acouple of years at this rate.

Also, 'orrible bastard, don't you think he joined us because of who we are, rather than the fact we managed to get £50m?

of course it had something to do with it. but had Torres decided to sit on his hands and see out the remainder of his contract then Carroll would never have joined! Carroll joined Liverpool because United, City, Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea were not knocking on the door! and if they were they didn't value him at £35M!

of course most players would rather play for LFC than Newcastle, Bolton, Villa & Wolves, but it certainly helps when the buying club suddenly has £50M burning a hole in their pocket! for one day LFC were elevated to the stature of a European Power House (which they once were). time will tell if they spent that money wisely, i i have my doubts.

An English club spends £50 Million on a player and it worries UEFA

Real Madrid spend £80 Million on Ronaldo...UEFA don't bat an eyelid

Yes, but not something stupid like £50k or even £100k p/w. I'd say £150k p/w is good.......but the problem is that players in England get taxed more so it would be a huge disadvantage to England for their to be a basic salary cap.

-------------

In regards to NFL.....it's completely different. Not every football club has some sugar daddy with a whole state full of supporters and a massive 80,000 seater superdome.

forestfcfan wrote:An English club spends £50 Million on a player and it worries UEFA

Real Madrid spend £80 Million on Ronaldo...UEFA don't bat an eyelid

Forgot already?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f8cfe182-566f-11de-9a1c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1CkdYdWCa