|
|
Post by The Swahili Bastardizers on Jun 25, 2011 22:24:55 GMT
Great read with many a Stoke mention.. 'The bigger clubs could afford to pay greater wages, but the smaller clubs were greatly concerned by the growing disparity between the wealthiest and the rest. It was Derby County who made the first appeal for a maximum in wage in 1893. It wasn’t brought in at the time, but the Football League introduced one in 1901 it was at the behest of Stoke City. In a thrice, the highest paid players in England had their wages savagely cut. Bonuses were banned, and the maximum wage was set a £4 per week. This figure in itself was enough to do for the AFU. The vast majority of players still earned less than this amount (which was double what a skilled tradesman – ie, somebody earning a good wage – was paid at the time), so were unconcerned by talk of strikes.' Cracks in the combination of the maximum wage and retain-and-transfer system had been showing for some considerable time. Neil Franklin was arguably the finest centre-half of his generation, yet, like all other players in post-war Britain, he was tied to a maximum wage that paid him £12 per week during the season and £10 week during the close season with win and draw bonuses of £2 and £1 respectively. On top of this, he was eligible for a £750 lump sum benefit payment every five years. Concerned at the quality of life in Stoke-on-Trent, he signed for Indepentiente Santa Fe of Bogota in Colombia in 1950, breaking his contract with Stoke City for a £5,000 per year contract with £35 win bonuses and free accommodation. He even went to the trouble of withdrawing from the 1950 England World Cup squad, earning himself a ban from the FA at the same time. It wasn’t even as if FIFA could act – Colombia’s FA was considered a “rebel” organisation and was not within their jurisdiction. Franklin’s time in Bogota was short-lived and miserable. He arrived there – along with fellow former Stoke player George Mountford – to find the country politically unstable and an early evening curfew in place, Santa Fe were unable to keep their financial promises to him. He received just one week’s wages in the two months that he was in Colombia, played just six matches for Santa Fe and his ban by the FA lasted until 1951. His lateral view of how he could develop his career, however, was an indicator of a stable door that was bolting and the maximum wage looked more and more anachronistic as the decade wore on. The reality was that almost all players earned this amount, meaning that famous international players were taking home no more than players a division or two below them. Moreover, this system only encouraged under-the-counter payments which, if exposed, could seriously damage the reputation of the game and, of course, left players easily susceptible to bribery. With the maximum wage gone, the times were a-changing and the days of retain and transfer were also numbered. In 1959, George Eastham had submitted a transfer request to his club, Newcastle United, and then refused to sign a contract with them and left to find work elsewhere. Newcastle eventually agreed a fee with Arsenal of £47,500 for Eastham’s services, but Eastham, with the backing of the PFA, took the matter further, stating that: Our contract could bind us to a club for life. Most people called it the “slavery contract”. We had virtually no rights at all. It was often the case that the guy on the terrace not only earned more than us — though there’s nothing wrong with that — he had more freedom of movement than us. People in business or teaching were able to hand in their notice and move on. We weren’t. That was wrong. The case was heard before Justice Wilberforce in 1963, and the judge found partially in favour of Eastham, stating that Newcastle’s decision to retain his registration had amounted to an unfair relationship but that he was not entitled to wages from Newcastle because he had refused to pay for them. As such, Eastham did not personally gain from the case, but the retain and transfer system was fundamentally altered. Transfer tribunals were introduced for end of contract disputes and players received better tersm for agreeing new contracts. This system remained in place until the Bosman ruling, in 1995. Coincidentally, Jimmy Hill didn’t benefit much either from the abolition of the maximum wage – he retired from playing in November 1961 and took over as the manager of Coventry City. The risks that the likes of Eastham, Hill, Billy Meredith, Charlie Roberts and Herbert Kingaby took should not be forgotten by today’s players. Without them, the likelihood of £100,000 per week contracts or the right to leave for another club would have been that bit more remote, and it is also worth remembering that football isn’t all about the multi-millionaires at the top. Players from the bottom of the game have benefitted from the ending of the practices that curtailed the earnings of so many players over the years, and those that blazed the trail for them should be remembered for their sacrifices. www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=13565 |
|
|
|
Post by Roy Cropper on Jun 26, 2011 19:27:46 GMT
There should be a maximum wage now the games financial side has gotten so ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperRickyFuller on Jun 26, 2011 20:34:55 GMT
Cracking read
|
|
|
|
Post by MermaidSal on Jun 27, 2011 0:09:14 GMT
There should be a maximum wage now the games financial side has gotten so ridiculous. Agree. AND a minimum wage for each of the pro and semi-pro divisions. Whether that's compatible with agent power though....  |
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jun 27, 2011 0:11:44 GMT
How hard would it be for Blatter to just say, "from now no player will earn more than 40k a week"?
For him very hard because he knows nothing about football but you know what I mean...
|
|
|
|
Post by aworldofmyown on Jun 27, 2011 6:43:22 GMT
There should be a maximum wage now the games financial side has gotten so ridiculous. Agree. AND a minimum wage for each of the pro and semi-pro divisions. Whether that's compatible with agent power though.... there should ba a maximum wage and the players should pay their own agents, that's who they are working for. |
|
|
|
Post by Dharma Bum on Jun 27, 2011 10:28:34 GMT
A maximum wage will never happen, for exactly the same reasons it was scrapped in the first place. It's market forces that allow players to be paid large amounts: big clubs have the money and the best players are always in demand. Incidentally, what do you think should be set as the maximum and minimum wages?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bojantastic on Jun 27, 2011 11:12:29 GMT
How hard would it be for Blatter to just say, "from now no player will earn more than 40k a week"? For him very hard because he knows nothing about football but you know what I mean... Problem is, if he did that, it would just see an increase in bonuses. It's a private sector business, and therefore whilst a cap on how much money clubs can spend could be put in place, it would be near impossible to stop because clubs would just give players big hand outs and stupid bonuses for appearances and goals. If a club has 100 million pounds, you can't stop them distributing it how they want can you?  |
|
