[Archived] Levelling The Playing Field

[S15]

it could but it would also double,treble or quadruple transfer fees..i cant see turkeys voting for crimbo.

This is the biggest issue. No 'leveller' is going to be voted for by the bigger/richer clubs, which is why it's time for the FA/UEFA/FIFA to grow some balls and make the decisions over the big boys heads.

[philipl]

Are they not introducing a squad of 25 ala Spain here next season?

Yes together with a domestically reared qotient.

[Stuart]

A draft system cannot work, neither can a wage cap system. How's this for an idea??

A 'committe' of whoever sit down each season and award marks/rankings to each player worldwide. A cap is set as to the highest player points total a club can field at one time.

Doesn't contravene any laws and is enforceable as a condition of competition.

Say Messi merits top marks, say 200 and Julie gets a few less say 10 other palyers are mmmm 30 each so a game cap of 480 points means we could play Messi in our line up but to change Andrews for Ronaldo (mmm 199) blows the limit and we can't line up that way (even though we have Ronaldo on our books).

Simple system that stops Chelsea buying the best 11 players in the world and playing them all at once. Brings the skill of team selection back into game.

Bring on the revolution

I think the easiest way to even things out would be to limit the number of transfers allowed my each club per window. For example, only two or three permanent signings allowed per window, and one loan. it wouldn't have to be specifically those numbers, but you get the idea. It would actually make the big clubs think twice about signing players we've lost over the last few years, such as Bentley, Bellamy, Santa Cruz, Duff et all, all have all been signed as part of mass makeovers by clubs over summer periods.

Such a limitation would massively improve the chances of those players staying, giving clubs like Rovers a chance to compete at the top end of the table, can you imagine our team had we have kept all our top players over the last 5 or 6 years? Do you think Hughes would have left us for City had these limitations been in place?

i think this idea could work, and benefit all clubs as a result.

These two suggestions sound like a real life version of fantasy football! Maybe there's something in that.

I wonder who would be on the committee giving out the points though. The same people who sat on the dubious goals panel perhaps? Or those people who set the values for the fantasy football leagues online and in the papers. It'd be no mean feet to rank every player in the world.

Comments:

1) It would need to apply world-wide to avoid other nations continuing without limits (e.g. Real Madrid)

2) What is the points limit? And, if this cap was applied from next season - let's say 10000 point cap for each squad - what happens at the end of the season if a team's points tally is over 10000? Do they have to get rid of someone, say swap Lampard for Andrews to even things up?

3) It could perhaps be introduced that academy players don't count toward the quota - providing they came through the ranks.

4) It could kill transfer fees as clubs may be forced into sales. Perhaps they could pool together the surplus players from all of the top clubs and apply some kind of draft system to those players (kind of like an improved version of the out-of-contract player list).

5) Following that it would therefore kill player contracts since a player who was given a 4 year contract could be forced out after a year because the quota has been reached and he's surplus. His club would have to pay him off to leave!

I'm sure there are more issues with it so it's very unlikely to work.

In terms of levelling the playing field, I wonder if there's some mileage in 3) and extending the 'home-grown quota' system... for instance, I'd love it if there was a ruling that meant 5 members of the first team squad had to be from the club's town or at least county.

[Steve Moss]

Referees need to be impartial not biased either way. Viddy evidence could sort that.

Agreed. The only way you could do this is with each side being given the chance of appeal, maybe 2 times a half, and if they lose one they lose both for the half. The other thing I seriously think would be a good idea is if the ref is given the option to get a '4th' opinion if he isn't completely sure (like rugby and cricket decisions).

I agree with the video evidence, in the discretion of the referee. I would allow the managers to demand a video review but only if they made the demand before the ball goes in or out of play, as the case may be. This is to ensure the flow and speed of play is not unduly interrupted. And if the video review does not support the manager's opinion, it should be an automatic yellow card against the manager's player who was the subject of the review. This is to discourage constant reviews, puts an element of danger (and therefore entertainment) in the review process, and would prevent the use of tactical 'reviews" much as American football and basketball uses time outs.

Better revenue sharing. Look at MLB as an example - gate revenues: 2/3 to the home team, 1/3 to the away team. They do equal sharing of all merchandise revenue (I'd change that a little, as it doesn't provide incentive for smaller clubs to sign name players, maybe 1/3 stays in their coffers and 2/3 gets put in a league pot). Luxury tax: cap the squad at 25 and if you spend over x amount in wages, you have to put that same amount in a pot to be shared by those who don't. Any major injury crises have to be filled by youth team players under 18.

This would be the single biggest equalizer between the haves and have nots. Which is why it will never be allowed to happen.

And the slice of the pie given to Championship and lower tiers of football should also increase.

[TimmyJimmy]

2) What is the points limit? And, if this cap was applied from next season - let's say 10000 point cap for each squad - what happens at the end of the season if a team's points tally is over 10000? Do they have to get rid of someone, say swap Lampard for Andrews to even things up?

Well I was trying to come up with a system that was not based around cash, mainly because the law of the land always overides rules like salary caps etc.. Drafts of any kind cannot work here because as Abbey points out we have no Uni's to act as a feeder system and also who could afford the wages if they won the pick.

Theno's view on sqaud limits is OK and workable I think as it is also not based on any financial measure so could be enforced as a rule of the competition entered.

To answer your question Jisty I was trying to find some middle ground (just for the hell of it) that allowed a club to sign as many players as they wanted, at any price they wanted, and at any wage they wanted to pay, they just wouldn't be able to get them on the field at the same time. My notion of a points limit was per game not per squad. So if the EPL decided a club could have no more than 1000 points on the pitch at any one time then the following happens :

- the big clubs get to stay 'big', they purchase who they want, preserve the Galactico image etc for the marketing guys

- the big clubs always are in a more powerful position than the small clubs (as now) as they can still afford to buy the biggest players, the restriction is who they put on the pitch at one time

- the points limit should be selected to preserve that difference else we'll end up up with communism and all have Trabant style players

- the points limit adds back a diminension currently lost from the game namely the skill of selecting, substitution limits could be removed as the points limit would always ensure a balance or near balance

- if a team is playing and it is up to its max points total on the pitch and the manager decided he wanted to bring on Torres he would have to replace another high points player with a lower points player to stay within the limit.

You're right that the limit needs careful selection to make this work (too low a limit and you end up only being able to field one player e.g messi, too high and anything goes so no gain to anyone) and also the allocating of points to players (worldwide) is open to abuse and so needs careful oversight - but these are mere details as to how to make this work not whether it's a workable idea - IMO.

I'm not aware this scheme having been suggested elsewhere - I'm not a gamer so have no idea of the computer games available - but if it is a fresh twist on something I hereby claim copyright TimmyJimmy, All Rights Reserved 2009 Who knows I could earn a fortune and buy the club

[PAFELL]

Well I was trying to come up with a system that was not based around cash, mainly because the law of the land always overides rules like salary caps etc.. Drafts of any kind cannot work here because as Abbey points out we have no Uni's to act as a feeder system and also who could afford the wages if they won the pick.

Theno's view on sqaud limits is OK and workable I think as it is also not based on any financial measure so could be enforced as a rule of the competition entered.

To answer your question Jisty I was trying to find some middle ground (just for the hell of it) that allowed a club to sign as many players as they wanted, at any price they wanted, and at any wage they wanted to pay, they just wouldn't be able to get them on the field at the same time. My notion of a points limit was per game not per squad. So if the EPL decided a club could have no more than 1000 points on the pitch at any one time then the following happens :

- the big clubs get to stay 'big', they purchase who they want, preserve the Galactico image etc for the marketing guys

- the big clubs always are in a more powerful position than the small clubs (as now) as they can still afford to buy the biggest players, the restriction is who they put on the pitch at one time

- the points limit should be selected to preserve that difference else we'll end up up with communism and all have Trabant style players

- the points limit adds back a diminension currently lost from the game namely the skill of selecting, substitution limits could be removed as the points limit would always ensure a balance or near balance

- if a team is playing and it is up to its max points total on the pitch and the manager decided he wanted to bring on Torres he would have to replace another high points player with a lower points player to stay within the limit.

You're right that the limit needs careful selection to make this work (too low a limit and you end up only being able to field one player e.g messi, too high and anything goes so no gain to anyone) and also the allocating of points to players (worldwide) is open to abuse and so needs careful oversight - but these are mere details as to how to make this work not whether it's a workable idea - IMO.

I'm not aware this scheme having been suggested elsewhere - I'm not a gamer so have no idea of the computer games available - but if it is a fresh twist on something I hereby claim copyright TimmyJimmy, All Rights Reserved 2009 Who knows I could earn a fortune and buy the club

A club should be forced to operate within their means. No club should be allowed to buy players if the have got to a certain debt level. For example man U / liverpool should be forced to pay at least 3 quaters of the debt they owe before they can buy anymore players. Rovers do have a debt - but one within their means to pay.

No lower league club should be in the position of Accy Stan - though it looks like some dodgey dealings is going on there. The top clubs should do more to help the lower division clubs. After all a lot of local talent is recruted into these teams. No club should be allowed to be bought by a person that saddles the club with huge debts.

Though in my view the only way now to level the field is a european league - but a club should not be allowed to join until most of their debt is paid. If there was a european league and a club from each current major domestic league was promoted each season - I don't know how many leagues there are - and the same relegated. We all know the tv money would follow that league - eventually most clubs would benefit.

We all know there has been talk about a european league in the past - but nobody has suggested how a club would qualify for such a league - how could a fair system be developed on getting into this league. I also suggest that we have no need of a international european competition - the world cup is enough.

[ABBEY]

could the draft people please tell us how it would work? not having a go at anyone ..curios thats all.

[PAFELL]

could the draft people please tell us how it would work? not having a go at anyone ..curios thats all.

Nobody knows how to level the playing field - but I suggest most football supporters want something done for the good of the game as a whole. But what, that is the question

[ABBEY]

the question is how would/could the people advocating a draft do it ?

[American]

- the big clubs get to stay 'big', they purchase who they want, preserve the Galactico image etc for the marketing guys

- the big clubs always are in a more powerful position than the small clubs (as now) as they can still afford to buy the biggest players, the restriction is who they put on the pitch at one time

But that is a part of the problem now - they stockpile good players keeping them out of the hands of other teams.

Similar to what college football powerhouses in the US used to do decades back. The NCAA decreased the number of scholarships available and more teams have now been able to compete on a better level.

[Stuart]

To answer your question Jisty I was trying to find some middle ground (just for the hell of it) that allowed a club to sign as many players as they wanted, at any price they wanted, and at any wage they wanted to pay, they just wouldn't be able to get them on the field at the same time. My notion of a points limit was per game not per squad. So if the EPL decided a club could have no more than 1000 points on the pitch at any one time then the following happens :

Okay, I understand a little better now. Trouble your points system is linked to the value of a player. So if City, Chelsea and Real Madrid each have squads of the 30 highest value players then, unless these players decide they love the game more than the money, nothing much would change. They we still have the big 4, etc. The other teams like Rovers can't afford to bring in the big players so whilst Sunderland get a first team of 1000 points, we are struggling to make a 600 point team.

Maybe if there was some kind of handicap system which meant the points won from a game were pro-rata based on the difference in points? So if we beat Sunderland then we get 1000/600 x 3 points (or 5 points). Now that would make things interesting, if a little complicated!

I still like the idea but like most of the ideas there are too many obstacles. Not least the fact that the big 4 wouldn't advocate a system where they might stop being the big 4.

the question is how would/could the people advocating a draft do it ?

I'm not American but I imagine for a draft system to work, the PL would have to buy all of the PL clubs and pay all of the lower league clubs for their best players to be put into a draft system.

Draft wiki

[philipl]

Portuguese ref has denied the Mancs a blatant penalty and booked the Manc for diving.

That is exactly the sort of reffing we need in the Prem to even things up.

[Stuart]

We already have bad refereeing...!

We need refs who are strong enough to give the right decisions in front of the likes of RFW and 75,000 cockneys.

[philipl]

We have about 30 crud decisions to get even with the Mancs before anyone can start talking about fair refereeing against that lot!

[Stuart]

We have about 30 crud decisions to get even with the Mancs before anyone can start talking about fair refereeing against that lot!

[Baz]

I think the idea of having a max squad size is a good one and should help us stop seeing clubs with big money hoarding players.

Also, I'd like to see only the champs given the champs league automatically and then a play-off system for the other 3 spots, involving say any team in the top-half. Exciting for all, and adds a little randomness into proceedings.

Also, I think the champs league needs sorting out, the group stages need reducing to a 3 game league not a home & away basis, at least then there would be far fewer dead-rubbers and guaranteed revenue for nothing.

Also, lets go and hire the best ref's in Europe - the ones in this country are shocking and biased. Makes me think of what was happening in Italy at present.

[TimmyJimmy]

A club should be forced to operate within their means. No club should be allowed to buy players if the have got to a certain debt level.

I think the problem with any rule about constraining finances is that it will be illegal (emphasis on 'I think'). Clubs are limited companies after all and can do what they want with their finances as long as it doesn't contravene the law of the land and doesn't upset the shareholders. So whilst desirable I don't think it is do-able.

But that is a part of the problem now - they stockpile good players keeping them out of the hands of other teams.

Totally agree, it stinks and is anti-competitive, but IMO that cannot be stopped legally, also any scheme to level the playing field is not going to fly unless the big clubs buy into it, preventing them from purchasing who they want would then be like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.

... if City, Chelsea and Real Madrid each have squads of the 30 highest value players then, unless these players decide they love the game more than the money, nothing much would change. Then we still have the big 4, etc. The other teams like Rovers can't afford to bring in the big players so whilst Sunderland get a first team of 1000 points, we are struggling to make a 600 point team...

The bit I like about this scheme is that every club can carry on doing what they are doing but now they have to make game changing choices.

If at the beginning of the season the EPL rule that no club shall have a points total on the pitch in excess of 1,000 at any one time, just imagine the result of that. Does the manager play 9 mediocre players plus 2 world class stars and then he wants to bring on a third world class player, what does he do? Replace one worldy already on the pitch or put on the third and replace four mediocre players with four crappy ones so that the points total isn't breached. Adds a new dynamic to the game.

Back to American's point, this may persuade the bigger clubs not to waste their money on payers who can never play. The players who will never play can work that out for themselves as they know the system that the manager wants to play and sees who's already at the club and can figure out their chances of getting a game pretty easily. If I were them I'd sign elsewhere.

Would also ensure we get competitive games each week because even though there is still some quality gap between the teams everyone is now 'beat-able' whereas right now the big four are not.

[American]

I think the problem with any rule about constraining finances is that it will be illegal (emphasis on 'I think'). Clubs are limited companies after all and can do what they want with their finances as long as it doesn't contravene the law of the land and doesn't upset the shareholders. So whilst desirable I don't think it is do-able.

Totally agree, it stinks and is anti-competitive, but IMO that cannot be stopped legally, also any scheme to level the playing field is not going to fly unless the big clubs buy into it, preventing them from purchasing who they want would then be like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.

The bit I like about this scheme is that every club can carry on doing what they are doing but now they have to make game changing choices.

If at the beginning of the season the EPL rule that no club shall have a points total on the pitch in excess of 1,000 at any one time, just imagine the result of that. Does the manager play 9 mediocre players plus 2 world class stars and then he wants to bring on a third world class player, what does he do? Replace one worldy already on the pitch or put on the third and replace four mediocre players with four crappy ones so that the points total isn't breached. Adds a new dynamic to the game.

Back to American's point, this may persuade the bigger clubs not to waste their money on payers who can never play. The players who will never play can work that out for themselves as they know the system that the manager wants to play and sees who's already at the club and can figure out their chances of getting a game pretty easily. If I were them I'd sign elsewhere.

Would also ensure we get competitive games each week because even though there is still some quality gap between the teams everyone is now 'beat-able' whereas right now the big four are not.

The problem is that the player's have egos so big that they think they'll work there way into the main squad. Tons of examples of this - SWP, Sidwell being two obvious ones.

A squad number limit like in Spain is best. Look at Madrid this year - they ended up with too many players, so had to sell a couple good players who normally would have sat on the bench if they were allowed an unlimited number.

[Amo]

It doesn't help matters that the Uefa Cup ("Europa League") has been reduced to a paltry sideshow where even the participating clubs consider it a hindrance to their league form. I remember watching our Uefa Cup games live on BBC and relishing the occasion. Now they're shown on ITV3.

Champions League place to the winner would certainly pique some interest in the tournament.

[Rover Down Under]

Just to emphasise the 2 tier league we now play in; we are only just into November and the media are already talking about "blows" and "boosts" to the title chances of X, Y and Z (X,Y and Z of course being Chelsea, Arenal and Man U).

Ten games in and 3/4's of the teams already written off and we all know things won't change come April, infact they will just get worse and at current rates the Big Four will have goal differences of about +60 and the lower teams about -60. While this isn't unusual (we had +41 in title year and bottom team Ipswich had -52) the spread will be much greater. Far more teams will have big negative GD and the top few massive positive GD. Are we ever going to do anything?