"An independent arbitration panel has upheld a claim from the Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA) that the EFL was in breach of the constitution of the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee (PFNCC) by introducing ‘Squad Salary Caps’.
In August 2020 following an extensive and comprehensive consultation process with EFL clubs, Leagues One and Two voted to adopt new financial controls that replaced the previous Salary Cost Management Protocols (SCMP).
The PFA argued that the PFNCC’s remit to consider matters relating to the employment of, and any associated rules and regulations to professional players employed by EFL clubs, was not properly considered as part of the process to introduce the new rules and as a result served a notice of claim to that effect.
The EFL and PFA then agreed to refer that matter to arbitration and after hearing submissions from both parties, an independent panel concluded that the EFL was in breach of its agreement as a member of the PFNCC.
At the time of the adoption of the Salary Cap Rules, the EFL included a provision to ensure that any decision such as this would have the effect of reinstating the SCMP rules that were in operation during season 2019/20, which links player related expenditure to turnover.
The EFL will now discuss the matter of financial controls and implications linked to this outcome at a series of meetings with its member clubs later this week."
(09-02-2021, 02:44 PM)hilsea12 Wrote: [ -> ]"An independent arbitration panel has upheld a claim from the Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA) that the EFL was in breach of the constitution of the Professional Football Negotiating and Consultative Committee (PFNCC) by introducing ‘Squad Salary Caps’.
In August 2020 following an extensive and comprehensive consultation process with EFL clubs, Leagues One and Two voted to adopt new financial controls that replaced the previous Salary Cost Management Protocols (SCMP).
The PFA argued that the PFNCC’s remit to consider matters relating to the employment of, and any associated rules and regulations to professional players employed by EFL clubs, was not properly considered as part of the process to introduce the new rules and as a result served a notice of claim to that effect.
The EFL and PFA then agreed to refer that matter to arbitration and after hearing submissions from both parties, an independent panel concluded that the EFL was in breach of its agreement as a member of the PFNCC.
At the time of the adoption of the Salary Cap Rules, the EFL included a provision to ensure that any decision such as this would have the effect of reinstating the SCMP rules that were in operation during season 2019/20, which links player related expenditure to turnover.
The EFL will now discuss the matter of financial controls and implications linked to this outcome at a series of meetings with its member clubs later this week."
Great news surely!!!
I think so, I was so pleased I posted twice, but it's a pity they didn't change it before the Window closed.
It's a good start but the last bit could pose a problem in the future.
so they basically buggered up the season for a lot of clubs
If I was a player who was forced into a contract on a lower wage than could have reasonably been expected had the cap not been in place, I'd be seeking some spondooolies from the EFL.
No incentive to get promoted now then.
Great news! That should mean Naylor, Whatmough & William's can be tied down for a little longer.
I wonder how long the notice period has to be? I'm sure they'll try to do this again over the summer.
(09-02-2021, 05:38 PM)TBP Wrote: [ -> ]No incentive to get promoted now then.
Apart from it is probably 100% certain KJ's contract won't be renewed unless we are promoted.
If we are, I would hope that they still let him go or give him only 6 months at the most - but that is wishful thinking.
I'm not against limiting budgets to a proportion of club turnover. But it must be related to ability to pay. If that had been in place when we were in the prem, we might not have gone bust. (for the 4th time?)
Agreed Hammie. The thing that p;ssed me off about it was that it had no intention of creating a sustainable league. It was all about serving the premiership overlords.
Have a turnover of £12M - 2.5M cap for you
Have a turnover of £2M - 2.5M cap for you too
Want to buy your own players beyond this? No
Want to spend unlimited money on under 21's? Sure, no problem.
Laughable if it wasnt so detrimental to clubs.
Accies chairman having a hissy fit!
Never thought I would see Pompey fans toasting financial deregulation
Catlin deserves a lot of credit for leading the fight against this ridiculous scheme. Just a shame it took so long for common sense to prevail.
Makes me wonder how long we will be able to keep him before either a big club move for him or the EFL tempt him with a national role. Like implementing the replacement scheme for instance.
Eisners,Jackett,Catlin. we are indeed in a good place.
I am surprised that Catlin is being credited with leading the fight to overturn the salary cap, surely this is down wholly and solely to the PFA, certainly the Independent Arbitration Panel refers only to the PFA and fails to mention any representations by others.
The PFA acted only in the interests of their members who they felt would be unfairly impacted by the proposed cap, as ever, the considerations of the employers, the L1 and L2 clubs don’t really concern the PFA.
I seems that Catlin and the other anti-cap Chairmen / CEOs were outsmarted up to, and at, the August meeting losing the vote and seeing the cap imposed, fortunately the EFL exceeded their remit in the view of the IAP and the cap has been overturned.
(12-02-2021, 02:46 PM)Wightblue Wrote: [ -> ]I am surprised that Catlin is being credited with leading the fight to overturn the salary cap, surely this is down wholly and solely to the PFA, certainly the Independent Arbitration Panel refers only to the PFA and fails to mention any representations by others.
The PFA acted only in the interests of their members who they felt would be unfairly impacted by the proposed cap, as ever, the considerations of the employers, the L1 and L2 clubs don’t really concern the PFA.
I seems that Catlin and the other anti-cap Chairmen / CEOs were outsmarted up to, and at, the August meeting losing the vote and seeing the cap imposed, fortunately the EFL exceeded their remit in the view of the IAP and the cap has been overturned.
Catlin worked with the PFA and helped with their case.
I am surprised !
Surprised that an organisation like the PFA with their very considerable financial clout and track record of successfully taking on the FA, FL and now the EFL, would need the help of the CEO of L1 Club on what seems to be a matter of the interpretation of rules or law. Wonders never cease !
Out of interest, who or what’s your source ?
(12-02-2021, 06:25 PM)Wightblue Wrote: [ -> ]I am surprised !
Surprised that an organisation like the PFA with their very considerable financial clout and track record of successfully taking on the FA, FL and now the EFL, would need the help of the CEO of L1 Club on what seems to be a matter of the interpretation of rules or law. Wonders never cease !
Out of interest, who or what’s your source ?
Deep is Mark Catlin lol
(12-02-2021, 06:25 PM)Wightblue Wrote: [ -> ]I am surprised !
Surprised that an organisation like the PFA with their very considerable financial clout and track record of successfully taking on the FA, FL and now the EFL, would need the help of the CEO of L1 Club on what seems to be a matter of the interpretation of rules or law. Wonders never cease !
Out of interest, who or what’s your source ?
The News.
And why should it be a surprise that the PFA would talk to the recognised leader of the clubs opposed to the proposal to establish the facts thet needed for making their case ?
He's also spoken about it in his q&a sessions.
he was not outsmarted, he was outvoted, that's how democracy works.
So if the EFL wage cap was illegal, what are the chances of us, along with Sunderland, Peterborough and Ipswich hitting them with a lawsuit on the grounds that their seasons were less successful as a result?
(13-02-2021, 02:09 PM)Gerry Hatrick Wrote: [ -> ]So if the EFL wage cap was illegal, what are the chances of us, along with Sunderland, Peterborough and Ipswich hitting them with a lawsuit on the grounds that their seasons were less successful as a result?
Can't be proven though can it? Player form, injuries, etc. are unpredictable and think how many signings we've made in the past that we thought could work out but turned out to be, er, Downing or Carl Tiler.
Interesting to see MC's comments in the Snooze today about certain people using the cap for opportunism. Any thoughts on who he could be referring to?
(15-02-2021, 11:43 AM)Rick Pumpkin Wrote: [ -> ] (13-02-2021, 02:09 PM)Gerry Hatrick Wrote: [ -> ]So if the EFL wage cap was illegal, what are the chances of us, along with Sunderland, Peterborough and Ipswich hitting them with a lawsuit on the grounds that their seasons were less successful as a result?
Can't be proven though can it? Player form, injuries, etc. are unpredictable and think how many signings we've made in the past that we thought could work out but turned out to be, er, Downing or Carl Tiler.
Interesting to see MC's comments in the Snooze today about certain people using the cap for opportunism. Any thoughts on who he could be referring to?
I'm guessing he means anyone who has voted for the cap. But specifically, Darrag McAnthony did a last min U-Turn. Also the Accrington Chairman was very vocally in favour of the cap (but you would be if you only had 1 man and his dog contributing to your matchday revenue).
This really shows up as a kind of morality question, we hate the premier league and it's rule by finance.
The question in my mind is do we have the right to rule league 2 because we are one of the wealthy clubs in comparison toe the Rochdale's and Crewe's of the league?
Are we just a miniature Man city or Liverpool?