The Wage Debate

The debate over footballer’s wages reared its ugly head again this week after Liverpool player John Arne Riise’s payslip ended up on the internet, revealing his substantial pay packet plus numerous bonuses. Confidentiality is such that we rarely find out exactly how much Premier league stars are paid, although experts and insiders give us a rough idea as to ballpark figures. Riise’s carelessness then, sparked great excitement, surprise and also anger from some following this one-off peak into the real world of footballer wages. By the end of the week, John Terry had been lambasted by Sports Minister Gerry Sutcliffe for taking home ‘obscene’ wages and even PM Gordon Brown had had a word to say on the matter. So, are modern footballer’s being paid too much? Not enough maybe? And should we introduce a salary cap?

A False Economy
This is not the first time wages have caused controversy within the British game, and one presumes the FA and many of those inside football will hope the interest in a tricky matter dies away, as quickly as it surfaced. Roman Abramovich’s arrival at Chelsea in 2003 spawned the dawn of a new era of lavish spending in the Premiership. At the time many were aghast, at the unrealistic fees for players and wages being paid and frustrated by the unfair advantage it gave the London club. Since then other clubs have deemed the only way to compete at this new level of finance is to sell to wealthy foreign investors, but the voices of disquiet about this new era have rumbled on. Fans and several club directors are irritated by the farcical operating costs which mean clubs like Chelsea are making substantial losses each year (last year £80 million) but are bailed out by the owners. In reality clubs like Chelsea, West Ham and Man City would go bankrupt quickly and there is no safety net to protect from the likes of Abramovich, Magnusson or Shinawatra becoming bored and the vital funds being suddenly withdrawn. Just look what happened to Leeds Utd. Flying high and enjoying European success, Leeds owners miscalculated, or rather, took a gamble on future earnings, which failed to materialise. The club’s fall from grace was sizeable and they are now penniless after spending more than they could afford. Today they are still paying the price as they play their football down in League One.

Riise Slips Up
Riise’s payslip showed that he was paid £139,634, including a £4,000 appearance bonus and Champions League-related salary increase. Riise himself was at a loss as to how the payslip had been discovered, a bewildered spokesman for his club said ‘I can assure you that John Arne Riise is not in the habit of throwing payslips out, it’s clearly been stolen and taken without his permission.’ Now, as far as I’m concerned the amount paid is not an astronomical wage for a player of Riise’s talents. According to the payslip he receives a £30,000 a week basic wage and probably £1,000 per appearance bonus. For a player who is first choice, a regular international and has won the Champions League I think this is fair enough. It is also relatively peanuts compared with what many of Chelsea’s players are paid though and this provided the key point in the Sports Minister’s recent attack on football in the UK. Sutcliffe riled both Chelsea and Man Utd when he accused them of pricing out supporters, running unsustainable businesses and he singled out John Terry among others as being paid ‘obscene’ amounts in wages. Terry is believed to take home £135,000 a week, while Andriy Shevchenko, Michael Ballack and Frank Lampard also take well over £100,000. Several Man Utd players earn around the same mark, including Wayne Rooney (£110,000) and Cristiano Ronaldo (£119,000). Is this justifiable for what they do?

Avram Grant thinks so and launched a vigorous defence of his captain upon reading the comments by Sutcliffe, ‘He did not choose the right person and he did not choose the right issue.’ Grant fumed. ‘I don’t know why these people talk about footballers, why not tennis or NBA players? They earn a lot of money too. And what about singers, nobody talks about them. They get more money for one hour than footballers get for one year.’ His comments were also supported by Sven Goran Eriksson, who felt footballers were artists and should be paid similarly, ‘You have to see a footballer today like an artist, someone who can move you with their performance…I think it is only fair that players earn god money as they are finished by the time they are 35.’ This sounds, as you’d expect, as though Grant and Eriksson are protecting football and themselves as much as they are John Terry. Particularly as Eriksson received such a generous wage when in charge of England and Grant may be planning fresh investments come January. Those within the game are enjoying the fruits of their labour at present, as football has become the most popular and therefore wealthy sport in the world. Compared with other wealthy sports, the wages would not seem so ‘obscene’.

Impressive though it was, Sutcliffe was forced to revise several of his claims made against Chelsea and Man Utd in his report. Coming, as they did, only hours after the government had leant its support to England’s 2018 World Cup bid, Sutcliffe’s findings irritated Gordon Brown. A spokesman for the PM said, ‘With hindsight, Gerry Sutcliffe might have put things differently.’ Contrary to Sutcliffe’s statement, Man Utd cannot be accused of running an unsustainable business, as their mass worldwide appeal guarantees them the required income. However, simply because Man Utd can afford the wages, does it make it right? On the one had if Alex Ferguson does not pay Rooney and Ronaldo what they want, then someone else will do and why should he risk losing them. However, Man Utd’s attempts to stay on top of a mounting wage bill may explain why season tickets at Man Utd are continuing to rise. Sutcliffe’s findings stated, ‘Manchester Utd increased their season ticket prices by 13% and said fans have automatically to buy European and Carling Cup games as well, and that costs an extra £200. That’s taking the game away from the ordinary grass-roots supporter’. For his efforts Sutcliffe appears not to have much support, accrued possibly to an error in the timing of his outburst. His comments though, if slightly muddled, are designed with the interests of the supporter and the future of the game at heart.

The Cap Crusade
Football is a huge industry these days, Sky Sports and Setanta has dramatically increased commercial opportunities, but has also driven a rise in the quality of player performance and pressure on individuals to succeed - this deserves financial recognition. If player wages did not increase in conjunction with the growth of the sport excess money would go elsewhere, probably to directors and businessmen behind the scenes. This is where the often-mentioned salary cap idea would have to be carefully constructed to protect against the potential for particular parties to either significantly gain, or lose out more than others under such a stipulation. For me a salary cap negotiated with the chairmen of the league clubs and the FA would provide a structure to guard against over-the-top payments, keep order and discipline and distribute players and finances more evenly across the game. Some will feel that it is a retrospective step, especially considering that Jimmy Hill and co fought to get rid of the wage ceiling nearly 40 years ago. If fairly managed though, and allowed room to fluctuate and deviate in accordance with inflation then it could be a viable option. Mandatory investments could be made from clubs’ available excess cash-flow, going into youth developments, training and stadium facilities and club-led community schemes. An excess of funds freed up from salary capping may also drive down the need for such high ticket and season ticket prices, highlighted in Sutcliffe’s report. The Sports Minister, after checking his facts, found that Man Utd had driven up season ticket prices by 10.87% from last year.

Could it be time for the Premiership to win its first cap?