|
|
Post by chrish on Jan 26, 2009 12:56:36 GMT
I came across this article this morning on the BBC website about the challenges facing the likes of Histon if they turn fully professional. news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/h/histon/7850922.stmIt got me thinking about the current situation in the BSP. At the moment Histon are doing very well. I have no idea how many of their players (if any) are on full time deals but to me its seems that the likes of Histon and Salisbury have an unfair advantage they have over teams who have committed to full time structures. The Histon lad in the article talks about the need to win promotion before they even need to think about offering players full time contracts. If they went down this road, surely they would have to average a minimum of 1,500 to employ a number of professionals. I notice that in League two on Saturday, Accrington Stanley attracted a crowd of just over 1,000 (1,056 to be exact) and high flying Dagenham got 1,800. Surely Accrington can't hope to sustain league football on those kind of crowds and the same goes for Dagenham. I've been looking at the attendances for ex non league clubs in League two. At Morecambe for example their highest was 2,606 (their first home game of the season) and their lowest was 1,571, which ironically enough was the next home game! Maccesfield always have had low attendance figures since they've been in the football league and this season their gates have fluctuated quite wildly between 1,182 (a Tuesday night Showdown at home to Grimsby) and 2,600. The point I'm trying to make is this. If there's a ruling to have stadiums up to a certain standard if they are ready for League football, should there also be one for making clubs become full time? The fear I have for Histon and Crawley is that if they did go up how could they afford to go full time giving that you would think they would barely attract enough people through the turnstiles to break even. I guess that this ties in nicely with the thread the other day with the salary cap due to come back again. Would it sufficiently level the playing field for all concerned? Does anyone think it would go far enough? Or will the likes of the fat Gene Hunt at Crawley and that Histon chairman find a loophole? Is it right that teams should be allowed into the football league when they are going to find it near impossible to sustain for any period of time? Or should we just let clubs succeed or fail in this organic manner? I guess you can draw a few comparisons with the excellent Team Bath thread a couple of months ago and the fact they are more or less subsidised and are competing against the likes of AFC Wimbledon who are getting better crowds like some League 2 clubs. As the Histon lad says in the article about going full time, "For some of the young lads it wouldn't be too difficult, but some of us have careers". I bet it would bring a wry smile to Tim Sill's face. I'm sure he still has a hand in a marketing consultancy somewhere, but to all intents and purposes he's committed himself to a career in football. Personally I think that clubs should be full time in the BSP or at the very least a quota should be introduced to help the smaller clubs out a little bit. |
|
|
|
Post by David Graham's Eighth Pint on Jan 26, 2009 14:41:35 GMT
I got the impression from the article that it was a wages issue. The player in question mentions that the younger players wouldn't have a problem, but some of them have careers to think about.
I would suggest this is only something the players themselves can decide if and when this happens.
Personally, if I was doing a job I love for, say, £25,000 a year and also playing part-time for a Conference team then I would have serious concerns regarding a huge drop in wages to become a full-time footballer.
But then if I was working part-time, as a waiter for example, and playing part-time, it would be a no-brainer.
But then it's not always about the money...
My question in return to your excellent post Mr. Hayes is that, in this time of economic difficulties, should it be necessary for all clubs in the Football League to be full-time?
|
|
|
|
Post by forevertufc on Jan 26, 2009 17:30:48 GMT
iam not a very well read person ,one question i would have is, would barring a part-time team from the bsp fall foul of any restriction of trade laws ? maybe merse the wise one would know the answer to that.
this is a very good post and tie's in with a thread i started on another forum ,i asked should their be 3 up 3 down from league 2 /bsp in light of the fast improving standard of the bsp and the fact that bsp clubs faired better on the whole in the f.a cup.
reading this post has made me realize that idea may not work,as it would increase the chances of a part-time team being promoted to the league who may in turn struggle ,both on and off the pitch.
i would not like to see part-time teams barred from the bsp
thinking about it ,would it be better to restructure the lower league's ,would 5 smaller divisions work i.e league 1 ,2 league 3
north and south and then conference national.
league 3 north and south to be made up on finishing positions in league 2 /bsp and location with midlands clubs hoping between each to keep numbers even as they in do the bss/n.
the running costs of a regionlised league would obviously not be so great ,which would help clubs like accrington etc survive,and also could act as a stepping stone to full time football for clubs like histon with ambitions to climb the football league ladder.
for ex-league clubs like ourselves and life long non-league /part-time clubs like histon being under the football league banner made increase local interest and improve attendance's.
and the conference national would be on more of a level playing field in terms of club size and fiances ,so then the likes of altricham should no longer feel the need to blame all ex-league clubs for ruining their lives
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jan 26, 2009 18:04:47 GMT
The first question I need to ask is, do teams in league two have to be full time, reading your post and the article Chris, I do not think they have to be.Histon are only part time and doing very well and we have talked about the gap between the BSP and league two before, most seem to think there is not a great deal of difference these days. It that really is the case then a part time Histon in league two, may well still be a completive club, who at worst could hold a mid table place.
Yes there is talk about wage capping again next season and Histon on their gates could not afford to pay all its players full time and If they were forced to do so, they would then end up with the worst players going. I would expect that as David Graham's Eighth Pint pointed out, some Histon players may well earn a very good wage in their full time job, far more than Histon could pay them full time. For these players it would mean an end to playing in the BSP or even league two, if Histon went up.
How would you define full time anyway? we had a keeper here on full time and he also worked as a rep for the family Office supply company, so would it have to be 40 hour week? if not how many hours and would it mean the player could not have a second job.
No wage capping and clubs would end up getting into big trouble as they tried to pay full time wages, have wage capping and such clubs on really low gates will end up playing 16 year kids and have a squad of only 15 players, who will be doing ever other job around the club, as no other staff could be afforded.
While I think you view that all BSP clubs should be full time is not a bad one, all that will happen is in time there will only be a few teams left in the league, most unable to simply afford to pay full time, will drop down to a lower level, where they will not have such worries.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrish on Jan 26, 2009 18:28:12 GMT
Well when I was writing the initial post I was wondering about the points you both make about a) whether its necessary for clubs in the current climate to be fully professional and b) whether forcing clubs to go full time is against any employment laws. Is there actually a written rule in the football league rulebook which states that to become a member you have to be professional and employ players on a full time basis? Or is there nothing in the rule book which actually forbids football league clubs from employing players on a part time basis. I do remember a post Merse made a while back on the old dot net about the an ex Leyton Orient defender who got up very early each day to run his fruit and veg business in North London before going to work again as a professional footballer. I guess that both the part time and full time arguments both have their advantages or disadvantages. The advantages of being part time could help players actually have a job outside of football, earn a little more on the side if they're good enough and are then able when they finish football still be experienced enough to work in another field. If they are seriously good footballers then a bigger club will be able to pay them enough to consider choosing one career over another. Because part time players are being paid less, it should help with the club's finances. However the main disadvantage is that being part time would give players less time to train which would have a knock on effect with fitness levels and their general developement. You could argue that this would then lead to having a poorer quality of footballer. To fair be to the likes of Histon and Salisbury they've done exceptionally well to find enough part time players who are up to the standard of the BSP and in Histon's case capable of competing against the likes of us! How dare they!!  Does anybody know what the current status is at AFC Wimbledon? Are they full or part time? |
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Jan 26, 2009 19:12:16 GMT
Does anybody know what the current status is at AFC Wimbledon? Are they full or part time?  AFC Wimbledon were ready to go full time next season but on the advice of their manager Terry Brown will remain part time for one more season at least - whether or not they win promotion to the BSP. Brown's experience of a fast track change from part time to full time whilst manager at Aldershot leads him to prefer a more graduated changeover as he felt that some players who were in good outside employment were too easily lost to the Shots when the change was made there and it was to the detriment and overall progression of the club. There is not a league in the land that demands full time contracted players as any parameter for running their OWN affairs nor as any prerequisite for membership. On the other hand neither is there a league that prohibits full time footballers. Wimbledon vowed to remain part time when they first entered the Football League but by the end of the season were employing players on full time contracts as they found they couldn't attract the calibre of player they realised they needed to bring in to enhance their existing squad. Likewise, Dagenham and Redbridge came into the Football League as a part time club but have slowly evolved into a full time one. I think as far as the BSP goes a club in a geographical location such as Torquay needs to employ a wholly full time squad wheres a a more centrally located one such as Burton Albion can go just as far as a part time outfit. In reality small clubs who are currently playing in the Football League such as D&R, Macclesfield, Accrington and Morecombe are smaller and less substantial clubs such as ourselves, Cambridge, York and Wrexham in the BSP. There is no reason why Burton would find being part time any more of a hindrance in League 2 as they do in the BSP, why should they? the crunch for remaining part time comes when (as I intimated earlier) they find themselves wishing to recruit from the full time ranks rather than the part time ranks as they have been up until now. I personally believe OUR club would find life much more difficult as a part time club than it does as a full time one, purely because we tend to recruit players from further afield than a centrally located one and that inevitably requires a degree of re-location which centrally located clubs don't have to face up to..................and if one is a part time player what earthly attraction is there in Devon on the employment front outside of football? |
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jan 27, 2009 17:14:16 GMT
Merse I would agree that the club would find life much more difficult as a part time club than it does as a full time one and for some of the reasons you listed. Yes we get most of our full time players from out side the southwest and those that come do so only because they will be getting a full time contract. It has been shown that we have been able to attract players here for two main reasons, one is we offer a good rate of pay and two we have sold the cub to them as one that is ambitious and wants to move forward.
While there will be jobs in London that you will not find in Devon, there are still so many jobs here that are no different to ones you will find in any town or city. The only real difference may be the rate of pay, as you know it tends to be lower in Devon. Not wishing to sound rude but you worked in Devon as a bus driver and did the same in London, only on better pay. What sort of jobs do you think part time footballers do? I would expect many do jobs like most working class people, or are you suggesting they all do some top City slicker type jobs.
If any part time footballer wanted to play full time when he was able to get such a contract, they would have no problem doing a job in Devon to make up their earnings to a living wage. If they wanted a top flight job, then football would only really come second to them and unless they could get the job they wanted here in Devon, would not ever sign for our club.
You really need to get this idea out of your head, that the only jobs that people do in Devon is milk cows and sell ice creams on the seafront, there are jobs that are equal here to any you will find in a City and we have the added attraction of having the most beautiful county in the land to live in.
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jan 28, 2009 19:00:01 GMT
Chris, I think the our game against Lewes on Tuesday night, may just give you the answer. Only 500 plus paying to watch the game and just how many would it have been, if it was not TUFC they were playing on Tuesday night.
If it had been so many other teams, the gate could have been below 300 and that amount of paying fans would not have been enough to even pay the basic bills of the club. Just how could they even have any left over to pay players, even having just part timers must have the club looking for some big overdraft from somewhere.
Like I said, if all BSP clubs had to go full time, we would soon see so many drop out of the BSP and while we may feel its not a proper league as such, it would end up as just the top of the amateur league and the gap between the BSP and the 2nd division, would grow and grow.
|
|
