Quote Originally Posted by Pico View Post
What like when the union agreed to a salary cap freeze for a few years in exchange for greater contract security from the FFA after the fury collapse. Go ask the laundry list of players who have been screwed out of wages and super from the FFA's hand picked owners. Where was the FFA making sure that the players got a fair compensation for the theft of their entitlements.

If the FFA isn't responsible for the actions of their owners then why is the PFA expected to be held to a greater standard. If you ask me the owners and FFA have brought a lot of this on themselves with the disregard for how some of the owners have acted.
No argument their FFA are far from clean in this instance also.

Like it or not the yanks have the best system.
Each player is own by the MLS and are leased out to the franchises. The League pays the players wages directly by using the revenue from the broadcasting rights. I'm not sure how the DP positions work exactly, the League still pay their wages but they bill the franchise they lease them to I think.
This is the System the A-League should adopted I think.

Still I think the PFA are asking for to much of the pie, I seen a figure that the PFA are seeking 30% of the FFA overall revenue. My personal opinion is that the PFA should be entitled to 50% of the A-League/Socceroo/Matilda Broadcasting revenue. The PFA asking for 30% of overall revenue is asking for money that doesn't belong to them.