As I understand it, match payments are only for lower ranked players on a list.I’m at least 48 hours and 10 pages late to this latest round of debate over salaries, etc., but could someone please do a tired, old mind a favour by answering a few questions for me?
Do we have any reliable information on:
*whether match payments count towards the salary cap, or are rather payments over and above?
*whether match payments are a defined amount, and the same for all players?
The piece from The Age linked to earlier suggests a defined amount and from the cap. That means that the available amount for distribution is actually less than the cap (I.e. 23 rounds x 23 players x $5000 = $2.645mill less). Anyone able to access anything official that supports or refutes this notion?
This is part of the reason why I am unable to put any faith in the “reported” salaries of any player. How does the player/manager, let alone the reporter, know whether the player is going to play all 23 games? Sure, they’re probably reporting to the top figure, but then that surely applies also to any bonuses/incentives that are also built into the contract. So Darcy (e.g.) is almost never getting paid his $750k pa because he is not in every year playing every game and getting AA / top 5 Doig / whatever high performance benchmark you want to set.
The numbers being bandied about in the press / online are pure fiction, if only because they can’t ALL be true, given that only 23 players per team play each round, there are only 10 players in the top 10 Brownlow, only 22 players in the AA squad, etc., etc.
TL;DR you can't just add up the reported salaries to work out if we have cap space.
I got a whole other thought about contracts / renewals and salary cap management, but I’ve already avoided work for too long.
Jeremy Cameron is not getting a $5k match payment every time he plays a game for example!