- It would probably be got around using other forms of payment such as performance bonuses, image rights payments, and so forth. You could see players simultaneously employed as “football consultants” or some such.
This wouldn’t happen.
Take a look at the rules for the rugby cap. It covers a wide range of ways of trying to get round the cap. Payments or benefits to spouses, children, family members, agents etc etc are all counted. You can’t loan money to players unless it’s paid back in the same year, you can’t make payments through third parties or through second jobs.
That’s good to know. I would still be concerned about clubs getting around it. I think abolishing the whole concept of second jobs or employing family members potentially has undesirable knock-on effects but maybe if you do really want to pay players less for some reason then that’s a price worth paying.
It is perfectly fine for players to have second jobs at clubs, and for family members to be employed. It just has to be included in the assessment of ‘salary’. There is also scope for common sense. If a player married a person employed by the club then that wouldn’t impact the salary calculation as long as the partner had a genuine job. If partners of all players were appointed ‘match day ambassadors’ but there were no responsibilities or requirements attached then their salary would be included.
The penalties for getting round it need to be severe and the policing needs to be effective. Sarries have been hit very heavily for their attempts to get round it.