Squad Watch 2022/23

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I thought the agreed limit was £16.5m, there or thereabouts?

[Nameless]

I'm still convinced both Joao and Puscas will leave on the basis I think we needed to shift 2 out of Moore, Joao and Puscas to get underneath this season's wage cap. As Moore isn't going anywhere due to injury then we may not have any options. I also think it was the reason Meite started up front against Brighton, as that's Ince's plan A without Joao.

If my hypothesis is correct then e're likely to need another striker as it seems that Shane will have injury issues throughout the season and the likes of Clarke, etc are not ready for regular starting time.

Loan move for Danny Loader anyone?

I don't think that the EFL have capped our overall wage bill for this season - they're aware that we are effectively at the mercy of whether our high-wage players leave or not. They've simply restricted the weekly wages of any new signings, banned us from paying a fee and put a limit on the total number of players we can have in the squad. I guess that the amount we lose this season could impact what we have to spend next season, but the EFL might just be happy to see our wage bills falling to a certain level by then.

There is a specific £16 million ceiling on our wage bill. It’s one of the few things with an actual number attached in the agreed decision document..
Your other points are roughly correct
- the is a limit on the wage we can pay new signings
- we aren’t specifically banned from paying a fee, but we can’t pay a fee above a limit set by the EFL which isn’t stated and we assume is currently zero
- we can have a maximum of 25 permitted players, but most of our youngsters are not ‘permitted’ players so the likes of Clarke, Andresson, Ebrefa, Melvin-Lambert, Osario, Scott, Dorsett, Leavey, Camara, Holzman etc etc etc are in addition to the 25.

[3points]

I'm still convinced both Joao and Puscas will leave on the basis I think we needed to shift 2 out of Moore, Joao and Puscas to get underneath this season's wage cap. As Moore isn't going anywhere due to injury then we may not have any options. I also think it was the reason Meite started up front against Brighton, as that's Ince's plan A without Joao.

If my hypothesis is correct then e're likely to need another striker as it seems that Shane will have injury issues throughout the season and the likes of Clarke, etc are not ready for regular starting time.

Loan move for Danny Loader anyone?

I don't think that the EFL have capped our overall wage bill for this season - they're aware that we are effectively at the mercy of whether our high-wage players leave or not. They've simply restricted the weekly wages of any new signings, banned us from paying a fee and put a limit on the total number of players we can have in the squad. I guess that the amount we lose this season could impact what we have to spend next season, but the EFL might just be happy to see our wage bills falling to a certain level by then.

It's capped at £16m, per the EFL decision from last year. Then there are additional restrictions on number of players and average salaries

The Club and EFL have agreed a cap on Total Player Salary Costs of not more than £21.1m in the
current Season, reducing to £16m in the following Season (Championship status), with a number of
other conditions, including:
3.1 the Club will be permitted to have registered at any one time no more than 25 Permitted Players;
3.2 the Club will not be permitted to pay or commit to pay any Transfer Fee, Compensation Fee or
Loan Fee or any other form of payment (other than a sell on fee) in respect of the registration of
any Player in excess of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.3 the average Salary of all new Contract Players registered from the date of this Agreement until
30 June 2023 will not exceed an average of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.4 the Salary of any new Contract Player registered from the date of this Agreement until 30 June
2023 will not exceed the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.5 any contribution to fees paid to an Intermediary by the Club on the behalf of a Player will be
limited to 3% of the Player’s Basic Gross Income (as defined in the FA Regulations on Working
with Intermediaries);

[3points]

There is of course the prospect that we stick to the restrictions until the Jan transfer window. If we're looking pretty safe in the table at that point we could, in theory, start spending again and just take the 6 point deduction. I'm sure the EFL would be delighted at that stance tjhough!

[Nameless]

There is of course the prospect that we stick to the restrictions until the Jan transfer window. If we're looking pretty safe in the table at that point we could, in theory, start spending again and just take the 6 point deduction. I'm sure the EFL would be delighted at that stance tjhough!

Could (would) probably mean more than a 6 point deduction. The agreement says the suspension does not replace punishment for future offences. Would be pretty stupid !

[Zip]

Is Southwood counted as one of the 25 now that he is out on loan?

[YorkshireRoyal99]

There is of course the prospect that we stick to the restrictions until the Jan transfer window. If we're looking pretty safe in the table at that point we could, in theory, start spending again and just take the 6 point deduction. I'm sure the EFL would be delighted at that stance tjhough!

Could (would) probably mean more than a 6 point deduction. The agreement says the suspension does not replace punishment for future offences. Would be pretty stupid !

Would "future offences" count as offences beyond our current restrictions though? Otherwise there would be no point having a 6 point deduction suspended would there? Unless there is something obvious that I'm missing.

[Nameless]

There is of course the prospect that we stick to the restrictions until the Jan transfer window. If we're looking pretty safe in the table at that point we could, in theory, start spending again and just take the 6 point deduction. I'm sure the EFL would be delighted at that stance tjhough!

Could (would) probably mean more than a 6 point deduction. The agreement says the suspension does not replace punishment for future offences. Would be pretty stupid !

Would "future offences" count as offences beyond our current restrictions though? Otherwise there would be no point having a 6 point deduction suspended would there? Unless there is something obvious that I'm missing.

Our suspended deduction is for a previous offence. A further offence would see that suspension activated and could also be punished in it’s own right. I suspect there are all sorts of permutation sof things like could lead to different outcomes but I don’t think we can look at the suspension as a ‘banked’ punishment giving us a free hit at doing bad stuff again and just getting a 6 point deduction. To be honest the scenarios in which it would be a worthwhile risk are pretty unlikely (if there actually are any !)

[Snowflake Royal]

I'm still convinced both Joao and Puscas will leave on the basis I think we needed to shift 2 out of Moore, Joao and Puscas to get underneath this season's wage cap. As Moore isn't going anywhere due to injury then we may not have any options. I also think it was the reason Meite started up front against Brighton, as that's Ince's plan A without Joao.

If my hypothesis is correct then e're likely to need another striker as it seems that Shane will have injury issues throughout the season and the likes of Clarke, etc are not ready for regular starting time.

Loan move for Danny Loader anyone?

I don't think that the EFL have capped our overall wage bill for this season - they're aware that we are effectively at the mercy of whether our high-wage players leave or not. They've simply restricted the weekly wages of any new signings, banned us from paying a fee and put a limit on the total number of players we can have in the squad. I guess that the amount we lose this season could impact what we have to spend next season, but the EFL might just be happy to see our wage bills falling to a certain level by then.

They have. It's £16m. Which is about half what it was in 2020/21.

[Elm Park Kid]

I'm still convinced both Joao and Puscas will leave on the basis I think we needed to shift 2 out of Moore, Joao and Puscas to get underneath this season's wage cap. As Moore isn't going anywhere due to injury then we may not have any options. I also think it was the reason Meite started up front against Brighton, as that's Ince's plan A without Joao.

If my hypothesis is correct then e're likely to need another striker as it seems that Shane will have injury issues throughout the season and the likes of Clarke, etc are not ready for regular starting time.

Loan move for Danny Loader anyone?

I don't think that the EFL have capped our overall wage bill for this season - they're aware that we are effectively at the mercy of whether our high-wage players leave or not. They've simply restricted the weekly wages of any new signings, banned us from paying a fee and put a limit on the total number of players we can have in the squad. I guess that the amount we lose this season could impact what we have to spend next season, but the EFL might just be happy to see our wage bills falling to a certain level by then.

It's capped at £16m, per the EFL decision from last year. Then there are additional restrictions on number of players and average salaries

The Club and EFL have agreed a cap on Total Player Salary Costs of not more than £21.1m in the
current Season, reducing to £16m in the following Season (Championship status), with a number of
other conditions, including:
3.1 the Club will be permitted to have registered at any one time no more than 25 Permitted Players;
3.2 the Club will not be permitted to pay or commit to pay any Transfer Fee, Compensation Fee or
Loan Fee or any other form of payment (other than a sell on fee) in respect of the registration of
any Player in excess of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.3 the average Salary of all new Contract Players registered from the date of this Agreement until
30 June 2023 will not exceed an average of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.4 the Salary of any new Contract Player registered from the date of this Agreement until 30 June
2023 will not exceed the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.5 any contribution to fees paid to an Intermediary by the Club on the behalf of a Player will be
limited to 3% of the Player’s Basic Gross Income (as defined in the FA Regulations on Working
with Intermediaries);

Ah, I didn't realise that. I had thought that the £16m was a target, with an understanding that whether we can achieve it isn't really in our hands as combined total for our existing high-wage players would mean we couldn't have a 25 man squad and achieve the limit.

I remember hearing last season that our wage cap was £12K - which comes out at £15.6m a year for 25 players. Sure, some of our players won't be on that high a wage, but you'd imagine that the majority are. Maybe we're not paying that much on the loanee salaries.

[3points]

I don't think that the EFL have capped our overall wage bill for this season - they're aware that we are effectively at the mercy of whether our high-wage players leave or not. They've simply restricted the weekly wages of any new signings, banned us from paying a fee and put a limit on the total number of players we can have in the squad. I guess that the amount we lose this season could impact what we have to spend next season, but the EFL might just be happy to see our wage bills falling to a certain level by then.

It's capped at £16m, per the EFL decision from last year. Then there are additional restrictions on number of players and average salaries

The Club and EFL have agreed a cap on Total Player Salary Costs of not more than £21.1m in the
current Season, reducing to £16m in the following Season (Championship status), with a number of
other conditions, including:
3.1 the Club will be permitted to have registered at any one time no more than 25 Permitted Players;
3.2 the Club will not be permitted to pay or commit to pay any Transfer Fee, Compensation Fee or
Loan Fee or any other form of payment (other than a sell on fee) in respect of the registration of
any Player in excess of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.3 the average Salary of all new Contract Players registered from the date of this Agreement until
30 June 2023 will not exceed an average of the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.4 the Salary of any new Contract Player registered from the date of this Agreement until 30 June
2023 will not exceed the level as agreed with the EFL;
3.5 any contribution to fees paid to an Intermediary by the Club on the behalf of a Player will be
limited to 3% of the Player’s Basic Gross Income (as defined in the FA Regulations on Working
with Intermediaries);

Ah, I didn't realise that. I had thought that the £16m was a target, with an understanding that whether we can achieve it isn't really in our hands as combined total for our existing high-wage players would mean we couldn't have a 25 man squad and achieve the limit.

I remember hearing last season that our wage cap was £12K - which comes out at £15.6m a year for 25 players. Sure, some of our players won't be on that high a wage, but you'd imagine that the majority are. Maybe we're not paying that much on the loanee salaries.

if you take a few players in the £20-25k range (Moore, Puscas, Joao) then this will pull down the average to closer to £10k per new incoming player. Doesn't mean we can't pay more but it also means we have to pay less for others. I'm thinking we may pay Long £15k, but Fornah £5k, etc, etc. It gives some flexibility but probably explains why it is so hard to do anything quickly as it's a moving target when in negotiations with individual players, yet trying to manage it "on the whole" at the same time.

The drop to £16m, with Moore out injured and unable to be moved on, is the reason I'm convinced Joao will be sold along with Puscas. The club effectively confirmed in the STAR review that Moore, Puscas and Joao were the top 3 earners. They also said don't believe everything you read in the media about last summer's £8.5k max wage

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Could (would) probably mean more than a 6 point deduction. The agreement says the suspension does not replace punishment for future offences. Would be pretty stupid !

Would "future offences" count as offences beyond our current restrictions though? Otherwise there would be no point having a 6 point deduction suspended would there? Unless there is something obvious that I'm missing.

Our suspended deduction is for a previous offence. A further offence would see that suspension activated and could also be punished in it’s own right. I suspect there are all sorts of permutation sof things like could lead to different outcomes but I don’t think we can look at the suspension as a ‘banked’ punishment giving us a free hit at doing bad stuff again and just getting a 6 point deduction. To be honest the scenarios in which it would be a worthwhile risk are pretty unlikely (if there actually are any !)

Yeah I know I can't imagine we would ever go and actively get 6 points deducted in a realistic scenario, but I thought the 6 point deduction would be applied if we were to break the agreement we have with the EFL, be it having a fee on a player/loan or going over our agreed wage limit for the season etc. I thought it was more of a "fixed" punishment rather than one that was open to change.

[Nameless]

Would "future offences" count as offences beyond our current restrictions though? Otherwise there would be no point having a 6 point deduction suspended would there? Unless there is something obvious that I'm missing.

Our suspended deduction is for a previous offence. A further offence would see that suspension activated and could also be punished in it’s own right. I suspect there are all sorts of permutation sof things like could lead to different outcomes but I don’t think we can look at the suspension as a ‘banked’ punishment giving us a free hit at doing bad stuff again and just getting a 6 point deduction. To be honest the scenarios in which it would be a worthwhile risk are pretty unlikely (if there actually are any !)

Yeah I know I can't imagine we would ever go and actively get 6 points deducted in a realistic scenario, but I thought the 6 point deduction would be applied if we were to break the agreement we have with the EFL, be it having a fee on a player/loan or going over our agreed wage limit for the season etc. I thought it was more of a "fixed" punishment rather than one that was open to change.

It’s not open to change. It’s a 6 point suspension for our previous offence. But if we committed a new offence it would activate the suspended deduction AND potentially be subject to it’s own punishment. We couldn’t be punished for paying a fee as the league wouldn’t allow the deal. Most likely way to do it would be if we had actually budgeted to get Moore and Puscas off the payroll and don’t, but the salaries we are actually offering must be based on our current wage bill, not our planned one (you’d hope)

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Our suspended deduction is for a previous offence. A further offence would see that suspension activated and could also be punished in it’s own right. I suspect there are all sorts of permutation sof things like could lead to different outcomes but I don’t think we can look at the suspension as a ‘banked’ punishment giving us a free hit at doing bad stuff again and just getting a 6 point deduction. To be honest the scenarios in which it would be a worthwhile risk are pretty unlikely (if there actually are any !)

Yeah I know I can't imagine we would ever go and actively get 6 points deducted in a realistic scenario, but I thought the 6 point deduction would be applied if we were to break the agreement we have with the EFL, be it having a fee on a player/loan or going over our agreed wage limit for the season etc. I thought it was more of a "fixed" punishment rather than one that was open to change.

It’s not open to change. It’s a 6 point suspension for our previous offence. But if we committed a new offence it would activate the suspended deduction AND potentially be subject to it’s own punishment. We couldn’t be punished for paying a fee as the league wouldn’t allow the deal. Most likely way to do it would be if we had actually budgeted to get Moore and Puscas off the payroll and don’t, but the salaries we are actually offering must be based on our current wage bill, not our planned one (you’d hope)

Ok - as I say I thought it was a fixed punishment, rather than one that was open to further punishment as well.

[Snowflake Royal]

Yeah, any new offence will receive a punishment, probably 9 to 12 points, with the previously suspended 6 imposed, making it a total of 15 to 18.

[Stranded]

So, according to Ince today. Sarr done, just waiting on approval but been training all week. Loum should be at Bearwood tomorrow.

NGW should sign but wants another, probably more senior LB.

Hutchinson only likely if we have money left after sorting out the remaining priorities.

All seems sensible, pretty well planned and realistic.

Also made it clear there were other targets we couldn't get, likely due to money.

[Hound]

Thanks Stranded - where are the quotes on this or was it radio?

[blythspartan]

Thanks Stranded - where are the quotes on this or was it radio?

https://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/foot ... 614697.amp

[blythspartan]

Thanks Stranded - where are the quotes on this or was it radio?

https://rdg.today/reading-fc-boss-paul- ... -transfer/

[Hound]

Thanks, found them now