Bury F. C. put the case of the poorer Club, who would be hard put to it to find an extra £80
per player, plus the extra amount for the Provident Scheme.
Aldershot F. C. agreed that the wealthier Clubs would be able to afford the suggested increase,
but had doubts about the poorer Clubs who had to compete, and wondered whether there could not
be a different maximum wage for the First and Second Division than for the Third.
Bonus. Cardiff City F. C. suggested that a point gained away from home was better than a point gained
at home, and suggested that the away bonus should be £3 for a win and 30/- for a draw.
Admission The representative of Birmingham City F.C. stated that his Club had written to the 44 Clubs of
Price. the First and Second Divisions suggesting an increase in the admission charge from 1/3 to 1/6,
and the replies received showed 36 in favour of the increase and 1 against. He suggested that the
time had now arrived when 1/3 was too paltry a sum to pay to watch first-class football and drew
attention to the great increase in expenses of Clubs since 1946. He wondered what possible
objection the Chancellor of the Exchequer could make when all expenses of Government controlled
businesses were going up. He expressed the opinion that the 1/3 portion of the ground is the least
popular and pointed out that in the Scottish League, and even the Southern Football League, a
1/6 minimum was quite usual. He hoped that the Management Committee would put this proposal
on the Agenda for the Annual General Meeting.
Plymouth Argyle F. C., speaking in support, pointed out that two years ago this increase was
before the Annual General Meeting and only just failed to be passed. It was also suggested by
them that possibly Birmingham City F. C. would consider proposing the deletion of Regulation 32
and thus allow Clubs to be masters in their own house.
Burnley F. C. spoke in agreement with the proposed increase.
Tottenham Hotspur F. C. said that, although they voted against the increase two years ago,
they were now in favour.
Southampton F. C., speaking in favour of the proposed increase, stated that everything was
going up except the income of Clubs, and suggested a study of Club Balance Sheets would show
that 60 per cent. of the Net income went in Wages and Salaries, and did not think that any
increase in wages was possible without an increase in admission charges.
The President stated that the Management Committee were of the opinion that Rule 32 was
very good and left things largely at the discretion of Clubs. He pointed out that Third Division
Clubs might have difficulty over any increase. He added that the League have already had a letter.
from the National Federation of Supporters Clubs deprecating any increase. He agreed that
wages and admission prices were inseparable.
Birmingham City F. C. asked if the pledge of 1946 regarding a "reasonable proportion" of
the ground was now forgotten.
The President replied that all Clubs had honoured the agreement with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer and thought that the interpretation of "a reasonable proportion" had altered.
Service The representative of Bradford (Park Avenue) F. C. referred to all the talk in the Press and
Bonus. elsewhere about illegal payments to players, and said that such things were a scab on the game.
He spoke of the legal illegalities, such as jobs, etc., causing unrest among players, and suggested
that the main solution was that any increase given should be given for loyalty. He insisted that
Clubs should support the principle of one man one job, and suggested that Clubs should not allow
players to take outside jobs between, say, the ages of 21-31/2.This would allow the player to
serve an apprenticeship and to prepare for his future towards the end of his playing career. He
suggested that the League should do away with the present Benefit system and introduce a
Service Bonus Regulation. He suggested that players should be credited with Bonus on a
sliding scale of, say, £104 for the first year's service and increase by £26 each year so long as he
stays with that Club. If the player is transferred at the request of his Club, his service should not
be considered broken, and the new Club would carry on with the increments. If, however, the
player is transferred at his own request he would start from scratch. It was thought that this
scheme would cut out a lot of transfer requests.
Regulation 78 Tottenham Hotspur F. C. stated that they considered the time had come when the out-of-
pocket expenses allowed to players on tour (Rule 78) should be increased to £2 per day,and
stressed the increased cost of everything.
Sheffield Wednesday F. C. and Liverpool F. C. supported this on the grounds of increased
expenses.
Training Everton F. C. read an extract from Football Association Rule 29 regarding the expenses
Expenses payable to Amateur players, and pointed out that youths were unable to afford to attend training
for when they had to pay their own expenses and asked the Management Committee to support a
Amateurs. suggested alteration of the F. A. Rule so that Clubs could pay the out-of-pocket expenses of
Amateur players when attending training. A limit of 4/- was suggested.
The President stated that the matter was already under discussion, and that the suggestion
of allowing the payment of up to 4/- for two nights a week had found favour. He asked for other
comments from Clubs.
Sheffield Wednesday F. C. stated that they were in favour but wondered if the 4/- maximum
would become the minimum.
2
