MLS Long Term Injured List Rules Need Adjustment
by Dave Clark on May 9, 2011 11:13 AM PDT
in Sounders: MLS Regular Season
Email
Print
Major League Soccer has more extensive rules than most soccer leagues in the world, but they aren't as complicated as say Major League Baseball. The "Reserve" League for example is not run from a seperate roster, but is a collection of guys that didn't play much in the last or next game. But there is a significant issue where MLS could help its teams that have suffered significant long term injuries. Currently a rolled ankle (short term injured list) and a torn ACL with fractured patella (long term injured list) have exactly the same salary cap and roster slot relief.
Here are the two injured lists from the 2011 Roster Rules
(K) SEASON-ENDING INJURY REPLACEMENTS
A team with a player lost to a season-ending injury can replace that player on its roster, while remaining responsible for the full amount of the injured player’s salary. A player can be placed on the season-ending injury list once another player has been signed as a replacement (provided the team has budget space). International player limits still apply at the time a season-ending replacement is made (with the player being replaced not counting against those limits).
(L) SHORT-TERM INJURY REPLACEMENTS
A team with a player who has a short-term injury can replace that player on its roster, while remaining responsible for the full amount of the injured player’s salary. A player can be placed on the short-term injured reserve list once another player has been signed as a replacement (provided the team has budget space). Note that the injured player will have to sit out a minimum of six MLS League matches before he can rejoin the team’s roster. International player limits still apply at the time a short-term replacement is made (with the player being replaced not counting against those limits).
If you can find the difference between those rules you are a better legal analyst than I. While there is mention of the two lists, there is no point. And that must change. Currently the following players are going to miss at least half of full MLS season due to injuries sustained on the field of play - Steve Zakuani, Javier Morales, David Ferreira and Branko Baskovic. O'Brian White will also miss that much time, but not due to injury. MLS needs to change the long term injury rules because there are four likely Playoff teams that need help with fanbases that deserve the assist.
What ever rule change is made should not be one that creates an advantage for the team with the long term injury, but instead should be some small help to give the team a tiny bit of strength, and provide the team and the injured player a buffer so that they do not hurry back and wind up re-injured due to the pressure of a Playoff race in October.
While the MLS Player's Union and the Competition Committee would have to craft the rule adjustment it should at least do the following.
- Apply to teams that will be without a player for 20+ MLS matches
- Not allow said player to participate in any competitive non-league match
- Provide an amount of Allocation Dollars, but not Salary Cap Relief
- If the lost player is an international grant a additional international slot
- Limit newly signed player through only two transfer windows
- Limit number on 20 match list to 1 or 2 (6 match list is limited to 4 players)
Something structured along these lines would mean that a team could get a short term version of Mauro Rosales, a good player, but not a great one. In the case of the Seattle Sounders they could add two players but only up until the 2012 secondary transfer window. The players added would be those that are hungry for playing opportunities, but not at high salary. Instead they would have an infusion of cash through the allocation.
This does not add too much confusion to the rules, but a team like Real Salt Lake or FC Dallas losing their MVP caliber players deserve an oppotunity to replace their enourous losses. The league has the funds, and needs the quality to be replaced so that the gate and ratings are only dented within the MLS markets effected, rather than potentially destroyed.
This structure would no reward a team for being injured, but instead offer them the opportunity to no languish.
9 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The difference
“Season-ending” means they can’t play in MLS the rest of the year.
Short-term is 6 games minimum.
That’s really the only difference between the two. As you point out, there really is no reason to distinguish because you might as well utilize the short-term list to the fullest (4 players) in case one of them can come back more quickly.
My shot at drafting a clause
LONG TERM INJURY LIST
A team with a player who has a long-term injury can place that player on the Long-Term Injury List (hereinafter List). This player will be barred from playing in MLS League or other competitive matches within 18 weeks of being placed on the List, but this player may play in MLS Reserve League matches and friendlies 16 weeks after being placed on the List. The team remains responsible for the full amount of the players salary. Players on this List do not count against any roster player limits, but do count against the salary cap. Teams are limited to 2 players on this List. For each player placed on this List, teams will be granted $25,000 in Allocation Dollars.
Teams who place a player on this list may sign a new player to replace the injured player (provided they have budget space). Players signed in this manner can only be signed through two transfer windows.
Abuse of this List, through oversigning, avoidance of transfer windows, or any other manner, as determined by the League Commissioner, will result in forfeiture of any Allocation Dollars obtained through the list, points deduction, fine, or any other reasonable penalty determined by the Commissioner.
More Simple Please
>only one window – mid-year; align with the transfer period?
>League provides allocation amount for the actual player salary amount (amortized to ½ year).
>I’m indifferent on international slot
>Once you exercise this option, the player is out for the rest of the year (playoffs and all other competitions included)
>An extension could be granted if the injury was incurred close to the cut-off…to allow teams to evaluate the severity of the injury
If a player goes down in Game 2, the replacement player wouldn’t be eligible until Game 18 (assuming 34 game season). Same story if a player was injured in Game 16. If a player goes down in Game 19 (past the halfway window) only the normal short-term injury rules apply. This provides some relief, but also minimizes the gaming and complexities by allowing the player back on the field. Admittedly, it would only address severe injuries; and might put some teams in a pickle if the player might return (i.e., OBW).
injuries are a part of sports
Its part of that unpredictability of sports. In a salary capped league like mls the devastation of a high paid high profiled player is more extreme, maybe. What do they do in basketball where one player is even more important?
I’d change the rule in this league to allow the club the option to sign a player using club money up to half of the salary cap hit of the injured player.
If a team loses a big name player it’s sad and hard for the team, but that’s sports.
by python6114 on May 9, 2011 7:36 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
According to Deadspin, we are getting screwed
Per Deadspin:
“In MLS Commissioner Don Garber’s perfect world, the two biggest markets in the country would have the two best teams. These teams would, of course, be the New York Red Bulls and the LA Galaxy. They would be better than the other teams but not so much better that fans in smaller markets would give up hope. Ideally, they would meet for the championship in November and squash their East Coast-West Coast beef. But don’t take my word for it. Let’s examine some recently released MLS salary data.
Here’s the 2011 guaranteed payrolls for NY and LA and two smaller market teams. The difference is obvious:
NY Red Bulls: $13,397,087.04
LA Galaxy: $12,205,725.12
Real Salt Lake: $3,517,856.76
Colorado Rapids: $3,173,078.64
Keep in mind that MLS sets player salaries, not the teams. The invisible hand that exists in other pro sports is really just Garber’s hand."
It's somewhat true
They negotiate salaries for plenty of incoming players such as Generation Adidas rookies and returning players like Benny Feilhaber. They also handled the CBA negotiations which sets up a lot of the guidelines for player salaries. The league has a pretty active hand in keeping team costs down.
That's highly misleading
$10M of NYRB’s payroll is Henry and Marquez. $10M of LAG’s payroll is Landon, Beckham, and Angel. Teams might not have a lot of control over the player salary negotiations, but they have a lot of control over DP costs, and that’s where NYRB and LAG are out-spending RSL and CR. I’m of the mind that 2-3 players on a side, even great players, aren’t going to make the kind of difference that their salaries suggest they might. Indeed, they can’t make the kind of difference that their salaries suggest. Henry and Marquez each make more than RSL’s total payroll, but they aren’t going to win more games individually than RSL does as a team. As long as the cap for DP slots is kept at 3, this isn’t really a big deal.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Sounder At Heart
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
