SCB's CEO Marc Lüthi and you often speak from Switzerland hockey out. When did he first tell you about six foreigners?
It's not that he called me out of the blue and said he had an idea. Discussions on the cost explosion have been almost two years. Kloten President Hans-Ulrich Lehmann was the initiator and after the first meeting the clubs produced a concept paper with proposals for termination of the wage phase. Ten, eleven approach. Some people quickly left the table, like a payroll that is not compatible with our labor law. At the end there was the idea: the rise of aliens.
Is not it ironic that the Kloten President, who has led his club into the Swiss Alliance and would like to give up soon, is shaping the future?
Lehmann quickly made this hot spot a hot topic. It helped her to be impartial. In June, at the League meeting, we then voted for the rise of foreigners. Four clubs favored, eight against. So the topic was really out of the table. But Bern and Servette brought it back to the wall with an official request.
Did you vote in June?
Right. Since the number of foreigners is a strategic decision, we discussed this matter with the government. And there we agreed on it. Even though I see that lifting foreigners could affect if done right. But you have to be consistent.
"If a player has a good season, agents immediately demand a salary increase of over 100 percent."
Fifth and sixth foreigners should be really cheap. But I do not think the clubs will stick to it.
Are these mini-arcobellos dreamed by Marc Lüthi? 120 000 francs?
Europe has high-quality cheap aliens. At GCK we had Blaine Down or Kris Foucault. There are many AHL Canadians in Great Britain. The highest foreigners earn 2,000 pounds per week for 30 weeks. Then we would have 80,000 francs. They have to pay taxes themselves. In Slovakia, the best players will receive 60,000, 70,000 francs. But, as I said, I do not think that the reason for clubs is big enough to get just such cheap players.
Speaking of the reason. If the clubs are reasonable, they simply can not meet the Swiss players for each paycheck. Or not?
It's so easy. Of course, the club decides what to pay for. But agents make use of market imbalances. The demand for Swiss players is higher than the supply. If the player has a reasonably good time today, the agents demand the same salary increase of over 100 percent. And they donate all clubs to rising prices.
Why do not you say we do not pay, have you?
We can say that. But not in all cases. Six foreigners would make room for maneuver. But the risks involved in such a decision are too great. On the one hand, too much money is spent on expensive foreigners. Secondly, the Swiss players remain on track. For example, Pius Suter was with us 19 normal and has done great development. But what if we could have used six foreigners then?
"The German hockey continues to suffer from the opening of foreigners today, 25 years later."
He probably would not have played.
Exactly. Especially for boys who are on the way to the National League, growth could be fatal. And then the Swiss hockey would be permanently damaged. German hockey continues to suffer from the opening of foreigners today. 25 years later. The catastrophe is done quickly, the repair lasts for years.
The clubs could also strengthen market imbalances by training more players. Like Sweden and Finland. Would not this be more sensible?
Yes. But you can not change it within two years. If we succeed in expanding Basea today, what would be highly desirable, we can only feel the effects after one, two-generation players. It's simply a fact that there are many players in the Swedish and Finnish youth sectors. Ice Hockey is the number one for them, we compete with many sporting events. And then there is another problem.
It would be?
Compatibility between school and sport. Clubs have taken the initiative to develop separate solutions with private schools, but there are too few cantonal or even intergovernmental organizations. In Scandinavia, the school has been adapted to sports betting sports, and it is the other way around.
What do you think clubs need a certain number of U20 players on the match page? So you can also reduce costs.
We talked about this idea, but we rejected it again. As there is a high risk that quota teams will be included in teams with one or two missions. It would be bad for development. They then play better with Elite Juniors or the Swiss League.
How can you reduce from twelve to ten teams?
It would be an advantage that we have 40-50 more players in the market. But the disadvantages are also greater. The Swiss map is extremely full of hockey. If two clubs crashed, the area could be weakened or lost. And how would we get 50 games in ten teams? Less games mean less revenue and would also affect the TV deal.
In 2008 Marc Lüthi proposed raising to five foreigners. At that time, five clubs voted yes, seven no. And now?
It's the same. Bern, Davos, Lausanne and Servette are in favor, Lugano seems still unknown, but we are Ambri, Biel, Friborg, Langnau, Rapperswil, Zug.
Could the clubs change their attitudes?
I do not think so. What should I get them to say the other way around till now? It would only hurt their credibility.
Or is there a possible compromise: the increase from four to five foreigners instead of six?
Nothing! This proposal is not in the table. This can only be decided by a vote of attorney. It did not concern a simple majority but three-quarters of the votes. I would like to strongly defend against such a vote. This version was not verified seriously. Such an important strategic decision can not be introduced as quickly as possible with the counter-argument. That would be suspicious.
Created: 08.11.2018, 23:50