The site might not be great but the figures seem about right .It has been reported around the country in local media .True ? Well as has been said who is included as a player .It is never going to be spot on but it maybe not that far from the truth as to where we stand budget wise.
The size of the squad won't make any difference if the average is calculated by dividing total wages by the number of players if their earnings make up that total.
It would make a difference where you drew the line .Is it all players that have made a appearance ?Teams that have used young players a few times could greatly affect figures .Only the senior squad with the appearances in which case Morris,Nelson and Bingham may not be included in the figures .I would guess that we are looking at very approximate figures that give a hint of where we are wage wise .
What does it matter if Morris etc or youngsters are included when you take an average of the total wages of the players in the 'population'?
If it is done on one appearance for example Gillingham would have the likes of Oldaker ,Hadler ,Cundle,Murphy etc that would bring the average down .All I am saying is that it is not that accurate as it depends where you draw the line .In Gillingham's case we did keep a regular squad through most of the season .But had many bit part players .
Why on earth would you take an average based on appearances unless you're bonkers?
Go on then where is the cut off all professional players maybe ?
I did the calculation based on the Club's financial statements, including the average number of players and, as you can see, I came to about the same figure using very little in the way of assumptions. How else would you do it?
