SOCCER'S players union has warned that the impending broadcast deal must not just be used to bandage the A-League's financial problems, and insisted that the players must share in any windfall the game gets from TV rights.

Alarmed by Football Federation Australia's plans to increase the grant given to each club directly from the bigger pot it hopes to accrue, Professional Footballers Australia (PFA) CEO Brendan Schwab argued that the players were responsible for rising crowds and TV audiences over the past season.

Football Federation Australia (FFA) has promised that under the new broadcast deal it will aim to cover the salary cap, which next season will be a fraction under $2.5 million, to assuage the anger of the A-League owners at the size of their losses.

Although Schwab is standing down as PFA chief he will continue to lead negotiations for a new pay deal later this year, and signalled a hardline approach if the FFA sought to implement the cost-cutting measures recommended last year by the Smith Review, particularly player wages.

"Because the players are already receiving a fair and equitable share of the game's revenue, when that goes up it has to be shared with the players," Schwab said.

"Otherwise the impact will be a reduction in the quality of the league, the fans will suffer, and yet the deep-seated financial problems will continue.

"The owners must ask themselves why they are receiving such a low dividend from FFA - it's certainly not up to the players to have their payments set too low just because the owners and the FFA can't agree on what's fair.

"The FFA has the world's most responsible players union as its partner, yet we hear constant claims that player payments are part of the problem. An overall analysis of the game's finances needs scrutiny of the 70 per cent of revenues spent elsewhere."

Schwab pointed out that the salary cap is imposed with the consent of the players, whom he said limited themselves to around a third of the FFA and A-League combined income.

"The salary cap after all involves the imposition of a restraint on the players' freedom to negotiate employment," he said. "That can only be justified as a matter of law if it's justified - and it can't be reasonable, and therefore is unlawful, if it's no longer based on a fair and equitable share."

FFA Head of Corporate Affairs and Communications, Kyle Patterson responded that the "absolute priority" had to be the financial sustainability of the clubs. "The Smith Review says that, the FFA Strategic Plan says that, the A-League clubs themselves say that," he said.

"Every sensible commentator says that and I would think the PFA would wholeheartedly agree. If the PFA seeks contract security, stability and increasing opportunities for players as their priority, then the debate is surely not about carving up future broadcast rights money before a new agreement is reached."s

"It's about clubs, the employers in this case, living within their means when it comes to employee entitlements.

"FFA will make an assessment once on the new rights agreements are concluded. Until such time, we shouldn't get ahead of ourselves."

Follow @Telegraph_Sport on Twitter and like Telegraph Sport on Facebook

Originally published as A-League players want their share