Although the cash-strapped Mariners would be one of the teams significantly disadvantaged by a lifting of the existing $2.55 million wage ceiling, Charlesworth said that if clubs can afford to splash the cash they should be allowed to because it “would raise the level of the competition”.

Mindful not to condone Glory’s excesses, which brought the club a $269,000 fine and will see it relegated to a seventh-place finish this season, Charlesworth said the system needs a shake-up.

“I don't think the cap should be so rigid,” he said. “If clubs want to invest, within reason, they should be allowed to do so.

“People would argue it would be to the detriment of the little guys like the Mariners, but I don’t see it that way.

“If the clubs are prepared to spend money on building bigger squads with better players that can only be a plus for the league in general.

“I am a supporter of anything which helps grow the game and our club as a business can grow on the back of the growth of the league.”

Pressed on how much leeway potential big spenders should be allowed, Charlesworth replied: “I don’t know what the exact percentage should be but the point is that you don’t want to restrict investment in a developing competition.

“If people are prepared to spend their money on the product, then good luck to them.”

Well-resourced sides like Melbourne Victory, Sydney FC and Melbourne City would be likely beneficiaries of such a system.

Charlesworth, who failed in his recent bid to convince Football Federation Australia (FFA) to expand the competition into Asia with the introduction of teams from nations like Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, added: “In my view the league needs a shot in the arm right now, and it’s crazy not to allow clubs to invest.”

He acknowledged that were the A-League’s elite unencumbered by the straitjacket of the cap the likes of the Mariners and Newcastle Jets would be “less competitive”.

But he doesn’t see that as a threat to their long-term survival.

“If you are adding value to the league and you have bigger clubs bringing big-name players to Central Coast Stadium then it puts bums on seats and benefits all," he argued.

“Does Burnley want to be playing against teams like Rotherham and Fulham in the Premier League? The answer is no. They want be playing Manchester United, Chelsea and Arsenal.

“It’s not so much a question of whether it's fair or not. It's more the fact It works. Obviously the FFA is seeking to protect the smaller clubs but I don't think the existing system is necessarily the right way to go about it.

“I get the fact that the FFA believes in a level playing field for all and is trying to preserve that.

“It's true that It makes the league more competitive and interesting, but as long as the little guys are still funded and can survive, does having clubs with bigger budgets really matter? Survival is what really matters.

“Do the people on the Central Coast want a club in among the big boys or do they not want a club at all? Of course they want a club.

“If we are seen as the battlers forever and a day I think the people would buy into that.

“As long as the money (from the TV deal) is distributed evenly across all the clubs, then if certain teams want to spend more to build up their business, why should they be stopped?

“If the rich are getting richer and also the poor are getting richer, that can only be good for the game.”

Addressing Glory’s breaches, Charlesworth added: “Obviously they have broken the rules and there should of course be some penalty.

“The club may have gone about things the wrong way, but the sentiment of investment is right.

“Tony Sage has been penalised for investing money and trying to build his club.

“Unfortunately, we are having to go the other way and cut our costs. With that in mind, arguably it’s us who are damaging the brand more.”