THERE has been a rumour growing over the last month or so that Wellington Phoenix have a ‘secret’ marquee, undisclosed to the public.

People often complain about clubs disgracing the marquee rule by signing a player who turned out to be a flop (insert your chosen fat, lazy, old, distracted, homesick, cost a million dollars and couldn’t score in a brothel marquee here).

At least in those situations the players were signed in good faith and were expected to perform, whereas a secret marquee would be classified as such solely to have his wage outside the salary cap.

If signing a marquee that turns out to be a flop is mocking the rule, then signing a secret marquee is flat out bullying it. It also makes one wonder what the FFA is up to, IF this rumour is true.

The intention of the marquee rule is to let clubs sign a player who is a recognised star, even if not immediately, who will excite current fans and bring new ones to the club/league. Surely a secret marquee is highly unlikely to do this in a way any of the official marquee players have, and surely the ability to attract fans must be part of the marquee criteria the FFA have set, right?

Obviously not, because this supposed marquee is not being expected to draw crowds, or even perform above the standard of his team-mates and only qualified due to having played for his country.

I can see a case for the clubs without a recognised marquee though: closing the gap with teams like Melbourne, Newcastle, and Sydney who have a high-profile marquee year after year.

If a club signs a player who can qualify as a marquee, perhaps they should be allowed to have him classified as one in the interests of freeing up cap space to sign one or two players of a slightly higher quality.

This could counteract other clubs who have a player who can potentially have a large impact on their team’s performance, by building a squad of an overall slightly higher quality.

Yes, this argument can fall down when looking at the history of marquees in this league, that successful ones are few and tend to be Australian, but what is to say that five clubs next year won’t get it right and sign high-profile marquees? What effect could this have on the other five teams?

Which side of the fence one sits in this argument relies mostly on what you think is the best way to grow the league: through high-profile stars or a higher quality of play overall.

I think the second argument sits better with me, though perhaps the FFA could force clubs to announce any marquee signings and let the fans know the expectations on the player.

We could be seeing the birth of the Cap Marquee.