It's a well known fact that maths is not fun. Nevertheless, the past week has seen the FFA introduce a number of new provisions that epitomise just how not fun maths is.

When Kevin Muscat's maybe/maybe not testimonial match and Scott Jamieson being stuck in Germany are top news items I thought two things. Firstly, that "it's a slow news week" and secondly, "something big has to happen in the world of football soon". Something bigger than Muscat thinking about retiring at any rate (which, let's face it, wouldn't be that hard).

And so it appeared. Twice.

On Monday, the FFA announced that "clubs will now have the ability to sign a top Australian player in addition to the current Marquee Player" and that the guest player could now play for 10 matches, including in the finals series.

On Wednesday, the consolation came. If you're too povvo to afford a Socceroo, you can "sign up to three National Youth League players to minimum wage contracts outside of the salary cap". Which works out to $111 387.78 for 3 players (correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't done maths this complicated since year 10).

All this means that, this season, clubs can have 2 marquee players, 3 youth players and an under-23 marquee player outside the salary cap.

I was trying to use the PFA website to make sense of all these numbers and, quite frankly, I'm baffled. But I'll continue.

Presuming each marquee player would demand around $1million a season (a conservative estimate, I think) should a club choose to use all 6 players outside the salary cap, they would be paying around $2.26 million in wages a season outside the $2.35million salary cap. And that's before we even start thinking about guest players.

The harsh reality is that not all clubs are going to be able to afford this. It's no secret that Fury, Roar, Adelaide, Mariners and Gold Coast have had a few financial problems of late and in their first season, I'm unsure as to whether the new Melbourne Heart franchise will be able to afford this either.

I understand that these new provisions will allow for more quality players in the league, however, I can't help but be concerned that, rather than encouraging the growth of the competition, it may hinder it. If richer clubs can afford to support a stronger playing roster than a financially struggling franchise, I can envisage a pretty large divide forming between clubs on the two ends of the spectrum.

For all they've said, Sydney FC, for example, seem to be able to afford a Nicky Carle AND a Robbie Fowler. However, North Queensland Fury, from all reports, would struggle to support a marquee signing of Fowler's wage level.

A side with Carle and Fowler would unquestionably be stronger than a side full of Paul Hendersons and Beau Buschs. It may not necessarily be reflected in the two clubs' results but I think that it is more than likely that it will be.

If all clubs were in a strong financial position, this wouldn't be an issue. However, I can't help wonder what exactly the FFA were thinking when they passed these rules. Are they keen to get more Socceroos home? Are they not happy with some clubs' past marquee signings? If that's what they were concerned about, surely they could've stuck with one marquee player and given the A-League some control over who was given marquee player status.

On the positive side, not being able to afford two marquee players may encourage clubs to use the signing three youth players rule. I'll keep my fingers crossed that it does, before it gets to the start of the season and I'll come crashing back down to reality, as I always seem to do with anything and everything, because the only club that will have enough sense to use the youth players outside the salary cap rule will be Sydney FC.

Pessimistic? Me?

Just a little bit.