IS the $2m Bonus a Good for Sport

When the Singapore Football Team created history by beating Hong Kong on their own turf on the 18th of November 2025, Forrest Li, the President of the FAS, announced that the bonus for the entire first team and staff would be tripled.  A few days later, he announced that the team would receive a $2m pay out for making it to the Asian Cup in Saudi Arabia 2027.  This was the single biggest pay out for football players ever.  In side conversations, people asked if this money came from the FAS or from Forrest’s own pocket.  I knew the answer from the start.  The amount is almost 15% of the budget of the FAS.  The amount paid out in fact surpasses what an SPL club receives in grants for an entire season.  It had to come from his own pocket.  Even the President of the FAS has to follow procedure in the use of the Association funds.  

On 7th December 2025, reporters Sazali Abdul Aziz and Kimberly Kwek from the Straits Times wrote a “Big Question” article: Is Forrest Li’s $2m bonus for the Lions good or bad for Sport?  

Let me say one thing at the start.  More funding in any sport is a positive thing.  It is even more crucial in an ultra-competitive sport like football.  Football globally receives more funding than possibly all the other sports combined, and the countries around Singapore outspend us by a significant factor bar countries like Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia.  Funding in football has gone into sharpening every single bit of advantage that can be eked out – facilities, programs, sports science and diet, structure and organisation of clubs, pay etc.  This money comes from both the government and private sources.  To compete, more money will help Singapore do the same. 

Motivation and Money in Sport

But the Big question asked is if spending $2m on bonus for the players was a good or bad thing.  I will not address the other question of whether this is the best use of additional money in football.  I will instead focus on this question: Is a huge bonus a big motivation to perform on the field?

Although the link between incentive pay and performance is not definitive in behavioural economics, in football, there is a general acceptance that “pay for performance” as a principle is important.  At the club level, the contract of footballers are always written in ways to spur performance.  Players have individual bespoke contracts based on appearance, goals scored or conceded, minutes played and so on.  They are paid when targets are met.  But there are also bonus pools allocated to team performance – win bonuses, progression in cup tournaments, league placements, and trophies won as some examples.  Some contracts are also multiyear. A player may be rewarded if the team wins promotion within three years, reflective of a longer term project. 

But at the national level, things are very different.  In each FIFA window, FIFA compels clubs to release their players for international duty with zero compensation for the club.  The National Association are not expected to pay players, although many do.  But it is always done at a fraction of what their primary clubs do.  While players can turn down the national call up, most do so because of reasons other than remuneration. There are multiple reasons for this.  The clearest one is that wearing of the national jersey is for most players the pinnacle of a football playing career.  Representing the country in the highest possible reward.  There is also a sense of duty.  The fan base expects the best player to turn up.  Imagine the backlash to the personal standing of a player would get if he refuses to turn up for the national team on the basis that he is not adequately compensated. It is also clear that international football is a stage to perform.  An excellent performance by a player on the international stage increases the value of the player significantly. 

For many years during my time in the FAS, Chinese Taipei ranked above Singapore in the FIFA Rankings.  I asked the then President of the Chinese Taipei Football Association (CTFA) how they rewarded their players.  The then President was very clear that the CTFA was an underfunded organisation and was not in a position to dish money out.   But this did not represent a problem for the FA.  CTFA paid players US500 per game, which is a miniscule amount.   He said that playing for the National Team in Taiwan should be enough reward.  Apart from pride, playing for the national team was the pathway to the Chinese Super League (CSL).  No CSL club scout watched local Taiwanese football.  But they all watched the Chinese Taipei National Team.  Getting picked up should be enough motivation for the players to perform.  

This raises the question of whether the bonuses are necessary.  Limited bonuses actually is the norm for most countries around our ranking.  As an example, Hong Kong also offered a very limited bonus of HK$1m for the team to beat Singapore and qualify for the Asian Cup.  This is less than 10% of the $2m eventually paid by Forrest to the Singapore team.   Recent SEA Games bonuses offered by Thailand and Vietnam were even less in the order of magnitude.  So the $2m paid out is generous indeed.  Those who say this is unsustainable are correct.  So it must be clear that this is not the norm.  

But it is not every day that Singapore qualifies for the Asian Cup.  So this is a one off.  And if it is so, in my book, it is ok.  The way that the FAS did it was correct.  They announced a standard bonus at a sustainable level before the game - $6000 per player for a win, and $40000 for qualification.  The special bonus was on top and was completely of the prerogative of the donor.  In fact, if any Singaporean wants to give a special bonus, this is completely their prerogative.  We should not stop them.  Erick Thohir, the President of PSSI in Indonesia, is said to favour this same protocol, giving special bonuses after the game.  We also cannot stop people from doing this.  As another example, it was widely reported that Hassan Sunny was the recipient of “donations” from Chinese citizens after his goalkeeping heroics in the Singapore goal allowed China to advance to the next round of the world cup at the expense of Thailand.    It was unexpected, and it was a one off on the back of a heroic performance.  Who are we to say that what Chinese citizens did was wrong?

Hariss Harun put the role of bonuses best in his comments to David Lee from the ST, a day before the match against Hong Kong.  Hariss referred to bonuses as incentives and nothing more. “Of course, it can motivate you in a certain way, but in sport and in international football, its so much more than that when you are playing for the national team, because of what it means to everyone in Singapore…. the bonus is not the foremost thing in our heads – we are just fully focused on the game itself.”  

Hariss has got it spot on.  A bonus is no doubt important to make the players feel appreciated and will always be a positive thing.  But this cannot be the primary reason for the player wanting to play and perform for the National Team.