strider
Post Whore
- Messages
- 78,643
Article on the SMH website: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/27/1072308727072.html
In this it appears the Goose's Lawyer, oops I mean Roosters' Lawyer and vice-chairman, seems to be trying to make everyone believe that the idiots are doing this for the good of everyone....a few quotes:
1) Other Codes will Poach Rugby League Talent
"League as a code faces a huge threat from other sports if players are not going to be suitably paid"
The only threat of taking existing players is Rugby Union - no player will leave to play any other code. And Rugby Union has come under ALOT of pressure itself for doing what it did with Rogers, Sailor and Tiquiri. I don't see Union taking any significant players or number of players from League in the future - these 3 were a World Cup oriented stunt.
As for kids going to other sports - does a 14yr old really think, 'I can make $25,000 extra a year playing AFL than I could playing League'...I don't think so - they play the sport they love to play - if thats league, then the possibility of substantial salary is enough....AND lets face it, despite troubled times, league still has the best junior infrastructure of any code in the rugby league states - sure it needs to be improved, but increasing the salary cap won't change it!
Strike 1 - to the roosters propaganda machine!
2) Rugby League Players are under-paid
"I know at the Roosters our coach, Ricky Stuart, doesn't want his players to be working jobs so they can be full-time footballers, but then some of these guys have to live off salaries that are less than what the staff earn"
My God - what is the world coming to?!?!....Lets face it, the only guys who might be underpaid are the 1st Div squad (ummm - these guys aren't even under the salary cap!!!) and maybe the odd guy in the top 25....However, the issue of the lesser players being paid fairly was already discussed with the player's union - rules were put in place for minimum salary and the union was satisfied with the outcome of that particular point.
If there are some players being paid less than the ball-boys at the Sydney Roosters (ok - thats a bit of an exageration, but you get my point), then maybe the club should take a good hard look at how it got itself into that situation!!!....When you signed Chris Walker for chickens feed cos he'd already got a chunk of money from Souths, did you really think he'd take the same money in the future??? Now you are crying poor cos you can't pay him the tens-of-thousands more that he wants - go and get stuffed you moronic idiots!!!
Strike 2 - roosters!
3 - No Club Must Spend All Their Cap Money
"As for ruining the game, that's just rubbish. No-one is making every club spend every cent of their salary cap. That is not in the rules."
Well of course they don't need to spend all their money - AND DIDN'T SOUTHS DO A FANTASTIC JOB WHEN THEY ADOPTED THAT PHILOSOPHY!!! ....Lets face facts, if you want ANY success in the NRL you MUST spend the money on some decent players!!!.....and success = crowds/fans = corporate sponsorship = more money for the club = club gets better.
If the Roosters seriously believe that the NRL will remain strong with many of the clubs spending well below the cap because they can't afford it they are deadset idiots!!!
Strike 3 - roosters - goodbye!!!
But Finally a Little Truth
"We want an increase so that our players are fairly rewarded and we want to be able to be able to retain our players."
Fairly rewarded??? - Craig Wing being paid how many hundred-thousand isn't enough eh?.....maybe some lesser players are doing it tough - maybe Craig (and others) shouldn't be getting overpaid in the first place, then there'd be more for the lesser underpaid players....maybe there are other bigger issues here - maybe rules need to be imposed for maximum salaries???....oh no, don't do that - I won't be able to afford my mansion on the beach!
The only bit of logic in the whole story was at the end there...."...we want to be able to be able to retain our players.".....THAT IS ALL that this stunt he Roosters have put on is about - 'Not losing their players'....before you Roosters fans tell me they have lost players - lets face it, they have lost reserve players to other clubs - not their stars - many other clubs have lost more important players (regular top 13 players) to the cap.
BUT now that the Roosters are in cap trouble for 2005, they want to change the rules....never needed a court case before when other teams were losing players to the cap.....of course not - all these so-called 'issues' were never issues then - only now - when the Roosters will lose players.
Rugby League does have issues to deal with: development at junior levels, keeping infront of other codes, making sure lesser players are taken care of financially.......BUT NONE OF THAT WILL BE SOLVED BY INCREASING THE SALARY CAP.....the Roosters are being selfish and just raising a big ugly issue for no reason other than retaining their current players - the sooner they admit that, the sooner this whole mess will be laid to rest.
In this it appears the Goose's Lawyer, oops I mean Roosters' Lawyer and vice-chairman, seems to be trying to make everyone believe that the idiots are doing this for the good of everyone....a few quotes:
1) Other Codes will Poach Rugby League Talent
"League as a code faces a huge threat from other sports if players are not going to be suitably paid"
The only threat of taking existing players is Rugby Union - no player will leave to play any other code. And Rugby Union has come under ALOT of pressure itself for doing what it did with Rogers, Sailor and Tiquiri. I don't see Union taking any significant players or number of players from League in the future - these 3 were a World Cup oriented stunt.
As for kids going to other sports - does a 14yr old really think, 'I can make $25,000 extra a year playing AFL than I could playing League'...I don't think so - they play the sport they love to play - if thats league, then the possibility of substantial salary is enough....AND lets face it, despite troubled times, league still has the best junior infrastructure of any code in the rugby league states - sure it needs to be improved, but increasing the salary cap won't change it!
Strike 1 - to the roosters propaganda machine!
2) Rugby League Players are under-paid
"I know at the Roosters our coach, Ricky Stuart, doesn't want his players to be working jobs so they can be full-time footballers, but then some of these guys have to live off salaries that are less than what the staff earn"
My God - what is the world coming to?!?!....Lets face it, the only guys who might be underpaid are the 1st Div squad (ummm - these guys aren't even under the salary cap!!!) and maybe the odd guy in the top 25....However, the issue of the lesser players being paid fairly was already discussed with the player's union - rules were put in place for minimum salary and the union was satisfied with the outcome of that particular point.
If there are some players being paid less than the ball-boys at the Sydney Roosters (ok - thats a bit of an exageration, but you get my point), then maybe the club should take a good hard look at how it got itself into that situation!!!....When you signed Chris Walker for chickens feed cos he'd already got a chunk of money from Souths, did you really think he'd take the same money in the future??? Now you are crying poor cos you can't pay him the tens-of-thousands more that he wants - go and get stuffed you moronic idiots!!!
Strike 2 - roosters!
3 - No Club Must Spend All Their Cap Money
"As for ruining the game, that's just rubbish. No-one is making every club spend every cent of their salary cap. That is not in the rules."
Well of course they don't need to spend all their money - AND DIDN'T SOUTHS DO A FANTASTIC JOB WHEN THEY ADOPTED THAT PHILOSOPHY!!! ....Lets face facts, if you want ANY success in the NRL you MUST spend the money on some decent players!!!.....and success = crowds/fans = corporate sponsorship = more money for the club = club gets better.
If the Roosters seriously believe that the NRL will remain strong with many of the clubs spending well below the cap because they can't afford it they are deadset idiots!!!
Strike 3 - roosters - goodbye!!!
But Finally a Little Truth
"We want an increase so that our players are fairly rewarded and we want to be able to be able to retain our players."
Fairly rewarded??? - Craig Wing being paid how many hundred-thousand isn't enough eh?.....maybe some lesser players are doing it tough - maybe Craig (and others) shouldn't be getting overpaid in the first place, then there'd be more for the lesser underpaid players....maybe there are other bigger issues here - maybe rules need to be imposed for maximum salaries???....oh no, don't do that - I won't be able to afford my mansion on the beach!
The only bit of logic in the whole story was at the end there...."...we want to be able to be able to retain our players.".....THAT IS ALL that this stunt he Roosters have put on is about - 'Not losing their players'....before you Roosters fans tell me they have lost players - lets face it, they have lost reserve players to other clubs - not their stars - many other clubs have lost more important players (regular top 13 players) to the cap.
BUT now that the Roosters are in cap trouble for 2005, they want to change the rules....never needed a court case before when other teams were losing players to the cap.....of course not - all these so-called 'issues' were never issues then - only now - when the Roosters will lose players.
Rugby League does have issues to deal with: development at junior levels, keeping infront of other codes, making sure lesser players are taken care of financially.......BUT NONE OF THAT WILL BE SOLVED BY INCREASING THE SALARY CAP.....the Roosters are being selfish and just raising a big ugly issue for no reason other than retaining their current players - the sooner they admit that, the sooner this whole mess will be laid to rest.
