Khoder Nasser + Danny Weidler = ?????????

I read this in the Sun Herald this morning.

A player strike?  You've got to be kidding.  It doesn't surprise me coming from this guy though.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/fight-for-your-rights-nasser-tells-players-to-strike-for-a-better-deal-20100508-ukuu.html

Fight for your rights: Nasser tells players to strike for a better deal

THE NRL's loss of Sonny Bill Williams has been strongly lamented this week by Darren Lockyer, Benji Marshall, Jarryd Hayne and Cameron Smith, and now Sonny's manager, Khoder Nasser, has some stunning advice for players of the game: strike until you get the conditions you want. There's been an uprising among the players

over pay and miniscule salary cap increases as defections from the game
have become a real concern. Willie Mason suggested a
revolt and Hayne came close to agreeing. ''I don't know what it is, but
something is happening in the playing group - there is a strong feeling
there,'' he said. Now Nasser has said what the players haven't. ''It's
time for the boys to stand up and boycott the games until they get what
they want,'' he said. ''Sonny was called 'Money Bill' by some
ill-informed critics - but what he is is a professional sportsman
getting what he is worth on the open market. He's not being dictated to
by officials who sit in their corporate boxes and eat their
chocolate-fed beef. These executives are not being dictated to by a
communist cap. These officials setting the rules don't have a a cap on
them, the coaches don't have a cap. Look at Wayne Bennett
- he gets paid what he wants and then we find out he is getting even
more cash from a group of businessmen who back the Broncos - the
Thoroughbreds. So Mr Super Coach is earning more than his players … a
team we are told is under the cap. It's time [the players] bit the
bullet and did what the boys in baseball did and went out on strike and
got what they deserved. You go speak to 45-year-old ex-players with
creaking joints and mounting medical bills and try and tell me that
they shouldn't have got more money. Anthony Mundine
realised when he was the game's biggest earner that he wasn't getting
what he was worth. Why isn't the game rewarding these blokes? Why don't
they conduct an audit on the NRL and find out where the money is going?
And the players are upset about players leaving the game - I'd be just
as upset about one of my teammates, Israel Folau, not
being selected in the Australian team - they say it's on form. That's a
hard one to swallow but it looks like everyone has.''


You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • stupidity......
    expect no less from nasser...
    would screw over his own mother for a higher percentage of a contract deal
  • Khoder Nasser is a germ, simple as that
    • Have to agree BBG
    • Dont you get sick off logging off and logging back on ?
    • Mate, if there was more money available, don't you think the players would be more highly paid?? There's about a $700k gap between the NRL grant and the salary cap and some clubs - e.g. Cronulla and Canberra - don't spend their entire cap because they'd run the risk of going broke.

      If a $700k shortfall is enough to leave some of the less wealthy clubs in a precarious position, how pray tell do you propose that paying players whatever they desire is a prescription for anything other than most clubs going broke??

      I agree that the NRL needs to devise new revenue streams BEFORE the new TV rights deal is negotiated, but player revolts are not the solution! How can the players legitimately expect to get more money into the game by not playing it??

      People like you who seem to think fiscal responsibility is akin to 'whinging' or 'envy' are quite simply not engaging their brain!
  • I keep laughing when I hear them mention how huge the loss of Craig Gower was. Craig who?
  • I am in no way supporting a player revolt, but there is one very good argument raised in this article.

    The salary cap (indirectly) limits how much a footballer can earn playing in the NRL, some would argue that it's a 'restriction of trade'. Meanwhile, the businessmen and coaching staff that run the game are entitled to earn an infinite amount of money. In effect, it is one system for the workers but another for the benefactors... much like Chinese Communism.

    Personally, i'm all for the salary cap... however, corporate gain should not come at the expense of the players' salary. If the NRL truely wants to look at increasing the cap, they can start by decreasing the amount of revenue flowing out of the game and start giving it back to the players. Perhaps the businessmen who run the game should have their salaries capped for a change... god forbid, they take a pay cut for once in their life.

    But, we all know it won't happen so i guess it's tough sh*t for the players.
    • Nice in theory, but apart from Gallop, no coach or administrator's salary comes close to those of the top players in the game.

      If a club CEO invests his money wisely and ends up increasing his pay through other business ventures - as opposed to a good proportion of players who piss theirs up the wall or feed it through the pokies - then good on them. It is interesting to think that the only former player who comes to mind who has used his playing income to set up a million dollar business venture post football is Jarrod McCracken. Why can't more of them do it??
  • I was listening to an interview with David Gallop the other week and when asked by Greg Alexander proportionately how much of the NRL's total revenue is returned to the players, he couldn't give an aggregate figure, however, he justified the NRL's position by quoting that the NRL return about 24% while the AFL return only 19%.

    Two problems here. Where is the other 75% going?? I know the bush needs funding as do junior leagues and their coaches, referees and administrators but it seems that seems that considering the top flight players in the NRL are what attracts crowds into grounds, the sale of merchandise and to encourage young kids into our game, I would have thought that 24% is a tad low.

    Second issue is that even if the AFL return proportionately 5% less than the NRL, they earn twice as much annually so the players are getting considerably more in 'real' terms than our boys.

    I'm no accountant and wouldn't want to speculate on whether the NRL's breakdown of revenue is being spent wisely or otherwise, but if there's no room to move in the distribution of NRL revenue (as evidenced by this token gesture of $50k extra to the cap and $50k extra to the grant effective immediately), then I reiterate once again that the NRL should look long and hard and removing (or at least increasing) the limit for third party sponsorships brokered by the clubs!

    Despite the potential inequities it could create, it's the only way forward in my opinion!
  • Didn't Baseball strike in the States 1994? Was that situation the same and what was the outcome?
This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Desieels replied to Eels2025's discussion Jason Ryles... Report so far
"all I see is excuses "
46 minutes ago
fishbulb replied to Bob mertens's discussion Shane Flanagan given a month to turn the dragons around.
"Care not"
2 hours ago
Bob mertens replied to Bob mertens's discussion Shane Flanagan given a month to turn the dragons around.
"Fuck my grammar is horrendous wish I was more like poppa. "
2 hours ago
Bob mertens replied to Bob mertens's discussion Shane Flanagan given a month to turn the dragons around.
"It's more the father and son combo. The heat is coming! "
2 hours ago
More…