Carmont to french rugby union

[ancientnloyal]

To be fair, at 30 and a late comer to rugby league he needs/ would like all the money he can while he can, i say 'go for it'. He hasn't exactly had the best employment history so if he can get more, get it while he has 2/3 seasons left.

Now, Chris Ashton.... :conf:

[DaveO]

It is amazing how many others are so willing to believe that george carmont is somehow paid the national minimum wage. I can guarantee that he will be earning far more than at least 98% of the users on this site.

The general consensus is that he is on a low wage. I am basing my arguments on that. We don't know for sure if he is on a low wage or not but the discussion is based on the assumption he is.

If he isn't then I would have a different opinion so no, I am not being hypocritical as you say below.

I am also not sure how you can guarantee he earns more than 98% of earners on this site as you don't know what he earns or what people on here earn so that is clearly no basis for an argument.

Is that "poorly paid" as claimed by some?

I what poorly paid? You don't know what he earns relative to anyone on this site so this is irrelevant.

It's even more irrelevant because we are not pro sportsmen and he is! They normally tend a bit more then your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!

In this economic climate, I think some people need to get perspective on wages at the club, rather than upping players money just because someone else at the club is earning more than they are.

What has the economic climate got to do with it? Should all the team take a pay cut because of the banking crisis?

Far more relevant are questions like do you think he should be on less than Mathers for instance?

DaveO is being hypocritical in his assessment that he deserves an increase because "he is not on a good wage". What do you class a good wage for a rugby player?

Well that is not my argument at all. He deserves to be on a wage consummate with his value to the club as a player. They all do (which means some will be overpaid!).

Therefore IF he is being paid a low wage compared to several other players who are not as good as him, that is simply not fair. He himself may well see it that way and if he does, I could not blame him for being dissatisfied with his wages.

And more importantly how do you know he is not receiving it?

And how do you know he is? The discussion is assuming he is not. I think you will find plenty use of the word IF in relation to the discussion.

The consensus is he is on a low wage but you some pretty convinced he earns more than most on this site and that is completely unfounded speculation on your part.

Especially as you yourself are leading the charge for more signings to strengthen the side for next season - how can that work within the constraints of the salary cap?

What do you mean by that? It is pretty obvious the club has to mange the salary cap budget. I am saying if he is on a low wage no one should be surprised if he wants away. I am also saying the club can't complain if this happens if they were hoping to get away with paying him a low wage.

As for Shawxshark, I do have a grip on reality thank you. I fully understand that if someone was to offer me more money to do the same job i do, I too would leave my current position - anyone would (unless money was not to the forefront of anyones working life). That his how employment works, but not every employer increases their wages just to keep staff from "moving on", they have to keep within a budget, in order to prevent jealousy (and the repercussive demand that that would cause) and also to prevent spiraling wages.

That is ironic. It could well be the fact that he is jealous of what is being paid to others leads to him leaving.

The notion paying Carmont a wage befitting his value to the club is going to cause problems is nonsensical. It's paying poor players high wages that is the problem. If Carmont got an improved contract in recognition of his obvious ability on what basis would any player also demand an increase when none of them can argue they have been as good as him?

FWIW I think he is easily worth £60K a year. He is an established and quality player. If the club pays him (for the sake or argument) £20K or £30k then I think he has every right to be fed up about it.

I also can not fathom why anyone would not want to see Carmont properly rewarded for his efforts in line with what his peers get in the sport.

What he earns relative to you or me is just not relevant.

Dave

[richpark]

This is my first post on the rumour mill so please bear with me. i think that discussion Carmonts wages, and him going off to live in the land of garlic and onions, is what it is just paper talk. how many times have the papers said things and nothing has come from it. Carmont has had a cracking 1st season in the super league, he came over put the shirt on and got on with it quietly (or not so much as the case maybe). he works hard on the field and should recieve that in his wage packet. if he wasn't happy with deal then he should not of signed it, but i'm sure IL was aware of what we had in Carmont and kept him off the bread line. however if it turns out it is true then it is pointless having a player that dosn't want to be here.

[the_cow]

let's all give this argument over salary value a bit of economic perspective...

the average median (not mean) salary in the uk in 2007 was £489 a week (office of national stats). that is for the whole uk and i guess encompasses all sectors and all levels of work from unskilled labourers to executive directors. so if you times that up 52 x £489 = £25,428 pa.

However, we all know sl has a false economy in that we have a cap that we have to manage our squad within.

we have a cap of £1.65m unless it has changed again. If you deduct out say £125k for junior team expenses (25 nr x £5k each) and then another £187.5k for reserves/fringe squad players (15 x £12.5k) then that leaves £1,337,000ish for say 20 first team players. so that works out at £66,850 as an average for the first team squad (*this is where someone points out that all reserve team expenses don't count or something to that extent*)

so overall by using my educated guess work figures above then if an average player earns £66k they are earning about x2.5 the national salary and could potentially have little in the way of skills or intelligence that the rest of the economy requires (other than labouring on a construction site). i could happily live on that...

nb: i have based all figs on rough estimates so please give positive criticism not rip my figures to shreads.

[the-Bowtun-Warrior]

It is amazing how many others are so willing to believe that george carmont is somehow paid the national minimum wage. I can guarantee that he will be earning far more than at least 98% of the users on this site.

The general consensus is that he is on a low wage. I am basing my arguments on that. We don't know for sure if he is on a low wage or not but the discussion is based on the assumption he is.

If he isn't then I would have a different opinion so no, I am not being hypocritical as you say below.

I am also not sure how you can guarantee he earns more than 98% of earners on this site as you don't know what he earns or what people on here earn so that is clearly no basis for an argument.

Is that "poorly paid" as claimed by some?

I what poorly paid? You don't know what he earns relative to anyone on this site so this is irrelevant.

It's even more irrelevant because we are not pro sportsmen and he is! They normally tend a bit more then your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!

In this economic climate, I think some people need to get perspective on wages at the club, rather than upping players money just because someone else at the club is earning more than they are.

What has the economic climate got to do with it? Should all the team take a pay cut because of the banking crisis?

Far more relevant are questions like do you think he should be on less than Mathers for instance?

DaveO is being hypocritical in his assessment that he deserves an increase because "he is not on a good wage". What do you class a good wage for a rugby player?

Well that is not my argument at all. He deserves to be on a wage consummate with his value to the club as a player. They all do (which means some will be overpaid!).

Therefore IF he is being paid a low wage compared to several other players who are not as good as him, that is simply not fair. He himself may well see it that way and if he does, I could not blame him for being dissatisfied with his wages.

And more importantly how do you know he is not receiving it?

And how do you know he is? The discussion is assuming he is not. I think you will find plenty use of the word IF in relation to the discussion.

The consensus is he is on a low wage but you some pretty convinced he earns more than most on this site and that is completely unfounded speculation on your part.

Especially as you yourself are leading the charge for more signings to strengthen the side for next season - how can that work within the constraints of the salary cap?

What do you mean by that? It is pretty obvious the club has to mange the salary cap budget. I am saying if he is on a low wage no one should be surprised if he wants away. I am also saying the club can't complain if this happens if they were hoping to get away with paying him a low wage.

As for Shawxshark, I do have a grip on reality thank you. I fully understand that if someone was to offer me more money to do the same job i do, I too would leave my current position - anyone would (unless money was not to the forefront of anyones working life). That his how employment works, but not every employer increases their wages just to keep staff from "moving on", they have to keep within a budget, in order to prevent jealousy (and the repercussive demand that that would cause) and also to prevent spiraling wages.

That is ironic. It could well be the fact that he is jealous of what is being paid to others leads to him leaving.

The notion paying Carmont a wage befitting his value to the club is going to cause problems is nonsensical. It's paying poor players high wages that is the problem. If Carmont got an improved contract in recognition of his obvious ability on what basis would any player also demand an increase when none of them can argue they have been as good as him?

FWIW I think he is easily worth £60K a year. He is an established and quality player. If the club pays him (for the sake or argument) £20K or £30k then I think he has every right to be fed up about it.

I also can not fathom why anyone would not want to see Carmont properly rewarded for his efforts in line with what his peers get in the sport.

What he earns relative to you or me is just not relevant.

Dave

you must have some bloody spare time on your hands! :eh: :doz: :conf:

[lucky 13]

It is amazing how many others are so willing to believe that george carmont is somehow paid the national minimum wage. I can guarantee that he will be earning far more than at least 98% of the users on this site.

The general consensus is that he is on a low wage. I am basing my arguments on that. We don't know for sure if he is on a low wage or not but the discussion is based on the assumption he is.

If he isn't then I would have a different opinion so no, I am not being hypocritical as you say below.

I am also not sure how you can guarantee he earns more than 98% of earners on this site as you don't know what he earns or what people on here earn so that is clearly no basis for an argument.

Is that "poorly paid" as claimed by some?

I what poorly paid? You don't know what he earns relative to anyone on this site so this is irrelevant.

It's even more irrelevant because we are not pro sportsmen and he is! They normally tend a bit more then your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!

In this economic climate, I think some people need to get perspective on wages at the club, rather than upping players money just because someone else at the club is earning more than they are.

What has the economic climate got to do with it? Should all the team take a pay cut because of the banking crisis?

Far more relevant are questions like do you think he should be on less than Mathers for instance?

DaveO is being hypocritical in his assessment that he deserves an increase because "he is not on a good wage". What do you class a good wage for a rugby player?

Well that is not my argument at all. He deserves to be on a wage consummate with his value to the club as a player. They all do (which means some will be overpaid!).

Therefore IF he is being paid a low wage compared to several other players who are not as good as him, that is simply not fair. He himself may well see it that way and if he does, I could not blame him for being dissatisfied with his wages.

And more importantly how do you know he is not receiving it?

And how do you know he is? The discussion is assuming he is not. I think you will find plenty use of the word IF in relation to the discussion.

The consensus is he is on a low wage but you some pretty convinced he earns more than most on this site and that is completely unfounded speculation on your part.

Especially as you yourself are leading the charge for more signings to strengthen the side for next season - how can that work within the constraints of the salary cap?

What do you mean by that? It is pretty obvious the club has to mange the salary cap budget. I am saying if he is on a low wage no one should be surprised if he wants away. I am also saying the club can't complain if this happens if they were hoping to get away with paying him a low wage.

As for Shawxshark, I do have a grip on reality thank you. I fully understand that if someone was to offer me more money to do the same job i do, I too would leave my current position - anyone would (unless money was not to the forefront of anyones working life). That his how employment works, but not every employer increases their wages just to keep staff from "moving on", they have to keep within a budget, in order to prevent jealousy (and the repercussive demand that that would cause) and also to prevent spiraling wages.

That is ironic. It could well be the fact that he is jealous of what is being paid to others leads to him leaving.

The notion paying Carmont a wage befitting his value to the club is going to cause problems is nonsensical. It's paying poor players high wages that is the problem. If Carmont got an improved contract in recognition of his obvious ability on what basis would any player also demand an increase when none of them can argue they have been as good as him?

FWIW I think he is easily worth £60K a year. He is an established and quality player. If the club pays him (for the sake or argument) £20K or £30k then I think he has every right to be fed up about it.

I also can not fathom why anyone would not want to see Carmont properly rewarded for his efforts in line with what his peers get in the sport.

What he earns relative to you or me is just not relevant.

Dave

you must have some bloody spare time on your hands! :eh: :doz: :conf:

[wall_of_voodoo]

The general consensus is that he is on a low wage. I am basing my arguments on that. We don't know for sure if he is on a low wage or not but the discussion is based on the assumption he is.

If he isn't then I would have a different opinion so no, I am not being hypocritical as you say below.

I am also not sure how you can guarantee he earns more than 98% of earners on this site as you don't know what he earns or what people on here earn so that is clearly no basis for an argument.
I what poorly paid? You don't know what he earns relative to anyone on this site so this is irrelevant.

It's even more irrelevant because we are not pro sportsmen and he is! They normally tend a bit more then your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!
What has the economic climate got to do with it? Should all the team take a pay cut because of the banking crisis?

Far more relevant are questions like do you think he should be on less than Mathers for instance?
Well that is not my argument at all. He deserves to be on a wage consummate with his value to the club as a player. They all do (which means some will be overpaid!).

Therefore IF he is being paid a low wage compared to several other players who are not as good as him, that is simply not fair. He himself may well see it that way and if he does, I could not blame him for being dissatisfied with his wages.
And how do you know he is? The discussion is assuming he is not. I think you will find plenty use of the word IF in relation to the discussion.

The consensus is he is on a low wage but you some pretty convinced he earns more than most on this site and that is completely unfounded speculation on your part.
What do you mean by that? It is pretty obvious the club has to mange the salary cap budget. I am saying if he is on a low wage no one should be surprised if he wants away. I am also saying the club can't complain if this happens if they were hoping to get away with paying him a low wage.
That is ironic. It could well be the fact that he is jealous of what is being paid to others leads to him leaving.

The notion paying Carmont a wage befitting his value to the club is going to cause problems is nonsensical. It's paying poor players high wages that is the problem. If Carmont got an improved contract in recognition of his obvious ability on what basis would any player also demand an increase when none of them can argue they have been as good as him?

FWIW I think he is easily worth £60K a year. He is an established and quality player. If the club pays him (for the sake or argument) £20K or £30k then I think he has every right to be fed up about it.

I also can not fathom why anyone would not want to see Carmont properly rewarded for his efforts in line with what his peers get in the sport.

What he earns relative to you or me is just not relevant.

Dave

you must have some bloody spare time on your hands! :eh: :doz: :conf:

I don't, otherwise I would be bothered to reply.

[crookmeister]

get vaealiki back in

[josie andrews]

let's all give this argument over salary value a bit of economic perspective...

the average median (not mean) salary in the uk in 2007 was £489 a week (office of national stats). that is for the whole uk and i guess encompasses all sectors and all levels of work from unskilled labourers to executive directors. so if you times that up 52 x £489 = £25,428 pa.

Can you tell me where one of these jobs are based please?

[the_cow]

let's all give this argument over salary value a bit of economic perspective...

the average median (not mean) salary in the uk in 2007 was £489 a week (office of national stats). that is for the whole uk and i guess encompasses all sectors and all levels of work from unskilled labourers to executive directors. so if you times that up 52 x £489 = £25,428 pa.

Can you tell me where one of these jobs are based please?

I reckon that this figure is a fair reflection upon skilled workers in most industries and you consider how much the top earners in the country earn which must distort the figures. Also, you have to consider the north/south difference in pay levels and cost of living. However, when you think about the number of unskilled workers earning about £12/£13k it makes the figures hard to believe. It's more than likely that the figures are being spun by the gov't as per usual.

Going back to my original post- you get the feeling that with some r.l. players (eg. hock), there isnt much going on upstairs, and so i think they are doing very well for themselves to be on over £50k as they would be lucky to earn that in 3 yrs if they were in the normal world.