Carmont to french rugby union

[the-Bowtun-Warrior]

This is where interpretation comes in. I heard basically the same thing at the time, but that Withers was brought in becuase the club already had a sniff that Chris Ashton was getting uppity and itchy feet.

he had itchy feet long before Jo public was made aware of it....

Rubbish Chris Ashton left because he was offered a crap contract of less than 12k and told they weren't sure if he was good enough, this after winning supporters player of the year. Northampton offered over 100k per year, a house and car. In my opinion he couldnt turn it down and it was nothing to do with rubbish like "itchy feet".

My sincere apologies that u didn't get my point.

His itchy feet were down to northampton. They offered silly money 1st.

[wall_of_voodoo]

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.

Today, I can be bothered

I can be fairly sure that george carmont, as a pro-sportsman earns more than 98% of the users of the site. Of the vast majority of the general population in and around the wigan borough, how many are on wages of £30k upwards, then add that to them being wigan warriors fans and then posters on here, I think you can "do the math" Dave it is not speculation, just a fact that the vast majority of the working public, in and around this area receive no-where near the financial remunerations that the likes of he (and others) are paid.

Is that "poorly paid" as claimed by some?

Is 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!

Neither do you know what he earns dave - yet you yourself will not explain why he signed the extension to his contract if he was unhappy with the money on offer. It is your arguement that is "irrelevant"

Furthermore, you say "They normally tend a bit more than your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!" Indicates that you think (and after his apparent disgruntled stance just weeks after re-signing the contract) he might be short of brain power. Just a thought on your perception of him.

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?

What has the economic climate got to do with it? Are you a retired millionaire? All businesses (including sporting clubs for that matter) ARE concerned over this current financial turmoil, some had money in the icelandic banks (probably gone forever - hope not). Liverpool themselves have postponed the building of the new ground due to the inability to get credit and the exorbitant fee to pay now. The club has still not announced a new sponsor - not linked? I think so, you are being rather small-minded not to think so also. This is affecting all the sporting clubs (not even talking businesses or other sports at the moment) you are delusional to think that the current economic climate will in no way affect the wigan warriors and its chairman/owner.

BTW, what has the clubs offer in regards a contract to mathers, got to do with how carmont feels he is worth? He was one of the clubs best players last season, pro-rata, are you now saying he should be one of the clubs biggest earners now because of it?

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.

Answered all your posts here in my paragraphs above. As such they are "irrelevant" as you like to contradict people.

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.

The only speculation is coming from you! With your contradictory stance and seige mentality that you are "right". I stated in one of my earlier posts that "This is if the papers are correct in this story of course" So I did originally place the "if" word in the context of the posts, of which you should read before charging into them like a bull in a teashop! What is fair as what wigan pay there players? And more to the point, can it ever be fair? So why should the club be "fair" to carmont now? Especially weeks (as I have said) after signing the extension.

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.

So what is the point of your argument then? Clubs offer better terms and players move, happened in the past, will happen in the future. Just to pay players what they want in order to keep them, is what got wigan over the salary cap in the first place. Were you happy about that?

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.

Form is a strange "animal". Carmont did arrive at wigan as an unknown. Not a big name aussie or kiwi, with very few nrl games under his belt. As such, he accordingly got paid a lesser sum, then another would have been. Yet carmont was happy enough to move around the world to play for the wages on offer. Not the thing someone would do if the recompense was not to their advantage is it? Especially if he brought family over too. Form as I indicated is relative, carmont could get paid what you would appear to love him receive, yet perform no better than mathers next season, would you be happy then? Players are offered the market value, of which he himself must have agreed upon, when signing the extension, the market value of him only increased with the apparent sniffing around of the french ru. BTW, didn't mathers deal see him paid very little this season as a "motivational" factor into him proving form and fitness to see his extension exercised and as such recompensed better for it in the latter years of his deal?

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

Dave

Yet you are saying that the club should "freeze" it entry admission and season tickets. Perhaps you (or your wife) stand outside tescos, asda's, morrisons or sainsburys etc refusing to pay their price increases also?? It is an inflationary world unfortunately, just because the club has not had one of the best season on record, does not mean the club has debts to pay or bills to meet, like everyone. So this was relevant to what you or I can afford, as well as other, in order to keep the likes of carmont "happy".

[markill]

there looks a lot to read on this thread...until you realise most of it is two people repeating what they and others have said already.

Cow added a bit of perspective and others have tried but you have all missed the particular economics of sport and the market conditions of RL and RU, which broadly aren't related to the wider economy and have nothing to do with whether or not carmont has a contract or is happy at wigan. i know this is going no where specific but stop the repeating agruements.

the rumour is carmont has been approached by french ru scout. the question is: is he going anywhere anytime soon? I personally expect him to play, and play committed good rugby, for wigan next year

[DaveO]

I can be fairly sure that george carmont, as a pro-sportsman earns more than 98% of the users of the site. Of the vast majority of the general population in and around the wigan borough, how many are on wages of £30k upwards, then add that to them being wigan warriors fans and then posters on here, I think you can "do the math" Dave it is not speculation, just a fact that the vast majority of the working public, in and around this area receive no-where near the financial remunerations that the likes of he (and others) are paid.

You don't know what he earns so you don't have an argument. Period.

The speculation is he is on a very low contract. No one before you has ever considered he may already be a well paid player.

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!

Neither do you know what he earns dave - yet you yourself will not explain why he signed the extension to his contract if he was unhappy with the money on offer. It is your arguement that is "irrelevant"

I thought he simply took up the option of a second year and has not signed an extension.

However it really doesn't matter whether he signed an extension or took up the option. Ever heard of the saying "act in haste, repent at leisure"?

Just because he signed an extension/took the option doesn't mean he is well paid.

Furthermore, you say "They normally tend a bit more than your average person. There is a possibility he might not be!" Indicates that you think (and after his apparent disgruntled stance just weeks after re-signing the contract) he might be short of brain power. Just a thought on your perception of him.

It indicates nothing of the sort. I meant what was written, nothing more. Pro sportsmen tend to earn high wage but he may not be. You can not imply I think he is thick based on that!

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?

What has the economic climate got to do with it? Are you a retired millionaire? All businesses (including sporting clubs for that matter) ARE concerned over this current financial turmoil, some had money in the icelandic banks (probably gone forever - hope not). Liverpool themselves have postponed the building of the new ground due to the inability to get credit and the exorbitant fee to pay now. The club has still not announced a new sponsor - not linked? I think so, you are being rather small-minded not to think so also. This is affecting all the sporting clubs (not even talking businesses or other sports at the moment) you are delusional to think that the current economic climate will in no way affect the wigan warriors and its chairman/owner.

You are the one being delusional if you think the club will not pay to the cap limit in wages next year as it did this. The wage bill this year will have been £1.6m the wage bill next year will be as well. And if the cap goes up by inflation to say £1.65m you can bet your house on it Wigan will spend to the cap limit. The debate is therefore about what share of that Carmont should get relative to the other payers.

You have also lost sight of the point that some players who are not as good as Carmont WILL be on more than him regardless of any Icelandic bank going bust and that is why he may be disgruntled. The club won't cease paying these other players their high wages next season.

BTW, what has the clubs offer in regards a contract to mathers, got to do with how carmont feels he is worth? He was one of the clubs best players last season, pro-rata, are you now saying he should be one of the clubs biggest earners now because of it?

I am saying if he knows he is on a lower wage than some players who he knows are not as good as him he may well be disgruntled. I also said at the and of my previous post what I thought a fair wage for him would be. So no I am not saying he should be one of the clubs biggest earners and that should have been obvious given what I had previously written.

The only speculation is coming from you!

Come off it. You speculate on what he earns relative to people on this site. You speculate what effect Icelandic banks will have on his wages and you speculate that because he signed a contract extension he must be on a good wage!!

You have no idea of the true facts regarding any of the above so I'd say that counts as speculation. Unless of course you believe because your arguments seem logical to you they must be fact?

With your contradictory stance and seige mentality that you are "right". I stated in one of my earlier posts that "This is if the papers are correct in this story of course" So I did originally place the "if" word in the context of the posts, of which you should read before charging into them like a bull in a teashop! What is fair as what wigan pay there players? And more to the point, can it ever be fair? So why should the club be "fair" to carmont now? Especially weeks (as I have said) after signing the extension.

They should simply not expect him not to want away if they pay him a low wage when he is offered a better one.

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.

So what is the point of your argument then? Clubs offer better terms and players move, happened in the past, will happen in the future. Just to pay players what they want in order to keep them, is what got wigan over the salary cap in the first place. Were you happy about that?

You really ought to give up on reading stuff into things that are not there. Again my point was very simple. If he is on a low wage the club should not be surprised if he wants away. How many more times does it need to be said? It does not mean they should offer him mega-bucks nor pay players what they want. How stupid would that be?

His form for us was excellent last season and so if this has drawn him to the attention of the French RU it will, if he is on a low wage, be that much easier to tempt him away and will also be much easier for him to be dissatisfied with his wage relative to others in the squad.

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.

Form is a strange "animal". Carmont did arrive at wigan as an unknown. Not a big name aussie or kiwi, with very few nrl games under his belt. As such, he accordingly got paid a lesser sum, then another would have been. Yet carmont was happy enough to move around the world to play for the wages on offer. Not the thing someone would do if the recompense was not to their advantage is it? Especially if he brought family over too. Form as I indicated is relative, carmont could get paid what you would appear to love him receive, yet perform no better than mathers next season, would you be happy then? Players are offered the market value, of which he himself must have agreed upon, when signing the extension, the market value of him only increased with the apparent sniffing around of the french ru. BTW, didn't mathers deal see him paid very little this season as a "motivational" factor into him proving form and fitness to see his extension exercised and as such recompensed better for it in the latter years of his deal?

Mathers deal was I believe one where this season he was on a low wage and the club had the option to terminate the contract had he not recovered from his injury but if he was retained he would get a better wage automatically.

That said I am not sure how anything you say above answers the points I made.

I have never seen it written before that the fact the form of a player may drop so we'd better not pay him a decent wage, which is what you are suggesting above. We may as well give the entire team a pay cut based on that logic given most of them had form worse than Carmonts this season. What his market worth was when he signed has changed for two reasons. One because he has proven one of the best centres in the competition and two because it appears French RU are sniffing which is no doubt because of one.

Yet you are saying that the club should "freeze" it entry admission and season tickets. Perhaps you (or your wife) stand outside tescos, asda's, morrisons or sainsburys etc refusing to pay their price increases also?? It is an inflationary world unfortunately, just because the club has not had one of the best season on record, does not mean the club has debts to pay or bills to meet, like everyone. So this was relevant to what you or I can afford, as well as other, in order to keep the likes of carmont "happy".

Huddersfield have CUT season tick prices to £80. They have done it to try and attract some new supporters. They have also outbid us for Carney offering him higher wages. So yes I think its possible for the club to freeze its prices and pay its players. Huddersfield prove it.

As I said before Wigan will pay to the cap limit whatever that is. The debate is therefore what proportion of the cap Carmont is getting or should get relative to other players. All you economic theories about his wages being affected buy the credit crunch are therefore I am afraid irrelevant.

Dave

[wall_of_voodoo]

All your post reply is pure rubbish DaveO. Not withstanding a possible acceptance you could play devil's advocate as a moderator, you take the stance of being purely contradictory for the sake of it! Where is any sense in that? I could easily regurgitate and contradict all your trite and inane waffle (for that is what it is), but what is the point? You would simply reply with the asinine and crass replies of which you appear to favour of "prove it" or "I know better than you do" in all your replies!

You yourself can provide no facts nor details on any of your own unbalanced and contradictory/biased opinion on any matters, yet somehow you feel that you are more worthy in your replies.

If you were anything to do with the club (in any capacity) then we are genuinely f****ed. But I get the impression you are not, you live in your own little world were nothing affects one another, nothing interacts with anything else and you are safe in your own little world that as long as DaveO has his drink of beer to make things better, then all things perspectively will be better on the warriors front. You had better start drinking the harder stuff Dave, for the economic climate will start to affect you more than you might think!

ps you still will not answer my question, just guessing that he is stupid or in retrospect regrets it is pathetic as your criticism of the deal done with mathers before he ever played for wigan (and the subsequent criticism the deal drew)

I leave others to draw their own conclusions on whether the current state of the economy might affect the club (amongst others), and the rights and wrongs of players reneging on contract deals just weeks after signing them.

[DaveO]

All your post reply is pure rubbish DaveO.

No its not. For example me saying the club will spend to the salary cap limit is quite true. Do you disagree?

Now you going on about Icelandic banks going bust affecting what the club might pay Carmont or its players, now that is rubbish IMO but at least I say why I think so.

Not withstanding a possible acceptance you could play devil's advocate as a moderator, you take the stance of being purely contradictory for the sake of it!

First of all no I don't and my being a moderator has nothing to do with what I post. Nor should it. So don't start off down that track. I happen to believe that if Carmont is being underpaid he may well feel disgruntled and so could be tempted to break his contract.

That is all there is too it. We don't need simple economic lessons to dispute this. It's an opinion.

Where is any sense in that? I could easily regurgitate and contradict all your trite and inane waffle (for that is what it is), but what is the point? You would simply reply with the asinine and crass replies of which you appear to favour of "prove it" or "I know better than you do" in all your replies!

You can't make assumptions yourself (Carmont earns more than 98% etc) and treat them as fact and then criticise other peoples posts for also making assumptions and expect people not to pick you up on it.

You yourself can provide no facts nor details on any of your own unbalanced and contradictory/biased opinion on any matters, yet somehow you feel that you are more worthy in your replies.

I have no notion of worthiness, I see no contradiction in my replies (I assume you refer to may assertion IL could freeze season tickets yet pay Carmont more. Of course he could).

If you were anything to do with the club (in any capacity) then we are genuinely f****ed. But I get the impression you are not, you live in your own little world were nothing affects one another, nothing interacts with anything else and you are safe in your own little world that as long as DaveO has his drink of beer to make things better, then all things perspectively will be better on the warriors front. You had better start drinking the harder stuff Dave, for the economic climate will start to affect you more than you might think!

I was nearly made redundant earlier this year. I work for an American company whose main business in the USA is mortgage processing! So I am well aware of the economic climate but this does not prevent me from realising that Wigan RL works as it does and that it will pay the full amount of cap to its squad.

ps you still will not answer my question, just guessing that he is stupid or in retrospect regrets it is pathetic as your criticism of the deal done with mathers before he ever played for wigan (and the subsequent criticism the deal drew)

What are you on about? I said in my previous post what sort of deal Mather got which means an improved contract in 2009.

I leave others to draw their own conclusions on whether the current state of the economy might affect the club (amongst others), and the rights and wrongs of players reneging on contract deals just weeks after signing them.

You need to be a bit less black and white and see it from his perspective. If he was on a good deal here I'd be disappointed to see him try and leave after signing a new deal. The assumption is he isn't on a good deal.

If he is not, then I don't see what moral justification there is in your argument. He may have signed the deal and so legally it's supposed to be enforceable but we know it isn't from past experience.

So here is a simple question. If Carmont was being paid £20K a year and he signed an extension to his contract for that wage do you think that is fair treatment of the player by the club or is it exploitation?

Dave

[shaunedwardsfanclub]

All this nonesense and speculation can now be put to bed see wiganwarriors.com

[ian.birchall]

Pas du tout comme les Francais disent

[GeoffN]

All this nonesense and speculation can now be put to bed see wiganwarriors.com

Correct. Locked.