nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Fri May 10, 2019 1:42 pm
Where has all of the extra money gone if Sam was on such a high wage and we still offered him a very high one for his next contract.
Surely we could have signed another marquee player? Its not as if other signings and improved contracts to the squad really happened.
I think IL has tried doing things on the cheap hence the players we’ve signed in the past few years. We were lucky that wane got the best out of an average bunch that could play to his tactics.
It now started to bite IL on the arse as Lam tries to play more expansive rugby and there just not capable of producing it
Caboosegg wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 8:03 pm
Is it fact link me some proof DaveO?
Tomkins said the deal he was offered was very high but hed made he choice by then.
If im wrong i will hold my hands up but without evidence its again just hearsay.
“Wigan had an option on Sam’s contract to keep him as one of our marquee players for 2019. After a great deal of consideration, taking all of the factors into account and following an open and honest conversation with Sam, the club felt that the option salary set when Sam returned from New Zealand was too high and opted instead to offer a substantial new four-year deal in its place. This new deal was still one of the top three contracts that the club has offered anyone in the past 10 years and was as a marquee player still.
But please take note... they offered him one of the top 3 salaries offered by the club in the last 10 years....
So what? They asked him to pay cut compared to what was agreed when he signed. Wigan wanted to change his contract, one they agreed with him, for the worse which is unprecedented for a top player who was obviously so key to the team. That statement is classic IL spin.
“Wigan had an option on Sam’s contract to keep him as one of our marquee players for 2019. After a great deal of consideration, taking all of the factors into account and following an open and honest conversation with Sam, the club felt that the option salary set when Sam returned from New Zealand was too high and opted instead to offer a substantial new four-year deal in its place. This new deal was still one of the top three contracts that the club has offered anyone in the past 10 years and was as a marquee player still.
But please take note... they offered him one of the top 3 salaries offered by the club in the last 10 years....
So what? They asked him to pay cut compared to what was agreed when he signed. Wigan wanted to change his contract, one they agreed with him, for the worse which is unprecedented for a top player who was obviously so key to the team. That statement is classic IL spin.
Have to agree..
That people still try and defend that horrendous piece of spin is beyond Me a pay cut is a pay cut as simple as that, and the cost cutting started there and has carried on by not replacing Bitcon etc.