In reply to southward
No man......the Admin hunderstand my slant. But seriously, don't you think Gordon, is wondering who the hell is leaking these things and don't you think he is stressing over it?

In reply to HumbleCalf

I hear Gordon getting cussed by other WICB man for giving the players too much money.

In reply to HumbleCalf

yeah i guess thats right. the problem from admin's point of view is that repeated unnamed sources makes his journalism akin to that of the enquirer. its robbed of credibility.

ideologically, im in support, and yeah the guy deserves kudos....but he just cant go on with hearsay.

think ill leave it here and wait for the customary abuse.

Old leatherface Gordon has to read the riot act to the skuntholes in the WICBandits who continue to be as dishonest and as money-grubbing as possible, seeking to rob the players of their just due in any and every possible way.

People here do not know the extent to which WIPA and Dinas exercise restraint in coping with the torrent of shyte constantly being offloaded by the Bandits in their dealings with WIPA. But for that restraint, the public would be shocked...appalled even, to know of just how reckless the Bandits can be in failing to meet their obligations to the players.

The old sticky-fingers ones among the Bandits, the ones who believe in "by any means possible", continue to behave in the same old way. Gordon must cause them to change their ways or leave.

This era of WI cricket cannot accommodate their kind of behaviour any more, if only because Dinas and WIPA are very incisive in dealing with any and all attempts at skullduggery. But more than that - if WI cricket is to improve, it must not be hamstrung by unprincipled behaviour by the Bandits that keeps it in a state of turmoil off the field - something that must negatively impact performances on the field and the public's perception of the cricket.

As an aside, the exit of well known Bandits accomplices like Tony CozyUpToTheBandits will go a long way to foster change. The less accomplices the Bandits have in the press to unfairly blame the players and poison the public's mind against the players, the better the chances for WI cricket to improve.

In reply to redbaron

Everyone on this MB seems to forget that none of the players have performed consistently, yet they expect to be rewarded handsomely, regardless. Calling for the idiots in the WICB to be professional without similar calls for the players is at best disingenuous. None of these current crop of players deserve anything special in terms of compensation because they have all failed to perform at the highest level even 50 percent of the time. Until they can demonstrate the level of professionalism of the top two teams, quite frankly they have no serious claims to make for the obsecene compensation they seek. As Mikey Holding, the BEST fastbowler to ever grace the cricketing grounds across the globe, said recently - this team is all about the money, World Cup or no World Cup.

In reply to Fortis
i seriously disagree with what u have written. we live in a money world. the players have all right to demand proper remuneration, indeed if the wicb had a rep for paying then maybe we would all be entitled to demand professional performances.

on this mikey is wrong.

my problem with the article is its lack of substance and its ability to lead people like the baron etc thats the disingenous part.

In reply to Fortis
The team "inconsistent" performance are still raking in millions of dollars for the WICB. Therefore the players should be fully paid based on the agreed compensation with the WICB.

In reply to Fortis

Is either you very naive or very stupid, take your pick, to write that shyte.

Good or awful, it's the players who play cricket, and, by extension, bring in the money - ALL OF IT.

If you capable of understanding that, then you'd be foolish not to understand that what people bring in they must have a share of - and a very good share, to boot.

I am one of the harshest critics of the players here, and I say that the 22% they getting for this WC 2007 is NOT, IMO, a fair share. 50% would have been barely adequate, with the other 50% for the Bandits to squander, as they are wont to do and have a well documented history of doing.

The Bandits earn no money - not a fugging cent - but you would have them keep all and the people who earn ALL the money get little or none.

That's how stupid some of you people are.

In reply to southward



Kindly say what you talking about when you call my name so I can respond.

Thank you.

In reply to redbaron

scroll up to the top of the thread.

In reply to southward

That has nothing to do with me.

Your opinion that the article "had no substance" is just that - your opinion, and holds no water for anyone else, so WTF you calling my name for based upon your opinion and not fact?

Exactly WTF you referring to? Don't obfuscate - say what you mean. Vague reference to "top of thread" won't do.

If you hold brief for the Bandits, that's you. I have access to information that you don't, so I know whereof I speak when I speak of their skuntholery.

If you have a point, speak up so I can discuss it. Else don't call my facting name in vain.

Who cares, lets play cricket!!

Million dollar contracts typically take a long time to negotiate, and are going to have some nitpicking, last minute details to be worked out. Thats why you start early on these things.
To be honest, taking time to work out the details of a multimillion dollar contract Is a GOOD THING. What the WICB and WIPA should have done is start negotiating earlier.

In reply to redbaron

all i did was ask u to scroll up to the top of the thread so that u could read and understand why i said what i have said.

seems that u havent done that, because if u had u would have known that my references are very specific and that i have even gone to the trouble of outlining them point by point.

no big deal, im sure it wouldnt make any difference to u anyway becos yer access to info which the rest of us dont have gives u a license.

so carry on. yuh bad like a yaws!

In reply to southward

In general as you are well aware Journalists often use the term " reliable sources " , in a effort to protect the persons who have supplied them with information .

Obviously if the names of the source or sources is revealed , then getting information from that source would vanish .

That being the case , WE would at sometime in the future know whether the Admin's Source or sources is correct .

In my opinion we should withold judgement regarding the accuracy or inaccuracy of the story .

I am sure that you are aweare that credible stories come from unnamed people , who have to remain anonymous to protect themselves from being canned . They are generally described as whistleblowers .

In reply to POINT

absolutely agree with u point.

all i am doing is witholding judgement and waiting for the claims to be substantiated.

i dont think anyone is more anti wicb than u (or for that matter me) and what i realize is that in order to take them on one has to have credibility. its that important.

i like to believe that i am a thinking human being and that makes it so very hard for me to just accept what is served up hook, line and sinker becos it comes from ryan or becos i wanna believe it.