here's my essay ... in the form of an extended question. I'm not sure I am particularly interested in watching a sport that is being played by people who are discontentedly doing so, run by people who are out for themselves using a board that is broke and futureless.
He also claims they are highly paid in a country that is not full of wealth and from a cricket board that is without doubt struggling ... he lost creedence though when defending the bigdogs ... as Hhm pointed out..flash g wrote:Players are paid all their salaries every month without fault ... the contract drafted by the board allows for the accumulation of match fees, those match fees can then be paid as a lump sum at a time the board feels it can pay out.
but what do we know?hhm wrote: We know about [...] 'honoured' player salaries & 'fair' contracts,[but] player discontent is not a fallacy
Rikki Wessels was paid... late, but he was paid
we also know this ...
but then Vermeulan came back (in terms of jobs, is ZC the best of a bad lot in Zim?)... and as ZIMDOGGY said somehwere (to this effect): "I don't know why Taylor, Jarvis... stay. Maybe ZC are lucky"canvas wrote:If all the players have been paid on time as reported by Flash g why did Vermeulen and a few other players from the Mountaineers not take the field on the last day of their four day match against the Mash Eagles in protest that they had not been paid for some months and why since then has Fat Phil been booted out as CEO of the Moutaineers.
It can't just be luck, on the surface it seems that although it may not be the most stable job in the world, it seems to still be a fairly attractive one in Zim. But i would like to know if anyone actually knows the situation. Are we simply being propped up briefly only to be disappointed round the corner by more walk outs and less Int cricket?