So there might be a rugby players\’ strike:
England players are currently paid £9,000 per game regardless of the result. That is just under £100,000 per annum for the 10-11 matches England play. However, sources at the RFU said last night that, under the terms of the new deal on the table, players would be paid a far smaller flat fee up front.
The rest would be paid dependent on win bonuses and how the England team performed in the RBS Six Nations and World Cup. According to one source, the two sides are thought to be about £20,000 apart.
The players are adamant that the introduction of performance-related payments would suggest that they might sometimes give less than 100 per cent in a given England game and would therefore call their integrity into doubt.
The honour and achievement that is deserving of reward and on which all payments should be based, they argue, is earning selection by England. The result, they argue, although important, is not relevant in terms of payment.
The RFU, who remain confident that a compromise will be reached, strongly beg to differ and point to the fact that many of their personnel are already employed on performance-related schemes, including Andrew himself, chief executive Francis Baron and Johnson.
Difficult to see which side to support here. I\’ve a certain sympathy for the players\’ view: anyone competitive enough to make it into the national team isn\’t going to become more so for the sake of a few thousand pounds in a win fee. Or so one might think…..but then perhaps that is indeed true for most of them. But if it\’s not true for all and every one of them then moving towards a bonus structure might indeed pull that 1-5% more out of the few that need that motivation.
I realise that I\’m involved in a dereliction of my blogger\’s duty when I say I dunno….instant opinions on everything are rather the point, aren\’t they? But I don\’t: anyone got any ideas?