Broncos withdraw their two year offer to Greg Inglis

[gUt]

I don't hate Mundine.

 

[Charmamba]

I don't hate Mundine.

+1

He can be a wank for sure but don't hate him. Always cheer him on when he boxes.

 

[Big Pete]

Seriously, it's like Mundine's been watching way too much wrestling.

He's like those evil managers that turns all the good wrestlers bad.

 

[Professor47]

Surely there has to be more to this - surely not a simple brain wash by Mundine?

It really is not starting to make sense now... esp if he's not getting more money?!

 

[Kimlo]

Surely there has to be more to this - surely not a simple brain wash by Mundine?

It really is not starting to make sense now... esp if he's not getting more money?!

TBH I don't buy the whole brainwash shit, Inglis is not a 14 year old boy, he's an adult, SBW was not a 14 year old boy either, they are both 21+ ffs. They made the decision to leave, not Mundine even if he might have encouraged them. I believe it's purely a money decision just as SBW's decision was money even though I don't know how Souths could legitimately afford to pay more than we offered.

Mundine is friends with MANY football players, it's really just Inglis being a dick and Mundine is the sort of person who always backs up his friends. It's really the same in football culture, no matter what a player does other players always seem to come out in their defence.

 

[Kimlo]

No dude. Mundine is a brain washer. Remember what happened to SBW after he had involvement with Mundine? He got onto the footyshow and started to talk....like Mundine. Absolutely identical.

Mundine is a brainwasher.

They are not kids, it's not acceptable IMO. I hate how people seems to shift the blame to Mundine instead of just saying INGLIS is the dickhead. Mundine is a dick no doubt but Inglis is the dog here Mundine is just the support act.

I do notice the whole third person talking and shit once Mundine gets with them though and it is pathetic [icon_lol1.

 

[Kimlo]

Um you don't have to be a kid to be brainwashed. You just have to be naive. And dumb. Both SBW and Inglis match that criteria.

[icon_lol1. I guess but I'm more angry at Inglis, he is just as much of a dog as SBW is :evil:

 

[Kimlo]

Inglis' girlfriend has had a job lined up for her in Sydney .........
NOTHING SUS GUYS..... :roll:

 

[Charmamba]

Sounds like that's part of the combo to get him at the rabbits.

 

[Kimlo]

Sounds like that's part of the combo to get him at the rabbits.

Yeah and of course it's not part of the salary cap :roll:

 

[Charmamba]

Sounds like that's part of the combo to get him at the rabbits.

Yeah and of course it's not part of the salary cap :roll:

Not for the pride of the league.

 

[Foordy]

Inglis' girlfriend has had a job lined up for her in Sydney .........
NOTHING SUS GUYS..... :roll:

doesn't getting a job for a players partner have salary cap implications

 

[Flutterby]

Depends who the job is with. If it's with the club, a club sponsor or director or someone very publicly and directly involved with the club then yes it needs to count towards the salary cap. If there's not direct link with the club then no.

 

[Coxy]

Depends who the job is with. If it's with the club, a club sponsor or director or someone very publicly and directly involved with the club then yes it needs to count towards the salary cap. If there's not direct link with the club then no.

^^^ This.

So if, say, Anthony Mundine "knows a guy" and puts in a good word for Sally Robinson, no big deal. Hell even if Russell Crowe tapped on the shoulder of one of the no doubt hundreds of Sydney businessmen he knows, it still wouldn't be counted on the cap unless it was documented that the job was offered on the proviso that Inglis signed with Souths.

It certainly wouldn't be the first time a club or manager has assisted a player's partner in finding work in whatever city they've moved to, by giving them contacts etc. And nor should that count on the cap. Hiring them or having a job offered as a condition of signing a contract? Different story.

 

[Kimlo]

Depends who the job is with. If it's with the club, a club sponsor or director or someone very publicly and directly involved with the club then yes it needs to count towards the salary cap. If there's not direct link with the club then no.

And how easy is it for someone like Russell Crowe to get a "unlinked" job?
I'd say 5 minute job.

Coxy while it's not "a condition" I bet cha verbally it was a condition on him joining Souths. The whole thing just reeks of foul play to me.

 

[Coxy]

Depends who the job is with. If it's with the club, a club sponsor or director or someone very publicly and directly involved with the club then yes it needs to count towards the salary cap. If there's not direct link with the club then no.

And how easy is it for someone like Russell Crowe to get a "unlinked" job?
I'd say 5 minute job.

Coxy while it's not "a condition" I bet cha verbally it was a condition on him joining Souths. The whole thing just reeks of foul play to me.

Meh, maybe, maybe not. Sounds to me it's more like "OK, my fiance's going to be living in Sydney I need a job". Call me soft but I don't have a problem with it really.

 

[Flutterby]

Yeah but the Broncos are in a similar position - the Broncos directors would pretty much know every businessman in Brisbane and could very easily use those contacts to "assist" a player's partner to find a job here.

The other thing that it would come down to is what can be proven.

I don't really have a problem either - be different if it happened the other way around and much more obviously. Say Crowe offered Sally a job working for him and then suddenly GI changes his mind. This is like anyone else moving for a job - most people will always ask their new employer if they have any leads for a job for their partner.

 

[Kimlo]

I'm eating at a leb shop and on next table are mundine and hodges next to me.