SBW

His 'pasting' was not undeserved. He made the decision to sign the contract, and he made the decision to flee the country in order to escape his legal obligations and chase a bigger payday. Every piece of criticism is totally warranted.
 
Yep, $BW couldn't man up and confront his employer man to man so he ran off because he wanted more money. Of course, he tried to play every card he could and was found out for all his bull s**t.

And y'know, out of everyone who's ever played the game, $BW wouldn't be in my Top 5 most hated and I'll freely admit to him being a talented player who had what it took to be an all time great. But his behaviour was not acceptable and there's no way you can defend his actions or present another POV. He's just a coward, so he plays a lesser sport.
 
a lesser sport by your opinion naturally, 0 fact in that call.
 
They don't even know how to tackle properly in Union.

Soward has a better technique and Lockyer would be like Trevor Gillmeister to them.
 
You mean the same technique that gets applauded and jizzed over on the odd occasion it's used in a League game?
 
SBW, what a player. Even dominating Rugby Union. Comes off the bench in the last 10 mins, first thing he does is get a yellow card, possibly giving Australia a chance to come back with NZ having 1 less man on the field.

There was a scathing article about how Parra were glad that they didn't sign Cooper after the terrible performance he had in the WC. There should be one for SBW too, hopefully.
 
I don't mean to be a SBW fan boy, but you obviously didn't watch much of the World Cup. He was one of the players of the tournament.
 
Last edited:
To further my point about SBW's contract situation: Paul Gallen had his contract tweaked by the Sharks only yesterday to reflect his stellar 2011 season. Originally he was re-signed at the beginning of 2010 on a deal that stretched through to 2013. Only one year into that deal (notice any similarities?) and the Sharks have acknowledged both his increased importance to the club (Douglas and Snowden goooone) and his improved standing in the game.

Loyalty is very much alive and well in the game - as long as you're playing well. IMO the Doggies really ballsed up the SBW scenario.
 
Last edited:
$BW, signed for $500,000 per year at the age of 22, for 5 years.

And walked after 18 months.

There shouldn't have been any :ranting:tweaking of $BW's contract. It was already worth $500,000
 
m1c said:
To further my point about SBW's contract situation: Paul Gallen had his contract tweaked by the Sharks only yesterday to reflect his stellar 2011 season. Originally he was re-signed at the beginning of 2010 on a deal that stretched through to 2013. Only one year into that deal (notice any similarities?) and the Sharks have acknowledged both his increased importance to the club (Douglas and Snowden goooone) and his improved standing in the game.

Loyalty is very much alive and well in the game - as long as you're playing well. IMO the Doggies really ballsed up the SBW scenario.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you've always felt this strongly about SBW, or if you once held similar views to me that have softened because you're a union fan or whatever. But it's absolutely inexcusable for him to have walked out on the club in the way that he did. The value of his contract at the time was widely reported as being $500,000. That's almost an eighth of the salary cap sunk into one player. I can't think of any other player in the NRL who's even been rumoured to be on that type of coin. So he was already reaping the rewards of outlasting Mason etc.
Obviously, you think that he was worth more than half a million per season, and by extension you think he was the most valuable player in the NRL. But even if he was on only $50,000 a year, he still walked out of the club without a release. He broke a legally binding contract and fled the country to avoid the repercussions of such an act, without saying a word to his club (or, even more inexcusably, his teammates). He then tried to defend himself by comparing himself to a bus driver changing companies for better pay, despite the fact that bus drivers don't sign 5 year, multi-million dollar contracts, and that bus companies don't build their business around the driver.
If he'd gone to the club and said 'look, guys, this isn't working out. I'm unhappy about all this, and I want a raise/release', he'd be no worse than Gower, Gasnier, Wing, or any of the other players who've tried their hand at another sport for big bucks. But he didn't do that. He snuck out in the middle of the night, leaving his teammates to pick up the pieces and try to get by without their gamebreaker, and leaving the club to struggle through without their star player and drawcard. He's not only greedy, he's dishonourable.
 
dukey said:
I don't know if you've always felt this strongly about SBW, or if you once held similar views to me that have softened because you're a union fan or whatever. But it's absolutely inexcusable for him to have walked out on the club in the way that he did. The value of his contract at the time was widely reported as being $500,000. That's almost an eighth of the salary cap sunk into one player. I can't think of any other player in the NRL who's even been rumoured to be on that type of coin. So he was already reaping the rewards of outlasting Mason etc.
Obviously, you think that he was worth more than half a million per season, and by extension you think he was the most valuable player in the NRL. But even if he was on only $50,000 a year, he still walked out of the club without a release. He broke a legally binding contract and fled the country to avoid the repercussions of such an act, without saying a word to his club (or, even more inexcusably, his teammates). He then tried to defend himself by comparing himself to a bus driver changing companies for better pay, despite the fact that bus drivers don't sign 5 year, multi-million dollar contracts, and that bus companies don't build their business around the driver.
If he'd gone to the club and said 'look, guys, this isn't working out. I'm unhappy about all this, and I want a raise/release', he'd be no worse than Gower, Gasnier, Wing, or any of the other players who've tried their hand at another sport for big bucks. But he didn't do that. He snuck out in the middle of the night, leaving his teammates to pick up the pieces and try to get by without their gamebreaker, and leaving the club to struggle through without their star player and drawcard. He's not only greedy, he's dishonourable.
Click to expand...

Hammer. Nail. *thwack*
 
It's unrealistic he would have walked if on such an amount - 500k would have been close to the threshold for what you could pay your marquee player and get away with. Where the Bulldogs erred, IMO, is that they failed to rectify the discrepancy between his contract value to his actual worth once they had the opportunity (departure of Mason and O'Meley). SBW's quotes even reflect so - 'Because you know I'd sat down with them and they'd promised me a lot before and it came up to nothing you know' - from a transcript on the ABC website.

The Gallen scenario serves as an example of the dynamic nature of club contracts. It shows that even established players on already big money aren't exempt to alterations. Snowden and Douglas left, Gallen had a top season - so the club adjusted his contract accordingly (increased importance at club and improved performance).

For the record, I think SBW is massive phallus. Though I will admit to enjoying his performances on field.

I just think he was tainted unfairly by media after a cheap story (very easy to paint him as the villain with Mundine and Nasser in his corner). It was a situation where the Dogs should have accepted just as much, if not more, blame. I understand most are set in their views on the scenario, but what I have mentioned is certainly another feasible way to look at it.
 
Look, I agree that a marquee player's contract should be open to alteration depending on the change of circumstances. And if the $500k figure is inaccurate, and he wasn't receiving the type of money he was worth, he wouldn't be wrong to ask for an increase. But here are the main points:

1. He voluntarily signed a 5-year contract with the club, rejecting overtures from other teams to do so. Surely, a 2 or 3 year deal would've been available, but he signed on for half a decade. It's reasonable to assume that he was on good money, and also reasonable to assume that the stability this afforded the Bulldogs would've impacted on their recruitment and marketing strategy.

2. 18 months into that contract, he left. He didn't discuss it with the club, he didn't get a release, he just jumped on a plane and left. He left the fans, the players and the club high and dry. The reasoning behind that action is still a mystery. He's never been able to adequately explain why his departure was so underhanded and dirty.

The media haven't unfairly tainted him, and it wasn't a cheap story. It was the biggest breach of contract Australian sport has seen. His soiled reputation is a result of his own decisions and actions, not the content of any newspaper article or editorial.
 
I'm sure the Bulldogs weren't saints, but to suggest that they were at all responsible for the way SBW walked out is kinda ridiculous. Not the fact that he did walk out, but the WAY he walked out. There is no excuse for that and, as others have said, SBW hasn't even come up with one himself.

The only other party that must accept some of the blame in this situation is the Nasser/Mundine Juggernaut. Toxic, the two of them.
 
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 924
1:26:21
NRL Semi Final, 2006 - Brisbane Broncos vs Newcastle Knights
View full media list »

Active Now

... and 1 more.
Total: 146 (members: 21, guests: 125)
Robots: 157
Back
Top