Re: John Mitchell's interview..

"Kip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:02:50 +1300, "Mr Scebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >With regard to remuneration, this is set by the NZRU, presumably with
match
> >payments for tests on top of what they earn - because they are contracted
by
> >the NZRU whether Mitchell selects them or not has no bearing on what they
> >are paid per se, only what performance benefits they pick up.
> >
>
> Mitchell is in charge of selection, and selection is a determinant of
> remuneration.

It's not. As you can see Cullen is still employed by the NZRU - he is still
getting his full salary paid, even though he never played for the AB's this
year. The same goes for all the others who are still contracted to them. I
believe that Randell asked to be let out of his contract so that he could
play in Engerlund, as did Cullen. This was granted to them, but they still
remain on the payroll - and Mitchell has no say in that.

Take MacDonald - Mitchell and Deans were disappointed that the NZRU chose
not to extend his contract - so if Mitchell was directly responsible for his
remuneration it is likely that he would have stayed. Mitchell had no say in
it whatever - and from what i recall he was pretty pissed about it too!

--
Mr Scebe
Losers always whine about their 'best'.
Winners go home and fuck the prom queen".
~Sean Connery in "The Rock"