Re: John Mitchell's interview..

> > 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!

Remember the Cullen fiasco about whether he was dropped or injured? If he
was dropped, he wouldn't get the full amount, but if he was injured but
available, then he would've been paid just as if he was playing?

The rift between Cullen and Mitchell wasn't helped by Mitchell claiming he
had dropped Cullen as opposed to Cullen saying he was injured. Mitchell had
a direct impact on Cullen's salary.

Lo.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.545 / Virus Database: 339 - Release Date: 27/11/2003