All their talk of s kevel playing is dishonest!
The more they try to explain this blatant favoritism, the worse it looks. On the one hand, the testimonial has to have a "charity component" but elsewhere it says that scam and thurston will pocket everything. It's says the NRL will consider any "integrity issues" in a players career before agreeing - well how about Coffs Harbour and numerous drunken escapades? How about blatant salary cap rorting? How about a career built on trying to maim opponents? What about the timing of this in relation to salary cap negotiations?
It's for only one club players that have played 250 plus games. Both Matai and snake don't fit the criteria anyway.
Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |